Petroleum Resource Rent Tax: an update on recent developments

2012 ◽  
Vol 52 (2) ◽  
pp. 654
Author(s):  
Ian Crisp

Although the Petroleum Resource Rent Tax (PRRT) has been operating for longer than 20 years, the past few years have seen a significant amount of activity on this front: The announcement by the Australian government, on 2 July 2010, to expand the existing PRRTto include onshore oil and gas projects, including coal seam gas projects and the North West Shelf Project. The release of three ATO draft taxation rulings in 2010 about the pre-conditions for the deductibility of project expenditure, excluded expenditure (including indirect administration expenses) and the treatment of expenditure paid under ’sub-contractor’ arrangements. The courts’ decisions about the treatment of contract payments and the application of the PRRT taxing point. This extended abstract explores these developments as they apply to existing and new PRRT taxpayers, and identify the key issues that oil and gas companies will need to be aware of as they continue or commence compliance with the PRRT. This extended abstract also explores the impacts of these developments on transaction structuring, due diligence, financial modelling and fiscal certainty in the broader context of asset portfolios.

2015 ◽  
Vol 55 (2) ◽  
pp. 432
Author(s):  
Carlo Franchina ◽  
Rod Henderson ◽  
Praneel Nand

With the global move towards tax transparency reporting measures, resource companies face challenges in ensuring that reporting captures the full extent of revenues contributed by resource companies and also correctly reports the project and profitability life cycles of resource companies. This extended abstract focuses on the global tax transparency debate and highlights the challenges for large Australian and global oil and gas businesses in demonstrating their payment of their fair share of tax and contributing to the communities in which they operate. Issues to be covered include: A summary of the revenue contribution of oil and gas companies in Australia through the layers of taxation, such as state royalties, the Petroleum Resource Rent Tax (PRRT) and corporate income taxes. Highlighting the types and rates of taxes paid by Australian oil and gas companies compared to other selected countries. A comparison of the concessions granted to Australian oil and gas companies to other countries. A historical summary of taxes paid by Australian oil and gas companies. A summary of existing and developing transparency reporting, such as the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) reporting of taxpayers with revenues more than A$100 million, the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative, Dodd Frank rules, OECD country-by-country reporting, and BEPS developments. Recommendations to get the message across; that is, what should be the common ground on reporting the actual overall global tax liability including income tax, resource taxes, employment taxes and indirect taxes.


2012 ◽  
Vol 52 (1) ◽  
pp. 149
Author(s):  
Kenneth Wee

Ongoing growth in deal activity in the oil and gas industry is one of the critical forces underpinning the sustained robustness of the Australian economy. Australian oil and gas assets continue to attract significant international interest and are actively pursued by global and domestic investors alike. On the supply side, exploration players are seeking the necessary funding and technical support to commercialise prospective oil and gas discoveries, while on the demand side, major established oil and gas companies are seeking to acquire viable targets as a means of rapidly replenishing their reserves. Consequently, merger and acquisition (M&A) deals and asset trades have become a regular feature of the corporate oil and gas scene in Australia. In time to come, a wave of industry consolidation is likely to emerge. This paper discusses key fiscal aspects of M&A transactions, as affected by recent developments in the Australian taxation landscape, and their impact on the overall economics of, and extracting value from, an investment in the oil and gas sector, including: the taxation of farm-in/farm-out arrangements, asset swaps and carry arrangements; structuring the deal consideration for fiscal efficiency; takeover and acquisition vehicle structures; the M&A issues associated with the extension of the Petroleum Resource Rent Tax (PRRT) to the onshore oil and gas industry; consideration associated with capital management, capital structure and financing trends for the industry; exit and repatriation routes—do all roads lead to tax?; managing transaction costs; and, managing tax risks in M&A deals.


2015 ◽  
Vol 55 (2) ◽  
pp. 497
Author(s):  
Wee Kenneth

Traditionally, the unitisation of oil and gas project interests involved the exchange of legal ownership interests between project proponents to achieve uniformity of their licence interests across the project. Recently, more contemporary and creative forms of unitisation have emerged including economic, beneficial and contractual unitisation approaches that do not necessarily involve the transfer of legal title interests. Unitisation is a way of pooling resources to improve the likelihood of an economically viable project for participants and to overcome practical challenges resulting from uneven interests in the component parts of a broader project. In some cases, unitisation is the catalyst for project sanction. Achieving agreement and alignment on the most equitable unitisation outcome, including the valuation of the relative resource base and ownership stakes, is not easy. It involves navigating a myriad of legal, commercial, operational and financial considerations. A project residing in both federal and state waters can add increasing layers of complexity due to the interaction between overlapping federal and state jurisdictional and taxing rights. This extended abstract discusses key issues arising in various unitisation models and considers the associated fiscal implications from income tax, capital gains tax, petroleum resource rent tax and royalty perspectives. It also examines the government’s announced tax measures for dealing with the swapping of interests or interest realignments resulting in a common development project and the impact and effectiveness of these rules on unitisation arrangements.


2014 ◽  
Vol 54 (2) ◽  
pp. 515
Author(s):  
Carlo Franchina ◽  
Ben Opie

When thinking about the key drivers of project value, the PRRT profile of a petroleum project may not be top of mind for non-tax teams. As a 40% tax on the upstream activities of a petroleum project, however, the PRRT can significantly impact on project NPV and non-tax teams can play an important role in optimising the PRRT profile of a project. For finance and legal teams, this may be as part of the due diligence, modelling, and contract negotiation phase of acquiring or disposing of an interest in a project. Operational and technical teams can play an important role in helping tax teams to understand a project so that they can apply tax technical concepts; for example, in determining the characterisation of expenditure. Properly substantiating PRRT expenditure is also of critical importance; finance, IT, commercial, and operational teams should be involved in developing systems that capture the information tax teams require to be able to quantify and evidence PRRT deductions. This extended abstract focuses on the practical ways in which non-tax teams can help optimise the PRRT profile and, in turn, the NPV of a petroleum project.


2016 ◽  
Vol 56 (2) ◽  
pp. 563
Author(s):  
Paul Harrison ◽  
Chris Swarbrick ◽  
Jim Winterhalder ◽  
Mark Ballesteros

The Oobagooma Sub-basin of the Roebuck Basin includes the offshore extension of the onshore Fitzroy Trough of the Canning Basin. Together with the Leveque Platform, it covers an area of approximately 50,000 km2, yet only 14 exploration wells have been drilled in the area to date, five of which were drilled in the past 30 years. The sub-basin contains sediments ranging in age from Ordovician to Recent. This study examines the petroleum prospectivity of a region that is one of the least explored on Australia’s North West Shelf. Recent exploration drilling has revived interest in the area, with the 2014 Phoenix South–1 oil discovery in the offshore Bedout Sub-basin and the 2015 Ungani Far West–1 oil discovery in the onshore Fitzroy Trough. The two most significant source rock sequences relevant to the Oobagooma Sub-basin are the Carboniferous Laurel Formation and the Jurassic section. The former interval is part of a proven petroleum system onshore and is the source of the gas discovered at Yulleroo and oil at Ungani and Ungani Far West. A thick Jurassic trough to the north of the Oobagooma Sub-basin is believed to be the source of the oil and gas in Arquebus–1A and gas in Psepotus–1. Hydrocarbon charge modelling indicates significant expulsion occurred during both the Cretaceous and Tertiary from both source intervals. Trap timing is generally favourable given that inversion structures formed in several episodes during the Late Jurassic to Late Tertiary. The Early Triassic, now proven to be oil prone in the Phoenix South area (Molyneux et al, 2015), provides an additional (albeit less likely) source for the Oobagooma Sub-basin. These rocks are thin to absent within the Oobagooma Sub-basin, so long-distance migration would be required from deep troughs to the west.


2018 ◽  
Vol 58 (2) ◽  
pp. 643
Author(s):  
Kenneth Wee

The petroleum resource rent tax (PRRT), a 40% profits-based upstream tax that applies to Australian oil and gas projects, has come under significant scrutiny as to its effectiveness in providing an appropriate return to the community for the exploitation of Australia’s petroleum resources. The April 2017 independent Callaghan review into the design and operation of the PRRT found that it remained the preferred way of achieving a fair return to the community from petroleum exploration and recovery, without discouraging investment into the sector. However, the Callaghan review recommended possible changes to the regime to improve its sustainability and compatibility with the current state of the industry, while ensuring fiscal stability for existing investments. In response to the findings and recommendations of the Callaghan review, Australian Treasury embarked on a consultation process to investigate potential reform options to the PRRT. Government has yet to announce its decision on the way forward. What the future holds for the PRRT and the consequential impact on existing and new or proposed projects remain to be seen pending the Government’s chosen policy direction. This paper covers the following: • a survey of the economic rent theory underpinning the framework of the PRRT regime, including its pros and cons compared with other forms of resource taxation • a review of key recent developments in the administration and interpretation of the PRRT law, and • how the PRRT regime is anticipated to change and the associated repercussions on the after-tax economics and practical compliance for existing and future projects.


1992 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 470
Author(s):  
Colin G. Thomas ◽  
Michael J. Minosora

The taxation consequences affecting the birth, life and death of an oilfield have recently undergone substantial legislative changes. The purpose of this paper is to inform readers of these recent developments, particularly as they affect petroleum projects on the North West Shelf and the Timor Gap, and to critically appraise the strengths and deficiencies of the legislative approach, and provide recommendations for improvement.


2001 ◽  
Vol 80 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-52 ◽  
Author(s):  
K.W. Glennie

AbstractOnce the great size of the Groningen Field was fully realized late in 1963, exploration in the southern North Sea was a natural development as the reservoir bedding dipped westward. The origin of that bedding was not certain, one possibility, dune sands, led immediately to a program of desert studies.Licensing regulations for Netherlands waters were not finalized until 1967, offshore exploration beginning with the award of First Round licenses in March 1968. In the UK area, the Continental Shelf Act came into force in May 1964, paving the way for offshore seismic, the first well being spudded late in that year. The first two wells were drilled on the large Mid North Sea High; both were dry, the targeted Rotliegend sandstones being absent. Then followed a series of Rotliegend gas discoveries, large and small, west of Groningen, so that by the time exploration began in Netherlands waters the UK monopoly market was saturated and exploration companies were already looking north for other targets including possible oil.The Rotliegend was targeted in the earliest wells of the UK central North Sea even though there had already been a series of intriguing oil shows in Chalk and Paleocene reservoirs in Danish and Norwegian waters. These were followed early in 1968 by the discovery of gas in Paleocene turbidites at Cod, near the UK-Norway median line. The first major discovery was Ekofisk in 1969, a billion-barrel Maastrichtian to Danian Chalk field. Forties (1970) confirmed the potential of the Paleocene sands as another billion barrel find, while the small Auk Field extended the oil-bearing stratigraphy down to the Permian. In 1971, discovery of the billion-barrel Brent field in a rotated fault block started a virtual ‘stampede’ to prove-up acreage awarded in the UK Fourth Round (1972) before the 50% statutory relinquishment became effective in 1978.Although the geology of much of the North Sea was reasonably well known by the end of the 1970s, new oil and gas reservoirs continued to be discovered during the next two decades. Exploration proved the Atlantic coast of Norway to be a gas and gas-condensate area. The stratigraphiC range of reservoirs extended down to the Carboniferous (gas) and Devonian (oil), while in the past decade, forays into the UK Atlantic Margin and offshore Ireland met with mixed success. During this hectic activity, Netherlands exploration confirmed a range of hydrocarbon-bearing reservoirs; Jurassic oil in the southern Central Graben, Jurassic-Cretaceous oil derived from a Liassic source mainly onshore and, of course, more gas from the Rotliegend. German exploration had mixed fortunes, with no commercial gas in the North Sea and high nitrogen content in Rotliegend gas in the east. Similarly in Poland, where several small Zechstein oil fields were discovered, the Rotliegend gas was nitrogen rich. The discovery of some 100 billion barrels of oil and oil equivalent beneath the waters of the North Sea since 1964 led to an enormous increase in geological knowledge, making it probably the best known area of comparable size in the World. The area had a varied history over the past 500 million years: platete-tonic movement, faulting, igneous activity, climatic change, and deposition in a variety of continental and marine environments, leading to complex geometrical relationships between source rock, reservoir and seal, and to the reasons for diagenetic changes in the quality of the reservoir sequences. Led by increasingly sophisticated seismic, drilling and wireline logging, and coupled with academic research, the North Sea developed into a giant geological laboratory where ideas were tested and extended industry-wide.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cameron Murray

1. Successful reforms of oil and gas resource taxation that reclaim the public’s rightful share of resource rents will be vigorously contested with extensive lobbying and campaigning. The oil and gas industry is also likely to challenge effective tax changes in the courts. If such industry actions do not occur, it is likely the reforms have been incomplete. After all, successful reforms will take billions of dollars a year of economic rent away from a handful of oil and gas companies and give it to the public. They will not be happy.2. PRRT has some economic advantages in theory, including stabilisation effects in highly cyclical industries. However, these may be small in practice, as resource rent taxes are complex and difficult to enforce. A lesson from Norway is that taking an ownership stake in projects help enforce such taxes and provides insurance against their avoidance.3. Previous changes to the PRRT have given ground unnecessarily to oil and gas companies. Changes to important details, like uplift rates on losses, transfer of PRRT credits between projects, and qualifying expenditure for the cost base, individually and cumulatively have had the effect of severely undermining the resource rent base of the PRRT. Closing these loopholes is necessary in order to effectively share resource rents with the public. In doing so, arguments about ‘retrospective taxation’ should be ignored, as protecting projects with their historical tax regimes simply hands over the economic rents any tax reforms are designed to collect for the public.4. In the absence of a reformed PRRT that has an appropriate resource rent tax base, there are two alternative ways for the public to collect resource rents:a. A 10% royalty on the market value of all oil and gas projects could replace all Commonwealth resource revenues from the suite of PRRT, crude excise and royalties. It would be simple to enforce and likely raise more revenues in the next decade as the industry unwinds from a large exploration phase. A 12% rate would be sufficient to replace Western Australia’s share of North West shelf royalties as well.b. A tax could be charged on pure economic rent using a system of self-declared unimproved resource values, with government holding a right to purchase at that value. An annual charge on this value at a rate slightly above the long-term bond rate would capture the majority of economic rents.


2002 ◽  
Vol 8 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 206-208
Author(s):  
V.G. Osadchyi ◽  
◽  
O.A. Prykhod'ko ◽  
I.I. Hrytsyk ◽  
◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document