* This is my paper in BusinessWorld last Wednesday.
See also:
BWorld 137, ASEAN trade expansion and RCEP, June 20, 2017
BWorld 138, PPP vs ODA, Part 2, June 21, 2017
BWorld 139, State central planning vs household decentralized planning, June 22, 2017
The Philippines’ mining potential is inversely
proportional to government mining policies.
Until about two years ago, the debate was on how much tax
hike would be imposed on mining. Then early this year, the debate shifted to
outright suspension and cancellation of operations by many mining companies.
After the Commission on Appointments rejection of Ms. Gina Lopez as DENR
secretary last May 3, the uncertainties have greatly subsided and certain
sectors are reviving the old debate -- how much tax increases to impose on big
mining companies.
Many of the anti-mining sentiments and groups will be
jumping on this issue. Very high taxes on metallic mining companies will produce
three results that are all favorable to them: (a) some operating companies will
be forced to close down especially when global metallic prices are low; (b)
planned projects or expansion of existing mines will be discontinued; and (c)
companies that continue to operate will be forced to somehow underdeclare
output and these groups will further demonize them and lobby for their closure.
In some developed countries like the US, Canada, and
Australia, it seems that even big environmentalist groups do not lobby for
mining closure but their counterparts in the Philippines are so adamant in this
philosophical nirvana.
Consider some data for member-countries of the
Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) below. Two technical terms are used:
1. Mineral rent: the difference between the value of
production for a stock of minerals at world prices and their total costs of
production. This rent is not the same as value added to GDP. Rent is pure
profit (price minus marginal cost multiplied by quantity) while value-added is
the sum of earnings from production that are due to residents. Thus, salaries
of mine workers are included in GDP value-added but not in rent.
2. Mining Contribution Index (MCI) is calculated based on
aspects of mining contribution to national economies, composite for three
variables: (a) Mineral export contribution in 2010 as percent of total
merchandise exports, (b) Increase/decrease in mineral export contribution 2005
to 2010, and; (c) Mineral production value as a percentage of GDP in 2010.
The numbers show the following:
1. China being a powerhouse producer of copper, silver,
zinc, lead, and gold is the world’s biggest mining country despite having a low
MCI. Australia comes second and its output is almost twelve times than that of
the Philippines.
2. Countries on the “ring side” of the Pacific Rim
generally have higher MCI -- Australia, Chile, Papua New Guinea, Peru -- than
those a bit far from the Rim.
3. The Philippines is estimated to have $1
trillion-mining potential yet its actual output in a year is low, only $7
billion in 2013, much of it from nickel production as the country is the
world’s second biggest producer of nickel, next only to Indonesia.
So a rich and developed Australia allows and optimizes
mining while a poor Philippines with big potential for mining discourages it,
at least in the minds of many environmentalists and some accidental DENR
officials.
Responsible mining is happening here and abroad. So long
as local mining companies follow the law in environmental protection and
rehabilitation, and doing plenty of community projects as specified by law,
they should not be demonized and over-taxed and/or over-bureaucratized.
The Philippine government can improve the mining
attractiveness of the country via two important taxation policies:
One, do not further increase taxes as existing taxes,
fees, royalties, bonds, fines, mandatory contributions, mandatory community
projects, and environmental rehabilitation are already high and plentiful.
Two, the government should also ensure stable tax rates,
or reduce demand for ad hoc taxes on excess or windfall profits as there are
also no ad hoc tax breaks or subsidies for excess losses when world metal
prices are low. Tax stability is more useful for private players than giving
them certain fiscal privileges because these policies may later be challenged
and reversed.
Having rule of law in mining audit, environmental
rehabilitation, and tax stability is the single most important function of any
government in economies with proven high mining potential. The Philippine
government should take this path.
---------------See also:
BWorld 137, ASEAN trade expansion and RCEP, June 20, 2017
BWorld 138, PPP vs ODA, Part 2, June 21, 2017
BWorld 139, State central planning vs household decentralized planning, June 22, 2017
No comments:
Post a Comment