scholarly journals Evaluating the Petroleum Contracts of Kurdistan Region in the Surveying and Applying the Deloitte Data (A Comparative Review)

Author(s):  
Beston Muhammed Qadir ◽  
Hazhar Omer Mohammed ◽  
Hawre Latif Majeed

A production sharing contract has been chosen by the Kurdistan Regional Government as supposedly the most appropriate contract model for the oil and gas resources of the Kurdistan Region, among several other forms of contract. In general, in terms of royalty, cost recovery, and sharing the residual sales as negotiated, the Kurdish model is similar to its foreign model, although the proportions are most likely to differ. The model of the Region specified 10 percent for the Royalty: Up to 45 percent for cost recovery, often between 7-9 percent of the company's share of the profit in the agreement. Investigating Deloitte reports and then comparing the 2017 to 2019 data shows the unstable output with a fair boost and stability at the later date as for 2017. A large contribution from the Kirkuk oil fields to the production of the overall region is noted until 16 Oct 2017. Around one-third of the revenues of oil went to the production oil companies, although as agreed for cost recovery, it is still less than 40 percent. The payment of the companies of Oil production could be explained as a collective sum between 9% of the profit oil and 25-28% of the sales oil's gross values! The cost recovery payment could not have been funded in the contract, which explains the region's claim about the debts of the companies, in its agreed manner.

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 35
Author(s):  
Arez Mohammed Sediq Othman

In the past 20 years, Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) of Iraq has signed hundreds of Production Sharing Contracts with many international oil companies to expand investment and develop its oil sector. According to the applicable laws in the region, in particular Oil and Gas Law No.22 of 2007, government shall work to establish Kurdistan National Oil Company (KNOC) to take charge of petroleum operations. Meanwhile, according to the same law, the duration of petroleum production sharing contracts shall not exceed 20 years with the possibility of five years extension. Despite the fact that KRG is abided to many legal obligations to share the produced oil under production sharing contracts, there is always a question of whether KRG will be able to administer its oil industry and what will be the future of these oil contracts? This paper argues that KRG cannot nationalize (by appropriating the whole oil industry and assets of foreign oil companies) its petroleum sector even after the establishment of KNOC as there are many legal terms preventing it from nationalizing the oil industry besides the lack of technical ability to run the sector without the direct support from foreign oil companies. Moreover, the paper also discusses different possibilities after the end of oil contracts with foreign international companies; Does KRG continue with the current contractual form or it will shift to other forms of contract such as service contract to develop oil industry in the region? It suggests that the best practice for the government is to institutionalize its oil sector with receiving direct support from oil companies. The establishment of KNOC is considered to be an effective step towards institutionalization of oil sector in the Iraqi Kurdistan Region.


2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 36
Author(s):  
Arez Mohammed Sediq Othman

Premeditated handling of settling disputes is one of the main issues that international parties have to take into consideration in concluding contracts. Having effective dispute resolution provisions is one of the key factors that will lead to success in international agreements. In the recent years, the Kurdistan Region of Iraq has made lots of transactions in petroleum industry by concluding many international agreements with various international companies in the energy sector. Negotiation, mediation and arbitration have been adopted by the Kurdistan Regional Government in details, through its Oil and Gas Law No.28 of 2007 and signed production sharing contracts, as means of dispute resolution. Nonetheless, having less experience in this field has weakened the position of the host government in front of foreign companies. Moreover, the recent case of Dana Gas versus Kurdistan Regional Government has proven this fact; it was an indication that the Kurdistan Region has to be more cautious when it comes to regulate the terms and conditions of the contracts with the international companies, particularly in dispute resolution part. This paper will shed light on the available mechanisms to resolve every kind of disputes between the conflicted parties, with the specific focus on Kurdistan Region. Investigating the effectiveness and enforceability of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms is another major part of this paper.


Author(s):  
Nicholas Lingard ◽  
Philip Morgan ◽  
Kate Apostolova ◽  
Jeremy Tan

Abstract While the current macro factors (such as the COVID-19 pandemic’s impact on oil and gas demand and lower crude prices) suggest a challenging period lies ahead, the oil and gas industry remains important to a number of Southeast Asian countries, representing a focus area for foreign investment, a driver of domestic auxiliary industries and a source of government revenue. This article focuses on key oil and gas jurisdictions in the region—namely, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand and Vietnam—and provides a comparative overview of the cost recovery mechanisms in each country. Despite the practical importance of understanding how the cost recovery regimes are intended to operate in each of the relevant jurisdictions, there remains a little detailed commentary on the relevant legislative and contractual frameworks. By tracking how each of the five jurisdictions has modified and adopted cost recovery provisions as it considers appropriate for its particular investment needs, and comparing the jurisdictions surveyed across a range of measures, as reflected in Table 8, this article aims to provide current and future market participants with insights on cost recovery, both to support investment decisions and provide context for disputes that may arise.


2011 ◽  
Vol 51 (2) ◽  
pp. 697
Author(s):  
Michael Clark ◽  
John Claypool

Oil companies, partnerships and entities developed for the exploration and/or production of hydrocarbons typically invest for a reasonably certain period of time, with the assets projected to have little or no value at the end of their life cycle. Historically, production facilities were decommissioned as cost effectively as possible, with limited consideration of the cost of this practice being factored into the initial costs or operating budgets, and the salvage value of the scrap metal was applied to cover the cost of the demolition. Today, most oil and gas producers are required to account for the estimated future cost of dismantling and removing facilities and equipment, as well as restoring land to its previous condition. The estimated costs for future dismantling, removal, and restoration are different to other costs associated with the acquisition and use of productive assets. The impact of potential environmental expenses associated with these practices typically occurs after an asset has ceased production. Planning for environmental costs for asset retirement obligations (AROs) is ideally conducted during the asset's operating life. This is so that compliance costs and other operating expenses are recorded consistently in conformance with accounting policies and regulations. Tentatively identified AROs include: asbestos, batteries, PCB transformers, underground or above ground storage tanks, well abandonment, waste impoundments, mercury, and other components of an active producing facility. Operators need to identify specific performance requirements that may impose obligations on their organisation. Federal, state and local requirements need be considered, as they apply to specific operating conditions.


2008 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 387-396
Author(s):  
Minas Khatchadourian

This article deals with the concession contracts for the exploration and the production of oil and gas in Egypt. Such tripartite contracts are concluded between the Government of Egypt (GOE) as the host country, a National Oil Company (NOC) as the concession holder and an international oil company (IOC) as the foreign contractor who receives a part of the oil or gas production on a production sharing agreement (PSA). From an Egyptian legal perspective, this contract is qualified as a State contract which is supposed to give the Government some exorbitant powers towards its counterparts. However, in order to attract foreign investors into this kind of agreement and encourage international oil companies to explore natural resources, several legal safeguards are incorporated in the concession agreement. Examples of this include placing the contract in the framework of a legislative act, granting the contract a supremacy on any contrary legislation, stabilization clause, adaptation of the contract through renegotiation, arbitration clause, etc.


Author(s):  
Qadir Aso Araz

The article deals with the problem of the influence of the Iraqi Kurdistan oil and gas industry on the relations of the Kurdish autonomy with the central authority of Iraq. The international aspects of extraction and transportation of hydrocarbons from the territory of the Kurdistan Region are also analyzed. The legal basis for the functioning of the oil and gas complex in the region, the main differences between Erbil and Baghdad regarding the powers of the Kurdish regional government in the field of exploitation of natural resources of the autonomy is represented. It has been established that the independent activity of the Iraqi Kurdistan authorities in the development of the oil and gas industry in its territory, the wide involvement of foreign investment provided autonomy a significant source of income, which became the financial backing of Erbil in his political disputes with Baghdad. At the same time, in the question of the transportation of hydrocarbon, the landlocked Iraqi Kurdistan was critically dependent on Turkey, which greatly limits its range of options in its relations with Ankara. Excessive dependence of the Iraqi Kurdistan economy on hydrocarbon exports is one of the strategic challenges for Kurdish autonomy, but significant positive developments in this area are possible only in the long-term perspective. Keywords: Iraq, Iraqi Kurdistan, Kurdish autonomy, Turkey, oil and gas industry.


2021 ◽  
Vol 315 ◽  
pp. 01002
Author(s):  
Vitaly Zhironkin ◽  
Michal Cehlar

The problems of the current ecological situation in the oil-producing regions are being investigated. The analysis of the impact of the growth of hydrocarbon production on the environment has been carried out. The main causes and sources of pollution have been identified, starting with the process of developing oil and gas fields and including directly extracting and processing oil and gas resources. It is noted that the main reason for the growing environmental hazard is the deterioration and depreciation of equipment and the low share of innovative activity of oil companies. The main methods of utilization of oil production wastes, which are currently used in world practice, have been analyzed. Some technologies for processing oil sludge with obtaining a secondary product are considered. Their main advantages and disadvantages associated with the features of the technological process are described. The possibility of obtaining inert soil, building material, expanded clay and other materials using drill cuttings has been evaluated. The complex separate processing of drilling waste has been determined as the most effective and promising. Its main advantages associated with the complete utilization of all components of oil sludge, as well as the problems of introducing this technology, are given.


Author(s):  
Dalsooz Jalal Hussein

The author of the article empirically studies the way countries are competing for establishing diplomatic relations with a non-governmental actor. The author focuses on the government of the Kurdistan region which uses its soft power to attract the attention of countries. Among other instruments, hydrocarbon fuels (oil and gas) were the main driving force of the Kurdistan region’s soft power. The author proves that economic and hydrocarbon ambitions have made the countries transform their traditional understanding of global diplomacy which inspires some former antagonist states to rebuild their relations with a non-governmental actor even more, and even to consider it as their close partner. The conclusions of the research correspond with the idea that the Kurdistan region will more actively participate in global diplomacy as it is rich in oil and gas resources.   


Yuridika ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Indah Dwi Qurbani

Based on Article 18 A (2) of the amended 1945 Constitution provisions, it can be inferred that article as the filosophical and constitutional basic of the Act No. 33 of 2004 about finance relationship between central government and regional government, include finance relationship in oil and gas sector. The problem statement in this research are firstly, elaborating of law oil and gas management in Indonesia and secondly analysing the principle of law distribution finance relationship between central government and regional government in sharing oil and gas finance. Social concept of ownership is a fundamental principle in the management of oil and gas as outlined in the basic orientation of national development. Oil and gas sector as a strategic non renewable natural resources shall be under the powers of the State and shall be used to the greatest benefit of the people.Keywords: principles of law, equity, production sharing, oil and gas


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document