Salim Khatri:
Kumiliki hisa za kampuni zina faida gani za ziada (advantage) juu ya
kupatiwa mapato ya “gesi ya faida” (siyo faida ya kampuni)?
Zitto Kabwe:
[S]uala sio umiliki v mgawo wa mapato. Hayo ni mambo ambayo yote yapo. [Production Sharing Agreement] PSA ni mkataba wa kugawana mapato, mkataba huu ni kwa kampuni yeyote. Iwe ya
nje au ya ndani. Iwe ya umma au binafsi.
Umiliki kuwemo kwenye maamuzi ya kampuni na kupata mgawo zaidi kupitia [D]ividend (Gawio). Kwa hiyo ukiwa na kampuni ya wananchi yenye hisa kampuni
hiyo itapata Gawio na [TPDC] itaendelea kukusanya mgawo wa mafuta ya ziada
(profit oil).
Haina maana kwamba tunachagua kati ya kugawana faida na kugawana
mapato. La hasha. Bali kampuni ya umiliki iwe na ushiriki wa wananchi kupitia
soko la mitaji na umiliki wa serikali.
[…]
Umiliki wa wananchi pia una maana haki ya wananchi kuamua kama rasilimali
itafutwe na kuchimbwa ‘right to free prior informed consent’. Iwapo hili
likifanyika mrahaba utabaki kwa wananchi na sio warasimu katika Serikali [K]uu.
Vile vile umiliki kupitia soko la hisa kwa wenye uwezo wa kununua (makundi yaweza kununua kupitia vipande pia). Nyingine kushikwa na Serikali
kupitia kampuni hiyo tanzu [ya kumiliki hisa kwenye makampuni ya mafuta na gesi].
Salim Khatri:
Serikali yetu kwa nia njema imeamua ku-focus kwenye mgao wa mapato na siyo umiliki wa makampuni. Umiliki na ushirika kwenye makampuni umeonyesha matatizo kadhaa wa kadhaa kwa upande wa serikali. Tumeshindwa kuendesha shirika la Reli (pamoja na TAZARA) kila siku zinaombwa bail out money. Tumeshndwa Williamson. Tunashindwa TANESCO (rejea takwimu za hasara ulizokuwa unazitoa kumkandamiza Prof. Muhongo). Shirika la Ndege na mifano mingine mingi tu. Kwa nini tuendelee kurudiarudia kitu hicho hicho kila mara tukitegemea matokeo tofauti?
Serikali imeamua kuwa inataka kusimamia kugawana faida badala ya kujiingiza kwenye umiliki wa hizi kampuni. Umiliki maana yake ni kuingiza pesa (za walipa kodi) kununua hisa na kuchangia hasara pale hasara inapotokea kwani si mara zote kampuni zinazalisha faida tu, Williamsons Diamond is living example.
Sekta binafsi inataka kufanya hivyo wafanye hivyo, hakuna aliyewazuia. Hivyo ndivyo anavyosema Prof. Muhongo. Wanataka kujiingiza kwenye risky business adventures, wafanye hivyo kwa pesa zao bila kutaka pesa za mkulima wa Korosho ziwasaidie kufikia malengo yao ya kujilimbikizia utajiri zaidi.
George Fumbuka:
Hapa nadhani mnaongelea hilo hilo. Mathematically, it is a straight
toss off between what you get in one regime compared to what you get in the
other. Lakini ya kuzingatiwa ni:
1. Dividend hutokana
na faida; huwezi kulipa dividend kama huna faida. “Faida” ni concept
ya kihasibu, inafuata IFRS. Pia dividend hulipwa tu kama Bodi inakubali
“kupendekeza”. In most cases, the majority shareholder ndiyo
hupitisha mahesabu (kuamua kama kuna “faida”), na ni yeye
anayependekeza gawio. If it is not in the majority shareholder’s interest kulipa
gawio, hakutakuwa na gawio; mahesabu yatapikwa hadi ionekane kuna hasara. Mfano
halisi TTCL mwaka ule.
2. PSA mara nyingi ina international benchmarks, tweaked here and there
for specifics like poor infrastructure; pricing power; the tax regime, na negotiating
prowess. Uzuri wa hii haifuati IFRS wala Board decisions, inakubalika upfront.
Lakini hata hapa pia the majority shareholder will have more information than
we have, kwa vile ni mtaalamu na yuko jikoni anajua kinachopikwa. Pia wana
tabia ya kudogosha mambo yetu – downplay the potentialities; wanalalamika
Watanzania ni “wavivu”; baadhi ya assets zetu wanazikataa (mnakumbuka
nyumba za TBL na buses na kindergartens na bendi ya muziki? Wanatoa thamani
ndogo immediately wakishasaini zinauzwa kwa bei kubwa); kuweka huge
contingencies ili zije ziamriwe na Bodi (yao) wakishaingia; na kuomba Board
control (hata kama hawana majority shares), n.k.
3. Kuna mbinu nyingi tu, mara nyinmgi majority shareholders wanatumia
the best advisors to protect themselves. Mathalani, wanaweza wakaweka management
fees au trademarks au patents royalties ili walipwe upfront, kwa hiyo hawana
incentive ya kupata gawio walishachukua chao mapema; wanaweza wakatumia big
bath accounting, wakalipa madeni na gharama zao zote kwenye kakosa kadogo,
mradi waishie loss making position, wanaweza wakatengeneza “consolidated
accounts”, wakachanganya mahesabu ya makampuni yao yote worldwide –
unakuta faida za Tanzania zinamezwa na R&D costs za Chile na Papua New
Guinea; na kedha wa kadha.
4. Njia pekeee ya sisi kujihami na kutumia mwizi kupambana na mwizi.
They have economists? We give them economists. They have financial analysts? We
give them our own analysts. Geologists? Ok, geologists, na sisi tunawapa wetu.
Shida yetu sisi tumewaachia wanasiasa kama PAC kutawala mambo, tunafuata
“ideas” zao (kama nakumbuka vizuri PAC hawakuwa na mtaalamu hata
mmoja wa escrow na IFRS!!).
[…]
Dr. Antipas Massawe:
Hisa kwenye hatimiliki za vitalu husika kwenye utafutaji wa mafuta na
gesi ndizo hizo hizo zinazotumika na makampuni ya kigeni kujipatia sehemu kubwa
ya mitaji yote husika kwenye utafutaji, na ni kuwa na hisa kwenye vitalu
vingi humwezesha mhusika apunguze riski na kuongezea uvutio kwa watoaji mikopo
kuzikubali hisa hizo kama rehani kwenye kuwapatia mikopo. Cha muhimu zaidi ni
kwamba thamani ya kuwa na hatimiliki kadhaa za vitalu husika kwenye utafutaji
wa mafuta na gesi ni kubwa mno ikilinganishwa na ukubwa wa mitaji husika kwenye
utafutaji ndani ya vitalu hivyo na kuwezesha wenye hati hizo kuwagawia sehemu
kidogo tu ya hisa hizo kwa wengine watakaowekeza mtaji wote wa kuendeleza
utafutaji husika na faida kwa waliowauzia sehemu ya hisa zao husika.
Serikali ilitakiwa itenge hisa za kutosha kwenye vitalu vyote kwa umoja wa Watanzania (private plus private sectors) na zilizobakiwa ziuzwe kwa makampuni
ya kigeni yatakayoshiriki ndani ya ubia na huo umoja wa Watanzania kwani umoja
huo wa Watanzania kuwa na hisa kwenye vitalu vyote husika kutakuwa
kumewaondolea riski kwa kiasi kikubwa.
Kuwa na hisa kwenye vitalu vingi iwezekanavyo ndiko kunakowezesha karibu
makampuni yote yanayoshiriki kwenye utafutaji wa mafuta na gesi ulimwenguni
kuendelea kupata faida japo kwamba ni chini ya 1% ya vitalu vyote husika kwenye
utafutaji huo hugundulika kuwa na rasilimali zinazochimbika kwa faida huku
vingine vyote zaidi ya 99% vikiwa havina rasilimali inayochimbika kwa faida kwa
sabababu gharama ya utafutaji kwenye vitalu vyote ni ndogo sana
inapolinganishwa na thamani ya raslimali iliyomo kwenye vitalu vichache
vitakavyogundulika kuwa na rasilimali zinazochimbika kwa faida.
Kuwa na hisa za kampuni ya uchimbaji humwezesha mhusika aweze kuzitumia mara
kadhaa kujichukulia mikopo kwa ajili ya kuwekeza kwenye kwenye miradi minngine
yenye faida kubwa na ya haraka pasipo kuzipoteza kwenye kampuni. Sio rahisi
kutumia hisa za faida itakayopatikana kutokana na uchimbaji kwa sababu hiyo
haina uhakika na huwa ikija kidogo kidogo.
Chambi Chachage:
Swali langu ni: Je, hiyo si ndiyo “speculation”, i.e., mtu
kuhodhi/kulimbikiza (“hisa” za) vitalu ili aviweke
“rehani”?
Dr. Antipas Massawe:
Ndiyo ni speculation/gambling inayowezesha wachezaji waweze kujipatia
faida kubwa hata kuzidi thamani ya madini yaliyomo au kutokana na speculation
inayoendelea kwenye hatimiliki za vitalu ambavyo havina madini kabisa kwa
kuhusisha uwekezaji wa wageni. Sehemu kubwa ya wawekezaji kwenye utafutaji na
uchimbaji wa madini ni gamblers wanaospeculate hatimiliki za vitalu vya
utafutaji ambavyo ni chini ya 1% huja kugundulika kuwa na migodi inayochimbika
kwa faida. Serikali ilitakiwa iwawezeshe Watanzania waweze kuspeculate hatimiliki za vitalu vya utafutaji wa madini kwa kiwango kikubwa kwani kufanya
hivyo ni kuwezesha taifa lijipatie faida kubwa kutokana na speculation
inayoendelea kwenye zaidi ya 99% ya vitalu husika kwenye utafutaji unaohusisha
uwekezaji wa wageni ambavyo havina migodi inayochimbika kwa faida.
Peter Bofin:
I think it is important that there is a common understanding of terms.
I’m sure the issue of profit oil/gas sharing is understood – a percentage of
production after cost recovery and varying with production levels is assigned
to the state, via the state oil company usually. This is usually the bulk of
state revenue under a production sharing contract.
Then you have the issue of “ownership”. Based on the model
PSAs, there is an option for TPDC take up a “participating interest” of up to
20% (I think). When agreed between companies it is often referred to as a
“farm-in”. This should not be confused with ownership of a company through
stock / shares in the company that is granted the licence. It allows for
participation in exploration and development through bearing a proportion of
the costs, and if successful, a proportionate share in the contractor’s profit
oil / gas. Think of it as a joint venture.
The participating interest can be a free-carry – meaning the state oil
company doesn’t have to cover a proportionate share of the costs – or it may
not, meaning that a proportionate share of exploration and development costs
will have to be borne by the state oil company. This, obviously, has an impact
on future revenues, as usually this is taken from the state oil company’s share
of profit oil / gas, if any. But be clear, participating interest in a licence
is not the same as owning stock or shares. And it can only be used to leverage
other financing in some way if there is actual production taking place.
On the issue of ownership of companies, the ongoing Swala Oil and Gas
Tanzania story should be a cautionary tale. The rise and fall of the share
price since its IPO in the summer to date has been dramatic. It’s opening price
was TZS500, it rose to c. TZS2,400 and now sits, more realistically maybe, at
TZS745. At its high point, the share price never reflected that of its parent
company. Swala’s price on the Australian exchange has been in steady decline
for the past year at least and now trades at AUD0.10. Though one cannot compare
directly, only its highest ever price was close to the DSE IPO price. The IPO
was promoted heavily across all media in a market where people’s understanding
of what drives share prices is limited. There was no questioning of the
company’s fundamentals in the media. Nor were any potential conflicts of
interest adequately flagged up – the Chairman of Swala Oil and Gas
Tanzania is the Chairman of one of the most prominent stockbrokers in Tanzania.
There is more to say about Swala. How did such a company that today is
so obviously under-capitalised, get a licence in the first place? But that is a
discussion for another day.
What does this tell us? It tells us that some people probably took a
big loss on the Swala share price rollercoaster, others probably made a
killing. More broadly, it tells us of the volatility of the oil company stock,
and the high risk nature of such stock.
Nothing new there in some ways, but looking at Swala, I think it would
be irresponsible to suggest share ownership in a previously state owned oil
company as a means of ensuring benefits reach Tanzanians. All it will do is
encourage people to invest in a very risky sector where market institutions and
oversight are not well developed and there is considerable asymmetry of
information between potential investors and those seeking investment. It is
setting some people up for a fall.
Anyway, ‘ownership’ is complicated and we need to be sure we are in
agreement about terms.
Paul Ngana:
My #2 cents on the issue “Shares vs profit/oil split
(PSA)”.
If you have shares in the joint venture, you stand to make more money
compared to only having a PSA. A strategy have to be in place
kuchagua wapi kuwa na hisa na watu kubaki na PSA tu. Sasa hapa inategemea
geological data waliyokuwa nayo watu wa pale TPDC, na strategy yao ya ugawaji
wa vitalu. Ndio maana sio vizuri kutogawa hivi vitalu haraka haraka. Ni bora
kugawa vichache strategically, halafu unasubiri success rate. Then using the
available geological data, unaendelea kuuza hivyo vingine. Now, with the
available geological data, you can deduce which ones are high prospects. Then
unachukua hisa kwenye hizo high prospects. In this way your taking a calculated
risk. So, kwenye hizo high prospects you even can decided to take > 20%
stake in the joint venture. Kwa hiyo kuwa na hisa kwenye baadhi ya vitalu ni
jambo zuri. Dr Massawe hapo [juu] asema unaweza kuchukua mikopo na hivi vitalu,
ni kweli. Ila jua kwamba if that well is dry, mkopo unaulipa “Tullow
Oil books $415 mln exploration write-off”.
Kuhusu ishu ya umilikaji wa hizo 20%. Nitatoa mfano halisi. Hapo Uholanzi,
kampuni ya kuchimba mafuta NAM iko Shell(30%), Exxon(30%) Exxon, and 40% (EBN).
Sasa hao EBN ni
mwakilishi wa serikali kwenye miradi yote ya gesi. Ni ukisoma kwenye hiyo
link utaona hii:
“The profits generated by these activities are paid in full to the
Dutch State, represented by the Ministry of Economic Affairs, our sole
shareholder”
So, in my opinion TPDC inatosha, however, lazima iwezeshwe kwa kuwa na
kitengo ambacho kitakuwa kinahusika na shughuli za biashara. Meaning hiyo
PetroTan iwe kitengo chini ya TPDC. Manake ukiangalia wenzetu wote Petronas,
PVDSA, Saudi Aramco… etc wanakuwa na kampuni moja tu.
For me what’s more important is, what is the legacy ya hii gesi. What
do we want to achieve? We need a vision. Watu wengi wanaangalia sana
kuhusu huo mgawano wa mapato profit oil/PSA/royalties, taxes ila
wanasahau pia kuhusu matumizi ya hizi hela na jinsi gani zitatutoa kwenye
umaskini. MD wa TPDC Mataragio yeye tayari anadhani mafuta/gesi hayatatutoa
kwenye umasikini “Why
gas isn’t likely to boost TZ economy”. I beg to differ, but
i reserve my judgement, time will tell.
Anway, kama Zitto alivyosema, thread ya “Manufaa ya gesi kwa
Mtanzania” ianzishwe ili discussion ziwe more productive, and hopefully
tunaweza kumpa mawazo MD wetu:-)
MJADALA UNAENDELEA KWENYE:
