Second National Reconcilation Study EITI Peru - unofficial…

Consultoría para la Elaboración del Segundo Estudio Nacional de
Conciliación de la Iniciativa de Transparencia para las Industrias
Extractivas (ITIE) en el Perú (2008 – 2010) (continuación)
With the exception of income tax, in all cases reconciliation was conducted on the basis of sums declared and
paid by the companies. In the case of income tax, reconciliation was conducted on the basis of sums declared
annually to SUNAT. There were two reasons for this:
• Payment of income tax is not effected in one single action as is the case for the other payments. In this case,
companies make monthly payments on account, annual adjustments of income tax and credit applications,
among other procedures. It is therefore more efficient to conduct the review on the basis of the total declared.
This is ultimately the same as the total paid over time.
• The distribution of income tax in the form of a mining canon is effected on the basis of the totals declared
annually to SUNAT by companies using the Annual Sworn Declaration.
The scope of our work was limited to the areas indicated in the preceding paragraphs.
Conclusions of the Reconciliation Study regarding payments made to the Peruvian State by the
companies signed up to this Study and the revenues which the State entities received from those
companies
The final outcomes of the Reconciliation of the payments made to the Peruvian State by the companies signed up
to this Study and the revenues which the State entities received from those companies are set out below.
• In the case of income tax Reconciliation, we did not find any discrepancies between the payments effected
by the companies which have signed up and the revenues received by the State institutions.
• In the case of the mining royalties, we identified a discrepancy of S/.110,764 [S/. being Peruvian nuevos
soles] from a total of S/.1,249,024,351, for the period 2008 – 2010. This represents 0.009% of the total
mining royalties reconciled. In comparison with the total collected in the Second Study, a sum of
S/.31,704,457,467, the aforesaid discrepancy represents less than 0.001%.
• In the case of hydrocarbons royalties, we identified a discrepancy of US$14,558 from a total of
US$2,824,038,049, for the period 2008 – 2010. This represents 0.001% of the total reconciled. In comparison
with the total collected in the Second Study, a sum of S/.31,704,457,467, the aforesaid discrepancy
represents less than 0.001%
• In the case of validity rights, we identified a discrepancy of US$942,359 from a total of US$23,924,029, for
the period 2008 – 2010. This represents 3.939% of the total reconciled. In comparison with the total collected
in the Second Study, a sum of S/.31,704,457,467, this inconsistency represents less than 0.009%.
These discrepancies mainly represent reported payments relating to 'mining denouncements' (notice of
discovery) on the part of companies which do not register ownership of the mines in question. Similarly, we
identify mining denouncements in the name of companies which are signed up to the Study where the validity
rights would have been paid by third parties. Additionally, discrepancies also correspond to the use of
average exchange rates for converting the figures given in Peruvian currency, nuevos soles, for reconciliation
purposes.
Consultoría para la Comisión Multisectorial Permanente de la ITIE Perú
12