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)
(iii) We requested additional documentation to that indicated above when we detected differences in
the reconciliation of payments made by companies and the revenues collected by public
institutions.
(iv) We obtained reports from public institutions regarding the distribution of resources collected in
aggregated terms, by geographic areas as well as regional, department, provincial and district
distribution without identifying resource distribution by company except in the case of Perupetro,
where the information allows us to identify distribution on a per company basis at the departmental
level and INGEMMET, whose disaggregated information shows distribution by company at the
district level.
3.2. Processing and verifying the information
(i) We systematized the information received on specially designed formats for both the participating
companies and public institutions. These formats can be found in Annexes I to IV of Section X.
When discrepancies were detected, we requested information from the company and/or state entity
in question; where necessary, we requested complementary information only for the point included
in the consultation.
(ii) We reconciled information on the payments made by the companies participating in the Second
Study regarding Income tax, Royalties and Validity Rights and the revenues collected by public
institutions: SUNAT in the case of Income tax and Mining Royalties; Perupetro in the case of
Petroleum and Gas Royalties; and INGEMMET in the case of Validity Rights.
(iii) We reviewed the information provided by public institutions to reconcile the revenue collected for
the aforementioned concepts and the contributions distributed by the corresponding public
institutions: DGDFAS-MEF (formerly DGAES-MEF) and PCM in the case of Income tax and Mining
Royalties; Perupetro and PCM in the case of Hydrocarbon and Gas Royalties; and INGEMMET in
the case of Validity Rights.
(iv) With regard to income tax (Mining Canon) and Mining Royalties, it is not possible to reconcile the
revenues collected by public institutions (from companies participating in the Study) with the
amounts distributed given that these amounts are presented in an aggregated manner by
geographic zones and not broken down by company. We have recalculated to evaluate the
reasonability of distribution for these concepts. In the case of Hydrocarbons, the information
provided by Perupetro allowed us to review the distribution of the oil canon and sobrecanon (royalty
surtax) by company only at the district level. In section VII “Details on the results of the
Reconciliation Study on Distribution,” we explain the particularities of the distributed concepts as
well as the work done to show the results of the companies’ distribution.
Consultoría para la Comisión Multisectorial Permanente de la ITIE Perú
33