财务生产分成合同(PSC)成本回收与PSC总分割的比较分析——以承包商SKK Migas为例

Budhi Refa Anjani, I. Baihaqi
{"title":"财务生产分成合同(PSC)成本回收与PSC总分割的比较分析——以承包商SKK Migas为例","authors":"Budhi Refa Anjani, I. Baihaqi","doi":"10.20474/jabs-4.2.2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This research explores two schemes of oil and gas Production Sharing Contract (PSC). First, Cost Recovery (old scheme) that the investor earned a production cost refund. While the second scheme is Gross Split (new scheme), which is the production sharing system without cost of recovery. The Gross Split scheme was implemented by the Minister of Energy and Mineral Resources, Ignatius Jonan in early 2017 in response to the concerns of People's Representative Council (DPR) Commission VII that the Cost Recovery scheme was no longer profitable for the government. Thus, there should be a new one which is better, beneficial, yet attractive to investors to entrust Indonesian oil and gas business. The study was conducted at PT XYZ, the first PSC Company which implemented Gross Split scheme after its contract period under the Cost Recovery scheme ended in January 2017. The study focuses on two cases of offshore oil and gas development projects, X and Y, by using economic capital budgeting indicators, such as NPV, IRR, and Payback Period. In addition, oil and gas fiscal calculations are done equally with Net Contractor Take and Government Take, then analyzed the sensitivity of the variable that affects its economic project. The results showed that Gross Split scheme projects have better NPV and IRR values than the Cost Recovery scheme. As for Payback Period, both schemes had the same value. This means that the economic value of Gross Split scheme project is better. However, it turns out that the Government Take value is much smaller. While from the sensitivity analysis, the amount of production and price is very sensitive to both economic projects as well as the widespread on the Gross Split scheme. It can be concluded that the PSC Gross Split scheme will benefit the Contractor if it is accomplished with good planning of WP&B (Work Program & Budgeting), accurate calculation of oil and gas reserve, timely development of oil and gas facilities, along with the efficient use of production costs. For the government, although the income is smaller, on the other hand, it is no longer burdened with cost recovery of production which has been disrupting state's finance in the development of exploration and domestic oil and gas production.","PeriodicalId":239750,"journal":{"name":"Strategy & Microeconomic Policy eJournal","volume":"15 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Analysis of Financial Production Sharing Contract (PSC) Cost Recovery With PSC Gross Split: Case Study in One of the Contractor SKK Migas\",\"authors\":\"Budhi Refa Anjani, I. Baihaqi\",\"doi\":\"10.20474/jabs-4.2.2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This research explores two schemes of oil and gas Production Sharing Contract (PSC). First, Cost Recovery (old scheme) that the investor earned a production cost refund. While the second scheme is Gross Split (new scheme), which is the production sharing system without cost of recovery. The Gross Split scheme was implemented by the Minister of Energy and Mineral Resources, Ignatius Jonan in early 2017 in response to the concerns of People's Representative Council (DPR) Commission VII that the Cost Recovery scheme was no longer profitable for the government. Thus, there should be a new one which is better, beneficial, yet attractive to investors to entrust Indonesian oil and gas business. The study was conducted at PT XYZ, the first PSC Company which implemented Gross Split scheme after its contract period under the Cost Recovery scheme ended in January 2017. The study focuses on two cases of offshore oil and gas development projects, X and Y, by using economic capital budgeting indicators, such as NPV, IRR, and Payback Period. In addition, oil and gas fiscal calculations are done equally with Net Contractor Take and Government Take, then analyzed the sensitivity of the variable that affects its economic project. The results showed that Gross Split scheme projects have better NPV and IRR values than the Cost Recovery scheme. As for Payback Period, both schemes had the same value. This means that the economic value of Gross Split scheme project is better. However, it turns out that the Government Take value is much smaller. While from the sensitivity analysis, the amount of production and price is very sensitive to both economic projects as well as the widespread on the Gross Split scheme. It can be concluded that the PSC Gross Split scheme will benefit the Contractor if it is accomplished with good planning of WP&B (Work Program & Budgeting), accurate calculation of oil and gas reserve, timely development of oil and gas facilities, along with the efficient use of production costs. For the government, although the income is smaller, on the other hand, it is no longer burdened with cost recovery of production which has been disrupting state's finance in the development of exploration and domestic oil and gas production.\",\"PeriodicalId\":239750,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Strategy & Microeconomic Policy eJournal\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-04-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Strategy & Microeconomic Policy eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.20474/jabs-4.2.2\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Strategy & Microeconomic Policy eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20474/jabs-4.2.2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

摘要

本研究探讨了油气产量分成合同(PSC)的两种方案。首先,成本回收(旧方案),即投资者获得的生产成本退款。第二种方案是Gross Split(新方案),即没有回收成本的产量分成制。Gross Split计划由能源和矿产资源部长Ignatius Jonan于2017年初实施,以回应人民代表理事会(DPR)第七委员会的担忧,即成本回收计划对政府不再有利可图。因此,应该有一个更好的、有益的、对投资者有吸引力的新渠道来委托印尼的石油和天然气业务。该研究是在PT XYZ进行的,PT XYZ是第一家在成本回收计划的合同期限于2017年1月结束后实施Gross Split计划的PSC公司。本文采用NPV、IRR和Payback Period等经济资本预算指标,重点研究了海上油气开发项目X和Y的两个案例。此外,石油和天然气的财政计算与净承包商收入和政府收入相同,然后分析影响其经济项目的变量的敏感性。结果表明,Gross Split方案比Cost Recovery方案具有更好的NPV和IRR值。对于投资回收期,两种方案的价值相同。这说明Gross Split方案工程的经济价值较好。然而,事实证明,政府拿走的价值要小得多。而从敏感性分析来看,产量和价格对经济项目和普遍存在的Gross Split方案都非常敏感。可以得出结论,如果在WP&B(工作计划&B)的良好规划下完成PSC总分割方案,将使承包商受益。预算),准确计算油气储量,及时开发油气设施,以及高效利用生产成本。另一方面,对于政府来说,虽然收入减少了,但它不再承担生产成本回收的负担,而生产成本回收一直是勘探开发和国内油气生产中困扰国家财政的问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparative Analysis of Financial Production Sharing Contract (PSC) Cost Recovery With PSC Gross Split: Case Study in One of the Contractor SKK Migas
This research explores two schemes of oil and gas Production Sharing Contract (PSC). First, Cost Recovery (old scheme) that the investor earned a production cost refund. While the second scheme is Gross Split (new scheme), which is the production sharing system without cost of recovery. The Gross Split scheme was implemented by the Minister of Energy and Mineral Resources, Ignatius Jonan in early 2017 in response to the concerns of People's Representative Council (DPR) Commission VII that the Cost Recovery scheme was no longer profitable for the government. Thus, there should be a new one which is better, beneficial, yet attractive to investors to entrust Indonesian oil and gas business. The study was conducted at PT XYZ, the first PSC Company which implemented Gross Split scheme after its contract period under the Cost Recovery scheme ended in January 2017. The study focuses on two cases of offshore oil and gas development projects, X and Y, by using economic capital budgeting indicators, such as NPV, IRR, and Payback Period. In addition, oil and gas fiscal calculations are done equally with Net Contractor Take and Government Take, then analyzed the sensitivity of the variable that affects its economic project. The results showed that Gross Split scheme projects have better NPV and IRR values than the Cost Recovery scheme. As for Payback Period, both schemes had the same value. This means that the economic value of Gross Split scheme project is better. However, it turns out that the Government Take value is much smaller. While from the sensitivity analysis, the amount of production and price is very sensitive to both economic projects as well as the widespread on the Gross Split scheme. It can be concluded that the PSC Gross Split scheme will benefit the Contractor if it is accomplished with good planning of WP&B (Work Program & Budgeting), accurate calculation of oil and gas reserve, timely development of oil and gas facilities, along with the efficient use of production costs. For the government, although the income is smaller, on the other hand, it is no longer burdened with cost recovery of production which has been disrupting state's finance in the development of exploration and domestic oil and gas production.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信