OT19245 - PRT: Valuation - Appendices
Appendix 23b PRT Nominations 1987 to 30/06/06
Old OT05235 - PRT: The Nomination Scheme
The nomination reconciliation
Aggregate nominated proceeds FA87/SCH10/PARA11(1)
After the end of the chargeable period, a participator is required to make a comparison, for each month, between the proceeds of nominated transactions plus the market value of any unnominated equity in excess of the amount nominated (the aggregate nominated proceeds) and the actual proceeds of the equity sold arm's length plus the market value of any equity transferred non-arm's length. This is known as the nomination reconciliation and forms are provided as part of the PRT1 for this purpose.
Nominated proceeds FA87/SCH10/PARA11(2)
To arrive at the nominated proceeds (i.e. the proceeds of nominated transactions) it is necessary to multiply the nominated price by the effective volume. The effective volume is defined by reference to the concept of 'nominal volume', (see OT05245)
Definition of effective volume FA87/SCH10/PARA9
In the case of a sale which includes a volume tolerance and into which oil is delivered, the effective volume is the greater of the minimum nominal volume (i.e. the nominal volume minus the tolerance) and the volume actually delivered, subject to a ceiling equal to the maximum nominal volume (i.e. the nominal volume plus the tolerance). For example, where the sale is for 600,000 barrels plus or minus 5% and the actual amount delivered is 590,000 barrels, then this is also the effective volume as it lies between the minimum of 570,000 and the maximum of 630,000.
Aggregate effective Volume FA87/SCH10/PARA10(2)
If for any reason a participator delivers less than the minimum
nominal volume of oil, and has nominated the whole of his equity
production, then the sum of his effective volumes for the month
will exceed his equity production. So that the comparison of
proceeds matches like quantities with like, the nominations are
reduced on a LIFO basis until the aggregate effective volume
remaining is equal to the equity production. For this reason it is
important that nominations for a month of delivery are taken into
account in the reconciliation in the chronological order in which
they are made, so that a participator cannot displace earlier
higher priced nominations by later lower priced ones.
For any unfulfilled nomination, the effect of the
reconciliation is for the amount not fulfilled to be taxed on the
higher of nominated or actual sale proceeds where the equity is
disposed of arm's length, or the higher of nominated proceeds or
market value if disposed of non-arm's length. The consequences of
nomination cannot be escaped by booking out a transaction: that
will be treated just as if the transaction was used for delivery of
non-equity oil i.e. tax will be charged effectively on the higher
of nominated price or arm's length sale proceeds, if sold arm's
length, or market value if sold non-arm's length.
For unnominated transactions, tax is charged effectively on
the higher of market value or arm's length sale proceeds if sold
arm's length, or at market value if disposed of non-arm's length.
If a participator holds back and does not nominate some or all of
his equity for a month, he risks being taxed on market value if
this is higher than his disposal proceeds.
Allocation of excess - exchange rate
Where, for one or more nominations, a participator fails to deliver the minimum which he has nominated, and also has unnominated transactions such that the excess to be valued under Paragraph 11(3) is less than the amount of liftings under unnominated transactions, then problems arise in calculating the aggregate nominated proceeds, because the contribution from the unnominated transactions is restricted to the market value of the equity production left over when the nominated amounts for all nominations have been taken into account (i.e. the excess over the aggregate effective volume - PARA11(3)). Where different exchange rates apply to the different unnominated deliveries, then the allocation of the excess among these becomes important. As there is nothing to attach greater or lesser weight to any particular one of the unnominated liftings, they should all be given equal weight, so that a pro- rata part of all of them is valued.
CT & Royalty Effect of Nomination Excess
The CT and Royalty treatment of any PRT nomination excess is as
follows
For Royalty purposes, the value to be included is defined by
PSPA75/SCH2 as the total of the amounts under OTA75/S2(5): the
nomination excess is included in the charge to PRT by S2(5)(e) and
will thus be part of the royalty charge.
For CT purposes, ICTA88/S493 applies where 'a person disposes
of oil in circumstances such that the market value of that oil in a
particular month falls to be taken into account under section 2 OTA
1975'. Market value falls to be taken into account under OTA75/S2
by virtue of OTA75/S2(5)(b) and OTA75/S2(5)(c). Excess nominated
proceeds, however, are taken into account by virtue of
OTA75/S2(5)(e) and thus are not covered by ICTA88/S493.
Although the nomination excess is calculated by reference to
market value this does not bring the excess within CT charge
(See appendix 1 at OT05267 for a comprehensive example)
Old OT05240 - PRT: The Nomination Scheme
| The nominated price |
| Treatment of pricing periods in formula contracts |
| Conversion of nominated price into sterling SI1338/87/Reg15 |
| Trigger Pricing |
The nominated price, FA87/SCH10/PARA6(1)
This is defined in order to calculate a participator's nominated proceeds for comparison with his actual proceeds, and for a proposed sale it is the unit price specified in the contract or where appropriate the formula under which that price is to be determined.
Treatment of pricing periods in formula contracts
OTO has identified the following examples of pricing periods within formula contracts:
- Fixed dates: e.g. Average of Dated Brent 17-21 February. The
nominated price will be the average calculated under the formula.
- Floating around bill of lading e.g. Average of Dated Brent
2-1-2 around bill of lading. The nominated price will be the
average calculated under the formula.
- Floating around bill of lading with the option to mutually deem the bill of lading e.g. Average of Dated Brent 2-1-2 around bill of lading. In this case the nominated price will be either the average around the deemed date, if the deeming provision was exercised, or the average around the actual physical bill of lading, if the provision was not exercised.
As part of the examination of forms PRT1 details of the agreed pricing period and the actual bill of lading should be obtained, where appropriate. If the agreed pricing period and the actual bill of lading differ significantly further details should be obtained from the company and the case referred to the Valuation Section Assistant Director.
- Pricing period not specified with provision to deem later. In this case the contract requires a subsequent agreement between buyer and seller to allow a price to be calculated. The position of such contracts is unclear and cases should be referred to the Valuation Section Assistant Director.
Any request to vary the pricing clause in examples 1) or 2)
outside the terms of the contract should be treated as a price
revision within the practice at
OT05230. Similarly, if the price formula
in 3) above is amended outside the terms of the deeming clause,
e.g. if the deeming provision includes a time limit and the
agreement is entered in to outside these limits, this should be
treated as a price revision within
OT05230.
Deemed pricing clauses became common in 1H1996 and their
treatment was reviewed in early 1997. OTO was concerned that
pricing may become dislocated from the physical delivery and that
the seller was gaining an opportunity to manipulate price contrary
to the spirit of the nomination Scheme. The review showed that in
the overwhelming majority of cases where the bill of lading was
deemed pricing continued to be closely related to the actual
physical lifting of the oil. OTO are content to maintain the
treatment set in example 3) above as long as the agreed pricing
period and the actual bill of lading do not differ
significantly.
Conversion of nominated price into sterling, SI1338/87/Reg15
The Act provides for the nominated price to be expressed in sterling. The main valuation legislation does not provide specific rules for the conversion of non-sterling prices or market values. Customarily, for valuation purposes, the conversion is based on delivery dates, with variations in the details of the conversion methods used by different companies. The same approach is adopted in relation to nominated prices, in that while the Regulations provide for the conversion to be made by reference to the date of delivery in the case of sales, and by reference to a deemed date of delivery - the fifteenth of the month of delivery - in cases where there is no actual delivery, they are silent as to the detailed method of conversion which should then apply, thus allowing existing agreed conventions to be used.
Trigger Pricing
A trigger mechanism in a contract allows the buyer or seller to
activate the pricing formula at a time of their choosing. A trigger
price is therefore a formula related deal with a speculative
element.
Example
On 19 March Company A buys a cargo (600,000 barrels) of
Forties crude from Company B due to lift (with laycan) 10-12 April.
The pricing formula has 3 separate elements:
- Trigger Price
Company B has the right to 'trigger' parcels of the crude cargo, pricing them on the basis of the IPE futures screen for June Brent. Company A is notified by telephone as each parcel (of 50,000 barrels) is priced. If all 600,000 barrels have not been priced by 10 April, the IPE screen value of June Brent at that date will apply to the balance.
- Dated to Paper Differential
The average of the Platts quotes for the Dated to June Brent differential for 2-1-2 days around the bill of lading is deducted from the average trigger price for the cargo.
- Quality Differential
An agreed quality differential (i.e. to reflect the difference in quality between Forties and Brent) of 0.14 USD per barrel is added to the sum of the first 2 elements of the price.
Old OT05245 - PRT: The Nomination Scheme
| The nominal volume FA87/SCH10/PARA7(1) and (2) |
| Tolerance Limit SI1338/87/Reg10 |
| Swing Producer's Tolerance |
| Example |
| Composite nominations SI1338/87/Reg6 |
Nominal volume, FA87/SCH10/PARA7(1) and (2)
This is the quantity of oil, which the participator proposes to sell, supply or appropriate. To cater for a number of different operational constraints, the nominal volume may be expressed in one of three different ways:
- as a specific volume plus or minus a tolerance expressed as a
percentage of that specific volume. This reflects the fact that oil
loaded into a ship at a terminal such as Sullom Voe cannot be
precisely quantified, so a company will contract to sell an
approximate quantity i.e. an amount subject to a tolerance, usually
5%.
- as the whole, or a specified fraction of a participator's
equity production for the delivery month. A small participator may
not know very far in advance in which months he will receive his
entitlement, or the amount of that entitlement, and will commonly
agree to sell the whole of his entitlement in advance to a single
purchaser.
- as a volume equivalent to all or part of the capacity of a delivery vessel plus or minus a tolerance, where the oil in question is transported from the field to the UK by one of a number of different capacity vessels and the participator does not know which vessel will be used when he makes his nomination.
Tolerance Limit, SI1338/87/Reg10
The maximum tolerance permitted for the purposes of the nomination reconciliation is 5%, and where a nominal volume is expressed by reference to a tolerance greater than this, the nominal volume is taken to be the specific volume plus or minus 5%.
Swing Producer's Tolerance
Where a company disposes of both its own equity and crude received under carried interest arrangements in the same cargo and the system operator allows variation between the delivered cargo and planned cargo to be applied to only one interest, the 5% tolerance may be exceeded by the interest that absorbs the variation. In practice the 5% tolerance may be applied to the full cargo size provided the participator nominates both his expected volume and, in an additional category on the nomination, the full cargo size for which he is swing producer.
Example
Company A enters into a contract for disposal of 500,000 bbls made up of
| Equity Interest | Company A | 450,000 | |
| Carried Interest | Company B | 25,000 | |
| Carried Interest | Company C | 25,000 | 50,000 |
| 500,000 * |
All three interests are nominated separately with the above
nominal volumes and the 5% tolerance applies to each. Company A
also includes the information that it is acting as swing producer
for a cargo of 500,000 barrels.
The cargo is delivered as follows
| Equity Interest | Company A | 475,000 | |
| Carried Interest | Company B | 25,000 | |
| Carried Interest | Company C | 25,000 | 50,000 |
| 525,000 * |
The difference between the delivered and nominal volume for
Company A is 25,000 bbls, 5.5%. Company A requests amendment under
SI1338/87/Reg12 and SI1338/87/Reg14 and the tolerance is applied to
the full cargo volume, the tolerance is therefore 5% of the full
cargo, 25,000 barrels, and the nomination is accepted. If, however,
the difference had exceeded 5% of the full cargo size the usual
consequences would have ensued.
Composite nominations, SI1338/87/Reg6
In the case of a composite nomination, the nominal volume is the quantity of oil to be delivered each month, whether this is a fixed quantity which is the same each month, or a quantity expressed as a percentage of the participator's equity that month.
Old OT05250 - PRT: The Nomination Scheme
Proposed delivery month, FA87/SCH10/PARA3(1) and (2)
As a rule, a nomination will be effective only for proposed deliveries or appropriations in a particular month - the proposed delivery month.
Composite nomination, FA87/SCH10/PARA3(3)
The Board is empowered to permit the nomination of a sale contract to cover more than one delivery month in circumstances specified in the Regulations (see- composite nominations). The Regulations also set out the necessary modifications to the operation of the Scheme in respect of such nominations.
Old OT05255 - PRT: The Nomination Scheme
Nomination before field determination
Oil may be extracted during production testing at a time when a
field has not been determined. The fact that a field may not yet
have been determined does not allow participators to escape the
consequences of making, or not making, nominations where it is
appropriate to do so. This is because OTA75/Part1 is deemed to
apply as if the field has been determined immediately before oil
was first won from the field (FA82/S135) and OTA75/Part1
encompasses, in OTA75/S2(5)(e), the concept of chargeable excess as
calculated under Schedule 10 and in accordance with the
Regulations.
In such cases it may be argued that nomination is unnecessary
because the production test liftings are less than the 25,000
metric tonnes specified in FA87/S61(2)(b). However, that exemption
(which was intended to exclude only small onshore fields) is due
only if the oil is normally disposed of in cargo-sized quantities
of 25,000 metric tonnes or less. A participator cannot use one or
two production test liftings to establish what the normal cargo
size will be and exemption from the nomination Scheme should not be
admitted on these grounds.
Old OT05260 - PRT: The Nomination Scheme
Blended Oil
FA87\SCH10\PARA12 and SI1338\87\Reg16 (Nomination of a blend)
cater for the case where a participator has an interest in more
than one field and, before disposal or appropriation, oil from his
fields is blended within the meaning of FA87\S63. Such a
participator may make a nomination in respect of the blended oil
for a proposed delivery month if he has not already made a
nomination for that month in respect of oil from one of the
originating fields.
SI1338\87\Reg17 and SI1338\87\Reg20 conversely, prevent a
participator that has nominated a transaction in blended oil for a
delivery month, from then nominating a transaction in respect of
oil from one field.
Old OT05261 - PRT: The Nomination Scheme
BFO Contract on Tax Nominations
The BFO – Brent Forties Oseberg - contract was adopted by
Industry in July 2002. In essence it is a contract for the sale of
a cargo of Brent crude oil with a seller having the option to
substitute (for any reason) a cargo of Forties crude oil or Oseberg
crude oil for the Brent cargo.
The seller must nominate the blend no later than 21 days
before the delivery date. The nomination of blend in this context
is a commercial nomination and should not be confused with the tax
nomination which must be made by 5pm of the business day following
the contract being entered into (assuming that will be the
transaction base date) (see
OT05220).
The tax nomination scheme guarantees that the actual price
paid in an arm’s length deal is the price taken for PRT
purposes only where the producer nominates the contract in time and
actually supplies equity oil as nominated.
For a nomination to be effective, the seller must set out
certain details of the proposed transaction which include, among
other things, the name of the originating field, or if a blend is
nominated, the name of the blend and the originating field or
fields (see
OT05210 and OT05260). There is no
provision within the nomination scheme for the seller to include
more than one blend in the nomination. So for example, a nomination
may specify Forties blend. Alternatively it could specify Brent
blend but it cannot specify both Forties blend and Brent blend. In
other words, the optionality on grades, which is reflected in the
BFO contract, cannot be reflected in the tax nomination.
If therefore a company nominates a field or blend and
delivers from a different field or delivers a different blend, the
tax nomination scheme actual price guarantee will not apply.
However, the nominated transaction remains applicable in computing
the “aggregate nominated proceeds for a month”. This
may result in a nomination excess.
Old OT05265 - PRT: The Nomination Scheme
Avoidance
The nomination Scheme has not completely removed the scope for
manipulation. While the oil companies cannot use hindsight to
choose between two arm’s length deals and use the lower price
for PRT purposes, there are circumstances in which they can tell
whether it is going to be more favourable for PRT to be based on
arm’s length price or market value. This is because
approximate market value for a particular delivery month becomes
apparent well before the last arm’s length deals for the
month are completed.
To combat this, the legislation contains anti-avoidance
provisions, which can be triggered by statutory instrument if there
is evidence of abuse. Once triggered, the rules apply across the
board to all companies having excesses to be valued for all the
months within the specified chargeable period, and operate to bring
any excess into the PRT computation at up to 50% above normal
market value. It is possible for a participator to take himself
outside the scope of the anti-avoidance rules entirely either by
ensuring that all his equity is nominated (so that no excess
arises) or be transferring all his equity non arm’s length
without nominating any of it (for example to a central trader for
refining elsewhere in the group), and thus suffering market value
on all deals.
Old OT05267 - PRT: The Nomination Scheme
Examples
- Using this information set out the following details with regard to the June 1995 Nomination reconciliation:
- the maximum and minimum nominal volumes with regard to each proposed sale, and
- the effective volume for each nominated transaction.
- Using the following assumptions and standardised values compute these sums:
- the Aggregate Effective Volume for June 1995,
- the Aggregate Nominated Proceeds for June 1995,
- the Proceeds of Disposals and Appropriations from the field in June 1995, and
- the Nomination Excess for June 1995.
- You should assume that:
- the Nominated price for all transactions is $20.
- the Exchange rate applicable to all transactions (including the NAL liftings) is 1.5
- the NAL value for June 1995 is $19.
- Compute each value three times using the following assumptions about the NAL liftings in the month:
- NAL nil bbls.
- NAL 375,000 bbls
- NAL 1m bbls.
NOM1
SCHedule E to Nomination Telex:
500,000 ( 5%
Amount actually delivered
519,628 bbls
NOM2
SCHedule E to the Nomination Telex:
98% of the full cargo capacity of the vessel used to
transport the oil ( 5%.
| Vessels | Full cargo capacity | 98% of full cargo |
| NORTHIA | 780,000 | 765,000 |
| PETRO FIFE | 880,000 | 863,000 |
| PETRO ABERDEEN | 700,000 | 685,000 * |
Amount actually delivered:
900,012 on PETRO FIFE.
NOM3
SCHedule E to the Nomination Telex:
500,000 ( 5%
amount actually delivered
Lifting restricted by bad weather. Nomination amended
timeously to show revised SCHedule E of 300,000 bbls only.
NOM4
SCHedule E to the Nomination Telex:
500,000 ( 5%
amount actually delivered
Cargo slipped into July where 481,563 was delivered. No
nomination amendment.
EXC1 KEY
EXC2 Key (nal0)
EXC2 KEY (nal 375K)
EXC2 KEY (nal 1M)
