Delimitación fiscal de los ingresos de la minería

The document examines the use of ring-fencing—the limitation of consolidating income and deductions across different mining projects or activities—as a tool for governments to ensure timely tax collection and protect the tax base. It analyzes the trade-offs between accelerating state revenue and potentially disincentivizing investment, particularly in marginal deposits. The guide provides detailed design options, such as ring-fencing by mining license area, activity type (upstream vs. downstream), or specific project, and offers recommendations on allocating indirect costs and managing transfer pricing risks. It also discusses exceptions for unsuccessful exploration costs to balance revenue goals with the need to attract exploration investment.

• Ring-fencing accelerates the collection of tax revenues by preventing companies from using costs from new exploration or development projects to offset profits from existing producing mines, which would otherwise defer tax payments for years or decades.
• Ring-fencing protects the tax base against permanent revenue losses that occur when costs from unsuccessful exploration projects are offset against profits from producing mines without the possibility of future recovery.
• The mechanism can mitigate Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) by deterring the artificial inflation of exploration and development expenses and preventing the use of complex financial derivatives to shift profits to low-tax jurisdictions.
• Ring-fencing can create a more level playing field for new market entrants by removing the tax advantage established operators have when they offset new project costs against existing income.
• A primary risk of ring-fencing is the potential to disincentivize investment in marginal or low-grade deposits where the ability to defer taxes through consolidation is critical for commercial viability.
• The most common and easiest to administer design is ring-fencing by mining license area, as it is linked to a specific geographic location defined in the license.
• Effective implementation requires clear definitions of direct, indirect, and general expenses; the guide recommends using actual use for significant costs and CAPEX-based allocation for less material indirect expenses to avoid delaying tax collection.
• A survey of 38 resource-rich jurisdictions found that ring-fencing is most prevalent in Africa, where 64% of the identified jurisdictions with such rules are located.

APA

International Institute for Sustainable Development (2025). Delimitación fiscal de los ingresos de la minería. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/2025-10/ring-fencing-mining-income-toolkit-es.pdf

Chicago

International Institute for Sustainable Development. Delimitación fiscal de los ingresos de la minería. 2025. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/2025-10/ring-fencing-mining-income-toolkit-es.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=International Institute for Sustainable Development |title=Delimitación fiscal de los ingresos de la minería |date=2025 |url=https://www.iisd.org/system/files/2025-10/ring-fencing-mining-income-toolkit-es.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{internationalinstituteforsustainabledevelopment2025delimitacin, author = {{International Institute for Sustainable Development}}, title = {{Delimitación fiscal de los ingresos de la minería}}, institution = {International Institute for Sustainable Development}, year = {2025}, url = {https://www.iisd.org/system/files/2025-10/ring-fencing-mining-income-toolkit-es.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }