Showing posts with label Eni. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Eni. Show all posts

Wednesday, January 20, 2016

NLNG: Shell, Total, ENI fleece Nigeria of $3.3bn —ActionAid

Not true, we’ve generated $33bn—NLNG


By Michael Eboh


Abuja—International advocacy group, ActionAid, yesterday, accused Shell, Total and ENI of fleecing Nigeria of $3.3 billion in seven years, through their investments in the Liquefied Natural Gas, operated by the Nigeria LNG Limited, NLNG.


NLNG is a joint venture, JV project owned by four shareholders, namely, the Federal Government of Nigeria, represented by the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation, NNPC, which has a 49 per cent stake,  Shell Gas BV, SGBV, 25.6 per cent; Total LNG Nigeria Limited, 15 per cent; and Eni International (N.A,) N.V. S. A, 10.4 per cent.


Accordingly, based on their equity holding, the JV partners owe as follows:


NNPC – 49% – $1.62billion


Shell – 25.6% – $845 million


Total – 15% – $495 million


Eni – 10% – $330 million


However, in a swift response to the allegations, the NLNG debunked the claims, saying that the tax incentives and Federal Government’s investment in the NLNG had yielded $33 billion in the form of dividends, taxes and feed gas purchases for Nigeria over the past 16 years. It added that an additional $5 billion had accrued through corporate spend on local goods and services during the same period.


Unusual tax breaks


Specifically, ActionAid, in a public presentation of its report titled: ‘Leaking Revenue: How a big tax break to European gas companies has cost Nigeria billions,’ in Abuja, disclosed that the country was fleeced of the amount due to the extraordinary tax breaks granted the companies after the initial five-year tax break elapsed.


According to the report, the massive tax break was enabled by a unique law passed in 1990, adding that it was a triple whammy — a tax break in three parts — stretching from 1999 to 2012.


The report said: “First came a regular five year tax holiday granted to most investors in Nigeria. Second, an extension for a further five years exceptionally allowed for this particular deal. Thirdly, tax allowances that would have been used during the tax holidays were rolled over and exempted the companies from tax for a further two years.”


ActionAid further stated that the tax holiday extension meant the loss of about $2 billion in revenue, and the rolled over allowances where the same tax was effectively foregone twice, a further $1.3 billion. It added that tax foregone in the first five years was not counted, as this was the normal tax break.


The report also noted that while tax holidays are normal, 10-year tax holidays, the type granted to Shell, Total and Eni, are not tailor-made laws like the type in this instance.


ActionAid also disclosed that the consortium is the only company in Nigeria with its own law defining its tax framework, adding however, that there is little publicly accessible information about how a special tax framework was created for the consortium.


JV partners keep mum


All the Joint Venture, JV, partners in the project preferred to defer to NLNG’s response to the allegations; as none of them would comment on the issue when contacted by Vanguard.


While NNPC insisted that it is not the operator of the venture, Shell advised Vanguard to: “kindly direct all questions on this to NLNG,” and Total insisted that “the company is not owing,” and no word from Eni.


Although the Corporation noted that it is merely a partner in the venture, but the report queried the role of NNPC in the issue and expressed suspicion over NNPC’s remittances to the Federation Account, from its dividends, loan and interest repayments in the consortium.


To this end, ActionAid called on the Federal Government and the National Assembly, to ensure that proposed amendment to the Companies Income Tax Act, CITA 2004, effectively extending pioneer status tax holidays from five to 10 years is not implemented.


Allegations are false, misleading — NLNG


However, in a response to the allegations, Nigerian LNG, in a statement by its General Manager, External Relations Division, Mr. Kudo Eresia-Eke, maintained that the claim by ActionAid is false and misleading.


He added that the concept of tax holidays are not unusual practice in the global business community, as Angola offered as much as 12 years tax holidays to encourage investments in their LNG industry.


Furthermore, other countries like Oman, Malaysia, Qatar and Trinidad had offered up to 10 year tax holidays to attract LNG investments, he argued.


Eresia-Eke further noted that more generous tax incentive schemes currently exist in free trade zones in Nigeria, where participants are granted absolute exemption from all forms of taxes and levies chargeable by any level of government, in perpetuity.


Companies defraud Nigeria of huge sums — Hembe


Also speaking, Mr. Herman Hembe, a member of the House of Representatives, said the country has lost huge amount due to tax avoidance practices and tax breaks granted to companies.


He said: “Of more concern, however, is the tendency for the country to willingly give out its due resources through different types of tax incentives. Strangely too, in some instances, even in ventures where it has invested heavily as in this particular case of NLNG.


“While tax incentive is not wholesale a bad inappropriate approach for attracting investors, to provide jobs and to address concerns about development of industry; it is however, a dangerous option when it is just about reducing tax bills of companies.”



NLNG: Shell, Total, ENI fleece Nigeria of $3.3bn —ActionAid

Saturday, December 19, 2015

$1.1bn Malabu Scam: Leaked emails show Shell, Eni, Jonathan’s aides conspired to divert money to Etete

Despite repeated denial by oil giants, Shell and Eni, that they did not know that the $1.1 billion they paid for OPL 245 was meant to be diverted to Malabu Oil and Gas, leaked emails have revealed that both companies were culpable in the plan to transfer the money to the dubious firm.


Malabu Oil and Gas, a shady oil firm, was incorporated by former Petroleum Minister, Dan Etete, five days before the oil bloc was awarded to it by the military regime of Sani Abacha.


Shell and Eni claimed however that they only paid the money to the Federal Government and have dismissed suggestions they knew the money would ultimately be sent to Malabu and Mr. Etete, an ex-convict.


But leaked email exchanges between officials of Shell and Eni obtained and published by Italian journalist, Claudio Gatti, showed that both companies actually wanted the money transferred to Malabu.


The mail showed the oil giants were involved in plans to make the transfer possible through the Federal Government, and also conspired to hide their involvement in the shady deal.


According to the leaked emails, six weeks before the deal was signed, an escrow agreement dated March 7, 2011 was drafted among the Federal Government, Malabu Oil and Gas Limited, Nigerian Agip Exploration Limited (NAE) (Eni’s Nigerian Subsidiary), Shell Nigeria Exploration and Production Company Nigeria Limited (SNEPCO) (Shell’s Nigerian Subsidiary), and J.P. Morgan Chase with the following passage showing the money was destined for Malabu:

 

(C)         Pursuant to the Resolution Agreement, NAE, on behalf of SNEPCO and NAE, has the obligation to wire transfer to the Escrow Account an amount of XXX million US Dollars ($XXX) to the benefit of FGN, within five (5) days from the date of execution of the Resolution Agreement.

(D)          The above amount shall be released by the Escrow Agent to MALABU on behalf of FGN pursuant to this Agreement, upon receipt of the Completion Notice.


But on March 30, 2011, conscious of the fact that it was getting involved in a criminal act, Shell sent another email to Eni which basically suggested a “new structure” for the deal that would hide its involvement with Malabu.


This new structure, which was later agreed by all involved in the deal, including the Federal Government, was tagged Resolution Agreements (RAs). An email from an Eni manager to Shell reads:

 

In general terms, Shell’s proposal to divide the RA in two separate agreements addresses part of Eni’s concerns, although it will need some re-work on our side. More specifically:

[…]

– FGN is envisaged to be the one paying Malabu directly. There is no need to refer to the Escrow Agreement no2, NAE paying to FGN etc; FGN shall pay Malabu and the fact that the money shall come to FGN from NAE is another matter dealt with under RA2.

– In general, we request to de-link, as much as possible RA 1 from RA 2, so that completion of RA 2 in [sic] not subject to the transaction under RA 1. […]


Two weeks before the deal was finalized, a meeting was held to discuss the final resolution.


The leaked email revealed that those present at the meeting were: Malabu representatives, Rasky Gbingie, Dele Adesina (Mr Etete’s lawyer), Shell managers Peter Robinson and Nike Olafimihan, Eni managers Roberto Casula, Vicenzo Armanna and Giorgio Vicini, Attorney General Mohamed Adoke and officials of the Ministry of Justice and Department for Petroleum Resources.


The minutes of the meeting reads:

 

Agenda

Discussion of draft OPL 245 agreements

The parties discussed the New Structure of agreements, in particular with respect to the comments from DPR.

Parties agreed to have 3 separate agreements and discussed the body of the text.

Finally parties agreed on the final wording as per attached documents

Way forward

The 3 agreements have been initialled by the respective parties. Parties to define the date for execution of the agreements.

 

A final email from Eni to Shell days before the deal was finalized further discussed whether Malabu would be in the room when the deal would be signed with the Federal Government.

 

Would Malabu attend the meeting as well? The resolution agreement with Malabu shall be signed at the same date, as well as the Shell resolution agreement. Is this going to happen?

 

When UK-based transparency organization, Global Witness, confronted Eni with the email exchanges it replied saying the organization misinterpreted the letters.


“We believe the interpretation in your letter is erroneous,” Eni said.


It added that it contracted a United States audit firm to investigate its involvement in the deal and nothing incriminating was found against it.


It however did not provide further details of the audit when Global Witness demanded for them.


Eni, however, did not respond to Global Witness’ questions, but in April 2015, it told Global Witness that: “We do not agree with the premise behind various public statements made by Global Witness about Shell companies in relation to OPL 245”.


On Tuesday, a British judge turned down request by Mr Etete for $85 million to be released to his fraudulent company, Malabu.


Justice Edis of the Southwark Crown Court ruled that he was not sure the administration of President Goodluck Jonathan acted in Nigeria’s interest when it approved the transfer of the money to Malabu.


“I cannot simply assume that the FGN, which was in power in 2011 and subsequently until 2015, rigorously defended the public interest of the people of Nigeria in all respects,” the judge ruled.


The judge also suggested that former President Goodluck Jonathan was beneficiary of the slush funds and was the person Italian investigators referred to by the code name “Fortunato”.


“The suggestion from the wiretaps is that “Fortunato” was implicated and I am told that this was a reference in code (not subtle) to the former president of Nigeria, President Goodluck Jonathan,” the judge said.


Fortunato is an Italian word that means “luck”, “lucky” or “good luck”.

 

Calls for government to cancel the deal and prosecute culprits


The director of Global Witness, Simon Taylor, said, “We now know beyond all possible doubt or denial that Shell and Eni knew exactly where their payment was going.


“It’s high time they stopped trying to mislead the public and investors about their role in this dirty deal, which deprived Nigeria’s citizens of over $1.1bn.


“To put that into context, $1.1 billion is equivalent to 80% of Nigeria’s health care budget for 2015.”


A Nigerian anti-corruption campaigner, Dotun Oloko, said “the Nigerian government needs to demonstrate to Nigerians and the wider public that it can and will rigorously defend Nigeria’s public interest by cancelling this contract and prosecuting all found culpable of wrongdoing.”


Nicholas Hildyard of The Corner House argued that “this evidence shows that high level executives in Shell personally took part in the creation, negotiation, and execution of this corrupt deal.


“It is now a matter of urgency that the judicial authorities in the UK, the US, the Netherlands and Nigeria, join forces with the Italian investigation into Eni, and properly investigate the role of Shell and its senior executives in this deal.”


Antonio Tricarico of Re:Common said: “Given the gathering pace of investigations into this deal and a call by the Nigerian House of Representatives to cancel the deal in 2014, investors in Shell and Eni, including the Italian public should demand to know why they were exposed to such risk.”


$1.1bn Malabu Scam: Leaked emails show Shell, Eni, Jonathan’s aides conspired to divert money to Etete