The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring Jeremy Skillington, CEO of Poolbeg Pharma has just been released. Listen here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
Does anyone have any further info regarding Sam's visit?
Surely the agreement to settle any tax due later (IF of course there is any) included Rkh trading normally in the meantime and was all TO ENABLE Sea Lion to happen. FIG need to keep to that agreement, not renege on Rkh trading normally in the meantime, and accept clarification of the wording to reflect the "meeting of minds" at the time of the agreement. That meeting of minds IS the contract that's actually in place. It presumably could be one interpretation of the existing wording. Simply needs clarification. All, as before, to enable SL including Rkh funding its equity share.
That's my tuppence worth for now!
After the farm out to Premier, there were a few wells drilled. Did RKH use some of the carry or did they pay their share completely themselves ?
Rkh no longer owe FIG any tax as the tax was owed on the free carry that they never received.
So it's zero tax owed on a free carry of zero !
The free carry went in 2021 when the new deal was struck with Navitas but FIG have not yet accepted the ammendment.
Its difficult to understand why FIG still haven't accepted this seemingly simple amnendment after 3 years as it seems relatively clear cut,being,No Free Carry = No Free Carry Tax.Simples !
RKH can't afford to pay FIG anything until Sealion is in production regardless of the OM payment. You can't have a situation where we pay a tax we don't even owe only to find Sealion doesn't get approval and RKH go bust due to lack if cash.
BlooBird, both equally good. It's as good an explanation as we can get get to from the information we have. Just need FIG to stop hindering their own O & G industry !
SpaceHoppa
It looks like we were both typing at the same time ... but you explained it slightly better than I did.
I'm probably wrong but this is how I see the situation.
I seem to remember that, after Premier walked away, the £64 million CGT was negotiated down to about £32 million ... to be paid after first oil.
RKH are negotiating with a 3rd party who want to purchase the OM claim but the 3rd party are worried that if/when ROI pay the money over to RKH then FIG will try and grab a prior claim to some of the money.
Buzz, this is how I understand it.
Rock has agreed with funder that funder has the right to pursue ROI for award amount and that Rock will transfer to funder the agreed % that they recover from ROI.
FIG though have a claim to Rock assets, so if ROI pay up the award money to Rock, FIG in theory then have a claim on that money and in theory could stop Rock paying funder their %.
FIG I think, just need to agree not to do that.
I've read all the comments but I'm not sure I really understand why RKH requested FIG approval. The OM award has nothing to do with FIG regardless of the tax position. You could argue the other way that RKH niw have skin in the game to say we will only pay tax if RKH Navitas get the green light on Sealion.
Security over the Award proceeds. Arguably the funder is junior to FIG in the pecking order. Sequential not pro-rata.
Patience
Had a reply from SM. I think Zinced came closest to answering but it's apparently a bit complex and involves a conflict. Here's his reply.
There is more complexity than this but at a high level we require FIG consent because the incoming funder wants security over the Award proceeds. That security would then clash with the broader security enjoyed by FIG over all of our assets which came into being at the time of the tax settlement deed many years ago.
Chess, this is my last post on the matter as we seem to be repeating ourselves.
You keep talking about FIG having a say about how Rock 'DISPENCE' funds.
The monetisation of the OM award is about how Rockhopper 'RECIEVE' funds.
FIG having a veto on that seems odd !
Jesus said to them, “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” And they marveled at him.
What is indisputable is that Rockhopper require the Falklands Islands Government to approve the OM transaction and the Falklands Island Government have also stipulated that no shareholders are allowed to receive any of the proceeds from OM so this strongly suggests to me that the tax liability is indeed related to OM or any other cash Rkh may come by until the liability is fulfilled, otherwise why on earth would Rkh require FIG to approve the OM transaction and dictate who how the proceeds can or cannot dispensed ?
Thanks Pre2rcd for that information. SM travelling to the Falklands is more likely to be a good sign that things are progressing, as opposed to a need to sort out a problem.
I fell the disputed tax liability regarding the Rock deal with Premier, unless anyone has information to say otherwise, is a totally unrelated issue to the Rock v Italian dispute. It is a red herring.
I emailed SM earlier asking why FIG have an effective veto on what seems a separate company matter, and unrelated to the Falklands. I will post if I get a reply.
Rkh are seeking an adjustment on the £59mln tax as they never received the Premier Free carry as agreed.
I asked Sam if there was any news from FIG regards approving the OM award sale. He said he will be in the Falklands next week so should hopefully have more info then.