Member Info for AIMtodeath

If you think you can build a mine with all money 'borrowed' for CAPEX you are very very mistaken.

Secondly raising money for mine build normally will pus the SP on towards better % of NPV as project is derisked and funds secured to build mine and sell the asset in the ground.

We will however have access to very eager funds within Europe and some grant money and definitely some pfftake, s 'equity' should be small......again if you thought you could raise all CAPEX without equity you are mistaken.

https://tvi24.iol.pt/amp/videos/sociedade/mina-do-barroso-empresa-exploradora-promete-sete-milhoes-de-euros-para-compensar-impacto/60abaf550cf26952d6c7048c?__twitter_impression=true

Sivad, the London Stocl Exchange sends websites 'transactions' a quantity and price....That is it! The websites liek this assign buy or sell signals to those transactions. If the transaction falls above the MID point of the bid/ask it gets tagged sell, and vice versa above is a buy tag.....
However in weird pricing times when all transactions fall above or below mid point they all get the same tag. So today many transactions are red because even the 'buys' are below the mid of the spread. Transactions matter nowt, post raise selling and worried people from the discontent that the 'Portuguese mole' has been introducing on the BB here can be a factor too.

Despite the fact that the Barroso Mine project was developed exclusively in the territory of the municipality of Boticas, about 1.4 km from the village of Alijó, the Ribeira de Pena City Council, which only became aware of the Barroso Mine project last month April, - You cannot be serious.....Do they live in a Vortex!?

No the site of a shutting down oil refinery can be converted to another type of business as power, water, administrative buildings exist etc. It makes economic sense to do.

Of course content od EIAs are regurated you fool, given that many of the ESG elements or concerns for mining one product are the same for others..... It was from SAVs own EIA submitted to Moz Gov, it is their own work.

forests, grazing land and arable land will be lost - Simply not true. What small amount of trees are cut down on the actual mining site, can be replanted. More trees burnt last year through global warming in Porruguese hills.
residents fear the area’s underground water supplies will be disrupted if not irreparably polluted. - Fearign it and what the APA require the mining company to do what will be 'science' in protecting the water. Polluted with what? SAV doesn't use any chemicals.
They believe the 'ENTIRE' concession area will be mined and trees cut down....Utter nonsense.
Complaints about using common land....land they are lucky to have a free use of, so they are complaining about losing something they do not own or pay for.......which ultimately belongs to Portugal and the Government. But SAV will only operate in a small area at any one time, they will not stop grazing across the whole concession.

98 people lose a job managing the trees SAV will cut down in a couple 100m/sq area....Sounds like over employment that!

Landscape ruined because there are tubes sticking out of the ground and shows the devastion of mining....what a pile of rocks? The test sites have not been rehabilitated becauuse they are not finished with them!
Drop a rock in a tube it hits water.....err so a low point magically attracts rain water?? An area 'below the village......

None of these impacts have been mentioned in the environmental impact study” - because they are made up and without scientific reasoning.....Just because you fear or think something does not make it any more likely.
Nor have the long-term economic advantages that will be lost” - So the report down by independent economists didn't know what they were talking about, or how to do they research, better tell the Uni to fire them they don't know what to do.

A lot of hyperbole type comments, though they do wnat you to take themn literally despite being pie in the sky.

An SLO is a crock of £$%"£$%..... And matters not, APA and EIA acceptance is the only thing that matters.

SAV has had an information point and newsletter for ages now for engagement in the project, offering money locally in the benefit sharing program, mitigating loads of things in the mining plan etc.

I want to draw your attention to this warning below -
Important Message from the Financial Conduct Authority
Posting inside information that is not public knowledge, or information that is false or misleading, may constitute market abuse. This could lead to an unlimited fine and up to seven years in prison.

Me thinks Jamie Lee doth protest too much...... I wonder why?......I have seen some trolling on this board but this is a new level of desperation.

And that is the guy SAV needs to convince..... Sounds like preaching to the converted.... Portugal WILL mine lithium. Just a matter of who... Sounds like he is telling 'never miners' shut up or ditch your tech gadgets etc.... No problem using them all, but head in the sand as to how they get made and from where.

https://www.icaew.com/insights/tax-news/2020/dec-2020/prepare-for-withholding-taxes-on-payments-to-and-from-eu-territories-from-1-january-2021

It would seem funneling TAXED dividends to parent companies now outside EU has some obstacles in certain EU countries, one being Portugal. By going via Holland SAV does not pay 'additional' taxes they would not otherwise have paid before Brexit.

Try this - https://www.icaew.com/insights/tax-news/2020/dec-2020/prepare-for-withholding-taxes-on-payments-to-and-from-eu-territories-from-1-january-2021

You will find that SAV UK would have to pay 10% on dividends from profits from Portugal subsidiaries. Whereas any money moving to the UK from a Dutch company there are no requirements. No sensible company would hand out 10% more in tax after already being taxed already.
This clarifies the UK/Portugal issue - In the case of dividends paid to the UK, some EU member states (eg, Portugal) only allow the treaty rate to apply where the dividends are subject to tax in the UK. A decision will therefore need to be made in those cases whether to elect to tax the dividend in the UK to secure the treaty rate of withholding tax.
Whereas Holland makes no requirement of withholding taxes if you own more than 25% of the subsidiary.

'claims'..... or facts? You seem to claim that Sav will not pay any Poruguese taxes because they have a holding company in another EU country. I have provided EU direction on how this arrangement is taxed. It states the subsidiary is taxed and the holding company is not on the profit/dividends paid to it.
But SAV will at a minimum, pay employment taxes and benefits, local taxes, sales taxes on any purchases/services whilst running a mine, pay royalties....... this mine will be the lycnh pin in the development of a whole lithium value chain, creating more companies paying taxes and employing people etc etc.... E.g. Google in Ireland pays no taxes in rest of EU and only 1% corporation tax in Ireland, however they employ 10k high skilled well paid 'tax paying' people, whom spend their money on goods and services and so on. The tax money ends up in Irish coffers eventually.

Somemore light reading for you - https://europa.eu/youreurope/business/taxation/business-tax/taxes-parent-companies-subsidiaries/index_en.htm

PS and the WHOLE LOT is owned by Savannah Resources Ltd in the UK..... So did you not think that would mean SAV would pay tax in the UK and not Portugal already??? Or were you just clutching at no idea straws?

And you do realise that subsidiaries PAY TAX in the country of operations.... they are legally separate entities with separate taxes.... try reading this.... https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/business/company-tax/parent-companies-their-subsidiaries-eu-union_en

You will find that it is the Dutch company that does not pay tax due to 'withholding taxes exemption'. I.e. you don't pay tax on dividends from the subsidiary in another EU country as the profits have already been taxed of the subsidiary!!!

quote - By the way, the little rouse of registering Savannah Lithium in Holland to avoid paying taxes in Portugal has just been uncovered. Not pretty!

JUST UNCOVERED?? - Year end accounts from 2017! see page bottom of page 46
https://www.savannahresources.com/cms/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Annual-Report-and-Financial-Statements-2017-print-version-2.pdf
- In September 2017 a new 100% subsidiary company, Savannah Resource Lithium B.V. was set up with an initial investment of €100 (~£92) in the ordinary share capital.

I repeat you are a fool.... I give you facts, you ignore....

You are being a fool..... They could not complete the DFS until they knew how the mine would be built and costs, based on the approval of the suggestions in the EIA to APA....drrrrrrr
Galp is paying for the DFS with their investment, did you not read that bit?

Jamie Lee you are not an investor here and you are a paid or otherwise (crusty) individual that is seeking to disrupt this board talking about stuff that goes on over all mining builds. Journalists were not allowed to report what went on inside the session - The one on Wednesday was NOT the public consultation of which was err public. Journos are idiots and they would only be reporting 'their own angle' facts are not journo strong points. The APA is there to take facts into consideration, not be paid lackies of groups pushing an agenda.

The EU has laws, none have been broken. Apple, Google, Amazon just a few companies with registrations in one country and trading in others. The Mine licence holders are Portuguese companies, they will pay taxes and royalties, SAV has had to register an EU company as being a UK registered holding company is probably problematic, so they have set up an EU operations base in the most tax effiecent (for shareholders) location withint hte framework of the EU. If the Portuguese Gov or Tax Dept have an issue with it then they should resolve it within the framework of EU laws. But I can guarantee the mine will pay its taxes....

So after 2 years work and some reworks forced by APA, SAV and APA don't know what they are doing....or just had their feet up and made some stuff out of the air....
quote - "My conviction is that there cannot be a mine because, in the first place, this whole EIA is a true fallacy. The data are not properly evaluated, nor are the repercussions of environmental impact," said the president of the Chamber at the end of the meeting. from Ribeira de Pena, João Noronha.

......because João knows....... Funny Portuguese Environment minister hails this as a fantastic pice of work well ahead of others, recognition given at conferences and speaking roles..... so what did they others do? Doodle a knnob on an A4 piece of paper??

Quote - The mayor pointed to the forecast for the construction of two bridges, in his territory, without "never" having been consulted.
----- The Governement is responsible for infrastructure and the APA would have asked what mitigating solutions would you provide for X, Y and Z and SAV would be we will build you bridges.... Gov will let the mushrooms know where and when they will be built.... Portuguese Mayors and their fiefdoms.

But what they say has little representation in the links if you have bothered to translate them.....