A Matter of Trust:
The Rise and Fall of Energy Trusts - Part 2
Article by Franklin Foster, Ph.D.
[note: this article made possible by support and funding
from the Petroleum Society of CIM,
Lloydminster
Section]
continued from page 1
At
their peak, just before the Government's announcement, assets owned by
energy trusts produced over one million barrels of petroleum per day in
Western Canada. This represented more than 20% of total Western
Canadian production. Trusts employed thousands of Canadians,
and directly paid substantial royalties and taxes, plus indirectly
generated personal tax on unitholder distributions. It was thought
that energy trusts represented an economically vibrant sector that was
important to government revenue and the overall economy.
However,
the October 31, 2006 Government announcement said that Energy Trusts would
now be subject to an additional tax of 31.5% at the corporate level.
Any new trusts would be taxed immediately, while existing trusts would be
taxed as of 2011, provided they did not exceed "normal growth". The
phased in period was largely overlooked by the public and the media and
the energy trust sector saw a $20 billion decline in four days.
Upon reflection, the announcement generated some further
interesting points. One concerned the apparent objective of the government
to collect more tax. Some pointed out that large corporations employ tax
experts who can often find ways of minimizing taxes. [For example, the
trust might acquire an asset with offsetting tax losses.] Individual
unitholders, however, are often individuals who are not adept at mining the tax
act for shelters. By shifting the burden of tax paying to corporations,
the Government seemed to set up a scenario where tax returns would be less than
previously.
Another argument the Government used was that
income trusts had come to represent significant leakage of taxable income
to foreign nationals. This was probably a valid point as it is
difficult to recover tax from such individuals. However, energy trusts,
especially at their current devalued levels, are prime targets for
takeover by foreign controlled corporations. Once this happens, the
energy trusts, with their enormous capital assets, are even more
problematic taxpayers to the Canadian Government.
The
Government announcement resulted in drastically lower equity valuation of
trusts; reduced ability for some trusts to access the capital markets;
increased concern by companies about the reliability of Government policy;
and a reduced confidence in capital spending in Western Canada by both
trusts and non-trusts. Significant restructuring within the energy
industry can be expected. Larger corporations are likely to be the
best survivors. Smaller, and recent start-up trusts, will likely not
survive. As discussed above, the percentage of foreign ownership
will likely increase. Overall the result for Canada appears
significantly negative.
A consortium of stakeholders
is still attempting to educate Government officials on the negative
implications of their Halloween scare. Only the most optimistic
believe the Government can be convinced to take off their threatening tax
collector mask and replace it with a face that would be more beneficial
for Canada in its pursuit of energy sustainability.