African Mining January 2020 | Page 25

COUNTRY IN FOCUS  fees and participation in all cash distributions made by the mines and Twiga. An annual true-up mechanism will ensure the maintenance of the 50/50 split,” says Bristow. A regulatory overhaul Concerns were raised by mining companies back in 2017, two years after Magufuli came to power, when there was a regulatory overhaul that included substantial amendments to the legal and institutional frameworks governing mineral resource extraction. According to Phiri, the most notable changes were made to the institutional structure, resource contracts, the fiscal regime and mineral licensing requirements. “Tanzania’s mineral resources were now held in a trust by the President on behalf of the citizens. Before ownership was vested in the country as a whole. Regardless, any mineral or petroleum agreement needs to be submitted to the National Assembly, which now has the authority to review and require the renegotiation of any existing or future agreement,” explains Phiri. In February 2019 government eased some of the earlier drastic regulations. The most noteworthy amendment included the lowering of the local content prescription from 51% equity in a mining venture to only 20%. With this, the government hoped to attract more mining-related foreign direct investment inflows, which started drying up as more mining companies took flight, the tighter Magufuli turned the screws. Despite these important changes, uncertainty remains, and, in the meantime, Tanzania has been put on the backburner by a host of exploration and development companies. Too many changes are never good, and in fact, has created uncertainty in many African mining jurisdictions, which often results in a dearth of new mining projects. According to Claude Baissac, CEO at consultancy firm Eunomix, it is the continuous reviews, changes and debates that never stop, and scares investors. “Investors never know what to expect. To exacerbate matters, policy changes are normally radical, and it happens suddenly. It’s usually for political reasons like declining support, a crushing debt crisis, or not favouring mining companies because they had close links to the previous regime. New government normally starts issuing licenses to companies aligned to them. These changes, of course, always take place The 2017 regulatory overhaul included an integrity pledge that obliged companies to reduce environmental and community impact. Furthermore, it stated that companies should refrain from actions that undermine the country’s national security or tax system. “The pledge received fierce criticism and created uncertainly by the incorrect wording and could be interpreted as mandatory. Fears were compounded by perceptions that non-compliance could constitute a breach of a company’s mining license prescriptions which could lead to it being suspended or revoked,” says Phiri. Reports in August last year indicated that the Tanzanian government was also considering revoking undeveloped exploration rights and re-awarding the areas. Companies like Amani Gold has been willing to take on the risk, and commission exploration projects in remote Tanzania. www. africanmining.co.za African Mining Publication African Mining African Mining  January 2020  23