Rio Tinto faces tough talks in Mongolia over giant mine

Fri Feb 1, 2013 3:54am EST

* Mongolia concerned about soaring project costs at Oyu Tolgoi

* Negotiations are a test for new Rio Tinto CEO

* Mongolia looks to step up state ownership, taxes on mines By Terrence Edwards and Sonali Paul ULAN BATOR/MELBOURNE, Feb 1 (Reuters) - Rio Tinto faces tough negotiations next week in Mongolia, where the government is under pressure to plug a budget deficit and increase its share of the wealth from the $6.2 billion Oyu Tolgoi copper and gold mine.

Oyu Tolgoi, 34 percent owned by Mongolia and controlled by Rio Tinto, produced its first concentrate this week and is on track to start supplying metal and paying royalties by June.

The success of the mine is crucial for both sides as, at full tilt, Oyu Tolgoi will account for nearly a third of Mongolia's economy, while Rio Tinto is depending on the mine to drive growth beyond its powerhouse iron ore business.

Rio Tinto is not expected to have to give up a bigger share of the mine, but some analysts say it could end up agreeing to provide more funding in areas like infrastructure to remove uncertainty over a project that is expected to produce 425,000 tonnes of copper and 460,000 ounces of gold a year.

Rio Tinto and its subsidiary, Turquoise Hill Resources Ltd , last year fended off an attempt by Mongolia to renegotiate their 2009 investment agreement on Oyu Tolgoi.

The government is drafting a law that would require Mongolians to hold at least a 34 percent stake in mines, however talk that this would apply to Oyu Tolgoi has died down.

Instead, there is speculation the government may press Rio for more funding outside the agreement, which includes a 5 percent royalty on all sales, as Mongolia faces a revenue squeeze despite being touted as the world's fastest growing economy as recently as 2011.

"It looks as if the government of Mongolia will run a large budget deficit in 2013," said Nick Cousyn, chief operating officer at BDSec, an investment bank in Mongolia.

"How they will close this gap is anyone's guess, but we think unilaterally changing the OT agreement is off the table," he said.

UPPER HAND

In meetings scheduled for next week, the government could question why project costs have blown out, raising concern that Rio Tinto may want to slow development due to the steeper costs, as it has done with other major capital projects.

Rio Tinto executives in Ulan Bator and a spokesman declined to comment on the upcoming talks.

Turquoise Hill last year put the total project cost at $13.2 billion, including developing an underground mine and sustaining capital costs, up from a 2010 estimate of $9.55 billion.

A Bloomberg report this week said Rio was considering a temporarily halt of construction to protest against demands by the government for a bigger stake in the project and new royalty rates.

In response to the report that cited two unnamed sources, Rio Tinto said it remained on schedule to start selling ore from the mine in the first half of the year.

One analyst said the firm may be considering delaying the project's second stage to build an underground mine, but others said it was unlikely to hold up the expansion for too long.

"It's not going to kill the project off because it's a cracking asset," said Hayden Bairstow, an analyst at CLSA.

The feasibility study for the underground mine is due to be finished in the first half of 2013. Construction was estimated last year at $5.1 billion.

ANOTHER WRITEDOWN?

Rio Tinto's latest battle in Mongolia poses a challenge for its new chief executive, Sam Walsh, who replaced Tom Albanese in January after the firm reported $14 billion in writedowns in aluminium and coal.

Walsh may want to smooth relations with the government rather than play tough to ensure that the firm does not have to keep fighting off a clamour for greater Mongolian ownership, CLSA's Bairstow said.

"When it's effectively a third of GDP, getting the entire country offside isn't a go-forward position that's going to work," he said.

If the firm bowed to some of the government's demands and as a result had to take a small writedown, the market may be forgiving, as it would remove uncertainty, Bairstow said.

The talks with Rio Tinto are part of a wider effort by the government to squeeze more out of the mining industry.

At a meeting on Friday, Mongolian miners complained about the proposed new mining law that would impose taxes on exploration and step up local ownership of resources to as much as 51 percent.

Though one of the aims of the law is to make sure resources stay in Mongolian hands, some local miners are just as worried over the legislation as foreign counterparts.

The proposed law includes heavy fines and could even have a company's licensed land revoked by the government, said Enkhsaikhan Batmunk, director general of Magma Mines.

Another concern is that if the state owns 51 percent of a firm, it will be tough to raise money via a public listing.

But while Mongolians recognised the need for foreign investment, "What's under the ground belongs to them like the sky," said Namgar Algaa, executive director of the Mining Association.

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (2)
ulaanbaatar wrote:
I believe news should be unbiased but the article does not mention why Mongolians don’t lose trust in big mining projects. It is the lack of transparency of Oyu Tolgoi, the lack of ability of the CEO to put sustainability and stakeholders’ concern a priority. The company from the beginning failed to be transparent, treated employees badly, and never had capable executives in their sustainability and community stakeholder departments. The CEO and executives don’t fully understand the Mongolians’ perspectives, respect their culture and listen to them. Rio Tinto underestimated what Mongolians are capable of doing, such as what would lack of transparency entails.

Feb 04, 2013 1:58am EST  --  Report as abuse
ulaanbaatar wrote:
When both sides have a win-win deal, then Rio Tinto or foreign miners can operate in Mongolia. Flashy PRs, brainwashing advertisements, which OT used for so long in Mongolia don’t work for long term. Mongolians feel they got a bad deal in the OT project, since no Mongolians are in executive decision making position especially in HR and Procurement positions. Some Australians who have no clue about Mongolia work there as VPs. Most of 3 or 4 billion dollars of initial investment went right outside of Mongolia, since OT did not try hard to involve local companies in their procurements. OT has not asked their employees how their family is doing while they are working on mine site for 2-4 weeks. Some of the Mongolians suppliers employees work there for 2 months, without meeting their families. OT has not asked them how they are doing. Many social and family related issued came up because OT has not spent money to build a town with schools and health facilities. It seems to me a common sense to respect and listen to their stakeholders in order for this global giant mine company to justify its investment in Mongolia, however, Rio Tinto does not seem to care much about the country or its people. In return, they might be kicked out. It is a good lesson for other companies, who want to gain short term profit in a developing country, in which the issues of corruption, elite capture, and income inequality prevail, the key lesson is listen to stakeholder of various background, social income groups, and listen to them and respect them and do something tangible and sustainable for the people from the early stage. Companies no longer can ignore the sustainable development issues and stakeholders’ concern.

Feb 04, 2013 8:40am EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.