Abstract

Operators of extractive joint ventures are typically reimbursed for their costs incurred on a ‘no gain, no loss’ basis. Some costs can be directly attributed, but many corporate overhead charges are indirect and recovered through a negotiated overhead charge. These overhead charges are a recurring source of audit disputes, and can escalate to a point of delaying the approval of proposed budgets. Recent benchmarking of contractual language related to overhead charges across 76 joint ventures shows wide variety in both median rates as well as allowable costs included in overhead. Analysis also identified certain gaps in contractual agreements that likely give rise to overhead-related disputes, which leads to three ways for co-venturers to rethink their approach to setting, modifying, and auditing overhead charges – with an eye towards reducing the incidence of frictions and dispute.

中文翻译：

---

在合资企业中设定运营商的间接费用：基准法律协议

摘要

采掘合资企业的经营者通常会以“无收益，无损失”的基础来偿还其产生的成本。可以直接归因于某些成本，但是许多公司间接费用是间接的，可以通过协商的间接费用来收回。这些间接费用是审计纠纷的经常性来源，并且可能升级为延迟批准概算的地步。最近与76家合资企业的间接费用相关的合同语言基准测试显示，间接费用中位数和允许的成本范围很广。分析还确定了合同协议中的某些空白，可能会引起与间接费用相关的纠纷，这导致合作者重新思考其设置，修改，