IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/clh/resear/v9y2016i35.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Alberta's New Royalty Regime is a Step Towards Competitivness: A 2016 Update

Author

Listed:
  • Daria Crisan

    (The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary)

  • Jack Mintz

    (The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary)

Abstract

Alberta’s new royalty regime has made the province a more rewarding place for anyone looking to invest in conventional non-renewable resources. After Alberta’s NDP government commissioned a review of the royalty regime to ensure the province was receiving its “fair share,” it ended up determining that revenue-neutral changes were warranted to the royalty system for conventional oil, with oilsands largely left untouched. However, the few changes that were made have had a substantial impact on incentives for new investment. Those changes have, in fact, only made it more lucrative for investors in Alberta’s conventional oil and gas. This paper focuses on oil and the fiscal regime (it does not consider other regulatory and carbon policies that affect competitiveness). The changes for conventional oil are significant enough that the new regime entirely overcomes the competitive disadvantages for non-oil sands producers created by the NDP government’s increase in provincial corporate income taxes last year. Under the current regime, Alberta conventional oil bears a marginal effective tax and royalty rate (METRR) of 35.0 per cent (the METRR is relevant for new investment decisions). The changes have sharply reduced that to 26.7 per cent. This year, when compared against its peers in the U.S., Europe and Australia, Alberta has one of the highest METRRs for conventional oil. When the new royalty regime takes fully effect in 2017, it will have one of the lowest, bested only by Australia, the United Kingdom, Pennsylvania and, in Canada, Nova Scotia and Newfoundland & Labrador. Most notably, Alberta is more competitive now than its immediate neighbours, British Columbia and Saskatchewan, for conventional oil investment. It is also less distorting across different types of wells, which is an important quality in a well-designed royalty system. Alberta continues to implement a system of price-sensitive royalty rates with the government’s take increasing with the oil price. Our results are derived using a certain projected oil price and a certain projected exchange rate — in this case US$50 per barrel of West Texas Intermediate and 77 U.S. cents per dollar — with changes to either potentially altering the rankings and making Alberta more or less competitive, depending on what happens with those two variables. Under the new regime, Alberta’s tax burden on conventional oil projects is reduced for a wide range of oil prices. Whether the Province will attract investment for conventional oil once the market conditions improve will depend as well on other policies being adopted but at least the new royalty regime will help boost interest in the Province.

Suggested Citation

  • Daria Crisan & Jack Mintz, 2016. "Alberta's New Royalty Regime is a Step Towards Competitivness: A 2016 Update," SPP Research Papers, The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, vol. 9(35), October.
  • Handle: RePEc:clh:resear:v:9:y:2016:i:35
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.policyschool.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/AB-New-Royalty-Regime-Crisan-Mintz-final.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bev Dahlby & Kevin Milligan, 2017. "From theory to practice: Canadian economists contributions to public finance," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 50(5), pages 1324-1347, December.
    2. Schaufele, Brandon, 2019. "Demand Shocks Change the Excess Burden From Carbon Taxes," MPRA Paper 92132, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Brandon Schaufele, 2022. "Curvature and competitiveness: Carbon taxes in cattle markets," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 104(4), pages 1268-1292, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:clh:resear:v:9:y:2016:i:35. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Bev Dahlby (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/spcalca.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.