Издатель ООО "ПОЛИС"
Адрес: 190000, г. Санкт-Петербург,
Казанская улица, 35/15
УДК: 622:349.6
Правовое регулирование горнодобывающей промышленности в Перу, Чили и Российской Федерации: сравнительный анализ Кильдеев А. Х.
Кильдеев Адель Ханяфиевич
Ленинградский государственный университет им. А.А. Жданова (1990)
Кандидат юридических наук
ORCID: 0009-0001-2211-4944
Аннотация: В статье проводится сравнительный анализ правового регулирования горнодобывающей деятельности в Перу, Чили и Российской Федерации. Рассматриваются правовая природа права недропользования, порядок его получения и оборотоспособность, а также фискальные условия и механизмы государственно-инвестиционных гарантий. Показано, что концессионные модели Перу и Чили обеспечивают большую гибкость и предсказуемость для инвесторов, тогда как российская система сохраняет административный характер доступа к недрам. Сделаны выводы о влиянии этих различий на инвестиционную привлекательность и эффективность проектов.
Ключевые слова: недропользование; концессия; роялти; горное право; инвестиционная привлекательность; фискальный режим; Перу; Чили; Российская Федерация; право собственности на недра; стабилизация налогового режима.
Использование искусственного интеллекта
При подготовке данной статьи использовались инструменты искусственного интеллекта — модели ChatGPT (OpenAI, 2025) и Gemini (Google DeepMind, 2025) — исключительно для технической и редакционной поддержки: оптимизации языка, структурирования ссылок и унификации терминологии. Все научные выводы, интерпретации и аналитические обобщения принадлежат автору и отражают результаты его собственной исследовательской работы.
LEGAL REGULATION OF THE MINING INDUSTRY IN PERU, CHILE AND THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
Kildeev Adel
Zhdanov A. Leningrad State University (1990)
Philosophiæ Doctor in Law
ORCID: 0009-0001-2211-4944
Abstract: The article provides a comparative analysis of the legal regulation of mining activities in Peru, Chile and the Russian Federation. The legal nature of the subsoil use right, the procedure for obtaining it and negotiability, as well as fiscal conditions and mechanisms of state investment guarantees are considered. It is shown that the concession models of Peru and Chile provide greater flexibility and predictability for investors, while the Russian system retains the administrative nature of access to subsoil. Conclusions are made about the impact of these differences on the investment attractiveness and efficiency of projects.
Keywords: Subsoil use; concession; royalty; mining law; investment attractiveness; fiscal regime; Peru; Chile; Russian Federation; ownership of subsoil; stabilization of the tax regime.
Use of artificial intelligence
In the preparation of this article, artificial intelligence tools — the ChatGPT (OpenAI, 2025) and Gemini (Google DeepMind, 2025) models — were used exclusively for technical and editorial support: language optimization, link structuring, and terminology unification. All scientific conclusions, interpretations and analytical generalizations belong to the author and reflect the results of his own research work.
Глава 1. Введение
Горнодобывающая отрасль является ключевым элементом экономического развития и государственной политики, определяя характер использования природных ресурсов, структуру экспорта и инвестиционную динамику. Однако системы правового регулирования недропользования в разных странах существенно различаются. Эти различия задают параметры доступа к минерально-сырьевой базе, степень защищённости имущественных прав и возможности привлечения капитала в добывающие проекты.
Перу и Чили формируют модели, ориентированные на гражданскую оборотоспособность прав на добычу, где ключевую роль играют регистрационные механизмы, прозрачные процедуры приобретения и передачи концессий, а также наличие инструментов обеспечения (включая ипотеку на горнодобывающие права в Чили). В обеих юрисдикциях государство сохраняет контроль над недрами и может пересматривать условия пользования в целях охраны окружающей среды или фискальной политики. Тем не менее данные решения, как правило, принимаются в рамках процедурных регуляторных механизмов, что снижает уровень неопределённости для частного капитала.
В Российской Федерации доступ к недрам также регулируется системой лицензирования, включающей геологическое изучение, разведку и добычу. Государство сохраняет возможность изменения условий недропользования, включая отзыв лицензий или пересмотр параметров разработки, в том числе по экологическим и социальным основаниям. Эти инструменты не являются уникальными для России, однако степень административной дискретности и практическая зависимость жизнеспособности проекта от отношений с регулятором может оказывать более значительное влияние на оценку рисков инвестором.
Таким образом, во всех трех рассматриваемых странах государство осуществляет контроль над недрами, включая потенциальную возможность прекращения или изменения прав на добычу. Отличия состоят не в самом факте государственного участия, а в масштабе процедурной определённости, уровне институциональной предсказуемости и доступности механизмов защиты имущественных интересов инвесторов. Сравнение правовых режимов регулирования горнодобывающего сектора промышленности Перу, Чили и Российской Федерации позволяет определить, какие условия создают большую устойчивость капитальных вложений, а какие формируют дополнительные регуляторные риски, а также выработать предложения по совершенствованию российского законодательства в сфере недропользования.
Глава 2. Правовые основы доступа к недрам и содержание права недропользования в Перу
Правовой режим использования минеральных ресурсов в Перу базируется на сочетании государственного суверенитета над недрами и частноправовой природы горнодобывающей концессии, которая признаётся отчуждаемым имущественным правом, подлежащим регистрации и обороту.
2.1. Конституционные положения
Согласно ст. 66 Политической Конституции Республики Перу (1993),[1] природные ресурсы, расположенные в недрах, находятся под суверенным управлением государства. Государство может предоставлять частным лицам право их использования на основании концессии, которая должна быть оформлена и действовать в порядке, установленном законом. Конституция тем самым вводит двухуровневую модель:
Это принципиальный элемент перуанской модели: государство не передаёт собственность на недра, но передаёт право извлечения и присвоения полезных ископаемых, которое имеет имущественную стоимость, может быть предметом сделки, залога и инвестиционной оценки.
2.2. Основной закон о недропользовании
Базовым нормативным документом выступает Всеобщий закон о горнодобывающей деятельности (Texto Único Ordenado de la Ley General de Minería, D.S. Nº 014-92-EM).[2]
Он закрепляет этапы и формы реализации горнодобывающей деятельности:
Общий принцип сформулирован в ст. 8–11 Закона:
горнодобывающая концессия является имущественным правом, которое может быть:
Таким образом, перуанское право не рассматривает концессию как простое административное разрешение, а как актив, обладающий экономической стоимостью и обладающий юридической оборотоспособностью.
2.3. Из чего «складывается» право недропользования
Право — это пакет правомочий, который оформляется по стадиям:
2.4. Государственная регистрация прав (INGEMMET)
Переход прав на концессию подлежит обязательной регистрации в Национальном геолого-горнодобывающем и металлургическом институте
(INGEMMET — Instituto Geológico, Minero y Metalúrgico).
Регистрация выполняет три функции:
Регистровая система — ключевой элемент предсказуемости: юридическая защита обеспечивается не личными связями с государством, а наличием в реестре.
2.5. Обязанности недропользователя и основания прекращения прав
Концессия влечёт обязательства, установленные законодательством:
Право может быть прекращено только по предусмотренным законом основаниям, например:
Каждое прекращение оформляется административным актом, подлежащим обжалованию в судебном порядке.
Таким образом, прекращение не носит произвольный характер — оно должно быть процедурно и документально обосновано.
2.6. Экология и разрешения
2.7. Фискальный режим и налогообложение горнодобывающей деятельности в Перу
Фискальная модель в Перу строится на сочетании налога на прибыль, роялти, налога на валовую маржу, а также возможности заключения стабилизационных соглашений для крупных проектов. Режим является смешанным: он включает как фиксированные налоговые обязательства, так и переменные элементы, зависящие от рентабельности проекта.
2.7.1. Derecho de vigencia (ежегодный платёж за площадь)
2.7.2. Налог на прибыль (Impuesto a la Renta – IR)
2.7.3. Горное роялти (Regalía Minera)
Роялти рассчитываются не от объёма добычи, а от операционной прибыли (операционной маржи) — это отличает Перу от стран, где роялти берут «с головы» (royalty ad valorem).
Ставка варьируется от 1% до 12%, в зависимости от рентабельности проекта:
Это называется Escala de Regalía (скользящая шкала).
2.7.4. Налог на горнодобывающую прибыль (Impuesto Especial a la Minería – IEM)
Этот налог также действует по прогрессивной шкале, но базируется на операционной прибыли до налогов:
Вместе с Regalía Minera, данный налог образует двойную систему участия государства в прибыли.
2.7.5. Налог на дополнительную ренту (Gravamen Especial a la Minería – GEM)
Применим к компаниям, которые имеют соглашение о стабилизации (Contratos de Estabilidad Jurídica y Tributaria).
Ставка — 2%–13.12%, также по прогрессивной шкале рентабельности.
Таким образом, компании без соглашений платят только IR + Regalía + IEM, а компании со стабилизацией — IR + Regalía + GEM.
2.7.6. Стабилизационные соглашения (Contratos de Estabilidad Jurídica)
Перу предоставляет иностранным инвесторам возможность зафиксировать налоговый режим на срок до 10–15 лет.
Это особенно важно для проектов с крупным CAPEX.
Стабилизационный контракт гарантирует:
Соглашения заключаются через ProInversión (агентство по инвестициям), как правило, для проектов с CAPEX от 10–50 млн USD и выше.
2.7.7. Малый и артезианский сектор
Для субъектов, проходящих формализацию (см. REINFO), применяется упрощённый режим:
Это сделано для целей вывода кустарных добытчиков из тени.
2.7.8. Фискальный режим Перу:
2.8. Прекращение и защита прав
2.9. Проблема нелегальных шахтёров и упрощённая легализация горной добычи в Перу
Одной из серьёзных проблем перуанского горнодобывающего сектора является существенное присутствие нелегальных шахтёров. По различным оценкам, от 40% до 50% всех небольших добывающих предприятий в стране работают вне правового поля. Эти нелегальные добытчики не уплачивают роялти, налоги на прибыль, социальные и пенсионные взносы, что создаёт значительные потери для государства. Более того, нелегальная добыча часто связана с криминальными структурами и может использоваться для отмывания денег. Об этой проблеме давно говорят не только политики и журналисты, но и многочисленные юристы[3], даже канадские.[4]
Чтобы справиться с этой ситуацией, перуанское правительство ввело механизм временной легализации. В рамках этого механизма нелегальным шахтёрам могут выдавать специальные временные разрешения на добычу. Эти разрешения позволяют им работать без полной процедуры, предусмотренной для обычных лицензий, включая упрощённые экологические требования и административные процедуры.
Например, согласно указу о формализации мелкомасштабной добычи, власти Перу могут предоставлять нелегальным шахтёрам временные разрешения сроком до определённого периода, при условии, что они начнут процесс перехода к полной легализации. Такой подход даёт возможность государству постепенно вывести значительную часть добычи «из тени» и получить хотя бы частичные поступления в бюджет.
Таким образом, этот механизм упрощённой легализации стал важной частью стратегии Перу по борьбе с нелегальной добычей и по расширению налоговой базы в горнодобывающем секторе. Тем не менее, согласно официальным данным Министерства энергетики и горнодобывающей промышленности, по состоянию на ноябрь 2024 года только 2 108 из 86 000 шахтеров, зарегистрированных в Интегрированном реестре для формализации майнинга, или REINFO, завершили этот процесс, что составляет всего 2,4%.[5]
Дополнительная конкретизация механизма:
В соответствии с Ley N° 27651 (Ley de Formalización y Promoción de la Pequeña Minería y Minería Artesanal)[6] и D.S. N° 013-2012-EM, формализация нелегальных добытчиков осуществляется в рамках Proceso de Formalización Minera Integral. Данный процесс включает несколько последовательных этапов:
Сроки действия и прекращение временного разрешения
Экономические последствия для государства и рынка
2.10. Земельные отношения и сервитуты при реализации горных прав
В странах андинской модели право недропользования и право собственности на землю юридически разделены, что требует отдельного регулирования доступа к поверхности. В Перу доступ к поверхности обеспечивается через:
Практика показывает, что в большинстве случаев вопросы решаются путём переговоров, а государство вмешивается только при затруднениях. Сервитут может быть установлен в принудительном порядке, если доказана общественная значимость проекта.
Глава 3. Правовые основы доступа к недрам и содержание права недропользования в Чили
Правовой режим в Чили основан на признании публичного доминиума государства на недра при одновременном существовании вещного права на недропользование (derecho real minero), которое принадлежит концессионеру и обладает свойствами частной собственности. Это ключевая концептуальная особенность чилийской модели, отличающая её от административно-лицензионных режимов.
3.1. Конституционные и законодательные основы
Эти нормы устанавливают:
3.2. Стадии формирования права
| Стадия | Правомочия | Срок | Цель |
| Concesion de Exploracion | Геологоразведка, бурение, временная инфраструктура | Обычно до 2 лет | Оценка перспектив участка |
| Mensura-Concesion de Explotacion | Промышленная добыча, переработка, экспорт | Бессрочно при соблюдении обязательств | Коммерческая разработка |
Ключевой момент:
После mensura право становится бессрочным, пока концессионер платит патент и соблюдает закон.
3.3. Регистрация и оборотоспособность прав
Право недропользования регистрируется в Conservador de Minas и может быть:
То есть в Чили горное право — не разрешение, а актив. Это основной фактор инвестиционной привлекательности.
3.4. Экологическая оценка
Оценка проводится в системе SEIA (Servicio de Evaluación de Impacto Ambiental):
3.5. Фискальная модель
• Корпоративный налог: 27%.
• Роялти (IEAM): 5%–14% от операционной маржи.
• Patente Minera: • Налог на дивиденды: 35% (с возможностью снижения по договорам об избежании двойного налогообложения).
3.6. Стабилизация налогового режима
Чили допускает договора о налоговой стабильности на 6–12 лет для крупных проектов. Основание: DL 600 (Estatuto de Inversión Extranjera) — действует в обновлённом виде после 2016 г.
3.7. Прекращение права
Основания:
Процедура строго судебная, что обеспечивает высокий уровень защиты инвестора.
3.8. Доступ к земле и режим горных сервитутов в Чили
В Чили право недропользования, оформленное в виде Concesión Minera Mensura, обладает непосредственной исполнительной силой. Согласно ст. 121–129 Código de Minería, концессионер вправе требовать немедленного доступа к поверхности, необходимой для ведения горных работ. При предъявлении титула Mensura и утверждённого плана разработки (Plano de la Faena), публичные органы, включая Carabineros de Chile, могут обеспечить доступ к участку без предварительного судебного решения. Я сам был свидетелем такого прямого вмешательства карабинеров Чили, когда местный фермер отказался пустить геологов к шахте по дороге через его земельный участок.
Вопрос о компенсации владельцу земли рассматривается отдельно и не препятствует реализации права на добычу. Такой режим снижает операционные риски и обеспечивает высокую предсказуемость доступа к объекту недропользования.
Глава 4. Правовые основы доступа к недрам и содержание права недропользования в Российской Федерации
В Российской Федерации право на недропользование основано на лицензионном режиме, где право пользования недрами имеет характер административного разрешения, а не имущественного права.
4.1. Конституционные и законодательные основы
Правовая природа: лицензия на пользование недрами — административное право на определённый вид работ; не является самостоятельным вещным/имущественным правом, оборот ограничен публичным правом.
4.2. Стадии предоставления права
| Вид лицензии | Содержание | Особенности |
| Геологическое изучение | Геологическая разведка, бурение, геофизика | Временный характер |
| Разведка и оценка | Подсчет запасов, постановка на госбаланс (ГКЗ/ТКЗ) | Обязательна экспертиза запасов |
| Добыча | Промышленная разработка | Режим промышленной безопасности (Ростехнадзор) |
Лицензии выдаются по видам работ и на конкретный участок недр:
Право не становится имущественным активом. Оно не может свободно передаваться.
4.3. Оборотоспособность и финансирование
4.4. Земля vs недра и доступ
4.5. Экология и безопасность
4.6. Фискальная модель
НДПИ в России — базовый налог, рассчитывается либо:
Для золота ставка НДПИ = 6% от стоимости добытого металла (в соответствии с ценой на Лондонской бирже в момент реализации), если нет льгот.
Для серебра — 6%
Для меди — 8% (может варьировать при льготах)
Для руд цветных металлов — 4–8% в зависимости от группы.
4.7. Прекращение и защита прав
Процедура — административная, возможен судебный контроль, но степень регуляторной дискретности выше, чем в Перу и Чили.
Глава 5. Заключение
Для наглядности сведем вышерассмотренные данные в сравнительную таблицу
СРАВНИТЕЛЬНАЯ ТАБЛИЦА
| Параметр | Перу | Чили | РФ | |
| Природа права | Концессия как имущественное право | Derecho real minero (вещное право) | Административная лицензия | |
| Оборотоспособность | Передача/продажа/
залог допускаются при регистрации |
Свободная передача; допускается ипотека (Hipoteca Minera) |
|
|
| Регистрация | INGEMMET (публичный реестр) | Conservador de Minas (публичный регистр) | Госреестры лицензий (ограниченная гражданская оборотоспособность) | |
| Стадии работ | Разведка → Добыча | Разведка (короткая) → Mensura → Добыча (бессрочно) | Отдельные лицензии: изучение, разведка, добыча | |
| Доступ к земле | Через сервитуты/договоры с владельцем земли | Через сервитуты/судебные процедуры | Через отдельные земельные режимы и горный отвод | |
| Экологические процедуры | DIAS/EIA в зависимости от масштаба | SEIA и публичные консультации |
|
|
| Залог права | Да (в INGEMMET) | Да (Hipoteca Minera) | Нет | |
| Роялти | 1–12% (прогрессивное) | 5–14% (прогрессивное) | НДПИ фиксированный | |
| Корп. налог | 29.5% | 27% | 20% | |
| Плата | $3/га/год | 0.56–16$/га/год | Нет аналога, разовая плата при получении лицензии | |
| Льготный режим | Да | Да | В отдельных случаях да |
Сравнительный анализ правовых режимов Перу, Чили и Российской Федерации показывает, что российское законодательство в сфере недропользования уступает по гибкости и инвестиционной привлекательности режимам Перу и Чили. Перу и Чили обеспечивают понятные, экономически мотивирующие механизмы участия государства, при этом предоставляя концессионерам более широкие имущественные гарантии и возможность гибко привлекать финансирование.
В Российской Федерации право недропользования носит административный характер, а ключевые финансовые механизмы, такие как НДПИ, не привязаны к реальной рентабельности проекта, что повышает порог входа и снижает конкурентоспособность новых предприятий. В сочетании с более сложными климатическими условиями и ограничениями на круглогодичную добычу в ряде регионов это приводит к снижению общих показателей эффективности отрасли и уменьшению налоговой базы.
О недостатках в правовом регулировании системы недропользования неоднократно писали российские юристы. Как пишет Шитик А.А.: «Сложившаяся система недропользования в Российской Федерации учитывает интересы не столько общества и государства, сколько собственников недродобывающих организаций. В последние годы российское государство стало активно закреплять свои права собственника в ряде организаций недропользователей, вносить позитивные изменения в нормативно-правовую базу недропользования и в акты по техническому контролю, устанавливать новые эффективные нормативы и стандарты, в то же время сохраняющаяся противоречивость и пробелы отечественного законодательства повышают факторы риска и неопределенности в деятельности хозяйствующих субъектов и коррупциогенности в деятельности государственных органов».[10]
Сравнение правовых моделей Перу, Чили и Российской Федерации позволяет сделать вывод о принципиально различном понимании содержания права недропользования. В странах андинской группы горная концессия квалифицируется не как временное разрешение, а как вещное и оборотоспособное право, закреплённое за конкретным субъектом и допускающее гражданско-правовые формы распоряжения. Такая конструкция обеспечивает стабильность правового титула, предсказуемость хозяйственной деятельности и возможность долгосрочного планирования разработки месторождений.
Ключевым преимуществом перуанской и чилийской моделей является вечный характер концессии, существующей до тех пор, пока концессионер надлежащим образом исполняет установленные законом и регулятором обязательства по освоению участка. Это право может быть отчуждено, передано по наследству, внесено в уставный капитал, заложено в качестве обеспечения кредитов, что формирует полноценный рынок прав на недропользование и интегрирует горные активы в финансовую систему. В результате концессия превращается в ликвидный инвестиционный актив, а недропользователь — в полноправного экономического участника, способного привлекать капитал на рыночных условиях.
Российская модель, напротив, сохраняет преобладание административно-дозволительного подхода и рассматривает недропользование как временное, ограниченное и зависимое от государственной дискреции право. Такая конструкция ограничивает оборотоспособность активов, снижает инвестиционную привлекательность проектов и ведёт к повышению транзакционных и институциональных издержек. В условиях глобального перераспределения интересов в сфере добычи полезных ископаемых модели Перу и Чили оказываются более адаптивными, ориентированными на устойчивое, долгосрочное освоение ресурсов, а не на краткосрочную эксплуатацию.
Таким образом, опыт андинских стран демонстрирует, что укрепление вещной природы горной концессии, обеспечение её оборотоспособности и включение недропользования в систему гражданского оборота создают предпосылки для формирования устойчивой, предсказуемой и привлекательной для инвесторов отрасли. Данный вектор может рассматриваться как ориентир для дальнейшего совершенствования законодательства Российской Федерации в области недропользования.
Список использованной литературы / References
1. Политическая Конституция Республики Перу (1993). Электронный ресурс https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Peru_2021
2. Texto Único Ordenado de la Ley General de Minería, D.S. Nº 014-92-EM Электронный ресурс: https://www.gob.pe/institucion/osinergmin/normas-legales/741037-014-92-em
3. John Crabtree, Anna Wilson, and Aaron Quiñón Cárdenas. Extending legal security in the Peruvian mining sector. The formalization of informal miners./ Extending_legal_security_in_the_Peruvian_mining_se.pdf
4. Sandra McKay. Critical minerals or criminal miners? The (in)formalization of artisanal and small-scale copper mining in Peru. Электронный ресурс: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214790X2500200X
5. Электронный ресурс: https://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2025/07/03/peru-mining-gold-criminals-registration-miners/7081751568296
6. Ley de Formalización y Promoción de la Pequeña Minería y Minería Artesanal. Электронный ресурс: extension://mjdgandcagmikhlbjnilkmfnjeamfikk/https://www.minam.gob.pe/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Ley-N%C2%B0-27651.pdf
7. Конституция Чили (1980, с последующими редакциями). Электронный ресурс: https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Chile_2021
8. Código de Minería. Электронный ресурс:https://www.bcn.cl/leychile/navegar?idNorma=29668&idParte=8681010&idVersion=1983-12-13
9. Ley Orgánica Constitucional sobre Concesiones Mineras (1981). Электронный ресурс:extension://mjdgandcagmikhlbjnilkmfnjeamfikk/https://www.lexoffice.cl/pdfs/ley18097.pdf
10. Шитик, А.А. Правовое регулирование отношение в сфере недропользования. Электронный ресурс: https://moluch.ru/archive/309/69736
UDC: 622:349.6
LEGAL REGULATION OF THE MINING INDUSTRY IN PERU, CHILE AND THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
Kildeev Adel Khanyafievich
A.A. Zhdanov Leningrad State University (1990)
PhD in Law
ORCID: 0009-0001-2211-4944
Abstract: The article provides a comparative analysis of the legal regulation of mining activities in Peru, Chile and the Russian Federation. The legal nature of the right to subsoil use, the procedure for obtaining it and negotiability, as well as fiscal conditions and mechanisms of state investment guarantees are considered. It is shown that the concession models of Peru and Chile provide greater flexibility and predictability for investors, while the Russian system preserves the administrative nature of access to subsoil. Conclusions are made about the impact of these differences on the investment attractiveness and efficiency of projects.
Keywords: subsoil use; concession; royalties; mining law; investment attractiveness; fiscal regime; Peru; Chile; Russian Federation; ownership of subsoil; stabilization of the tax regime.
Use of artificial intelligence
In preparing this article, artificial intelligence tools — the ChatGPT (OpenAI, 2025) and Gemini (Google DeepMind, 2025) models — were used exclusively for technical and editorial support: language optimization, link structuring, and terminology unification. All scientific conclusions, interpretations and analytical generalizations belong to the author and reflect the results of his own research work.
Chapter 1. Introduction
The mining industry is a key element of economic development and public policy, determining the nature of the use of natural resources, the structure of exports and investment dynamics. However, the systems of legal regulation of subsoil use vary significantly from country to country. These differences determine the parameters of access to the mineral resource base, the degree of protection of property rights and the possibility of attracting capital to mining projects.
Chile and Peru are developing models focused on the civil negotiability of mining rights, where registration mechanisms, transparent procedures for the acquisition and transfer of concessions, and the availability of security instruments (including mortgages for mining rights in Chile) play a key role. In both jurisdictions, the state retains control over the subsoil and may revise the terms of use for environmental protection or fiscal policy purposes. However, these decisions are usually made within the framework of procedural regulatory mechanisms, which reduces the level of uncertainty for private capital.
In the Russian Federation, access to subsoil is also regulated by a licensing system, including geological survey, exploration and production. The state retains the ability to change the conditions of subsoil use, including the revocation of licenses or the revision of development parameters, including on environmental and social grounds. These tools are not unique to Russia, but the degree of administrative discretion and the practical dependence of the project’s viability on relations with the regulator may have a more significant impact on the investor’s risk assessment.
Thus, in all three countries under consideration, the state exercises control over the subsoil, including the potential possibility of termination or change of mining rights. The differences lie not in the fact of state participation itself, but in the scale of procedural certainty, the level of institutional predictability and the availability of mechanisms for protecting the property interests of investors. A comparison of the legal regulatory regimes of the mining sector in Peru, Chile and the Russian Federation makes it possible to determine which conditions create greater sustainability of capital investments, and which create additional regulatory risks, as well as to develop proposals for improving Russian legislation in the field of subsoil use.
Chapter 2. Legal Framework for Access to Subsoil and the Content of Subsoil Use Rights in Peru
The legal regime for the use of mineral resources in Peru is based on a combination of state sovereignty over the subsoil and the private nature of the mining concession, which is recognized as an alienable property right subject to registration and circulation.
2.1. Constitutional Provisions
According to Article 66 of the Political Constitution of the Republic of Peru (1993),[1] natural resources located in the subsoil are under the sovereign management of the state. The state may grant private persons the right to use them on the basis of a concession, which must be formalized and operate in accordance with the procedure established by law.
This is a fundamental element of the Peruvian model: the state does not transfer ownership of the subsoil, but transfers the right to extract and appropriate minerals, which has a property value, can be the subject of a transaction, pledge and investment valuation.
2.2. Basic Law on Subsoil Use
The basic regulatory document is the General Mining Act (Texto Único Ordenado de la Ley General de Minería, D.S. Nº 014-92-EM).[2]
It fixes the stages and forms of implementation of mining activities:
The general principle is formulated in Articles 8-11 of the Law:
A mining concession is a property right that can be:
Thus, Peruvian law does not consider concession as a mere administrative authorization, but as an asset with economic value and legal negotiability.
2.3. What does the subsoil use right consist of?
A law is a package of powers, which is formalized in the following stages:
2.4. State registration of rights (INGEMMET)
The transfer of rights to a concession is subject to mandatory registration with the National Geological, Mining and Metallurgical Institute
(INGEMMET — Instituto Geológico, Minero y Metalúrgico).
Registration performs three functions:
The registry system is a key element of predictability: legal protection is provided not by personal ties with the state, but by presence in the register.
2.5. Obligations of a subsoil user and grounds for termination of rights
A concession entails obligations established by law:
The right may be terminated only on the grounds provided for by law, for example:
Each termination is formalized by an administrative act subject to appeal in court.
Thus, termination is not arbitrary – it must be procedurally and documented.
2.6. Ecology and permits
2.7. Fiscal Regime and Taxation of Mining Activities in Peru
The fiscal model in Peru is based on a combination of income tax, royalties, gross margin tax, as well as the possibility of concluding stabilization agreements for large projects. The regime is mixed: it includes both fixed tax liabilities and variable elements depending on the profitability of the project.
2.7.1. Derecho de vigencia (annual payment for the area)
2.7.2. Income Tax (Impuesto a la Renta – IR)
2.7.3. Mining Royalties (Regalía Minera)
Royalties are calculated not from the volume of production, but from operating profit (operating margin) — this distinguishes Peru from countries where royalties are taken «from the head» (royalty ad valorem).
The rate varies from 1% to 12%, depending on the profitability of the project:
This is called the Escala de Regalía (sliding scale).
2.7.4. Mining Profit Tax (Impuesto Especial a la Minería – IEM)
This tax also operates on a progressive scale, but is based on operating profit before taxes:
Together with Regalía Minera, this tax forms a double system of state participation in profits.
2.7.5. Supplementary Rent Tax (Gravamen Especial a la Minería – GEM)
Applicable to companies that have a stabilization agreement (Contratos de Estabilidad Jurídica y Tributaria).
The rate is 2%–13.12%, also on a progressive scale of profitability.
Thus, companies without agreements only pay IR + Regalía + IEM, while companies with stabilization pay IR + Regalía + GEM.
2.7.6. Stabilization agreements (Contratos de Estabilidad Jurídica)
Peru provides foreign investors with the opportunity to fix the tax regime for up to 10-15 years.
This is especially important for projects with a large CAPEX.
A stabilization contract guarantees:
Agreements are concluded through ProInversión (investment agency), as a rule, for projects with a CAPEX of 10-50 million USD and above.
2.7.7. Small and artesian sector
For entities undergoing formalization (see REINFO), a simplified regime is applied:
This is done for the purpose of bringing artisanal miners out of the shadows.
2.7.8. Fiscal regime of Peru:
2.8. Termination and Protection of Rights
2.9. The problem of illegal miners and simplified legalization of mining in Peru
One of the serious problems of the Peruvian mining sector is the significant presence of illegal miners. According to various estimates, from 40% to 50% of all small mining enterprises in the country operate outside the legal framework. These illegal miners do not pay royalties, income taxes, social and pension contributions, which creates significant losses for the state. Moreover, illegal mining is often associated with criminal structures and can be used for money laundering. Not only politicians and journalists, but also numerous lawyers[3], even Canadians, have long been talking about this problem.[4]
To cope with this situation, the Peruvian government has introduced a mechanism for temporary legalization. As part of this mechanism, illegal miners can be issued special temporary permits for mining. These permits allow them to operate without the full procedure provided for ordinary licenses, including simplified environmental requirements and administrative procedures.
For example, under the decree on the formalization of small-scale mining, the Peruvian authorities can grant temporary permits to illegal miners for up to a certain period, provided that they begin the process of transition to full legalization. This approach allows the state to gradually bring a significant part of the production «out of the shadows» and receive at least partial revenues to the budget.
As such, this simplified legalization mechanism has become an important part of Peru’s strategy to combat illegal mining and to broaden the tax base in the mining sector. However, according to official data from the Ministry of Energy and Mines, as of November 2024, only 2,108 of the 86,000 miners registered in the Integrated Registry for Formalization of Mining, or REINFO, have completed this process, which is only 2.4%.[5]
Additional specification of the mechanism:
In accordance with Ley N° 27651 (Ley de Formalización y Promoción de la Pequeña Minería y Minería Artesanal)[6] and D.S. N° 013-2012-EM, the formalization of illegal miners is carried out within the framework of the Proceso de Formalización Minera Integral. This process includes several consecutive stages:
Validity and termination of a temporary permit
Economic consequences for the state and the market
2.10. Land relations and easements in the implementation of mining rights
In the countries of the Andean model, the right of subsoil use and ownership of land are legally separated, which requires separate regulation of access to the surface. In Peru, access to the surface is provided through:
Practice shows that in most cases issues are resolved through negotiations, and the state intervenes only in case of difficulties. An easement can be established forcibly if the public significance of the project is proven.
Chapter 3. Legal Basis of Access to Subsoil and Content of Subsoil Use Rights in Chile
The legal regime in Chile is based on the recognition of the state’s public dominium on the subsoil with the simultaneous existence of a proprietary right to subsoil use (derecho real minero), which belongs to the concessionaire and has the properties of private property. This is a key conceptual feature of the Chilean model, which distinguishes it from administrative and licensing regimes.
3.1. Constitutional and legislative foundations
These norms establish:
3.2. Stages of law formation
|
Stage |
Powers |
Term |
Purpose |
|
Concesion de Exploracion |
Exploration, drilling, temporary infrastructure |
Usually up to 2 years |
Assessment of the prospects of the site |
|
Mensura-Concesion de Explotacion |
Industrial production, processing, export |
Indefinitely subject to compliance with obligations |
Commercial development |
Key point:
After the mensura, the right becomes perpetual as long as the concessionaire pays the patent and complies with the law.
3.3. Registration and negotiability of rights
The subsoil use right is registered with the Conservador de Minas and can be:
That is, in Chile , mining law is not a permit, but an asset. This is the main factor in investment attractiveness.
3.4. Environmental assessment
The assessment is carried out in the SEIA system (Servicio de Evaluación de Impacto Ambiental):
3.5. Fiscal model
• Corporate tax: 27%.• Royalties (IEAM): 5%-14% of operating margin.• Patente Minera: • Dividend tax: 35% (subject to reduction under double tax treaties).
3.6. Stabilization of the tax regime
Chile allows tax stability agreements for 6-12 years for large projects. Grounds: DL 600 (Estatuto de Inversión Extranjera) – Valid in updated form after 2016
3.7. Termination of the right
Base:
The procedure is strictly judicial, which ensures a high level of investor protection.
3.8. Access to land and the regime of mountain easements in Chile
In Chile, the subsoil use right, formalized in the form of Concesión Minera Mensura, has direct executive force. According to Articles 121 to 129 of the Código de Minería, the concessionaire has the right to demand immediate access to the surface necessary for the conduct of mining operations. Upon presentation of the title of Mensura and the approved development plan (Plano de la Faena), public authorities, including the Carabineros de Chile, can provide access to the site without prior court order. I myself witnessed such direct intervention by the Carabinieri of Chile, when a local farmer refused to let geologists into the mine on the road through his land.
The issue of compensation to the owner of the land is considered separately and does not prevent the exercise of the right to extraction. This mode reduces operational risks and ensures high predictability of access to the subsoil use facility.
Chapter 4. Legal Basis for Access to Subsoil and the Content of the Subsoil Use Right in the Russian Federation
In the Russian Federation, the right to subsoil use is based on a licensing regime, where the right to use subsoil has the nature of an administrative permit, and not a property right.
4.1. Constitutional and legislative foundations
Legal nature: a license for the use of subsoil is an administrative right to a certain type of work; is not an independent property/property right, the turnover is limited by public law.
4.2. Stages of granting the right
|
Type of license |
Content |
Features |
|
Geological study |
Geological exploration, drilling, geophysics |
Temporality |
|
Exploration and Evaluation |
Calculation of reserves, putting on the state balance sheet (GKZ/TKZ) |
Stock expertise is mandatory |
|
Mining |
Industrial development |
Industrial Safety Regime (Rostekhnadzor) |
Licenses are issued by type of work and for a specific subsoil area:
The right does not become a property asset. It cannot be freely transferred.
4.3. Turnover and financing
4.4. Land vs subsoil and access
4.5. Ecology and safety
4.6. Fiscal model
MET in Russia is a basic tax, calculated either:
For gold, the MET rate = 6% of the value of the mined metal (in accordance with the price on the London Stock Exchange at the time of sale), if there are no exemptions.
For silver – 6%
For copper – 8% (may vary with benefits)
For non-ferrous metal ores, it is 4–8%, depending on the group.
4.7. Termination and protection of rights
The procedure is administrative, judicial control is possible, but the degree of regulatory discreteness is higher than in Peru and Chile.
Chapter 5. Conclusion
For clarity, let’s summarize the above data in a comparative table
COMPARISON TABLE
|
Parameter |
Peru |
Chile |
RUSSIA |
|
|
The Nature of Law |
Concession as a property right |
Derecho real minero (property law) |
Administrative license |
|
|
Negotiability |
Transfer/sale/pledge is allowed upon registration |
Free Transmission; mortgage allowed (Hipoteca Minera) |
|
|
|
Sign up |
INGEMMET (Public Registry) |
Conservador de Minas (public register) |
State registers of licenses (limited civil circulation) |
|
|
Stages of work |
Exploration → Production |
Exploration (Short) → Mensura → Mining (Indefinite) |
Separate licenses: study, exploration, production |
|
|
Access to land |
Through easements/agreements with the owner of the land |
Through easements/court procedures |
Through separate land regimes and mining allotment |
|
|
Environmental Treatments |
DIAS/EIA scale-dependent |
SEIA and Public Consultation |
|
|
|
Pledge of Right |
Yes (at INGEMMET) |
Yes (Hipoteca Minera) |
No |
|
|
Royalty |
1–12% (Progressive) |
5–14% (progressive) |
MET fixed |
|
|
Corp. tax |
29.5% |
27% |
20% |
|
|
Fee |
$3/ha/year |
0.56–16$/ha/year |
There is no analogue, a one-time fee when obtaining a license |
|
|
Preferential treatment |
Yes |
Yes |
In some cases, yes |
A comparative analysis of the legal regimes of Peru, Chile and the Russian Federation shows that the Russian legislation in the field of subsoil use is inferior in flexibility and investment attractiveness to the regimes of Peru and Chile. Chile and Peru provide clear, cost-effective mechanisms for State involvement, while providing concessionaires with greater property security and the flexibility to attract financing.
In the Russian Federation, the right to subsoil use is administrative, and key financial mechanisms, such as the mineral extraction tax, are not tied to the real profitability of the project, which increases the entry threshold and reduces the competitiveness of new enterprises. Combined with more difficult climatic conditions and restrictions on year-round production in a number of regions, this leads to a decrease in the overall performance of the industry and a decrease in the tax base.
Russian lawyers have repeatedly written about the shortcomings in the legal regulation of the subsoil use system. As A.A. Shitik writes: «The existing system of subsoil use in the Russian Federation takes into account the interests not so much of society and the state, but of the owners of subsoil mining organizations. In recent years, the Russian state has begun to actively consolidate its ownership rights in a number of subsoil user organizations, to make positive changes to the regulatory framework for subsoil use and to acts on technical control, to establish new effective regulations and standards, at the same time, the remaining inconsistency and gaps in domestic legislation increase risk and uncertainty in the activities of business entities and corruption in the activities of state bodies».[10]
A comparison of the legal models of Peru, Chile and the Russian Federation allows us to conclude that the content of the subsoil use right is fundamentally different. In the countries of the Andean group, a mining concession is qualified not as a temporary permit, but as a proprietary and negotiable right assigned to a specific subject and allowing civil law forms of disposal. This design provides stability of title, predictability of business activities and the possibility of long-term planning of field development.
A key advantage of the Peruvian and Chilean models is the perpetual nature of the concession, which exists as long as the concessionaire duly fulfills the obligations established by law and the regulator for the development of the site. This right can be alienated, inherited, contributed to the authorized capital, pledged as collateral for loans, which forms a full-fledged market of subsoil use rights and integrates mining assets into the financial system. As a result, the concession turns into a liquid investment asset, and the subsoil user becomes a full-fledged economic participant capable of raising capital on market terms.
The Russian model, on the contrary, retains the predominance of the administrative-permissive approach and considers subsoil use as a temporary, limited and dependent on state discretion. Such a structure limits the turnover of assets, reduces the investment attractiveness of projects and leads to an increase in transaction and institutional costs. In the context of the global redistribution of interests in the field of mining, the models of Peru and Chile are turning out to be more adaptive, focused on sustainable, long-term development of resources, rather than on short-term exploitation.
Thus, the experience of the Andean countries demonstrates that strengthening the material nature of a mining concession, ensuring its negotiability and including subsoil use in the system of civil circulation create prerequisites for the formation of a stable, predictable and attractive industry for investors. This vector can be considered as a guideline for further improvement of the legislation of the Russian Federation in the field of subsoil use.
References
1. Political Constitution of the Republic of Peru (1993). Electronic resource https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Peru_2021
2. Texto Único Ordenado de la Ley General de Minería, D.S. Nº 014-92-EM Electronic resource: https://www.gob.pe/institucion/osinergmin/normas-legales/741037-014-92-em
3. John Crabtree, Anna Wilson, and Aaron Quiñón Cárdenas. Extending legal security in the Peruvian mining sector. The formalization of informal miners./ Extending_legal_security_in_the_Peruvian_mining_se.pdf
4. SandraMcKay. Critical minerals or criminal miners? The (in)formalization of artisanal and small-scale copper mining in Peru. Electronic resource: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214790X2500200X
5. Electronic resource: https://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2025/07/03/peru-mining-gold-criminals-registration-miners/7081751568296
6. Ley de Formalización y Promoción de la Pequeña Minería y Minería Artesanal. Electronic resource: extension://mjdgandcagmikhlbjnilkmfnjeamfikk/https://www.minam.gob.pe/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Ley-N%C2%B0-27651.pdf
7. The Constitution of Chile (1980, with subsequent editions). Electronic resource: https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Chile_2021
8. Código de Minería. Electronic resource:https://www.bcn.cl/leychile/navegar?idNorma=29668&idParte=8681010&idVersion=1983-12-13
9. Ley Orgánica Constitucional sobre Concesiones Mineras (1981). Electronic resource:extension://mjdgandcagmikhlbjnilkmfnjeamfikk/https://www.lexoffice.cl/pdfs/ley18097.pdf
10. Shitik, A.A. Legal Regulation of Relations in the Field of Subsoil Use. Electronic resource: https://moluch.ru/archive/309/69736
Electronic resource https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Peru_2021 ↑
Electronic resource: https://www.gob.pe/institucion/osinergmin/normas-legales/741037-014-92-em ↑
John Crabtree, Anna Wilson, and Aaron Quiñón Cárdenas. Extending legal security in the Peruvian mining sector. The formalization of informal miners./ Extending_legal_security_in_the_Peruvian_mining_se.pdf ↑
Electronic resource: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214790X2500200X ↑
Electronic resource: https://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2025/07/03/peru-mining-gold-criminals-registration-miners/7081751568296 ↑
Electronic resource: extension://mjdgandcagmikhlbjnilkmfnjeamfikk/https://www.minam.gob.pe/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Ley-N%C2%B0-27651.pdf ↑
Electronic resource: https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Chile_2021 ↑
Electronic resource:https://www.bcn.cl/leychile/navegar?idNorma=29668&idParte=8681010&idVersion=1983-12-13 ↑
Electronic resource:extension://mjdgandcagmikhlbjnilkmfnjeamfikk/https://www.lexoffice.cl/pdfs/ley18097.pdf ↑
Electronic resource: https://moluch.ru/archive/309/69736 ↑
UDC: 622:349.6
LEGAL REGULATION OF THE MINING INDUSTRY IN PERU, CHILE AND THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
Kildeev Adel Khanyafievich
A.A. Zhdanov Leningrad State University (1990)
PhD in Law
ORCID: 0009-0001-2211-4944
Abstract: The article provides a comparative analysis of the legal regulation of mining activities in Peru, Chile and the Russian Federation. The legal nature of the right to subsoil use, the procedure for obtaining it and negotiability, as well as fiscal conditions and mechanisms of state investment guarantees are considered. It is shown that the concession models of Peru and Chile provide greater flexibility and predictability for investors, while the Russian system preserves the administrative nature of access to subsoil. Conclusions are made about the impact of these differences on the investment attractiveness and efficiency of projects.
Keywords: subsoil use; concession; royalties; mining law; investment attractiveness; fiscal regime; Peru; Chile; Russian Federation; ownership of subsoil; stabilization of the tax regime.
Use of artificial intelligence
In preparing this article, artificial intelligence tools — the ChatGPT (OpenAI, 2025) and Gemini (Google DeepMind, 2025) models — were used exclusively for technical and editorial support: language optimization, link structuring, and terminology unification. All scientific conclusions, interpretations and analytical generalizations belong to the author and reflect the results of his own research work.
Chapter 1. Introduction
The mining industry is a key element of economic development and public policy, determining the nature of the use of natural resources, the structure of exports and investment dynamics. However, the systems of legal regulation of subsoil use vary significantly from country to country. These differences determine the parameters of access to the mineral resource base, the degree of protection of property rights and the possibility of attracting capital to mining projects.
Chile and Peru are developing models focused on the civil negotiability of mining rights, where registration mechanisms, transparent procedures for the acquisition and transfer of concessions, and the availability of security instruments (including mortgages for mining rights in Chile) play a key role. In both jurisdictions, the state retains control over the subsoil and may revise the terms of use for environmental protection or fiscal policy purposes. However, these decisions are usually made within the framework of procedural regulatory mechanisms, which reduces the level of uncertainty for private capital.
In the Russian Federation, access to subsoil is also regulated by a licensing system, including geological survey, exploration and production. The state retains the ability to change the conditions of subsoil use, including the revocation of licenses or the revision of development parameters, including on environmental and social grounds. These tools are not unique to Russia, but the degree of administrative discretion and the practical dependence of the project’s viability on relations with the regulator may have a more significant impact on the investor’s risk assessment.
Thus, in all three countries under consideration, the state exercises control over the subsoil, including the potential possibility of termination or change of mining rights. The differences lie not in the fact of state participation itself, but in the scale of procedural certainty, the level of institutional predictability and the availability of mechanisms for protecting the property interests of investors. A comparison of the legal regulatory regimes of the mining sector in Peru, Chile and the Russian Federation makes it possible to determine which conditions create greater sustainability of capital investments, and which create additional regulatory risks, as well as to develop proposals for improving Russian legislation in the field of subsoil use.
Chapter 2. Legal Framework for Access to Subsoil and the Content of Subsoil Use Rights in Peru
The legal regime for the use of mineral resources in Peru is based on a combination of state sovereignty over the subsoil and the private nature of the mining concession, which is recognized as an alienable property right subject to registration and circulation.
2.1. Constitutional Provisions
According to Article 66 of the Political Constitution of the Republic of Peru (1993),[1] natural resources located in the subsoil are under the sovereign management of the state. The state may grant private persons the right to use them on the basis of a concession, which must be formalized and operate in accordance with the procedure established by law.
This is a fundamental element of the Peruvian model: the state does not transfer ownership of the subsoil, but transfers the right to extract and appropriate minerals, which has a property value, can be the subject of a transaction, pledge and investment valuation.
2.2. Basic Law on Subsoil Use
The basic regulatory document is the General Mining Act (Texto Único Ordenado de la Ley General de Minería, D.S. Nº 014-92-EM).[2]
It fixes the stages and forms of implementation of mining activities:
The general principle is formulated in Articles 8-11 of the Law:
A mining concession is a property right that can be:
Thus, Peruvian law does not consider concession as a mere administrative authorization, but as an asset with economic value and legal negotiability.
2.3. What does the subsoil use right consist of?
A law is a package of powers, which is formalized in the following stages:
2.4. State registration of rights (INGEMMET)
The transfer of rights to a concession is subject to mandatory registration with the National Geological, Mining and Metallurgical Institute
(INGEMMET — Instituto Geológico, Minero y Metalúrgico).
Registration performs three functions:
The registry system is a key element of predictability: legal protection is provided not by personal ties with the state, but by presence in the register.
2.5. Obligations of a subsoil user and grounds for termination of rights
A concession entails obligations established by law:
The right may be terminated only on the grounds provided for by law, for example:
Each termination is formalized by an administrative act subject to appeal in court.
Thus, termination is not arbitrary – it must be procedurally and documented.
2.6. Ecology and permits
2.7. Fiscal Regime and Taxation of Mining Activities in Peru
The fiscal model in Peru is based on a combination of income tax, royalties, gross margin tax, as well as the possibility of concluding stabilization agreements for large projects. The regime is mixed: it includes both fixed tax liabilities and variable elements depending on the profitability of the project.
2.7.1. Derecho de vigencia (annual payment for the area)
2.7.2. Income Tax (Impuesto a la Renta – IR)
2.7.3. Mining Royalties (Regalía Minera)
Royalties are calculated not from the volume of production, but from operating profit (operating margin) — this distinguishes Peru from countries where royalties are taken «from the head» (royalty ad valorem).
The rate varies from 1% to 12%, depending on the profitability of the project:
This is called the Escala de Regalía (sliding scale).
2.7.4. Mining Profit Tax (Impuesto Especial a la Minería – IEM)
This tax also operates on a progressive scale, but is based on operating profit before taxes:
Together with Regalía Minera, this tax forms a double system of state participation in profits.
2.7.5. Supplementary Rent Tax (Gravamen Especial a la Minería – GEM)
Applicable to companies that have a stabilization agreement (Contratos de Estabilidad Jurídica y Tributaria).
The rate is 2%–13.12%, also on a progressive scale of profitability.
Thus, companies without agreements only pay IR + Regalía + IEM, while companies with stabilization pay IR + Regalía + GEM.
2.7.6. Stabilization agreements (Contratos de Estabilidad Jurídica)
Peru provides foreign investors with the opportunity to fix the tax regime for up to 10-15 years.
This is especially important for projects with a large CAPEX.
A stabilization contract guarantees:
Agreements are concluded through ProInversión (investment agency), as a rule, for projects with a CAPEX of 10-50 million USD and above.
2.7.7. Small and artesian sector
For entities undergoing formalization (see REINFO), a simplified regime is applied:
This is done for the purpose of bringing artisanal miners out of the shadows.
2.7.8. Fiscal regime of Peru:
2.8. Termination and Protection of Rights
2.9. The problem of illegal miners and simplified legalization of mining in Peru
One of the serious problems of the Peruvian mining sector is the significant presence of illegal miners. According to various estimates, from 40% to 50% of all small mining enterprises in the country operate outside the legal framework. These illegal miners do not pay royalties, income taxes, social and pension contributions, which creates significant losses for the state. Moreover, illegal mining is often associated with criminal structures and can be used for money laundering. Not only politicians and journalists, but also numerous lawyers[3], even Canadians, have long been talking about this problem.[4]
To cope with this situation, the Peruvian government has introduced a mechanism for temporary legalization. As part of this mechanism, illegal miners can be issued special temporary permits for mining. These permits allow them to operate without the full procedure provided for ordinary licenses, including simplified environmental requirements and administrative procedures.
For example, under the decree on the formalization of small-scale mining, the Peruvian authorities can grant temporary permits to illegal miners for up to a certain period, provided that they begin the process of transition to full legalization. This approach allows the state to gradually bring a significant part of the production «out of the shadows» and receive at least partial revenues to the budget.
As such, this simplified legalization mechanism has become an important part of Peru’s strategy to combat illegal mining and to broaden the tax base in the mining sector. However, according to official data from the Ministry of Energy and Mines, as of November 2024, only 2,108 of the 86,000 miners registered in the Integrated Registry for Formalization of Mining, or REINFO, have completed this process, which is only 2.4%.[5]
Additional specification of the mechanism:
In accordance with Ley N° 27651 (Ley de Formalización y Promoción de la Pequeña Minería y Minería Artesanal)[6] and D.S. N° 013-2012-EM, the formalization of illegal miners is carried out within the framework of the Proceso de Formalización Minera Integral. This process includes several consecutive stages:
Validity and termination of a temporary permit
Economic consequences for the state and the market
2.10. Land relations and easements in the implementation of mining rights
In the countries of the Andean model, the right of subsoil use and ownership of land are legally separated, which requires separate regulation of access to the surface. In Peru, access to the surface is provided through:
Practice shows that in most cases issues are resolved through negotiations, and the state intervenes only in case of difficulties. An easement can be established forcibly if the public significance of the project is proven.
Chapter 3. Legal Basis of Access to Subsoil and Content of Subsoil Use Rights in Chile
The legal regime in Chile is based on the recognition of the state’s public dominium on the subsoil with the simultaneous existence of a proprietary right to subsoil use (derecho real minero), which belongs to the concessionaire and has the properties of private property. This is a key conceptual feature of the Chilean model, which distinguishes it from administrative and licensing regimes.
3.1. Constitutional and legislative foundations
These norms establish:
3.2. Stages of law formation
|
Stage |
Powers |
Term |
Purpose |
|
Concesion de Exploracion |
Exploration, drilling, temporary infrastructure |
Usually up to 2 years |
Assessment of the prospects of the site |
|
Mensura-Concesion de Explotacion |
Industrial production, processing, export |
Indefinitely subject to compliance with obligations |
Commercial development |
Key point:
After the mensura, the right becomes perpetual as long as the concessionaire pays the patent and complies with the law.
3.3. Registration and negotiability of rights
The subsoil use right is registered with the Conservador de Minas and can be:
That is, in Chile , mining law is not a permit, but an asset. This is the main factor in investment attractiveness.
3.4. Environmental assessment
The assessment is carried out in the SEIA system (Servicio de Evaluación de Impacto Ambiental):
3.5. Fiscal model
• Corporate tax: 27%.• Royalties (IEAM): 5%-14% of operating margin.• Patente Minera: • Dividend tax: 35% (subject to reduction under double tax treaties).
3.6. Stabilization of the tax regime
Chile allows tax stability agreements for 6-12 years for large projects. Grounds: DL 600 (Estatuto de Inversión Extranjera) – Valid in updated form after 2016
3.7. Termination of the right
Base:
The procedure is strictly judicial, which ensures a high level of investor protection.
3.8. Access to land and the regime of mountain easements in Chile
In Chile, the subsoil use right, formalized in the form of Concesión Minera Mensura, has direct executive force. According to Articles 121 to 129 of the Código de Minería, the concessionaire has the right to demand immediate access to the surface necessary for the conduct of mining operations. Upon presentation of the title of Mensura and the approved development plan (Plano de la Faena), public authorities, including the Carabineros de Chile, can provide access to the site without prior court order. I myself witnessed such direct intervention by the Carabinieri of Chile, when a local farmer refused to let geologists into the mine on the road through his land.
The issue of compensation to the owner of the land is considered separately and does not prevent the exercise of the right to extraction. This mode reduces operational risks and ensures high predictability of access to the subsoil use facility.
Chapter 4. Legal Basis for Access to Subsoil and the Content of the Subsoil Use Right in the Russian Federation
In the Russian Federation, the right to subsoil use is based on a licensing regime, where the right to use subsoil has the nature of an administrative permit, and not a property right.
4.1. Constitutional and legislative foundations
Legal nature: a license for the use of subsoil is an administrative right to a certain type of work; is not an independent property/property right, the turnover is limited by public law.
4.2. Stages of granting the right
|
Type of license |
Content |
Features |
|
Geological study |
Geological exploration, drilling, geophysics |
Temporality |
|
Exploration and Evaluation |
Calculation of reserves, putting on the state balance sheet (GKZ/TKZ) |
Stock expertise is mandatory |
|
Mining |
Industrial development |
Industrial Safety Regime (Rostekhnadzor) |
Licenses are issued by type of work and for a specific subsoil area:
The right does not become a property asset. It cannot be freely transferred.
4.3. Turnover and financing
4.4. Land vs subsoil and access
4.5. Ecology and safety
4.6. Fiscal model
MET in Russia is a basic tax, calculated either:
For gold, the MET rate = 6% of the value of the mined metal (in accordance with the price on the London Stock Exchange at the time of sale), if there are no exemptions.
For silver – 6%
For copper – 8% (may vary with benefits)
For non-ferrous metal ores, it is 4–8%, depending on the group.
4.7. Termination and protection of rights
The procedure is administrative, judicial control is possible, but the degree of regulatory discreteness is higher than in Peru and Chile.
Chapter 5. Conclusion
For clarity, let’s summarize the above data in a comparative table
COMPARISON TABLE
|
Parameter |
Peru |
Chile |
RUSSIA |
|
|
The Nature of Law |
Concession as a property right |
Derecho real minero (property law) |
Administrative license |
|
|
Negotiability |
Transfer/sale/pledge is allowed upon registration |
Free Transmission; mortgage allowed (Hipoteca Minera) |
|
|
|
Sign up |
INGEMMET (Public Registry) |
Conservador de Minas (public register) |
State registers of licenses (limited civil circulation) |
|
|
Stages of work |
Exploration → Production |
Exploration (Short) → Mensura → Mining (Indefinite) |
Separate licenses: study, exploration, production |
|
|
Access to land |
Through easements/agreements with the owner of the land |
Through easements/court procedures |
Through separate land regimes and mining allotment |
|
|
Environmental Treatments |
DIAS/EIA scale-dependent |
SEIA and Public Consultation |
|
|
|
Pledge of Right |
Yes (at INGEMMET) |
Yes (Hipoteca Minera) |
No |
|
|
Royalty |
1–12% (Progressive) |
5–14% (progressive) |
MET fixed |
|
|
Corp. tax |
29.5% |
27% |
20% |
|
|
Fee |
$3/ha/year |
0.56–16$/ha/year |
There is no analogue, a one-time fee when obtaining a license |
|
|
Preferential treatment |
Yes |
Yes |
In some cases, yes |
A comparative analysis of the legal regimes of Peru, Chile and the Russian Federation shows that the Russian legislation in the field of subsoil use is inferior in flexibility and investment attractiveness to the regimes of Peru and Chile. Chile and Peru provide clear, cost-effective mechanisms for State involvement, while providing concessionaires with greater property security and the flexibility to attract financing.
In the Russian Federation, the right to subsoil use is administrative, and key financial mechanisms, such as the mineral extraction tax, are not tied to the real profitability of the project, which increases the entry threshold and reduces the competitiveness of new enterprises. Combined with more difficult climatic conditions and restrictions on year-round production in a number of regions, this leads to a decrease in the overall performance of the industry and a decrease in the tax base.
Russian lawyers have repeatedly written about the shortcomings in the legal regulation of the subsoil use system. As A.A. Shitik writes: «The existing system of subsoil use in the Russian Federation takes into account the interests not so much of society and the state, but of the owners of subsoil mining organizations. In recent years, the Russian state has begun to actively consolidate its ownership rights in a number of subsoil user organizations, to make positive changes to the regulatory framework for subsoil use and to acts on technical control, to establish new effective regulations and standards, at the same time, the remaining inconsistency and gaps in domestic legislation increase risk and uncertainty in the activities of business entities and corruption in the activities of state bodies».[10]
A comparison of the legal models of Peru, Chile and the Russian Federation allows us to conclude that the content of the subsoil use right is fundamentally different. In the countries of the Andean group, a mining concession is qualified not as a temporary permit, but as a proprietary and negotiable right assigned to a specific subject and allowing civil law forms of disposal. This design provides stability of title, predictability of business activities and the possibility of long-term planning of field development.
A key advantage of the Peruvian and Chilean models is the perpetual nature of the concession, which exists as long as the concessionaire duly fulfills the obligations established by law and the regulator for the development of the site. This right can be alienated, inherited, contributed to the authorized capital, pledged as collateral for loans, which forms a full-fledged market of subsoil use rights and integrates mining assets into the financial system. As a result, the concession turns into a liquid investment asset, and the subsoil user becomes a full-fledged economic participant capable of raising capital on market terms.
The Russian model, on the contrary, retains the predominance of the administrative-permissive approach and considers subsoil use as a temporary, limited and dependent on state discretion. Such a structure limits the turnover of assets, reduces the investment attractiveness of projects and leads to an increase in transaction and institutional costs. In the context of the global redistribution of interests in the field of mining, the models of Peru and Chile are turning out to be more adaptive, focused on sustainable, long-term development of resources, rather than on short-term exploitation.
Thus, the experience of the Andean countries demonstrates that strengthening the material nature of a mining concession, ensuring its negotiability and including subsoil use in the system of civil circulation create prerequisites for the formation of a stable, predictable and attractive industry for investors. This vector can be considered as a guideline for further improvement of the legislation of the Russian Federation in the field of subsoil use.
References
1. Political Constitution of the Republic of Peru (1993). Electronic resource https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Peru_2021
2. Texto Único Ordenado de la Ley General de Minería, D.S. Nº 014-92-EM Electronic resource: https://www.gob.pe/institucion/osinergmin/normas-legales/741037-014-92-em
3. John Crabtree, Anna Wilson, and Aaron Quiñón Cárdenas. Extending legal security in the Peruvian mining sector. The formalization of informal miners./ Extending_legal_security_in_the_Peruvian_mining_se.pdf
4. SandraMcKay. Critical minerals or criminal miners? The (in)formalization of artisanal and small-scale copper mining in Peru. Electronic resource: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214790X2500200X
5. Electronic resource: https://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2025/07/03/peru-mining-gold-criminals-registration-miners/7081751568296
6. Ley de Formalización y Promoción de la Pequeña Minería y Minería Artesanal. Electronic resource: extension://mjdgandcagmikhlbjnilkmfnjeamfikk/https://www.minam.gob.pe/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Ley-N%C2%B0-27651.pdf
7. The Constitution of Chile (1980, with subsequent editions). Electronic resource: https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Chile_2021
8. Código de Minería. Electronic resource:https://www.bcn.cl/leychile/navegar?idNorma=29668&idParte=8681010&idVersion=1983-12-13
9. Ley Orgánica Constitucional sobre Concesiones Mineras (1981). Electronic resource:extension://mjdgandcagmikhlbjnilkmfnjeamfikk/https://www.lexoffice.cl/pdfs/ley18097.pdf
10. Shitik, A.A. Legal Regulation of Relations in the Field of Subsoil Use. Electronic resource: https://moluch.ru/archive/309/69736
Electronic resource https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Peru_2021 ↑
Electronic resource: https://www.gob.pe/institucion/osinergmin/normas-legales/741037-014-92-em ↑
John Crabtree, Anna Wilson, and Aaron Quiñón Cárdenas. Extending legal security in the Peruvian mining sector. The formalization of informal miners./ Extending_legal_security_in_the_Peruvian_mining_se.pdf ↑
Electronic resource: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214790X2500200X ↑
Electronic resource: https://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2025/07/03/peru-mining-gold-criminals-registration-miners/7081751568296 ↑
Electronic resource: extension://mjdgandcagmikhlbjnilkmfnjeamfikk/https://www.minam.gob.pe/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Ley-N%C2%B0-27651.pdf ↑
Electronic resource: https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Chile_2021 ↑
Electronic resource:https://www.bcn.cl/leychile/navegar?idNorma=29668&idParte=8681010&idVersion=1983-12-13 ↑
Electronic resource:extension://mjdgandcagmikhlbjnilkmfnjeamfikk/https://www.lexoffice.cl/pdfs/ley18097.pdf ↑
Electronic resource: https://moluch.ru/archive/309/69736 ↑
Мы используем файлы cookie для корректной работы сайта, анализа трафика и улучшения пользовательского опыта. Нажимая «Принять», вы даёте согласие на использование файлов cookie.