ISU-ISU KRITIS KORUPSI PERTAMBANGANCHITRA RETNA S

DIREKTUR EKSEKUTIF ARTICLE 33 INDONESIA

EKSTRAKTIF: BERKAH VS ANCAMANPasal 33 UUD 45: memaksimalkan pengelolaan kekayaan alam

untuk sebesar-besar kemanfaatan bagi rakyat

Decision to extract

Contract/license

Fiscal Terms

Extraction

Comodity selling

Revenue Collection

Policy/Program

Revenue Management

Perbaikan tata kelola sepanjang rantai nilai

Titik Kritis Sepanjang Rantai Nilai Pertambangan

1. Masy kurang berpartisipasi dalam membuat keputusan ekstraksi

2. Tumpang tindih perijinan3. Korupsi terkait perijinan

4. Pemr daerah tidak mendapat bagian yang layak

Comodity selling

Revenue Collection

Policy/ProgramRevenue Management

ReklamasiPaska Tambang

Fiscal TermsExtraction

5. Reklamasi/paska tambang tidak dilakukan6. Possible korupsi dana jaminan reklamasi

Decision to extractContract

7. Underpayment8. Korupsi penerimaan

9. Penggunaan penerimaan tidak tepat10. Distribusi tidak merata

1. PERIZINAN TAMBANG

5

PERIZINAN TAMBANG

Total mining licenses (IUP) 10.780 (1/2/2013); CLEAN AND CLEAR (C&C) IUP: 5. 503 (mineral 3.268; coal 2.235)NON C&C IUP: 5.277 (mineral 3.639; coal1.638)

NON C&C : illegal, overlapping licensesOverlapping: 987 IUP

TITIK KRITIS PERIZINAN• MEKANISME

– Sebelumnya izin diberikan langsung mulai diberlakukan bidding – Penentuan wilayah tambang pemerintah pusat, mulai digugat

pemerintah daerah– Data (peta) tidak jelas, database izin tidak sistematis rawan tumpang

tindih• OTORITAS & SECOND LINE ENFORCEMENT

– Sejak diserahkan pada daerah, kasus tumpang tindih melonjak tinggi rawan digunakan untuk kepentingan politik

– Second line enforcement dari pemerintah pusat sangat tidak jelas moratorium s/d Maret 2013

• PERKEMBANGAN TERBARU– Permen Pelelangan (& Permen Perijinan)

7

KORUPSI DI PERIZINAN

1. PEMBERIAN IUP DI DAERAH ( KE DEPAN; PROSES BIDDING)

2. VERIFIKASI CNC

3. NEGOSIASI B-TO-B TUMPANG TINDIH IJIN

2. PENERIMAAN TAMBANG (PNBP): LANDRENT – ROYALTI - IIPKH

PENERIMAAN NEGARA: ROYALTI/LAND RENT TAMBANG

• Kontribusi ke GDP meningkat Penerimaan terus menurun?

PERKIRAAN KEHILANGAN PENERIMAAN: PSDH/DR HUTAN

H

Sumber: Hasil olahan ARTICLE 33 INDONESIA

Kayu Ilegal;70%

Kayu Legal;30%

Kerugian Negara akibat Illegal Logging (Rp 30 triliun/

tahun)

PNBP yang diterima negara dari kayu

legal (30%)PNBP dari kayu legal

yang hilang (70%)

PERKIRAAN KEHILANAN PENERIMAAN TAMBANG: IIPKH

Sumber: Hasil olahan ARTICLE 33 INDONESIA

2009 2010 2011 2012

168 174

430 469

-

98

172

224

325

465 478

544

Realisasi Penerimaan Perkiraan Penerimaan Perhitungan Potensi

12

SISTEM PENGUMPULAN PNBP TAMBANG

Royalty Policy

Regime

Establish Royalty Base

Estimate Royalty

Potential

Billing Payment NTR Payer Reporting

NTR Payer Data Mgmt

Controls and Compliance

Verification and Reconciliation

Revenue Sharing

Determination

Audit

Coal IUPs and PKP2Bs

Self-assessment

Pay to MPN or BI

Send payment report and docs

District Mining Dinas

Issue IUPs license and manage data of licenses issued

Reviews IUPs production plans

Receives payment reports

Follow up on non-compliance

Reconciles payment with MoEMR

To be determined

Provincial Mining Dinas

Bank of Indonesia

Treasury acc. at BI

DG Treasury,MoF

MPN System

Provide payment data for recon

Accepts DG Fiscal Bal. estimates

DG Budget,MoF

Review proposals

Lack data to evaluate forecasts

Future – SIMPONI billing system

Lack data to provide oversight of NTR realisation

DG Custom and DG Tax MoF

No current role

No current role

No current role

DG Mineral and Coal, MoEMR

Develop proposals

Issue PKP2Bs license and Clean & Clear (CNC) status to IUPs

Review PKP2Bs and large IUPs production plans & produce Forecast NTR

Set out deemed price

Issue decree on payment process

All reports should go to MoEMR

Sub-directorate evaluate returns (to be discussed)

Verifies and reconciles with SNG and DG Treasury payment data

Leads revenue sharing estimates

Audits sample

BPK Audits sample

13

TITIK KRITIS PROSES PENGUMPULAN PNBP

Estimating Royalty Potential

Establishingthe Royalty Base

Legislation and Royalty Regime

•Essential details of royalty calculation are contained in a hierarchy of legislation, regulations and decrees.Key

processes

Potential Issues

•Progress towards establishing the full mining “population” through MoEMR issuing “clean and clear” status to IUPs – currently 4,000 issued

•Sub-directorate uses list of last year’s payers (from KPPN) as the database of NTR payers. This is not linked to the CnC list.

•The list of last year’s payers does not automatically include new coal producers and those that did not pay (but should have done last year)

•The absence of a centralised registry of all mining licences (PKP2Bs and IUPs) results in significant gaps in the knowledge of who should be contributing royalty and renders the control and compliance function difficult

•MoEMR compiles an annual forecast of non-tax revenue from mining to DG Budget. Forecast is based on a review of prior realized revenue and review of information provided by PKP2Bs and large IUPs and provinces/districts on sales and production estimates for the upcoming year.

•Forecasts do not seem to use or check against macro data e.g., the 2012 coal production forecast is 20m tonnes less than total coal production for 2011

•Unclear process for reviewing forecasts during the year in response to market conditions

•Unclear if there is a process to compare actual/realised NTR with forecast. DG Budget does not have data on realised NTR by sector to compare with forecast

•Sudden death nature of royalty calculations at various thresholds.

•Consistency of some royalty provisions (for example payment frequency) between PKP2Bs and IUPs.

•There appear to be differences in sanctions for non-payment or under payment between PKP2Bs and IUPs.

14

NTR Payer ReportingPaymentBilling

• Royalty obligation is determined on a self-assessment basis.

• IUP royalties are due within a month of sale. PKP2B royalties are paid monthly or quarterly depending on generation.

• SIMPONI system to be introduced later in 2013 – SIMPONI is an NTR billing system linked to the MPN payment system

Key processes

Potential Issues

• BPK Audit findings: universal mistakes in company calculation of NTR obligation due to misinterpretation of deductions

• No communication of common royalty error calculations with industry.

• The proposed SIMPONI system needs to have in-built controls to prevent errors in calculation of NTR obligation.

• NTR payments in IDR should go through electronic Treasury MPN (Modul Penerimaan Negara – State Revenue Module) system and NTR forex payments go through Bank of Indonesia.

• In reality, most NTR go through BI as payers can choose (2011 IDR 80 trillion through MPN and 200 trillion through BI)

• The MPN system is currently only limited to recording the amount of NTR payment and not capturing supporting information. BI transfers capture even less information.

• The lack of information collected makes it difficult to reconcile later on and also to assess realised NTR against forecasts

• Coal producers are obliged to send hard copies of NTR payment report (Copy of SSBP form or Bank transfer proof; Lab analysis & survey by 3rd party assessment; sales report and sales invoice) to MoEMR. IUPs should send copies to district/provincial DINAS.

• Coal producers submit separately production and monitoring reports to authority issuing license (PKP2Bs to MoEMR, IUPs to district or province)

• Without a centralised licences registry it is difficult for MoEMR to know if all payment reports have been received.

• MoEMR receives different sets of supporting documentation – some not adequate - with payment reports.

• No mechanism to ensure that all relevant institutions receive reports and that reports are consistent. For example, MoEMR is reliant on local government to compile and send production and sales reports to them.

15

Controls and ComplianceNTR Payer Data Management

•Royalty payment data is electronically stored in an Excel spreadsheet only by MoEMR.•Subject to discussion with ESDM it is not

known how this data is, or can be, used effectively for royalty administration purposes.•There should be improvements with

implementation of the SIMPONI system.

Key processes

Potential Issues

•Royalty payments recorded by ESDM in an Excel spreadsheet – not robust and subject to human error. For example, analysis indicated possible:o inconsistency in paying entity nameso miscoding between the three types of mining

NTRo entry duplications•Current data system does not enable prompt

and meaningful NTR payment information (royalties by province, mineral etc.) to inform future policy making decisions.

Below information is based on initial discussions with MoEMR on the controls and compliance functions by the NTR sub-directorate:•NTR sub-directorate has 4 staff to evaluate PKP2Bs (2 staff) and IUP (2

staff) royalty returns/payment reports•Evaluation of royalty returns: checks against supporting documentation,

physical audits (sample), checks against list of previous NTR payers (from KPPN compilation). (Further determination of “evaluation” process is required).•District and provincial DINAs responsible for IUP compliance•Unclear debt management procedures

•Initial discussions with MoEMR suggests that administrative controls are inadequate – to be further analysed:o Revenue accounted for on a cash basis only – no recognition of debtors.o Controls impeded by the absence of a centralised licence registry that

generates an accurate list of all royalty payers.o No systematic use made of other coal producer data to evaluate

individual NTR payments: customs, VAT, tax, production and monitoring reports

o Unclear what controls and compliance measures adopted by district and provincial DINAS.

o No systematic use of aggregate production and trade data to evaluate aggregate NTR payments

o SIMPONI can provide information on non-payment and under-payment for those who register and bill, but currently no processes to link this information to a debt management system.

Masalah-masalah (draft, tidak untuk dikutip)

16

AuditRevenue SharingDetermination

Verification and Reconciliation

•NTR payment receipts sent by companies and recorded by MoEMR are reconciled quarterly (amount and type of payment), manually in an Excel file with: 1) Payment records by district and

provincial Mining Dinas2) Payment records by DG Treasury

(from KPPN data, incl. payments through BI) on a quarterly basis at the central level.

• Unclear what action is taken with unreconciled items

Key processes

Potential Issues

•Reconciliation does not identify potential underpayment, non-collection or errors in the recording of payment data. For example, for PKP2Bs the share of sales revenue should be reconciled to the royalty components for each payment – only 3 ratios are applicable for open-cut mines.

•The reconciliation details royalty amount by location which enables determination of SNG share of royalty revenue.

•DG Treasury will only categorise payments as royalties if MoEMR provides sufficient payment supporting documentation – otherwise payments are classified as other NTR (not part of revenue sharing)

•Incorrect miscoding between royalties and sales revenue can lead to incorrect revenue sharing.

•A range of organisations undertake royalty audits – BPK, BPKP.•Both BPK and BPKP are able to

conduct company audits, as well as an audit of MoEMR operations•Audits of companies are

conducted on a sample basis taking into account various considerations of compliance.•Companies that have been

audited need to respond to the various findings.•Most audits have detected errors

in NTR calculations.

•Possible confusion in industry of which agency will audit them.•Common errors from audits

are not communicated widely to industry to prevent recurrence.

TITIK KRITIS PENERIMAAN• PENENTUAN TAGIHAN PNBP:

– SELF ASSESSMENT PERUSAHAAN, PEMERINTAH KESULITAN DATA PEMBANDING, TIDAK ADA INSTRUMEN PENGECEKAN

– PEMERINTAH DAERAH TIDAK PUNYA CUKUP INSENTIF MEMAKSIMALKAN PNBP, KARENA OTORITAS LEMAH, MASUK KE PUSAT

• PEMBAYARAN:– SISTEM PEMBAYARAN USD, RENTAN KONVERSI NILAI TUKAR– DATA AKURAT PEMBAYAR TIDAK LENGKAP, MENYULITKAN PENGHITUNGAN PEMBAGIAN

DBH

• PELAPORAN:– SISTEM MANUAL, DATA TIDAK TERDOKUMENTASI BAIK, BERBEDA ANTAR INSTANSI DAN

LEMAH KOORDINASI (BEA CUKAI – DISTAMBEN – ESDM – KEUANGAN)

• MONITORING & AUDIT (ENFORCEMENT)– TIDAK CUKUP SDM UNTUK PEMANTAUAN

18

1. KURANG BAYAR PNBP (& PAJAK) KARENA PEMALSUAN DATA PRODUKSI, HARGA REFERENSI, KANDUNGAN DLL

2. TIDAK BAYAR PNBP (& PAJAK) KARENA PERTAMBANGAN ILEGAL ATAU EKSPORT ILEGAR

KORUPSI DI PENDAPATAN NEGARA

3. REKLAMASI TAMBANG

TITIK KRITIS DANA JAMINAN REKLAMASI

• BESARAN:– BELUM MENCAKUP JAMINAN RESIKO LINGKUNGAN/SOSIAL YANG MEMADAI– TERLALU KECIL MEMBERI INSENTIF UNTUK TIDAK DILAKUKAN REKLAMASI– TIDAK DIATUR DENGAN RINCI, OTORITAS MENENTUKAN TERGANTUNG ASSESSMENT

PERUSAHAAN, PEMDA SULIT MEMONITOR

• KELAYAKAN:– IZIN BANYAK DIKELUARKAN TANPA MENELAAH KELAYAKAN RENCANA REKLAMASI DAN PASKA

TAMBANG PERUSAHAAN– AMDAL & DOKUMEN LAIN HANYA PERSYARATAN PROSEDURAL

• PENGGUNAAN– SEJUMLAH DANA REKLAMASI DIBAYARKAN KEPADA PEMDA SEBELUM KEGIATAN PENAMBANGAN

DILAKUKAN– TRANSPARANSI DANA JAMINAN MINIM, BANYAK DALAM REKENING ATAS NAMA BUPATI– PENCAIRAN DANA MINIM PENGAWASAN, MENYALAHI ATURAN– LEBIH BANYAK KASUS PERUSAHAAN MEMILIH TIDAK MEREKLAMASI DAN MENGABAIKAN DANA

JAMINAN

21

1. PENGGUNAAN DANA REKLAMASI UNTUK HAL-HAL LAIN SELAIN REKLAMASI

2. TIDAK OPTIMAL/TIDAK DILAKUKAN REKLAMASI KARENA DANA JAMINAN KURANG MEMADAI

KORUPSI DI DANA REKLAMASI

REKOMENDASI

1. PENINDAKAN PENTING, TETAPI PERBAIKAN SISTEM LEBIH PENTING• SISTEM LICENSING, BESARAN ROYALTI, KOLEKSI PENDAPATAN

2. DESENTRALISASI KEWENANGAN KE DAERAH MENJADI SUMBER MASALAH SEKALIGUS POTENSI SOLUSI • NO RESENTRALISASI, OTORITAS DAERAH TAPI DENGAN SECOND LINE

ENFORCEMENT • AKUNTABILITAS LOKAL

3. TRANSPARANSI UNTUK AKUNTABILITAS• SEBAGAI SOLUSI TAHAP PERTAMA, TAPI AKUNTABILITAS DAN PEMERINTAH RESPONSIF

MEMBUTUHKAN PERBAIKAN SISTEM INSENTIF, TERMASUK INSENTIF SISTEM POLITIK

INOVASI MENCEGAH KORUPSI: MEKANISME TRANSPARANSI DAERAH, EITI

TERIMA KASIH