Oil and gas taxation

UK resident companies, and companies with a UK permanent establishment, are potentially subject to four levels of tax on their profits from oil and gas exploration and production:

  1. corporation tax

  2. the supplementary charge (the SC)

  3. petroleum revenue tax (PRT) (albeit at 0% from 1 January 2016), and

  4. from 26 May 2022, the energy profits levy (the EPL). At Autumn Budget 2024, the government announced that the EPL will end on 31 March 2030, extending its maximum lifespan by two years.

Corporation tax and the SC are applied to the ‘upstream’ (exploration, development and production) profits of the company as a whole. Corporation tax is applied to oil and gas profits at a higher rate than applies to other activities. The profit base for the SC is the corporation tax profit base adjusted for financing items and investment allowances.

PRT is applied on an oil field by oil field basis, and is deductible against corporation tax and SC profits. The rate of PRT was reduced to zero for periods ending after 31 December 2015, although the tax has not been abolished so that

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Energy News

The construction of jurisdiction clauses in the context of the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 and the mechanisms of service(Campeau v Gottex Real Asset Fund 1 (OE) Waste S.À.R.L)

Dispute Resolution analysis: This case considers a jurisdictional clause in the context of service under CPR 6.33(2B)(b), which allows service out of the jurisdiction where the defendant is party to a jurisdiction clause. There is no corresponding requirement for the claimant to be a party to that jurisdiction clause. The starting point is that jurisdiction clauses are not generally intended to concern disputes with third parties. However, that is no more than a starting point and one which can be departed from in appropriate cases. This was one such appropriate case whereby the circumstances and construction of the clause led to the finding that it did include the third party claimant’s (Mr Campeau) claim. While not strictly necessary given the judge’s findings in relation to the construction of the clause, Mr Justice Butcher considered that, where a jurisdictional clause was wide enough to encompass disputes from third parties, then it will likely also amount to a ‘relevant term’ for the purposes of section 1(4) of the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 (C(RTP)A 1999). That meant that the third party, in seeking to enforce their rights under the SPA, was statutorily obliged to do so in England and so could rely upon CPR 6.33 (2B) (b) in that respect also. Written by Georgia Whiting, legal counsel (contentious construction) at Capita.

View Energy by content type :

Popular documents