Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Australian Bankruptcies

Joined
20 July 2021
Posts
8,474
Reactions
11,699
Every time I hear about Qld businesses closing up due to energy prices makes me quite sad knowing we have almost endless amounts of LNG in Central Qld. The whole thing is a rort, it's OK for CEOs and public servants to jump on a plane and fly around the world but it's not ok to burn gas for electricity.
we should make them all fly on solar-powered aircraft and set a leading example
 
Joined
15 June 2023
Posts
490
Reactions
797
we should make them all fly on solar-powered aircraft and set a leading example
Online conferences would make sense but there are e-planes around these days. ;)

The slow introduction to renewables has come with a big cost to Australia, these people in Canberra don't give a crap about people's livelihoods. People have lost their jobs and need retraining to get into other fields of work, who pays for this financially and time-wise, it's never going to be them. Most European countries are now ramping up nuclear because they know it's a losing battle.
 
Joined
20 July 2021
Posts
8,474
Reactions
11,699
Online conferences would make sense but there are e-planes around these days. ;)

The slow introduction to renewables has come with a big cost to Australia, these people in Canberra don't give a crap about people's livelihoods. People have lost their jobs and need retraining to get into other fields of work, who pays for this financially and time-wise, it's never going to be them. Most European countries are now ramping up nuclear because they know it's a losing battle.
but online conferences are so insecure ( because they cut corners and give jobs to mates )

you can't have a rash of 'video-leaks' of delicate discussions , can you ??
 
Joined
15 June 2023
Posts
490
Reactions
797
but online conferences are so insecure ( because they cut corners and give jobs to mates )

you can't have a rash of 'video-leaks' of delicate discussions , can you ??
I know a bloke that's on the advisory panel for climate control in Canberra, they fly him and other colleagues first class to Europe for these climate change conferences. I don't think much of it is secret squirrel stuff.
 
Joined
20 July 2021
Posts
8,474
Reactions
11,699
I know a bloke that's on the advisory panel for climate control in Canberra, they fly him and other colleagues first class to Europe for these climate change conferences. I don't think much of it is secret squirrel stuff.
you might be surprised .. the masses as so far lulled into complacency , once someone tells them selects consultants fly first-class ( on the tax-payer funds ) but they can't own a V8 to go on camping holidays .

and then there is the data/strategies discussed some have more holes than the ozone layer ( remember that one ? )
 
Joined
15 June 2023
Posts
490
Reactions
797
And here we go again folks, another Aussie classic that's been around for decades gone.

700 jobs gone as Beaurepaires, iconic Aussie businesses shut doors

Beaurepaires, Australia’s oldest tyre retailer, is the latest business set to close its doors this year and an expert has warned it won’t be the last.

The iconic retailer is set to close 100 stores and lay off 700 workers after plans to sell the business to rival Bob Jane Corporation were reportedly unsuccessful.
 
Joined
14 February 2005
Posts
14,417
Reactions
14,905
Every time I hear about Qld businesses closing up due to energy prices makes me quite sad knowing we have almost endless amounts of LNG in Central Qld. The whole thing is a rort, it's OK for CEOs and public servants to jump on a plane and fly around the world but it's not ok to burn gas for electricity.

We had a lot of gas but pretty much the whole lot has been contracted for export. I'll keep off the politics, this seems the wrong thread for that, but suffice to say I strongly disagree with that having occurred.

What's done is done though, there's no undoing it short of defaulting on the contracts. Two thirds of it's still physically in Queensland but almost all of it's owned by someone overseas. :2twocents
 
Last edited:

Value Collector

Have courage, and be kind.
Joined
13 January 2014
Posts
11,067
Reactions
7,001
We had a lot of gas but pretty much the whole lot has been contracted for export. I'll keep off the politics, this seems the wrong thread for that, but suffice to say I strongly disagree with that having occurred.

What's done is done though, there's no undoing it short of defaulting on the contracts. Two thirds of it's still physically in Queensland but almost all of it's owned by someone overseas. :2twocents
What ever we don’t sell by 2050, will probably stay in the ground for ever, so economically (atleast from a company profit and government royalty thinking) it’s best to pump it out and sell as fast as we can.

There is a whole other resource opening in eg beetaloo In the NT, it’s going to be hooked up to the national grid in a couple of years.
 
Joined
15 June 2023
Posts
490
Reactions
797
What ever we don’t sell by 2050, will probably stay in the ground for ever, so economically (atleast from a company profit and government royalty thinking) it’s best to pump it out and sell as fast as we can.

There is a whole other resource opening in eg beetaloo In the NT, it’s going to be hooked up to the national grid in a couple of years.
It comes out of the ground by itself in a lot of cases, I was one of the people who worked with the exploration drilling in central Qld for a short while, another problem is that they don't pay any tax in Australia to extract it.
 

Value Collector

Have courage, and be kind.
Joined
13 January 2014
Posts
11,067
Reactions
7,001
It comes out of the ground by itself in a lot of cases, I was one of the people who worked with the exploration drilling in central Qld for a short while, another problem is that they don't pay any tax in Australia to extract it.
Thats not true at all, They pay royalties on all the gas they extract, corporate tax,
PRRT and excise.

https://energyproducers.au/all_news...as-tax-and-royalty-collections-almost-triple/

Also back in the early 2010’s I was a shareholder of both of the two big Queensland gas discoveries, Queensland Gas.Ltd and Arrow energy.Ltd

I remember the trouble we were having, we discovered all this gas, but the domestic market couldn’t consume it, we basically couldn’t get anyone from down south to buy much volume at all, so both companies built a bunch of gas power stations to convert the gas into electricity just so we could turn the gas into cash.

Thats why the concept for the export terminals came about, but it seemed hugely risky at the time, so the share holders we happy when internationals bought us out at a huge profit for about $10 billion.

it’s meant Australian shareholders walked away with billions, The government earns a lot more royalties, land owners earn cash, and workers and contractors have more employment.


IMG_0534.jpeg
 
Joined
15 June 2023
Posts
490
Reactions
797
Thats not true at all, They pay royalties on all the gas they extract, corporate tax,
PRRT and excise.

https://energyproducers.au/all_news...as-tax-and-royalty-collections-almost-triple/

Also back in the early 2010’s I was a shareholder of both of the two big Queensland gas discoveries, Queensland Gas.Ltd and Arrow energy.Ltd

I remember the trouble we were having, we discovered all this gas, but the domestic market couldn’t consume it, we basically couldn’t get anyone from down south to buy much volume at all, so both companies built a bunch of gas power stations to convert the gas into electricity just so we could turn the gas into cash.

Thats why the concept for the export terminals came about, but it seemed hugely risky at the time, so the share holders we happy when internationals bought us out at a huge profit for about $10 billion.

it’s meant Australian shareholders walked away with billions, The government earns a lot more royalties, land owners earn cash, and workers and contractors have more employment.


View attachment 170545
The ATO brought out a Tax Avoidance Taskforce to go after them in the last couple of years.


TaiAtoTable2.jpg

Oil and Gas

The report shows some large oil and gas companies have moved into a tax payable position. This is following the completion of LNG projects and the recoupment of start-up costs over a number of years.

Tax payments from this sector have grown markedly in the 2022–23 income tax year to in excess of $11 billion. Some of these companies are now amongst the largest taxpayers in Australia. The significant growth in tax payments will be reflected in the report to be published in 2024.

‘The Tax Avoidance Taskforce has been instrumental in moving a number of large oil and gas companies into a tax payable position. Oil and gas companies contributed $4.4 billion of the record $6.4 billion tax revenue secured from public and multinational businesses for the 2022–23 financial year. Our intervention ensured that these companies paid more tax and sooner,’ Ms Saint said.

Petroleum Resource Rent Tax (PRRT) payable doubled to almost $2 billion, with oil prices being a key driver. It is the highest reported PRRT since CTT reporting started.

 

Value Collector

Have courage, and be kind.
Joined
13 January 2014
Posts
11,067
Reactions
7,001
The ATO brought out a Tax Avoidance Taskforce to go after them in the last couple of years.


View attachment 170546

Oil and Gas

The report shows some large oil and gas companies have moved into a tax payable position. This is following the completion of LNG projects and the recoupment of start-up costs over a number of years.

Tax payments from this sector have grown markedly in the 2022–23 income tax year to in excess of $11 billion. Some of these companies are now amongst the largest taxpayers in Australia. The significant growth in tax payments will be reflected in the report to be published in 2024.

‘The Tax Avoidance Taskforce has been instrumental in moving a number of large oil and gas companies into a tax payable position. Oil and gas companies contributed $4.4 billion of the record $6.4 billion tax revenue secured from public and multinational businesses for the 2022–23 financial year. Our intervention ensured that these companies paid more tax and sooner,’ Ms Saint said.

Petroleum Resource Rent Tax (PRRT) payable doubled to almost $2 billion, with oil prices being a key driver. It is the highest reported PRRT since CTT reporting started.

Yeah, that’s mainly company tax was being limited by write downs on their plants. But they have been paying royalties, PRRT, revenue to land holders etc etc all along.

just like any major project where you spend billions, you can write off the depreciation of that plant against the operating profits you make, meaning that you can be making good cashflow in the early years, but not technically making a tax able profit.

but, eventually those write off run out, and you have to start booking taxable profits, that’s what happened here. They would have had to start booking profits anyway, the task force just slowed down the speed of the write off a bit so that the government good have a “political win”

it’s not really any different from when a tradie buys a $70,000 Ute and writes it off against his tax that year, so pays no income tax. but the next year he will pay tax and has no value in his Ute left to write off.
 
Joined
15 June 2023
Posts
490
Reactions
797
Yeah, that’s mainly company tax was being limited by write downs on their plants. But they have been paying royalties, PRRT, revenue to land holders etc etc all along.

just like any major project where you spend billions, you can write off the depreciation of that plant against the operating profits you make, meaning that you can be making good cashflow in the early years, but not technically making a tax able profit.

but, eventually those write off run out, and you have to start booking taxable profits, that’s what happened here. They would have had to start booking profits anyway, the task force just slowed down the speed of the write off a bit so that the government good have a “political win”

it’s not really any different from when a tradie buys a $70,000 Ute and writes it off against his tax that year, so pays no income tax. but the next year he will pay tax and has no value in his Ute left to write off.
I won't mention the name of the company but the LNG projects in Qld stiffed Qld of a lot of money. All the local businesses stocked up on parts, nuts, bolts, and washers and they went and bought them all overseas. They literally bought nothing locally even the nuts and bolts for electrical cable trays, they let a team of electricians sit and wait for 2 week while ordering washers and bolts from the US.



These companies do anything to avoid paying taxes here.


1707536701551.png 1707537277574.png


 

Value Collector

Have courage, and be kind.
Joined
13 January 2014
Posts
11,067
Reactions
7,001
I won't mention the name of the company but the LNG projects in Qld stiffed Qld of a lot of money. All the local businesses stocked up on parts, nuts, bolts, and washers and they went and bought them all overseas. They literally bought nothing locally even the nuts and bolts for electrical cable trays, they let a team of electricians sit and wait for 2 week while ordering washers and bolts from the US.



These companies do anything to avoid paying taxes here.


View attachment 170574 View attachment 170575


again, that relates to company tax, it’s not limited to LNG companies, all international companies with international supply chains have to apportion where they made profits, and pay taxes in the countries they made profits, ofcourse they will try to report the profits in the more tax effective areas.

But If a company has avoided paying tax, that should be looked at and they should be persecuted. But that’s not an argument against the project itself, that’s just an argument for better tax laws.

for example if we found out a plumber had avoided paying their taxes, that doesn’t me we shouldn’t get plumbing work done.


IMG_0544.jpeg
https://australia.chevron.com/news/...-tax-and-royalties-payments-exceed-12-billion
 
Joined
14 February 2005
Posts
14,417
Reactions
14,905
I remember the trouble we were having, we discovered all this gas, but the domestic market couldn’t consume it, we basically couldn’t get anyone from down south to buy much volume at all, so both companies built a bunch of gas power stations to convert the gas into electricity just so we could turn the gas into cash.

Thats why the concept for the export terminals came about, but it seemed hugely risky at the time, so the share holders we happy when internationals bought us out at a huge profit for about $10 billion.

it’s meant Australian shareholders walked away with billions, The government earns a lot more royalties, land owners earn cash, and workers and contractors have more employment.
Where the problem is is that those LNG plants take in more gas than the same companies produce indeed it's more than the total production in Queensland.

So we've a situation where gas is flowing from the southern states via Moomba (SA) into Queensland in order to feed the LNG plants. That's happening right now, literally at this moment gas is flowing from SA into Qld and in the past it's gone as far as Bass Strait gas flowing from Victoria to NSW, from NSW to SA, then SA to Qld and through to the LNG plants.

Meanwhile there's planned LNG import terminals in NSW, SA and Vic with the NSW one substantially built because Bass Strait and SA gas is running out, and supply isn't available from Qld since it's all going into LNG.

US spot natural gas price is USD 1.86 per mmbtu at the moment. Converting between currencies and metric measurements, the spot price in Australia is USD 6.77 in Victoria, 7.40 in Adelaide, 7.55 in Sydney and 7.61 in Brisbane.

Compared to pre-LNG gas prices adjusted for inflation, that's an increase in annual cost to Australian business and consumers of approximately $5.5 billion across Qld, NSW, ACT, SA, Vic and Tas.

Plus whatever is the cost of losing various industries eg fertilizer manufacturing in Brisbane for example, or the extreme pressure Mt Isa's under given gas provides essentially all of the energy input apart from petrol and diesel in vehicles, or of not establishing new industries that would otherwise have been viable. Plus the costs of not having gas available as a replacement for coal unless it's to be imported.

The basic issue is one of scale. Three separate projects all built two LNG trains, seemingly not paying attention to what others were also doing at the same time and considering that in the context of the resource base. If there'd just been two built in total, rather than six, there wouldn't be a problem. But to build enough capacity to export the entire reserves and more, that was always going to be an issue.

Obviously the companies and shareholders have gained from that but from a broader Australian economy perspective it's a "buy high, sell low" strategy that's increased a key input cost, gas and electricity, for just about every other business.

That said, I won't blame the companies for doing it, not even slightly. Business acts in the interests of shareholders indeed the law says that's what management are to do, business isn't there to act in the interests of the wider community unless that aligns with what's good for shareholders. So to the extent there's an argument for reserving gas for local use "in the national interest", that's a matter for government to bring about.

Noting there that Australia is the only country on earth that permits unconstrained exports of gas, nowhere else permits it not even the US. Indeed the US President very recently put the brakes on new LNG projects. The Australian problem there being "she'll be right" and failing to plan ahead - that comes back to bite and when it involves something critical like energy it bites damn hard.

So I'll argue that the scale of LNG export from Qld ought be considerably smaller but in saying that it was government's job to put the brakes on there.

That said, all these posts on gas are arguably off topic on this thread and could perhaps be better moved to a more suitable place? :2twocents
 

Value Collector

Have courage, and be kind.
Joined
13 January 2014
Posts
11,067
Reactions
7,001
Where the problem is is that those LNG plants take in more gas than the same companies produce indeed it's more than the total production in Queensland.

So we've a situation where gas is flowing from the southern states via Moomba (SA) into Queensland in order to feed the LNG plants. That's happening right now, literally at this moment gas is flowing from SA into Qld and in the past it's gone as far as Bass Strait gas flowing from Victoria to NSW, from NSW to SA, then SA to Qld and through to the LNG plants.

Meanwhile there's planned LNG import terminals in NSW, SA and Vic with the NSW one substantially built because Bass Strait and SA gas is running out, and supply isn't available from Qld since it's all going into LNG.

US spot natural gas price is USD 1.86 per mmbtu at the moment. Converting between currencies and metric measurements, the spot price in Australia is USD 6.77 in Victoria, 7.40 in Adelaide, 7.55 in Sydney and 7.61 in Brisbane.

Compared to pre-LNG gas prices adjusted for inflation, that's an increase in annual cost to Australian business and consumers of approximately $5.5 billion across Qld, NSW, ACT, SA, Vic and Tas.

Plus whatever is the cost of losing various industries eg fertilizer manufacturing in Brisbane for example, or the extreme pressure Mt Isa's under given gas provides essentially all of the energy input apart from petrol and diesel in vehicles, or of not establishing new industries that would otherwise have been viable. Plus the costs of not having gas available as a replacement for coal unless it's to be imported.

The basic issue is one of scale. Three separate projects all built two LNG trains, seemingly not paying attention to what others were also doing at the same time and considering that in the context of the resource base. If there'd just been two built in total, rather than six, there wouldn't be a problem. But to build enough capacity to export the entire reserves and more, that was always going to be an issue.

Obviously the companies and shareholders have gained from that but from a broader Australian economy perspective it's a "buy high, sell low" strategy that's increased a key input cost, gas and electricity, for just about every other business.

That said, I won't blame the companies for doing it, not even slightly. Business acts in the interests of shareholders indeed the law says that's what management are to do, business isn't there to act in the interests of the wider community unless that aligns with what's good for shareholders. So to the extent there's an argument for reserving gas for local use "in the national interest", that's a matter for government to bring about.

Noting there that Australia is the only country on earth that permits unconstrained exports of gas, nowhere else permits it not even the US. Indeed the US President very recently put the brakes on new LNG projects. The Australian problem there being "she'll be right" and failing to plan ahead - that comes back to bite and when it involves something critical like energy it bites damn hard.

So I'll argue that the scale of LNG export from Qld ought be considerably smaller but in saying that it was government's job to put the brakes on there.

That said, all these posts on gas are arguably off topic on this thread and could perhaps be better moved to a more suitable place? :2twocents
I don’t think that’s correct Smurf, the Moomba to Brisbane pipeline is bi directional and is regularly used to export gas out of Queensland back to Moomba and then to the southern states. There is also other pipelines that bring gas south.

think of Queensland being to gas what Tassie is to electricity, they import from other states and supply other states depending on the market.

i am an active follower of APA and the own that pipeline.

https://www.accc.gov.au/media-relea...mproves-but-risk-of-winter-shortfalls-remains

IMG_0547.jpeg https://www.accc.gov.au/media-relea...mproves-but-risk-of-winter-shortfalls-remains
 
Joined
24 February 2013
Posts
492
Reactions
536
We had a lot of gas but pretty much the whole lot has been contracted for export. I'll keep off the politics, this seems the wrong thread for that, but suffice to say I strongly disagree with that having occurred.

What's done is done though, there's no undoing it short of defaulting on the contracts. Two thirds of it's still physically in Queensland but almost all of it's owned by someone overseas. :2twocents
There is still plenty more LNG in the ground that is viable for greenfield expansion. That could be used for domestic supply but the environment regulations are what is stopping it from happening.
 
Joined
14 February 2005
Posts
14,417
Reactions
14,905
There is still plenty more LNG in the ground that is viable for greenfield expansion.
Queensland coal seam gas:

Total discovered technically recoverable gas = 66,955 PJ

LNG plant requirements over 30 years at full capacity = ~47,000 PJ.

Queensland domestic use over 30 years = 9400 PJ

All looks OK then?

Trouble is the detail with 25,300 PJ of that gas being uneconomic to extract according to the data provided to government. That cuts the total available to 41,665 PJ of which about 15,170 PJ has been extracted thus far with 26,495 PJ left to extract, presently being extracted at a rate of 1550 PJ per annum.

Those figures are all from Geoscience Australia (Government) ultimately sourced from the industry. Plus I've added in actual production since publication of those figures.

There's also the diversion of gas from Qld to other states via Moomba which adds to demand on Qld reserves. Doable at present but it relies on the "excess gas" being available in Queensland.

I'll leave others to add the numbers up there, based on whatever assumptions you choose, but suffice to say there's a reason for all the posturing going on. It's a game of musical chairs and nobody wants to lose.

A key issue there is timing and that shareholders and energy planners take a radically different view there. Shareholders and company boards might be thinking of their own investment horizon or their own tenure with that company and looking 5 or 10 years ahead. Energy planners and contract negotiators however are looking very much further ahead, in some cases through to the 2070's, and that explains the different perspectives. Nobody on that side is looking a year or two ahead, not when they're making 30+ year commitments to plant that requires gas to operate.

This chart sums up the overall position across all eastern states (including SA) including gas demand for export:

1707724062800.png

Source = ACCC

The "excess gas" referred to is simply that above the red line, above the contracted LNG exports. Noting that according to the LNG producers themselves, that uncontracted volume is negative from 2029 onwards. Or in simple terms supply falls short of demand. This doesn't change the physical need to send gas from Qld to Moomba to meet southern demand.

Putting the details aside, it's pretty straightforward and this is the bit of relevance to the thread. Australian buyers of gas, those wanting volumes that are above retail quantities (eg power generation, heavy industry) are finding it extremely difficult to do so. They issue a tender and these days it's pretty common to receive very few offers to supply at all, and none at an acceptable price. That's the issue of relevance to gas consuming businesses and the thread subject - the inability to obtain gas at a suitable price or even at all. All the rest, the reasons why, are really just background detail in that sense but it's price and availability, or the lack of it, that counts.

Those trying to contract gas beyond 2028, that is take volume away from the contracted exports, are finding it very hard to do so at all, and even harder to do it at an economical price. That's the crux of it. Even harder for those trying to get contracts running well into the future. :2twocents
 
Last edited:
Joined
8 June 2008
Posts
11,107
Reactions
15,282
Queensland coal seam gas:

Total discovered technically recoverable gas = 66,955 PJ

LNG plant requirements over 30 years at full capacity = ~47,000 PJ.

Queensland domestic use over 30 years = 9400 PJ

All looks OK then?

Trouble is the detail with 25,300 PJ of that gas being uneconomic to extract according to the data provided to government. That cuts the total available to 41,665 PJ of which about 15,170 PJ has been extracted thus far with 26,495 PJ left to extract, presently being extracted at a rate of 1550 PJ per annum.

Those figures are all from Geoscience Australia (Government) ultimately sourced from the industry. Plus I've added in actual production since publication of those figures.

There's also the diversion of gas from Qld to other states via Moomba which adds to demand on Qld reserves. Doable at present but it relies on the "excess gas" being available in Queensland which, according to the LNG producers themselves, goes negative beyond 2028. That is, available supply is less than contracted volume so there's no excess.

I'll leave others to add the numbers up there, based on whatever assumptions you choose, but suffice to say there's a reason for all the posturing going on. It's a game of musical chairs and nobody wants to lose.

A key issue there is timing and that shareholders and energy planners take a radically different view there. Shareholders and company boards might be thinking of their own investment horizon or their own tenure with that company and looking 5 or 10 years ahead. Energy planners and contract negotiators however are looking very much further ahead, in some cases through to the 2070's, and that explains the different perspectives. There are indeed companies wanting gas supply through to the 2070's yes.

This chart sums up the overall position across all eastern states (including SA) including gas demand for export:

View attachment 170700

Source = ACCC

The "excess gas" referred to is simply that above the red line, above the contracted LNG exports. Noting that according to the LNG producers themselves, that uncontracted volume is negative from 2029 onwards. Or in simple terms supply falls short of demand.

Putting the details aside, it's pretty straightforward and this is the bit of relevance to the thread. Australian buyers of gas, those wanting volumes that are above retail quantities (eg power generation, heavy industry) are finding it extremely difficult to do so. They issue a tender and these days it's pretty common to receive very few offers to supply at all, and none at an acceptable price. That's the issue of relevance to gas consuming businesses and the thread subject - the inability to obtain gas at a suitable price or even at all. All the rest, the reasons why, are really just background detail in that sense but it's price and availability, or the lack of it, that counts.

Those trying to contract gas beyond 2028, that is take volume away from the contracted exports, are finding it very hard to do so at all, and even harder to do it at an economical price. That's the crux of it. :2twocents
let's not forget that one of the key cause is the prevention when not legal prohibition of any new search let alone exploitation of new resources...Australia joining the bird brain movement leaded by the West..
With the same attitude, all oil would have been burnt by the 1980s...
Reserves are not static until you stop looking
 
Joined
20 July 2021
Posts
8,474
Reactions
11,699
let's not forget that one of the key cause is the prevention when not legal prohibition of any new search let alone exploitation of new resources...Australia joining the bird brain movement leaded by the West..
With the same attitude, all oil would have been burnt by the 1980s...
Reserves are not static until you stop looking
careful ... i have seen some smart crows in my time ( that weren't trained pets )

you know how the Greens feel about stereotyping ( no matter how justified )
 
Top