DOCSLIB.ORG

Transfer Pricing Update – Imputing Transactions & the Appropriateness

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Transfer Pricing Update – Imputing Transactions & the Appropriateness Transfer Pricing Update – Imputing Transactions & the Appropriateness of Guarantee Fees Tax Executives Institute (Calgary) – May 30, 2017 Julie D’Avignon 707917 MAY 30, 2017 STIKEMAN ELLIOTT LLP Today’s Topics Appeals from Transfer Pricing Reassessments: 1. Suncor Energy Inc. (As Successor to Petro-Canada) v R 2. Burlington Resources Finance Company v R 3. Conoco Funding Company v R 1 STIKEMAN ELLIOTT LLP STIKEMAN ELLIOTT LLP 1 Suncor Energy Inc. (As Successor To Petro-Canada) v R Notice of Appeal dated November 21, 2014; Reply dated April 13, 2015; and Answer dated July 10, 2015 2 STIKEMAN ELLIOTT LLP Suncor Energy Inc. (As Successor To Petro-Canada) v R Facts Corporate Structure (Simplified) • Appeal by Suncor from a notice of 3rd Petro-Canada reassessment of its predecessor, Parties Hedges on Brent Petro-Canada for the 2007 tax year crude oil • The Minister’s transfer pricing 3908968 Canada adjustment based on s. 247(2)(a) Inc. and (c) of the Income Tax Act Canada (Canada) (“ ITA ”) increased Petro- Canada’s income by $2 billion UK • In 2004 PCUK, a UK-based Holdings UK subsidiary of Petro-Canada, acquired certain assets in the North Sea 3rd PCUK Parties Sale of oil from • Around that time, Petro-Canada North Sea asset entered into forward contracts for the sale of 28,000 bbl/d of Brent North Sea Oil crude oil at $~25/bbl for the period Assets July 1, 2007 – December 31, 2010 3 STIKEMAN ELLIOTT LLP STIKEMAN ELLIOTT LLP 2 Suncor Energy Inc. (As Successor To Petro-Canada) v R Facts (Cont’d) • The North Sea oil assets started Price of Brent Crude Oil $US/bbl producing in 2007. Expected 140 production of 60,000 bbl/d Board authorizes 120 close out of • The first cash settlements on the hedges forward contracts became due in 100 First cash July 2007. Initial cash settlement settlement payments of USD $287 million due 80 • $US/bbl The price of crude had risen 60 Petro-Canada dramatically since 2004, Petro- enters hedges Canada entered into swaps to close 40 out the forward contracts with a settlement payment of USD $1.7 billion 20 0 • Petro-Canada deducted these settlement payments in calculating Jul-2002 Jul-2007 Jan-2000 Jan-2005 Jun-2000 Jun-2005 Oct-2003 Apr-2001 Apr-2006 Sep-2001 Feb-2002 Sep-2006 Feb-2007 Dec-2002 Dec-2007 Aug-2004 Nov-2000 Nov-2005 Mar-2004 its income May-2003 May-2008 Source: US Energy Information Administration 4 STIKEMAN ELLIOTT LLP Suncor Energy Inc. (As Successor To Petro-Canada) v R Minister’s Grounds for Reassessment • The Minister imputed a $2 billion reimbursement from PCUK to Petro-Canada for the hedging losses • The Minister made certain findings of fact: – The hedges were part of a strategy to allow Petro-Canada to increase its bid for the North Sea oil assets – Petro-Canada was the only company authorized to undertake forward contracts and the only company that could supply the credit to undertake such contracts • The Minister’s view was that, for the purposes of applying s. 247(2), the “series of transactions” encompassed: – The acquisition of the North Sea oil assets – Entering into the forward contracts – Closing out the forward contracts 5 STIKEMAN ELLIOTT LLP STIKEMAN ELLIOTT LLP 3 Suncor Energy Inc. (As Successor To Petro-Canada) v R Minister’s Grounds for Reassessment (cont’d) • Petro-Canada and PCUK were participants in an imputed transaction, whereby Petro- Canada entered into the hedges for the benefit of its non-resident subsidiary • Minister considered Petro-Canada and PCUK to have priced such imputed transactions at $0 as no reimbursement of Petro-Canada by PCUK • If the parties had been dealing at arm’s length, Petro-Canada would have allocated hedging gains to PCUK and PCUK would have reimbursed Petro-Canada for hedging losses • Minister applied a penalty for Petro-Canada’s failure to adequately prepare contemporaneous documentation 6 STIKEMAN ELLIOTT LLP Suncor Energy Inc. (As Successor To Petro-Canada) v R Notice of Appeal • Issues: – Whether the Minister erred by applying s. 247(2)(a) and (c) to impute a reimbursement by PCUK to Petro-Canada? – Whether, even if s. 247(2)(a) and (c) apply, the Minister erred in assessing Petro-Canada on the basis that the transfer price between Petro-Canada and PCUK was inconsistent with the arm’s length standard? – Whether the Minister erred by applying s. 247(3) and (4) to impose a penalty for the alleged failure to adequately prepare contemporaneous documentation? 7 STIKEMAN ELLIOTT LLP STIKEMAN ELLIOTT LLP 4 Suncor Energy Inc. (As Successor To Petro-Canada) v R Notice of Appeal (Cont’d) • Reasons: – S. 247(2)(a) and (c) does not apply: • Petro-Canada participated in two transactions: (1) entering into the forward contracts on its own behalf; and (2) settling those contracts • PCUK participated in two transactions: (1) the North Sea assets acquisition; and (2) earning revenue from the production and sale of crude oil from those assets with other arm’s length parties • Each of the transactions were made with arm’s length parties • The Minister’s application of s. 247(2)(a) and (c) results in an arbitrary application of the provision requiring taxpayers to self-report on imputed transactions that do not actually occur – Even if s. 247(2)(a) and (c) apply, the transfer price imputed by the Minister between Petro-Canada and PCUK was inconsistent with the arm’s length standard: • The adjustment makes PCUK liable for the obligations of Petro-Canada, which is inconsistent with the legal obligations of the parties 8 STIKEMAN ELLIOTT LLP Suncor Energy Inc. (As Successor To Petro-Canada) v R Notice of Appeal (Cont’d) • Reasons: • An arm’s length party would not make a $2 billion voluntary payment without a legal obligation • The $2 billion reimbursement would not have been agreed to by arm’s length parties. • Arm’s length price would be nil as PCUK had no entitlements or obligations under the forward contracts – There was no failure to adequately prepare contemporaneous documentation: • There was no transaction within the meaning of s. 247 to be documented and therefore no failure to document a transaction according to s. 247(3) and (4) • Asserting that a taxpayer should document notional transactions which the Minister may impute is inconsistent with the textual, contextual and purposive interpretation of s. 247(3) and (4) • Subsections (3) and (4) require reasonable efforts. Petro-Canada exercised reasonable diligence in the circumstances in documenting the transactions that actually occurred • Petro-Canada provided contemporaneous documentation with respect to each of the transactions in the series of transactions 9 STIKEMAN ELLIOTT LLP STIKEMAN ELLIOTT LLP 5 Suncor Energy Inc. (As Successor To Petro-Canada) v R Minister’s Reply • Issues: – Whether s. 247(2)(a) and (c) apply to adjust Petro-Canada’s income? – Whether Petro-Canada is liable to a penalty pursuant to s. 247(3)? • Reasons: – The Minister correctly applied s. 247(2)(a) and (c) to adjust Petro-Canada’s income: • Petro-Canada engaged in the forward contracts to hedge the price risk of its indirect subsidiary, PCUK, to guarantee a certain level of return for the North Sea asset acquisition • When PCUK acquired the North Sea assets, it also acquired the crude oil price risk. An arm’s length party would have reimbursed Petro-Canada for hedging losses – Petro-Canada is liable to a penalty pursuant to s. 247(3): • Petro-Canada did not make reasonable efforts to determine arm’s length transfer price with PCUK • Petro-Canada did not make or obtain adequate documentation 10 STIKEMAN ELLIOTT LLP Suncor Energy Inc. (As Successor To Petro-Canada) v R Comments • According to a Suncor press release dated December 5, 2016, Suncor successfully resolved the dispute with the CRA, resulting in no additional taxes, interest or penalties • The CRA position takes a broad view of the transfer pricing provisions of the ITA: – CRA imputed a transaction in absence of any legal obligation, legal entitlement or contractual relationship – Purports to expand the onerous requirements of the transfer pricing to notional transactions 11 STIKEMAN ELLIOTT LLP STIKEMAN ELLIOTT LLP 6 Burlington Resources Finance Company v R Notice of Appeal dated June 26, 2012; and Reply dated October 9, 2012 12 STIKEMAN ELLIOTT LLP Burlington Resources Finance Company v R Facts • Appeal by BRFC from a notice of reassessment for the 2002 - 2005 Corporate Structure taxation years (Simplified) Burlington • BRFC was a Nova Scotia unlimited Resources Inc. 0.5% guarantee liability company (“ ULC ”) that Guarantee of BRFC’s debt (“BRI”) fee to parent borrowed funds with its parent’s US guarantee and on-loaned those funds to related entities Canada Burlington • In exchange for the guarantee, Burlington 3rd Resources Finance BRFC paid its parent a 0.5% fee and Resources Parties Company (“BRFC”) deducted that fee in calculating its Loans On-loaned Group income funds to related entities at a spread • BRI sought advice from investment banks in determining an appropriate guarantee fee and agreed to the 0.5% fee with BRFC based on that advice 13 STIKEMAN ELLIOTT LLP STIKEMAN ELLIOTT LLP 7 Burlington Resources Finance Company v R Minister’s Grounds for Reassessment • The Minister reduced the guarantee fees to nil and imposed transfer pricing penalties pursuant to s. 247(3) • The Minister made certain findings of fact: – BRFC was established with minimal capital, no employees, no operations, no collateral and no cash flow – BRFC could not borrow funds without its parent’s guarantee – No bona fide purpose for this structure and the guarantee, other than to obtain a tax deduction for BRFC – An arm’s length party would require a fee at such an excessive rate that BRFC would not be able to on-loan its funds at a competitive rate – The terms and conditions of the transaction differed from those that would have been made between person’s dealing at arm’s length – Arm’s length parties would not have required that there be any fee in respect of BRI’s guarantees.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Initial Project Description Summary
    SUNCOR ENERGY INC. Base Mine Extension INITIAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION SUMMARY February 2020 SUNCOR ENERGY INC. Base Mine Extension - Initial Project Description Summary February 2020 This Page Intentionally Left Blank SUNCOR ENERGY INC. Base Mine Extension - Initial Project Description Summary February 2020 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Suncor Energy Inc. (Suncor) is submitting a proposal to develop the Base Mine Extension Project (the Project). All plausible pathways to address global emissions need energy from fossil fuels and Suncor views Canada’s world class, strategic oil sands resource as a key part of the energy future for decades to come. Commensurate with Canada’s ambitions, Suncor is committed to a long-term strategy of reducing absolute emissions. With the innovation we are known for, Suncor can provide the world with trusted low carbon energy. Suncor has invested billions of dollars in infrastructure that produces value added products to meet the energy needs of Albertans and Canadians. This Project is necessary to continue to add value with this infrastructure. The bitumen from this project will be used to supply the existing upgraders at Suncor’s Oil Sands Base Plant operations (Base Plant), when the existing mines are depleted. The Project is adjacent to Base Plant and includes an open pit mining operation and extraction facilities. Production is expected to be nominally 225 thousand barrels per day of replacement bitumen during its estimated 25-year operational life. The Project application will be based on best-available technology. In parallel, Suncor is developing new technologies, such as non-aqueous extraction. These new technologies have the potential to significantly reduce the overall footprint, reclamation timeline, and GHG emissions of mining and will be incorporated as appropriate.
    [Show full text]
  • Suncor Q3 2020 Investor Relations Supplemental Information Package
    SUNCOR ENERGY Investor Information SUPPLEMENTAL Published October 28, 2020 SUNCOR ENERGY Table of Contents 1. Energy Sources 2. Processing, Infrastructure & Logistics 3. Consumer Channels 4. Sustainability 5. Technology Development 6. Integrated Model Calculation 7. Glossary SUNCOR ENERGY 2 SUNCOR ENERGY EnergyAppendix Sources 3 202003- 038 Oil Sands Energy Sources *All values net to Suncor In Situ Mining Firebag Base Plant 215,000 bpd capacity 350,000 bpd capacity Suncor WI 100% Suncor WI 100% 2,603 mmbbls 2P reserves1 1,350 mmbbls 2P reserves1 Note: Millennium and North Steepank Mines do not supply full 350,000 bpd of capacity as significant in-situ volumes are sent through Base Plant MacKay River Syncrude 38,000 bpd capacity Syncrude operated Suncor WI 100% 205,600 bpd net coking capacity 501 mmbbls 2P reserves1 Suncor WI 58.74% 1,217 mmbbls 2P reserves1 Future opportunities Fort Hills ES-SAGD Firebag Expansion Suncor operated Lewis (SU WI 100%) 105,000 bpd net capacity Meadow Creek (SU WI 75%) Suncor WI 54.11% 1,365 mmbbls 2P reserves1 First oil achieved in January 2018 SUNCOR ENERGY 1 See Slide Notes and Advisories. 4 1 Regional synergy opportunities for existing assets Crude logistics Upgrader feedstock optionality from multiple oil sands assets Crude feedstock optionality for Edmonton refinery Supply chain Sparing, warehousing & supply chain management Consolidation of regional contracts (lodging, busing, flights, etc.) Operational optimizations Unplanned outage impact mitigations In Situ Turnaround planning optimization Process
    [Show full text]
  • Suncor Energy – Investor Presentation 2019 Q1
    INVESTOR INFORMATION Q1 2019 Published May 1, 2019 2 Canada’s leading integrated energy company $85B ~940 mbpd ~600 mbpd 28+ years ~460 mbpd ~1750 1 Oil production Heavy upgrading 2P Reserve life Refining nameplate Enterprise value Retail sites4 As at March 31, 2019 nameplate capacity2 nameplate capacity2 index3 capacity2 1, 2, 3, 4 See Slide Notes and Advisories 3 Suncor – A resilient business focused on shareholder returns Cash flow growth Cash generation Strong potential FFO1 increase largely independent of market conditions Significant upside FFO1 sensitivity to WTI, based on TTM5 actuals US$62.80 WTI, 0.76 C$/US$, US$18.00 NYH 3-2-1 crack spread 2 (C$ billion) ~5% CAGR (Based on 2019 price guidance) $16 $14 TTM average production 750 mbbls/d $12 Debottlenecks, $10 cost reductions $8 Fort Hills, and margin Syncrude, improvements $6 and Hebron $4 $5.5B Sustaining capital6 + dividend $2 $2.8B Sustaining capital6 $0 2018 FFO1 Production Free funds flow 2023E FFO1 $60 $63 $70 $75 $80 growth 3 growth4 TTM WTI ($USD) Shareholder returns Resilience Commitment to reliable returns through the commodity cycles Managing the balance sheet as a strategic asset Dividend per share7 Liquidity Buyback per share7,8,9 Anticipated buyback per share7,9 7% $5.3B $1.9B cash and $3.4B in available lines of credit Dividend + buyback yield As at March 31, 2019 — 5% 5% A low Credit rating 1.88 Investment grade 0.85 DBRS (A Low) Stable, S&P(A-) stable, Moody’s (Baa1) Stable 1.14 3% 3% Baa1 WTI FFO Break-Even10 (USD) 1.02 1.14 1.16 1.28 1.44 1.68 ~$45 Sustaining capital6 + dividend 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019E 2019 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 See Slide Notes and Advisories.
    [Show full text]
  • Suncor Energy Announces Successful Acquisition of 72.9% of Canadian Oil Sands Shares
    News Release FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Suncor Energy announces successful acquisition of 72.9% of Canadian Oil Sands shares (All dollar amounts referenced are in Canadian dollars) Calgary, Alberta (Feb. 5, 2016) – Suncor announced today that approximately 72.9 per cent of Canadian Oil Sands shares (“COS”) equating to 353,307,264 common shares and accompanying rights have been tendered to Suncor's Offer. Suncor will take up all tendered shares and those shares will be paid for in accordance with the terms of the Offer, initially made October 5, 2015 and most recently amended January 22, 2016. All shares tendered were held by "Independent Shareholders" as such term is defined by the COS shareholder rights plan dated December 31, 2010 as amended April 30, 2013 (the “COS Rights Plan”). “We’re pleased with the strong level of support from COS shareholders,” said Steve Williams, president and chief executive officer. “From the outset, we’ve spoken about the excellent value this offer creates for both COS and Suncor shareholders and I’m looking forward to delivering on that commitment.” In accordance with the "Permitted Bid" requirements of the COS Rights Plan and the terms of the Offer, Suncor has extended its Offer to Monday, February 22, 2016 at 5:00 p.m. MT (7:00 p.m. ET) so that COS shareholders who have not yet tendered their shares can do so. Further extensions beyond February 22, 2016 are not anticipated. COS shareholders who tendered to the Offer will receive 0.28 of a common share of Suncor for each share, which will be paid in accordance with the terms of the Offer.
    [Show full text]
  • Facts About Alberta's Oil Sands and Its Industry
    Facts about Alberta’s oil sands and its industry CONTENTS Oil Sands Discovery Centre Facts 1 Oil Sands Overview 3 Alberta’s Vast Resource The biggest known oil reserve in the world! 5 Geology Why does Alberta have oil sands? 7 Oil Sands 8 The Basics of Bitumen 10 Oil Sands Pioneers 12 Mighty Mining Machines 15 Cyrus the Bucketwheel Excavator 1303 20 Surface Mining Extraction 22 Upgrading 25 Pipelines 29 Environmental Protection 32 In situ Technology 36 Glossary 40 Oil Sands Projects in the Athabasca Oil Sands 44 Oil Sands Resources 48 OIL SANDS DISCOVERY CENTRE www.oilsandsdiscovery.com OIL SANDS DISCOVERY CENTRE FACTS Official Name Oil Sands Discovery Centre Vision Sharing the Oil Sands Experience Architects Wayne H. Wright Architects Ltd. Owner Government of Alberta Minister The Honourable Lindsay Blackett Minister of Culture and Community Spirit Location 7 hectares, at the corner of MacKenzie Boulevard and Highway 63 in Fort McMurray, Alberta Building Size Approximately 27,000 square feet, or 2,300 square metres Estimated Cost 9 million dollars Construction December 1983 – December 1984 Opening Date September 6, 1985 Updated Exhibit Gallery opened in September 2002 Facilities Dr. Karl A. Clark Exhibit Hall, administrative area, children’s activity/education centre, Robert Fitzsimmons Theatre, mini theatre, gift shop, meeting rooms, reference room, public washrooms, outdoor J. Howard Pew Industrial Equipment Garden, and Cyrus Bucketwheel Exhibit. Staffing Supervisor, Head of Marketing and Programs, Senior Interpreter, two full-time Interpreters, administrative support, receptionists/ cashiers, seasonal interpreters, and volunteers. Associated Projects Bitumount Historic Site Programs Oil Extraction demonstrations, Quest for Energy movie, Paydirt film, Historic Abasand Walking Tour (summer), special events, self-guided tours of the Exhibit Hall.
    [Show full text]
  • Foreign Investment in the Oil Sands and British Columbia Shale Gas
    Canadian Energy Research Institute Foreign Investment in the Oil Sands and British Columbia Shale Gas Jon Rozhon March 2012 Relevant • Independent • Objective Foreign Investment in the Oil Sands and British Columbia Shale Gas 1 Foreign Investment in the Oil Sands There has been a steady flow of foreign investment into the oil sands industry over the past decade in terms of merger and acquisition (M&A) activity. Out of a total CDN$61.5 billion in M&A’s, approximately half – or CDN$30.3 billion – involved foreign companies taking an ownership stake. These funds were invested in in situ projects, integrated projects, and land leases. As indicated in Figure 1, US and Chinese companies made the most concerted efforts to increase their profile in the oil sands, investing 2/3 of all foreign capital. The US and China both invested in a total of seven different projects. The French company, Total SA, has also spread its capital around several projects (four in total) while Royal Dutch Shell (UK), Statoil (Norway), and PTT (Thailand) each opted to take large positions in one project each. Table 1 provides a list of all foreign investments in the oil sands since 2004. Figure 1: Total Oil Sands Foreign Investment since 2003, Country of Origin Korea 1% Thailand Norway 6% UK 7% 2% US France 33% 18% China 33% Source: Canoils. Foreign Investment in the Oil Sands and British Columbia Shale Gas 2 Table 1: Oil Sands Foreign Investment Deals Year Country Acquirer Brief Description Total Acquisition Cost (000) 2012 China PetroChina 40% interest in MacKay River 680,000 project from AOSC 2011 China China National Offshore Acquisition of OPTI Canada 1,906,461 Oil Corporation 2010 France Total SA Alliance with Suncor.
    [Show full text]
  • News Release – the New Suncor Energy
    News Release FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Suncor Energy reports second quarter 2021 results Unless otherwise noted, all financial figures are unaudited, presented in Canadian dollars (Cdn$), and have been prepared in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS), specifically International Accounting Standard (IAS) 34 Interim Financial Reporting as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board. Production volumes are presented on a working-interest basis, before royalties, except for production values from the company's Libya operations, which are presented on an economic basis. Certain financial measures referred to in this news release (funds from operations, operating earnings (loss) and free funds flow) are not prescribed by Canadian generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). See the Non-GAAP Financial Measures section of this news release. References to Oil Sands operations exclude Suncor Energy Inc.’s interest in Fort Hills and Syncrude. Calgary, Alberta (July 28, 2021) – “Suncor generated $2.4 billion in funds from operations in the quarter while also completing significant turnaround activities in the upstream and downstream businesses,” said Mark Little, president and chief executive officer. “The improved cash generation enabled us to increase shareholder returns to approximately $1.0 billion, representing approximately 40% of our funds from operations and we’re targeting further debt reduction in the latter half of the year in line with our previously announced capital allocation strategy.” • Funds from operations increased to $2.362 billion ($1.57 per common share) in the second quarter of 2021, compared to $488 million ($0.32 per common share) in the prior year quarter. Cash flow provided by operating activities, which includes changes in non-cash working capital, was $2.086 billion ($1.39 per common share) in the second quarter of 2021, compared to cash flow used in operating activities of $768 million ($0.50 per common share) in the prior year quarter.
    [Show full text]
  • Suncor Energy Agrees to Sell Non-Core Assets in Northeast B.C. to Progress Energy Resources Corp
    News Release FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Suncor Energy agrees to sell non-core assets in northeast B.C. to Progress Energy Resources Corp. (All financial figures are approximate and in Canadian dollars unless otherwise noted.) Calgary, Alberta (February 9, 2010) – Suncor Energy has reached an agreement with Progress Energy Resources Corp. to sell certain natural gas properties for approximately $390 million. Current production on these lands is approximately 43.8 million cubic feet equivalent per day (mmcfe/d). The sale includes properties known as Jedney, Beg and Blueberry, which are located in British Columbia about 125 kilometres northwest of Fort St. John. The sale is expected to close at the end of the first quarter and is subject to closing conditions and regulatory approvals typical of transactions of this nature. As part of its strategic business alignment, Suncor plans to divest of a number of non-core assets. The proposed divestments include certain natural gas assets in Western Canada and the United States Rockies, all Trinidad and Tobago assets and certain non-core North Sea assets, including all assets in The Netherlands. To date, including the U.S. Rockies assets and the assets announced today, Suncor has reached agreements to dispose of assets for aggregate consideration of approximately $907 million. This news release contains forward-looking statements, including estimated production; potential future divestitures; and the anticipated timing and closing of the sale transaction. Assumptions are based on management's experience
    [Show full text]
  • Suncor Energy Responds to Fire at Oil Sands Upgrader
    News Release FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Suncor Energy responds to fire at oil sands upgrader Calgary, Alberta (Feb. 9, 2010) –Suncor Energy Inc. responded to a fire at approximately 12 a.m. today at one of the company's two oil sands upgraders (U1) north of Fort McMurray, Alberta. The area was immediately secured and all employees and contractors in the area were safely evacuated. The appropriate authorities and regulators have been informed. Suncor officials are currently assessing damage and will provide an update on scheduling of repairs when the assessment is complete. This news release contains forward-looking statements, including our outlook production range and preliminary assessment of the duration of the repair period, which are based on Suncor's current expectations, estimates, projections and assumptions and are subject to change. Assumptions are based on management's experience and perception of historical trends, current conditions, anticipated future developments and other factors related to Suncor's business. Readers are cautioned that actual results could differ materially from those expressed or implied as a result of our ongoing assessment of repair plans and the impact of events, risks and uncertainties discussed in Suncor's most recent earnings release, current annual information form/form 40-F, annual report to shareholders and other documents filed with Canadian securities commissions at www.sedar.com and the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) at www.sec.gov. Suncor Energy Inc. is Canada’s premier integrated energy company. Suncor’s operations include oil sands development and upgrading, conventional and offshore oil and gas production, petroleum refining, and product marketing under the Petro-Canada brand — a proud National Partner to the Vancouver 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games.
    [Show full text]
  • Crudemonitor.Ca Western Canadian Select (WCS)
    CrudeMonitor.ca - Canadian Crude Quality Monitoring Program Page 1 of 2 crudemonitor.ca Home Monthly Reports Tools Library Industry Resources Contact Us Western Canadian Select (WCS) What is Western Canadian Select crude? Western Canadian Select is a Hardisty based blend Canada of conventional and oilsands production managed by Liberia Canadian Natural Resources, Cenovus Energy, Manilol Suncor Energy, and Talisman Energy. Argus has sti. launched daily volume-weighted average price ibia Saskalchewan Edmon-i t indexes for Western Canadian Select (WCS) and will publish this index in the daily Argus Crude and Argus Americas Crude publications. Calgary Winnipt Map data ©2013 Google Most Recent Sample Comments: Light Ends Summary Last 6 Samples WCS-807, Sep 17, 2013 Most Property 6 Month 1 Year 5 Year Recent The September 17th sample of Western Canadian ( vol% ) Average Average Average Select contained slightly elevated density, Sample sulphur, MCR, BTEX and C7 x C10 concentrations, C3- 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.06 while butanes and pentanes were slightly Butanes 1.04 1.68 1.82 2.02 decreased. Simulated distillation results indicate Pentanes 3.56 4.76 4.87 4.44 an increase in the residue fraction. Hexanes 3.86 4.10 4.21 3.94 Monthly Reports Heptanes 3.70 3.00 2.96 2.82 Octanes 3.08 2.27 2.14 2.12 Basic Analysis Nonanes 2.36 1.72 1.57 1.50 Decanes 1.27 0.89 0.82 0.72 Most 6 Month 1 Year 5 Year Property Recent Average Average Average Sample BTEX H Density (kg/m3) 934.5 929.6 928.3 929.2 Most 6 Gravity (oAPI) 19.8 20.6 20.8 20.7 Property 1 Year 5 Year Recent Month 0 (vol%) Average Average Sulphur ( wt o) 3.71 3.53 3.51 3.52 Sample Average MCR (wt%) 10.20 10.02 9.84 9.71 Benzene 0.18 0.17 0.18 0.16 Sediment (ppmw) 305 302 296 329 Toluene 0.41 0.33 0.32 0.30 TAN (mgKOH/g) 0.94 0.91 0.93 0.94 • Ethyl Benzene 0.09 0.07 0.06 0.06 Salt (ptb) 28.0 30.9 46.4 Xyl enes 0.45 0.33 0.30 0.29 Nickel (mg/L) 62.7 60.7 59.0 Vanadium (mg/L) 147.0 143.7 141.8 Olefins (wt%) ND ND Distillation *ND indicates a tested value below the instrument threshold.
    [Show full text]
  • Suncor Energy Centre - East Tower 111 - 5TH AVENUE SW, CALGARY, AB
    FOR SUBLEASE > OFFICE SPACE Suncor Energy Centre - East Tower 111 - 5TH AVENUE SW, CALGARY, AB Building Details Constructed 1983 Rentable Area 590,368 square feet Average Floorplate 20,000 square feet Number of Floors 32 Landlord ARCI Ltd. and SEC GP Inc. HVAC Monday - Friday | 7:30 am - 6:00 pm Saturday | 7:30 am - 1:30 pm Sublease Information Available Subpremises Suite 1750 Option 1 - 6,510 square feet Option 2 - 5,008 square feet Sublandlord PetroChina International Canada (Trading) Ltd. Annual Net Rent Market Rates Operating Costs and Taxes $25.66 per square foot [2017] Occupancy Date Immediate Term of Sublease Flexible (2 years preferred) Parking Three (3) stalls Comments > Well improved leasehold improvements, fully furnished with high-end office furniture > +15 connected to Bow Valley Square, TransCanada Tower and Hanover Building > Efficient column free floorplate > Onsite management with 24/7 building access and security > 2 levels of retail and service amenities DAN LANNON CRAIG HULSMAN COLLIERS INTERNATIONAL Senior Vice President/Partner Associate 900, 335 - 8th Avenue SW 403 215 9865 403 571 8829 Calgary, AB T2P 1C9 [email protected] [email protected] 403 266 5544 www.collierscanada.com Photographs Suite 1750 Option 1 - 6,510 square feet > Reception Area > Boardroom N > 2 Meeting Rooms > Kitchen/Lounge Area > 3 Offices > 40 Workstations Option 2 - 5,008 square feet > Reception Area > Boardroom > Meeting Room > Kitchen/Lounge Area > 2 Offices > 32 Workstations POTENTIAL RECEPTION AREA Suncor Energy Centre - East Tower 111 - 5TH AVENUE SW, CALGARY, AB Suncor Energy Centre has a Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED®) Gold Certification for Existing Buildings: Operations and Maintenance (EB:O&M) MEMORIAL DRIVE NE EAU CLAIRE MARKET 3 1886 BOW RIVER EAU CLAIRE AVENUE SW CAFE RIVERFRONT AVE SW MILL BARLEY ERNST & PARADE BARCLAY 1 AVENUE SW YOUNG SIEN LOK PARK TOWER SHERATON 205 JOEY CALGARY CHINATOWN EAU CLAIRE RIVERFRONT EAU CLAIRE P P TOMATOES P N.W.
    [Show full text]
  • Information Request No. 1 Suncor Energy Inc. to Cenovus Energy Inc. February 1, 2021 Enbridge Pipelines Inc. (Enbridge) Canadia
    Information Request No. 1 Suncor Energy Inc. to Cenovus Energy Inc. February 1, 2021 Enbridge Pipelines Inc. (Enbridge) Canadian Mainline Contracting Application (Application) File OF-Tolls-Group1-E101-2019-02 02 Suncor Energy Inc. Information Request No. 1 to Cenovus Energy Inc. Table of Contents 1.1 Competitive Toll Settlement (CTS) Exit Toll Levels and Evidence of Market Power ............. 1 1.2 Dr. Webb’s “Data Validation Effort”—Sustainment Capital Additions .................................... 4 1.3 Dr. Webb’s “Data Validation Effort”—Carrier Property in Service (CPIS) for the Year 2019 .. 5 1.4 Dr. Webb’s “Data Validation Effort”—Receipt and Delivery Terminalling Revenue ............... 7 1.5 Dr. Webb’s Explanation for Including a “Market Access Revenue Adjustment” in his Canadian Mainline Revenue Requirement Calculations ....................................................... 9 1.6 Dr. Webb’s Cost of Service and “Probability” Analyses, and Market Power Assertions ...... 11 1.7 Negotiation of Enbridge’s MLC Proposal and Ability to Exercise Market Power .................. 13 1.8 Benefits of Negotiated Rates Relative to Cost-Based Rates ............................................... 15 1.9 The Historical Role of Cost in Setting Tolls on the Enbridge Mainline. ................................ 17 1.10 Incentives under Indexed Cost-Based Ratemaking Regimes .............................................. 21 1.11 Conversion from Common Carriage to Contract Carriage for Existing Capacity ................. 23 1.12 Economic Regulation of Natural Monopolies ....................................................................... 25 1.13 Market Power of Negotiating Parties ................................................................................... 28 31504138.3 Information Request No. 1 Suncor Energy Inc. to Cenovus Energy Inc. February 1, 2021 Page 1 of 28 Information Request No. 1 1.1 Competitive Toll Settlement (CTS) Exit Toll Levels and Evidence of Market Power Reference: (i) Direct Evidence of Michael J.
    [Show full text]