- Статьи
- Economy
- It is important for oil companies: the authorities compensate for the costs of the safety of fuel and energy complex facilities
It is important for oil companies: the authorities compensate for the costs of the safety of fuel and energy complex facilities
The authorities will help oil companies compensate for the costs of ensuring the safety of fuel and energy facilities from attacks: companies will be provided with subsidies or financial assistance. This issue will be considered and resolved individually on a case-by-case basis, Izvestia learned. The oilmen themselves asked the Cabinet of Ministers to approve their tax compensation, but the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Energy did not support this scenario. Experts believe that the state will have to develop and apply a universal mechanism to ensure an equal level of protection for such facilities, regardless of the financial capabilities of the owner.
On ensuring the safety of fuel and energy complex facilities
After working out the issue of compensation for costs related to ensuring the safety of facilities of the fuel and energy complex (fuel and energy complex), it was decided to consider them on a case-by-case basis at the level of the head of government. This is stated in the materials of the Cabinet of Ministers, which were reviewed by Izvestia.
According to an interlocutor of Izvestia familiar with the situation, for the first time the issue of additional protection of fuel and energy facilities and the resulting costs was discussed at a meeting of the National Anti-Terrorism Committee in 2022-2023. In 2024, Rosneft submitted a proposal for tax compensation to the Cabinet of Ministers. The organization asked to consider the issue of reimbursement of such costs by deducting from income tax, mineral extraction tax (MET) or by increasing the tax deduction for excise taxes on petroleum raw materials.
According to the materials of the Ministry of Energy of the Russian Federation, which were preparing for a strategic session on the development of the oil and coal industry until 2050, chaired by Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin, the results of the work of the Ministry of Energy and the Ministry of Finance, which dealt with this issue, were published.
"The Government of the Russian Federation has decided that the issue of compensation for such expenses should be considered on a case—by-case basis at the level of the prime minister in the form of subsidies or other inter-budget transfers, provided there is documentary evidence of the actual costs incurred, without the use of tax incentive measures," the document says (Izvestia has it).
As noted in the materials, according to the Ministry of Finance, the costs of ensuring security and anti-terrorist protection can be attributed to the cost of production. In addition, in the report in response to Rosneft's appeals (available to Izvestia) It is also noted that the taxpayer's expenses, including those related to ensuring the safety of production facilities, are taken into account when determining the income tax base.
Insurance of fuel and energy complex facilities
At the same time, speaking about the costs of companies to ensure the safety of fuel and energy facilities, the government did not ignore the issue of their insurance. As noted in the materials of the Cabinet of Ministers, the Ministry of Energy, together with interested regulators, is currently working on issues of "property insurance of fuel and energy sector entities in case of an attack on facilities using unmanned aerial vehicles."
"Currently, such events are classified by insurance companies as military risks and are not recognized as insured events," the document says.
Nevertheless, the Supreme Court has a slightly different position on this issue. They believe that such explanations are unlawful in cases where military, military operations or "wartime is not carried out or has not been declared in the relevant territory." This conclusion was made by the judicial board for economic disputes of the Supreme Court in February, when the case of Lafid LLC was being considered, whose property was damaged in the Belgorod region, and the insurance company refused to fully fulfill its obligations under the contract.
Anton Palyulin, a lecturer at the Department of Fundamental Legal and Socio-Humanitarian Disciplines at Synergy University, owner of the Palyulin and Partners Law Office, notes that insurers currently insist that UAV attacks fall under the exceptions of "sabotage" or "terrorist acts" (Article 205 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), "which allows them to avoid making payments".
According to Ekaterina Kosareva, managing partner of the VMT Consult analytical agency, insurers regularly analyze statistics on UAV attacks in a specific territory.
— Based on the figures, companies manage the limits that determine the amount of the insurance premium. This is a reaction to the increasing risks," she added.
Sovcombank Insurance told Izvestia that if compared with 2022, the volume of requests to include the risks of terrorism and sabotage in coverage has increased many times. Kirill Popov, Director of the Rosgosstrakh Industrial Risk Insurance Department, agreed with his colleague's opinion.
— At the moment, in all cases, we pay insurance compensation for attacks related to the fall of UAVs, which are appropriately classified by law enforcement agencies, if this risk was initially included in the coverage under the contract for the damaged object, — he said.
And Igor Ivanov, vice president of RESO-Garantia, said that in the company's portfolio "there are practically no refineries that were attacked by UAVs in 2024."
"Such a balanced underwriting policy allows us to control unprofitability, and we have not made any significant changes to the pricing of property insurance, both in products for citizens and in programs for legal entities," he said.
Universal fuel and energy sector support mechanism
While regulators are working on issues of insurance of subjects and facilities of the fuel and energy complex, which clearly require unambiguous interpretation, experts positively assess the government's decision to compensate companies for the costs of ensuring the safety of fuel and energy facilities, however, they agree that a universal support mechanism is still needed.
Igor Yushkov, a leading analyst at the National Energy Security Fund, recalled that ensuring security is part of the state's monopoly. And, on the one hand, it would be logical to consider investments in ensuring the security of fuel and energy facilities as part of defense spending.
"No one's going to do that right now. Therefore, oilmen and power engineers solve their tasks independently. And it would be logical to consider tax deductions for them," the expert noted.
— Since we are talking about mandatory requirements, the state will have to develop and apply a universal mechanism to ensure an equal level of protection for such facilities, regardless of the financial capabilities of the owner. At the same time, the issue of civil law relations between the policyholder and the insurer remains open, as well as the practice of recognizing attacks as insured events in order to ensure full compensation for losses. This is not happening yet," the expert believes.
Valery Andrianov, an associate professor at the Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation, agrees with this rhetoric. According to him, oil companies need a mechanism to compensate for security costs.
He recalled that the reduction in the size of the damper due to lower world oil prices does not stimulate investments in oil refining.
How to protect Russian refineries from attacks
Kiev believes that if Russian refineries are attacked and maximum damage is inflicted on them, this will affect the Russian economy, military expert Alexei Leonkov explained to Izvestia.
"Refineries are somehow connected with the supply of fuel and lubricants to the army," he explained. — The enemy even tried to attack oil loading points in Novorossiysk, which are international projects. To protect the refineries, we deploy air defense and electronic warfare systems on their territory, as well as anti-drone nets.
The enemy has always tried to reach oil refineries, military expert Vasily Dandykin added in an interview with Izvestia.
— Besides, this is a significant part of our exports. If Western countries give Ukraine money to work in the military—industrial complex, we have to deal with it ourselves," he said. — Now the Ukrainian Armed Forces are trying to launch strikes using drones and missiles, which is why they are asking the West to give them even more and the farthest ones.
The enemy specifically chooses enterprises that are least protected, such as small factories, suggested military expert Dmitry Kornev.
"They are usually not covered with full—fledged air defense systems, as they do with large regional centers," he told Izvestia. — The Ukrainian Armed Forces use a Fierce drone for attacks. Its range is about 1 thousand km. This is a very simple device, so the enemy can release dozens of it per week.
According to the expert, ideally, to protect against enemy attacks, it is necessary to create a continuous air defense zone along the border and the zone of combat contact.
Переведено сервисом «Яндекс Переводчик»
