UNITED
STATES
SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington,
D.C. 20549
ANNUAL
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)
OF
THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For
the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007
Commission
file number: 1-12102
YPF
Sociedad Anónima
(Exact
name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Republic
of Argentina
(Jurisdiction
of incorporation or organization)
Avenida
Pte. R. Sáenz Peña 777
C1035AAC
Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina
(54-11)
4329-2000
(Address
of principal executive offices)
Securities
registered or to be registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the
Act:
|
|
Name
of Each Exchange
on
Which Registered
|
American
Depositary Shares, each representing one Class D Share, par value 10 pesos
per share
|
|
New
York Stock Exchange
|
Class
D Shares
|
|
New
York Stock Exchange*
|
*
|
Listed
not for trading but only in connection with the registration of American
Depositary Shares.
|
Securities
registered or to be registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None
Securities
for which there is a reporting obligation pursuant to Section 15(d) of the Act:
None
The number
of outstanding shares of each class of stock of YPF Sociedad Anónima as of
December 31, 2007 was:
Class
A Shares
|
3,764
|
Class
B Shares
|
7,624
|
Class
C Shares
|
105,736
|
Class
D Shares
|
|
|
393,312,793
|
Indicate
by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as
defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.
|
Yes
No S
|
|
|
If
this report is an annual or transition report, indicate by check mark if
the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 OR
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
|
Yes
No S
|
|
|
Note
– Checking the box above will not relieve any registrant required to file
reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 from their obligations under those Sections.
|
|
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to
be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the
registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to
such filing requirements for the past 90 days.
|
Yes S
No
|
|
|
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an
accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of
“accelerated filer and large accelerated filer” in Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act. (Check one):
|
|
Large
accelerated filer x Accelerated
filer o Non-accelerated
filer o
|
|
Indicate
by check mark which financial statement item the registrant has elected to
follow.
|
Item
17 Item 18 S
|
|
|
If
this is an annual report, indicate by check mark whether the registrant is
a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange
Act)
|
Yes
No S
|
TABLE
OF CONTENTS
Page
Conversion
Table
|
1
|
References
|
1
|
Disclosure of Certain
Information
|
1
|
Forward-Looking
Statements
|
1
|
Oil and Gas
Terms
|
3
|
PART I
|
9
|
ITEM 1. Identity of
Directors, Senior Managers and Advisers
|
9
|
ITEM 2. Offer
Statistics and Expected Timetable
|
9
|
ITEM 3. Key
Information
|
9
|
Selected Financial
Data
|
9
|
Risk
Factors
|
13
|
ITEM 4. Information
on the Company
|
23
|
History and Development of
YPF
|
23
|
The Argentine
Market
|
26
|
History of
YPF
|
26
|
Business
Segments
|
26
|
Exploration and
Production
|
28
|
Exploration and Development
Activities
|
31
|
Refining and
Marketing
|
47
|
Chemicals
|
53
|
Research and
Development
|
54
|
Competition
|
55
|
Environmental
Matters
|
55
|
Property, Plant and
Equipment
|
57
|
Regulatory Framework
and Relationship with the
Argentine
Government
|
58
|
ITEM 4A. Unresolved Staff
Comments
|
74
|
ITEM 5. Operating and
Financial Review and Prospects
|
75
|
Overview
|
75
|
Presentation of Financial
Information
|
76
|
Segment
Reporting
|
76
|
Factors Affecting Our
Operations
|
77
|
Critical Accounting
Policies
|
85
|
Principal Income Statement
Line Items
|
90
|
Results of
Operations
|
92
|
Liquidity and Capital
Resources
|
98
|
Off-Balance Sheet
Arrangements
|
103
|
ITEM 6. Directors, Senior
Management and Employees
|
104
|
Board of
Directors
|
104
|
The Audit
Committee
|
110
|
Independence of the Members of our Board of
Directors and Audit Committee
|
112
|
Disclosure
Committee
|
112
|
Executive
Officers
|
114
|
Compliance with NYSE Listing
Standards on Corporate Governance
|
114
|
Compensation of Directors and
Officers
|
115
|
Supervisory
Committee
|
115
|
Employee
Matters
|
118
|
ITEM 7. Major Shareholders
and Related Party Transactions
|
120
|
Share Purchase Agreement and
Related Financing Agreements
|
120
|
Option
Agreements
|
121
|
Shareholders’
Agreement
|
121
|
Registration Rights and Related
Agreements
|
123
|
Related Party
Transactions
|
124
|
Argentine Law Concerning Related
Party Transactions
|
124
|
ITEM 8. Financial
Information
|
126
|
Financial
Statements
|
126
|
Legal
Proceedings
|
126
|
Dividends
Policy
|
139
|
ITEM 9. The Offer and
Listing
|
140
|
Shares and
ADSs
|
140
|
Argentine Securities
Market
|
142
|
ITEM 10. Additional
Information
|
145
|
Memorandum and Articles of
Association
|
145
|
Directors
|
145
|
Foreign Investment
Legislation
|
146
|
Dividends
|
147
|
Amount Available for
Distribution
|
147
|
Preemptive and Accretion
Rights
|
148
|
Voting of the Underlying Class D
Shares
|
149
|
Certain Provisions Relating to
Acquisitions of Shares
|
150
|
Taxation
|
152
|
Argentine Tax
Considerations
|
152
|
United States Federal Income Tax
Considerations
|
154
|
Available
Information
|
156
|
ITEM 11. Quantitative and
Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk
|
157
|
ITEM 12. Description of Securities
Other than Equity Securities
|
158
|
PART II
|
159
|
ITEM 13. Defaults, Dividend
Arrearages and Delinquencies
|
159
|
ITEM 14. Material Modifications to
the Rights of
Security Holders and Use of Proceeds
|
159
|
ITEM 15. Controls and
Procedures
|
159
|
ITEM 16.
|
160
|
ITEM 16A. Audit Committee Financial
Expert
|
160
|
ITEM 16B. Code of
Ethics
|
160
|
ITEM 16C. Principal Accountant Fees and
Services
|
160
|
ITEM 16D. Exemptions from the Listing
Standards for Audit Committees
|
161
|
ITEM 16E. Purchases of Equity Securities by the
Issuer and Affiliated Purchasers
|
161
|
PART III
|
162
|
ITEM 17. Financial
Statements
|
162
|
ITEM 18. Financial
Statements
|
162
|
ITEM 19.
Exhibits
|
162
|
SIGNATURES
|
163
|
Conversion
Table
1 ton = 1
metric ton= 1,000 kilograms = 2,204 pounds
1 barrel =
42 U.S. gallons
1 ton of
oil = approximately 7.3 barrels (assuming a specific gravity of 34 degrees API
(American Petroleum Institute))
1 barrel
of oil equivalent = 5,615 cubic feet of gas = 1 barrel of oil, condensate or
natural gas liquids
1
kilometer = 0.63 miles
1 million
Btu = 252 termies
1 cubic
meter of gas = 35.3147 cubic feet of gas
1 cubic
meter of gas = 10 termies
1000 acres
= approximately 4 square kilometers
References
YPF
Sociedad Anónima is a stock corporation organized under the laws of the Republic
of Argentina (“Argentina”). As used in this annual report, “YPF,” “the company,”
“we,” “our” and “us” refer to YPF Sociedad Anónima and its controlled and
jointly controlled companies or, if the context requires, its predecessor
companies. “YPF Sociedad Anónima” refers to YPF Sociedad Anónima only. “Repsol
YPF” refers to Repsol YPF, S.A. and its consolidated companies, including YPF,
unless otherwise specified. We maintain our financial books and records and
publish our financial statements in Argentine pesos. In this annual report,
references to “pesos” or “Ps.” are to Argentine pesos, and references to
“dollars,” “U.S. dollars” or “U.S.$” are to United States dollars.
Disclosure
of Certain Information
In this
annual report, references to “Audited Consolidated Financial Statements” are to
YPF’s audited consolidated balance sheets as of December 31, 2007, 2006 and
2005, and YPF’s audited consolidated statements of income for the three years
ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005.
Unless
otherwise indicated, the information contained in this annual report
reflects:
·
|
for
the subsidiaries that were consolidated using the global integration
method at the date or for the periods indicated, 100% of the assets,
liabilities and results of operations of such subsidiaries without
excluding minority interests, and
|
·
|
for
those subsidiaries whose results were consolidated using the proportional
integration method, a pro rata amount of the assets, liabilities and
results of operations for such subsidiaries at the date or for the periods
indicated. For information regarding consolidation, see Note 1 to the
Audited Consolidated Financial
Statements.
|
The
Audited Consolidated Financial Statements and other amounts derived from such
Audited Consolidated Financial Statements, included in this annual report,
reflect the effect of changes in the purchasing power of money by the
application of the method for remeasurement in constant pesos. All the amounts
were remeasured to constant pesos as of February 28, 2003. See Note 1 to the
Audited Consolidated Financial Statements.
Forward-Looking
Statements
This
annual report, including any documents incorporated by reference, contains
statements that we believe constitute forward-looking statements within the
meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These
forward-looking statements may include statements regarding the intent, belief
or current expectations of us and our management, including statements with
respect to trends affecting our financial condition, financial ratios, results
of operations, business, strategy, geographic concentration, production volume
and reserves, as well as our plans with respect to capital expenditures,
business strategy, geographic concentration, cost savings, investments and
dividends payout policies. These statements are not a guarantee of future
performance and are subject to material risks, uncertainties, changes and other
factors which may be beyond our control or may be difficult to predict.
Accordingly,
our future financial condition, prices, financial ratios, results of operations,
business, strategy, geographic concentration, production volumes, reserves,
capital expenditures, cost savings, investments and dividend policies could
differ materially from those expressed or implied in any such forward-looking
statements. Such factors include, but are not limited to, currency fluctuations,
the price of petroleum products, the ability to realize cost reductions and
operating efficiencies without unduly disrupting business operations,
replacement of hydrocarbon reserves, environmental, regulatory and legal
considerations and general economic and business conditions in Argentina, as
well as those factors described in the filings made by YPF and its affiliates
with the Securities and Exchange Commission, in particular, those described in
“Item 3. Key Information—Risk Factors” below and “Item 5. Operating and
Financial Review and Prospects.” YPF does not undertake to publicly update or
revise these forward-looking statements even if experience or future changes
make it clear that the projected results or condition expressed or implied
therein will not be realized.
Oil
and Gas Terms
Oil and
gas reserves definitions used in this annual report are in accordance with the
reserves definitions of Rule 4-10(a) (1)-(17) of Regulations S-X of the
SEC.
The
definitions of Reserves Estimate, Reserves Audit and Reserves Review as given
below and used hereunder are not terms defined under U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission (“SEC”) Rules or Regulations and are terms used by YPF in
this annual report as defined herein and consequently such definitions may be
defined and used differently by other companies.
For the
purpose of this annual report, any reserves estimate, or any independent
reserves audit or any reserves review invoked hereunder, are in accordance with
the oil and gas reserves definitions of Rule 4-10(a) (1)-(17) of Regulations S-X
of the SEC.
The
following terms have the meanings shown below unless the context indicates
otherwise:
“acreage”: The total area, expressed in
acres or km2, over which we have interests in exploration or production. Net
acreage is our interest in the relevant exploration or production
area.
“concession”: A grant of access for a
defined area and time period that transfers certain entitlements to produce
hydrocarbons from the host country to an enterprise. The company holding the
concession generally has rights and responsibilities for exploration,
development, production and sale of hydrocarbon. Typically, the concession is
granted under a legislated fiscal system where the host country collects
royalties on the estimated value at the wellhead of crude oil production and the
natural gas volume commercialized and taxes or fees on profits
earned.
“exploratory
well”: A well
drilled to find and produce oil or gas in an unproved area, to find a new
reservoir in a field previously found to be productive of oil or gas in another
reservoir, or to extend a known reservoir.
“hydrocarbons”: Crude oil and natural
gas.
“natural gas
liquids,” or “NGL”: The portions of gas from a
reservoir that are liquefied at the surface in separators, field facilities, or
gas processing plants. NGL from gas processing plants is also called liquefied
petroleum gas, or “LPG.”
“oil and gas producing
activities”:
(i)
|
Such
activities include:
|
A.
|
The
search for crude oil, including condensate and natural gas liquids, or
natural gas (“oil and gas”) in their natural states and original
locations.
|
B.
|
The
acquisition of property rights or properties for the purpose of further
exploration and/or for the purpose of removing the oil or gas from
existing reservoirs on those
properties.
|
C.
|
The
construction, drilling and production activities necessary to retrieve oil
and gas from their natural reservoirs, and the acquisition, construction,
installation, and maintenance of field gathering and storage systems –
including lifting the oil and gas to the surface and gathering, treating,
field processing (as in the case of processing gas to extract liquid
hydrocarbons) and field storage. For purposes of this section, the oil and
gas production function shall normally be regarded as terminating at the
outlet valve on the lease or field storage tank; if unusual physical or
operational circumstances exist, it may be appropriate to regard the
production function as terminating at the first point at which oil, gas or
gas liquids are delivered to a main pipeline, a common carrier, a
refinery, or a marine terminal.
|
(ii)
|
Oil
and gas producing activities do not
include:
|
A.
|
The
transporting, refining and marketing of oil and
gas;
|
B.
|
Activities
relating to the production of natural resources other than oil and
gas;
|
C.
|
The
production of geothermal steam or the extraction of hydrocarbons as a
by-product of the production of geothermal steam or associated geothermal
resources as defined in the Geothermal Steam Act of 1970;
or
|
D.
|
The
extraction of hydrocarbons from shale, tar sands or
coal.
|
“proved oil and
gas reserves”:
Proved oil and gas reserves are the estimated quantities of crude oil, natural
gas, and natural gas liquids that geological and engineering data demonstrate
with reasonable certainty to be recoverable in future years from known
reservoirs under existing economic and operating conditions, i.e., prices and
costs as of the date the estimate is made. Prices include consideration of
changes in existing prices provided only by contractual arrangements, but not on
escalations based upon future conditions.
i)
|
Reservoirs
are considered proved if economic productibility is supported by either
actual production or conclusive formation test. The area of a reservoir
considered proved includes:
|
A.
|
that
portion delineated by drilling and defined by gas-oil and/or oil-water
contacts, if any; and
|
B.
|
the
immediately adjoining portions not yet drilled, but which can be
reasonably judged as economically productive on the basis of available
geological and engineering data. In the absence of information on fluid
contacts, the lowest known structural occurrence of hydrocarbons controls
the lower proved limit of the
reservoir.
|
ii)
|
Reserves
that can be produced economically through application of improved recovery
techniques (such as fluid injection) are included in the “proved”
classification when successful testing by a pilot project, or the
operation of an installed program in the reservoir, provides support for
the engineering analysis on which the project or program was
based.
|
iii) Estimates
of proved reserves do not include the following:
A.
|
oil
that may become available from known reservoirs but is classified
separately as “indicated additional
reserves”;
|
B.
|
crude
oil, natural gas, and natural gas liquids, the recovery of which is
subject to reasonable doubt because of uncertainty as to geology,
reservoir characteristics, or economic
factors;
|
C.
|
crude
oil, natural gas, and natural gas liquids, that may occur in undrilled
prospects; and
|
D.
|
crude
oil, natural gas, and natural gas liquids, that may be recovered from oil
sales, coal, gilsonite and other such
sources.
|
“proved developed
reserves”: Proved
developed oil and gas reserves are reserves that can be expected to be recovered
through existing wells with existing equipment and operating methods. Additional
oil and gas expected to be obtained through the application of fluid injection
or other improved recovery techniques for supplementing the natural forces and
mechanisms of primary recovery should be included as “proved developed reserves”
only after testing by a pilot project or after the operation of an installed
program has confirmed through production response that increased recovery will
be achieved.
“proved
undeveloped reserves”:
Proved undeveloped oil and gas reserves are reserves that are expected to
be recovered from new wells on undrilled acreage, or from existing wells where a
relatively major expenditure is required for recompletion. Reserves on undrilled
acreage shall be limited to those drilling units offsetting productive units
that are reasonably certain of production when drilled. Proved reserves for
other undrilled units can be claimed only where it can be demonstrated with
certainty that there is continuity of production from the existing productive
formation. Under no circumstances should estimates for proved undeveloped
reserves be attributable to any acreage for which an application of fluid
injection or other improved recovery technique is contemplated, unless such
techniques have been proved effective by actual tests in the area and in the
same reservoir.
“recovery
factor”: The recoverable amount of the original or residual estimated
hydrocarbons in place in a reservoir, expressed as a percentage of total
hydrocarbons in place.
“refining
capacity”: The crude oil processing capacity of refineries, expressed as
an average over a period of time for the quality of oil and under conditions for
which the facility was designed. Such capacity could be improved through the
application of updated operation and maintenance techniques, increased
availability, equipment revamps, de-bottlenecking, and the use of higher
qualities of crude oil than those for which the refinery was originally
designed, among other improvements.
“reserves
audit”: A
reserves audit is the process of reviewing certain factual matters and
assumptions on which an estimate of reserves and/or reserves information
prepared by others has been based and the rendering of an opinion about (1) the
appropriateness of the methodologies employed, (2) the adequacy and quality of
the data relied upon, (3) the depth and thoroughness of the reserves estimation
process, (4) the classification of reserves appropriate to the relevant
definitions used, and (5) the reasonableness of the estimated reserves
quantities and/or the reserves information, and is, therefore, free of material
misstatement. The term “reasonableness” cannot be defined with precision but
reflects a quantity and/or value difference as contemplated under “Internal
Control on Reserves and Reserves Audits.” Often a reserves audit includes a
detailed review of certain critical assumptions and independent assessments with
acceptance of other information less critical to the reserves estimation.
Typically, a reserves audit letter should be of sufficient rigor to determine
the appropriate reserves classification for all reserves in the property set
evaluated and to clearly state the reserves classification system being
utilized. In contrast to the term “audit” as used in a financial sense, a
reserves audit is generally less rigorous than a reserves report.
The
estimation of reserves and other reserves information is an imprecise science
due to the many unknown geological and reservoir factors that can only be
estimated through sampling techniques. Since reserves are therefore only
estimates, they cannot be audited for the purpose of verifying exactness.
Instead, reserves information is audited for the purpose of reviewing in
sufficient detail the policies, procedures, methods and data used by us in
estimating our reserves information so that the reserves auditors may express an
opinion as to whether, in the aggregate, the reserves information furnished by
us is reasonable within established and predetermined tolerances and has been
estimated and presented in conformity with generally accepted petroleum
engineering and evaluation principles and within the rules and regulations of
the SEC.
In some
cases, the auditing procedure may require independent estimates of reserves
information for some or all properties. The desirability of such re-estimation
will be determined by the reserves auditor exercising his or her professional
judgment in arriving at an opinion as to the reasonableness of our reserves
information. In those cases, an external reservoir engineer makes an independent
comprehensive evaluation of reserves by interpreting and assessing all the
pertinent data to generate such engineer’s own cash flow analysis and proved
reserves estimate. The degree of assurance of such independent estimates cannot
usually be provided with numeric precision.
The main
product of these external engineering evaluations is a report that includes the
engineer’s actual proved reserves estimates and economic evaluation. This report
may also, at our request, include maps, logs, or other technical backup used by
the external reservoir engineer, with an opinion letter that includes the
reserves auditor’s findings, conformance or not with the applicable principles,
definitions and procedures for estimating reserves. This opinion may also, at
our request, include conclusions and recommendations. In the aforementioned case
where the auditor performs an independent estimate of reserves information, we
will call it an external reserves certification.
In all
cases, in the opinion letter or report issued by the auditor, the reserves
auditor states his or her professional standing and professional affiliation as
a registered or certified professional from an appropriate governmental
authority or professional organization.
A reserves
auditor is a professional who has sufficient educational background,
professional training and professional experience to enable him or her to
exercise prudent professional judgment while in charge of the conduct of an
audit of reserves information estimated by others. The determination of whether
a reserves auditor is professionally qualified is made on an
individual-by-individual basis with reference to the recognition and respect of
his or her peers. A reserves auditor would normally be considered by us to be
qualified if he or she (i) has a minimum of 10 years’ practical experience in
petroleum engineering or petroleum production geology, with at least
five years
of such experience in charge of the estimations and evaluation of reserves
information; and (ii) either (A) has obtained, from a college or university of
recognized stature, a bachelor’s or advanced degree in petroleum engineering,
geology or other discipline of engineering or physical science, or (B) has
received, and is maintaining in good standing, a registered or certified
professional engineer’s license or a registered or certified professional
geologist’s license, or the equivalent thereof, from an appropriate governmental
authority or professional organization.
Our
standard of independence for reserves auditors is that he or she must not have
any financial interest in the properties under evaluation. This is in order that
there is no incentive for his or her reports to be outcome-oriented because
there is no direct economic benefit for him or her as a consequence of the
results of his or her work. An independent reserves auditor’s compensation is
based only on professional services carried out to deliver an unbiased analysis
suitable for the public and financial communities. We also require that a
statement of such independence is included in the auditor’s report.
The
meaning of the terms “reserves audit,” “reserves report,” “external reserves
certification” among others may not be comparable to other similar terms used by
other companies in respect of proved reserves.
“reserves
estimate”: The process whereby a qualified reserves estimator performs a
comprehensive evaluation by interpreting and assessing all the pertinent data to
generate such proved reserves estimates and cash flow analysis. The main product
of this evaluation results in a report that includes: (i) the actual reserve
estimate quantities, (ii) the future producing rates from such reserves, (iii)
the future net revenues from such reserves, and (iv) the present value of such
future net revenue. This report may also include maps, logs or other technical
backup used by the estimator.
“reserves
review”: The process whereby a qualified reserves professional reviewer
conducts a high-level assessment of reserves information to determine if it is
plausible. The steps consist primarily of:
|
review
of historical reserves performance;
and
|
|
discussions
with reserves management staff.
|
“plausible”
means the reserves data appearing to be worthy of belief based on the
information obtained by a reserves estimator or by an independent qualified
reserves auditor in carrying out the aforementioned steps. It may result in a
statement like “Nothing came to my attention that would indicate the reserves
information has not been prepared and presented in accordance with the
applicable principles and definitions.”
Our
standard for an “Independent Qualified Reserves Auditor” is that an Independent
Qualified Reserves Auditor is a professional who has sufficient educational
background, professional training and professional experience to enable him or
her to exercise prudent professional judgment while in charge of the conduct of
an audit of reserves information estimated by others. The determination of
whether a Reserves Auditor is professionally qualified is made on an
individual-by-individual basis with reference to the recognition and respect of
his or her peers. A Reserves Auditor would normally be considered by us to be
qualified if he or she (i) has a minimum of 10 years’ practical experience in
petroleum engineering or petroleum production geology, with at least 5 years of
such experience in charge of the estimations and evaluation of reserves
information; and (ii) either (A) has obtained, from a college or university of
recognized stature, a bachelor’s or advanced degree in petroleum engineering,
geology or other discipline of engineering or physical science, or (B) has
received, and is maintaining in good standing, a registered or certified
professional engineer’s license or a registered or certified professional
geologist’s license, or the equivalent thereof, from an appropriate governmental
authority or professional organization.
Our
standard of independence for Consulting Reserves Auditors is that he or she must
not have any financial interest in the properties under evaluation. This is in
order that there is no incentive for his or her reports to be outcome-oriented
because there is no direct economic benefit for him or her as a consequence of
the results of his or her work. The Independent Qualified Reserves Auditor’s
compensation is based only on professional services
carried
out to deliver an unbiased analysis suitable for the public and financial
communities. We also require that a statement of such independence be included
in the auditor’s report.
Reviews do
not require examination of the detailed documentation that supports the reserves
information, unless this information does not appear to be plausible. A reserves
review, due to the limited nature of the investigation involved, does not
provide the level of assurance provided by a reserves estimate or a reserves
audit. Though reserves reviews can be done for specific applications, they are
not a substitute for an audit or an estimate.
Abbreviations:
|
“Bcf”
|
Billion
cubic feet ≡ 109 cubic feet
|
|
“Bcm”
|
Billion
cubic meters ≡ 109 cubic meters
|
|
“boe”
|
Barrels
of oil equivalent
|
|
“boe/d”
|
Barrels
of oil equivalent per day
|
|
“Condensate”
|
Mixture
of hydrocarbons that exist in the gaseous phase at original temperature
and pressure of the reservoir, but when produced condense into liquid
phase at temperature and pressure associated with surface production
equipment
|
|
“mbbl/d”
|
Thousand
barrels per day
|
|
“mboe/d”
|
Thousand
barrels of oil equivalent per day
|
|
“mcf”
|
Thousand
cubic feet
|
|
“mcm”
|
Thousand
cubic meters
|
|
“mmboe”
|
Million
barrels of oil equivalent
|
|
“mmboe/d”
|
Million
barrels of oil equivalent per day
|
|
“mmBtu”
|
Million
British thermal units
|
|
“mmcf”
|
Million
cubic feet
|
|
“mmcf/d”
|
Million
cubic feet per day
|
|
“mmcm”
|
Million
cubic meters
|
|
“mmcm/d”
|
Million
cubic meters per day
|
|
“Oil”
|
Crude
oil, condensate and natural gas
liquids
|
|
“WTI”
|
West
Texas Intermediate
|
Oil and
gas reserves definitions used in this annual report are in accordance with the
reserves definitions of Rule 4-10(a) (1)-(17) of Regulation S-X of the
SEC.
The
definitions of reserves estimate, reserves audit and reserves review as given
below and used hereunder are not terms defined under SEC Rules or Regulations
and are terms used by us in this annual report as defined herein and
consequently such terms may be defined and used differently by other
companies.
For the
purpose of this annual report, any reserves estimate, or any independent
reserves audit or any reserves review invoked hereunder, are in accordance with
the oil and gas reserves definitions of Rule 4-10(a) (1)-(17) of Regulation S-X
of the SEC.
PART
I
ITEM
1. Identity of Directors, Senior Managers and Advisers
Not
applicable.
ITEM
2. Offer Statistics and Expected Timetable
Not
applicable.
ITEM
3. Key Information
Selected
Financial Data
The
following tables present our selected financial and operating data. You should
read this information in conjunction with our Audited Financial Statements and
related notes, and the information under “Item 5. Operating and Financial Review
and Prospects” included elsewhere in this annual report.
The
financial data as of December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005 and for the years then
ended is derived from our Audited Consolidated Financial Statements, which are
included in this annual report. The financial data as of and for the years ended
December 31, 2004 and 2003 is derived from our audited financial statements,
which are neither included nor incorporated by reference in this annual report.
Our audited financial statements have been prepared in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles in Argentina, which we refer to as Argentine GAAP
and which differ in certain significant respects from generally accepted
accounting principles in the United States, which we refer to as U.S. GAAP.
Notes 13, 14 and 15 to our Audited Consolidated Financial Statements provide a
description of the significant differences between Argentine GAAP and U.S. GAAP,
as they relate to us, and a reconciliation to U.S. GAAP of net income and
shareholders’ equity as of December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005 and for the years
then ended.
In this
annual report, except as otherwise specified, references to “$,” “U.S.$” and
“dollars” are to U.S. dollars, and references to “Ps.” and “pesos” are to
Argentine pesos. Solely for the convenience of the reader, peso amounts as of
and for the year ended December 31, 2007 have been translated into
U.S. dollars at the exchange rate quoted by the Argentine Central Bank (Banco Central de la República Argentina or Central Bank)
on December 28, 2007 of Ps.3.15 to
U.S.$1.00 (the last quoted rate in December 2007), unless otherwise
specified. The exchange rate quoted by Central Bank on April 10, 2008 was
Ps. 3.16 to U.S.$1.00. The U.S. dollar equivalent information should not be
construed to imply that the peso amounts represent, or could have been or could
be converted into U.S. dollars at such rates or any other rate. See “Item 3. Key
Information—Exchange Rates.”
Certain
figures included in this annual report have been subject to rounding
adjustments. Accordingly, figures shown as totals may not sum due to
rounding.
|
|
As
of and for Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in
millions of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S.$,
except for per share and per ADS data)
|
|
|
(in
millions of pesos,
except
for per share
and
per ADS data)
|
|
Consolidated
Income Statement Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Argentine
GAAP(3)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
sales(4)(5)
|
|
|
9,239 |
|
|
|
29,104 |
|
|
|
25,635 |
|
|
|
22,901 |
|
|
|
19,931 |
|
|
|
17,514 |
|
Gross
profit
|
|
|
3,208 |
|
|
|
10,104 |
|
|
|
9,814 |
|
|
|
11,643 |
|
|
|
10,719 |
|
|
|
9,758 |
|
Administrative
expenses
|
|
|
(256 |
) |
|
|
(805 |
) |
|
|
(674 |
) |
|
|
(552 |
) |
|
|
(463 |
) |
|
|
(378 |
) |
Selling
expenses
|
|
|
(673 |
) |
|
|
(2,120 |
) |
|
|
(1,797 |
) |
|
|
(1,652 |
) |
|
|
(1,403 |
) |
|
|
(1,148 |
) |
Exploration
expenses
|
|
|
(166 |
) |
|
|
(522 |
) |
|
|
(460 |
) |
|
|
(280 |
) |
|
|
(382 |
) |
|
|
(277 |
) |
Operating
income
|
|
|
2,113 |
|
|
|
6,657 |
|
|
|
6,883 |
|
|
|
9,161 |
|
|
|
8,471 |
|
|
|
7,955 |
|
Income
on long-term investments
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
183 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
154 |
|
|
|
150 |
|
Other
expenses, net
|
|
|
(139 |
) |
|
|
(439 |
) |
|
|
(204 |
) |
|
|
(545 |
) |
|
|
(981 |
) |
|
|
(152 |
) |
Interest
expense
|
|
|
(93 |
) |
|
|
(292 |
) |
|
|
(213 |
) |
|
|
(459 |
) |
|
|
(221 |
) |
|
|
(252 |
) |
Other
financial income (expenses) and holding gains (losses),
net
|
|
|
257 |
|
|
|
810 |
|
|
|
667 |
|
|
|
561 |
|
|
|
359 |
|
|
|
202 |
|
Income
from sale of long-term investments
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
Reversal
(impairment) of other current assets
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
(69 |
) |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
Income
before income tax
|
|
|
2,173 |
|
|
|
6,844 |
|
|
|
7,258 |
|
|
|
8,772 |
|
|
|
7,782 |
|
|
|
7,903 |
|
Income
tax
|
|
|
(876 |
) |
|
|
(2,758 |
) |
|
|
(2,801 |
) |
|
|
(3,410 |
) |
|
|
(3,017 |
) |
|
|
(3,290 |
) |
Net
income from continuing operations
|
|
|
1,297 |
|
|
|
4,086 |
|
|
|
4,457 |
|
|
|
5,362 |
|
|
|
4,765 |
|
|
|
4,613 |
|
Income
on discontinued operations
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
Income
from sale of discontinued operations
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
139 |
|
|
|
— |
|
Net
income
|
|
|
1,297 |
|
|
|
4,086 |
|
|
|
4,457 |
|
|
|
5,362 |
|
|
|
4,907 |
|
|
|
4,628 |
|
Earnings
per share and per ADS(6)
|
|
|
3.30 |
|
|
|
10.39 |
|
|
|
11.33 |
|
|
|
13.63 |
|
|
|
12.48 |
|
|
|
11.77 |
|
Dividends
per share and per ADS(6) (in pesos)
|
|
n.a.
|
|
|
|
6.00 |
|
|
|
6.00 |
|
|
|
12.40 |
|
|
|
13.50 |
|
|
|
7.60 |
|
Dividends
per share and per ADS(6)(7) (in U.S. dollars)
|
|
n.a.
|
|
|
|
1.93 |
|
|
|
1.97 |
|
|
|
4.25 |
|
|
|
4.70 |
|
|
|
2.62 |
|
U.S.
GAAP
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
income
|
|
|
1,643 |
|
|
|
5,176 |
|
|
|
5,626 |
|
|
|
8,065 |
|
|
|
6,550 |
|
|
|
7,567 |
|
Net
income
|
|
|
1,056 |
|
|
|
3,325 |
|
|
|
3,667 |
|
|
|
5,142 |
|
|
|
4,186 |
|
|
|
4,435 |
|
Earnings
per share and per ADS(6) (in pesos)
|
|
n.a.
|
|
|
|
8.45 |
|
|
|
9.32 |
|
|
|
13.07 |
|
|
|
10.64 |
|
|
|
11.28 |
|
Consolidated
Balance Sheet Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Argentine
GAAP(3)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
196 |
|
|
|
118 |
|
|
|
122 |
|
|
|
492 |
|
|
|
355 |
|
Working
capital
|
|
|
1,296 |
|
|
|
4,081 |
|
|
|
4,905 |
|
|
|
2,903 |
|
|
|
3,549 |
|
|
|
4,001 |
|
Total
assets
|
|
|
12,096 |
|
|
|
38,102 |
|
|
|
35,394 |
|
|
|
32,224 |
|
|
|
30,922 |
|
|
|
32,944 |
|
Total
debt(8)
|
|
|
316 |
|
|
|
994 |
|
|
|
1,425 |
|
|
|
1,453 |
|
|
|
1,930 |
|
|
|
2,998 |
|
Shareholders’
equity(9)
|
|
|
8,273 |
|
|
|
26,060 |
|
|
|
24,345 |
|
|
|
22,249 |
|
|
|
21,769 |
|
|
|
22,534 |
|
U.S.
GAAP
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
assets
|
|
|
12,935 |
|
|
|
40,746 |
|
|
|
37,046 |
|
|
|
34,748 |
|
|
|
32,540 |
|
|
|
34,125 |
|
Shareholders’
equity
|
|
|
9,228 |
|
|
|
29,067 |
|
|
|
26,241 |
|
|
|
24,254 |
|
|
|
23,506 |
|
|
|
24,334 |
|
Other
Consolidated Financial Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Argentine
GAAP
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed
assets depreciation
|
|
|
1,314 |
|
|
|
4,139 |
|
|
|
3,718 |
|
|
|
2,707 |
|
|
|
2,470 |
|
|
|
2,307 |
|
Cash
used in fixed asset acquisitions
|
|
|
1,957 |
|
|
|
6,163 |
|
|
|
5,002 |
|
|
|
3,722 |
|
|
|
2,867 |
|
|
|
2,418 |
|
(1)
|
Consolidated
income and balance sheet data for the years ended December 31, 2005 and
2004 set forth above include the retroactive effect from the application
of new accounting rules in Argentina effective since January 1,
2006.
|
(2)
|
Consolidated
income and balance sheet data for the year ended December 31, 2003 set
forth above do not include the retroactive effect from the application of
new accounting rules in Argentina, which was not
material.
|
(3)
|
The
financial statements reflect the effect of changes in the purchasing power
of money by the application of the method for remeasurement in constant
Argentine pesos set forth in Technical Resolution No. 6 of the Argentine
Federation of Professional Councils in Economic Sciences (“F.A.C.P.C.E.”)
and taking into consideration General Resolution No. 441 of the National
Securities Commission (“CNV”), which established the discontinuation of
the remeasurement of financial statements in constant Argentine pesos as
from March 1, 2003. See Note 1 to the Audited Consolidated Financial
Statements.
|
(4)
|
Includes
Ps.1,350 million for the year ended December 31, 2007, Ps.1,451 million
for the year ended December 31, 2006, Ps.1,216 million for the year ended
December 31, 2005, Ps.1,122 million for the year ended December 31, 2004
and Ps.760 million for the year ended December 31, 2003 corresponding to
the proportional consolidation of the net sales of investees in which we
hold joint control with third parties. See Note 13(b) to the Audited
Consolidated Financial Statements.
|
(5)
|
Net
sales are net to us after payment of a fuel transfer tax, turnover tax
and, from 2002, customs duties on hydrocarbon exports. Royalties with
respect to our production are accounted for as a cost of production and
are not deducted in determining net sales. See Note 2(g) to the Audited
Consolidated Financial Statements.
|
(6)
|
Information
has been calculated based on outstanding capital stock of 393,312,793
shares. Each ADS represents one Class D share. There were no differences
between basic and diluted earnings per share and ADS for any of the years
disclosed.
|
(7)
|
Amounts
expressed in U.S. dollars are based on the exchange rate as of the date of
payment. For periods in which more than one dividend payment was made, the
amounts expressed in U.S. dollars are based on exchange rates at the date
of each payment.
|
(8)
|
Total
debt under Argentine GAAP includes nominal amounts of long-term debt of
Ps.523 million as of December 31, 2007, Ps.510 million as of December 31,
2006, Ps.1,107 million as of December 31, 2005, Ps.1,684 million as of
December 31, 2004 and Ps.2,085 million as of December 31,
2003.
|
(9)
|
Our
subscribed capital as of December 31, 2007 is represented by 393,312,793
shares of common stock and divided into four classes of shares, with a par
value of Ps.10 and one vote per share. These shares are fully subscribed,
paid-in and authorized for stock exchange
listing.
|
Exchange
Rates
From April
1, 1991 until the end of 2001, the Convertibility Law (Law No. 23,928)
established a fixed exchange rate under which the Central Bank was obligated to
sell U.S. dollars at one peso per U.S. dollar. On January 6, 2002, the Argentine
Congress enacted the Public Emergency Law (Law No. 25,561, the Public Emergency
and Foreign Exchange System Reform Law), formally putting an end to the
Convertibility Law regime and abandoning over 10 years of U.S. dollar-peso
parity. The Public Emergency Law, which has been extended until December 31,
2008, grants the executive branch of the Argentine government the power to set
the exchange rate between the peso and foreign currencies and to issue
regulations related to the foreign exchange market. Following a brief period
during which the Argentine government established a temporary dual exchange rate
system pursuant to the Public Emergency Law, the peso has been allowed to float
freely against other currencies since February 2002 although the government has
the power to intervene by buying and selling foreign currency for its own
account, a practice in which it engages on a regular basis.
The
following table sets forth the annual high, low, average and period-end exchange
rates for U.S. dollars for the periods indicated, expressed in nominal pesos per
U.S. dollar, based on rates quoted by the Central Bank. The Federal Reserve Bank
of New York does not report a noon buying rate for Argentine pesos.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(pesos
per U.S. dollar)
|
|
Year
ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
2.76 |
|
|
|
3.35 |
|
|
|
2.94 |
(1) |
|
|
2.93 |
|
2004
|
|
|
2.80 |
|
|
|
3.06 |
|
|
|
2.94 |
(1) |
|
|
2.98 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(pesos
per U.S. dollar)
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2.86 |
|
|
|
3.04 |
|
|
|
2.90 |
(1) |
|
|
3.03 |
|
2006
|
|
|
3.03 |
|
|
|
3.10 |
|
|
|
3.07 |
(1) |
|
|
3.06 |
|
2007
|
|
|
3.05 |
|
|
|
3.18 |
|
|
|
3.12 |
(1) |
|
|
3.15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Month
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
October 2007
|
|
|
3.15 |
|
|
|
3.18 |
|
|
|
3.16 |
|
|
|
3.15 |
|
November
2007
|
|
|
3.12 |
|
|
|
3.15 |
|
|
|
3.14 |
|
|
|
3.15 |
|
December
2007
|
|
|
3.13 |
|
|
|
3.15 |
|
|
|
3.14 |
|
|
|
3.15 |
|
January
2008
|
|
|
3.13 |
|
|
|
3.16 |
|
|
|
3.14 |
|
|
|
3.16 |
|
February
2008
|
|
|
3.15 |
|
|
|
3.17 |
|
|
|
3.16 |
|
|
|
3.16 |
|
March
2008
|
|
|
3.14 |
|
|
|
3.17 |
|
|
|
3.16 |
|
|
|
3.17 |
|
April
2008(2)
|
|
|
3.16 |
|
|
|
3.17 |
|
|
|
3.16 |
|
|
|
3.16 |
|
(1)
|
Represents
the average of the exchange rates on the last day of each month during the
period.
|
(2)
|
Through
April 10, 2008.
|
No
representation is made that peso amounts have been, could have been or could be
converted into U.S. dollars at the foregoing rates on any of the dates
indicated.
Exchange
Controls
Prior to
December 1989, the Argentine foreign exchange market was subject to exchange
controls. From December 1989 until April 1991, Argentina had a freely floating
exchange rate for all foreign currency transactions, and the transfer of
dividend payments in foreign currency abroad and the repatriation of capital
were permitted without prior approval of the Central Bank. From April 1, 1991,
when the Convertibility Law became effective, until December 21, 2001, when the
Central Bank closed the foreign exchange market, the Argentine currency was
freely convertible into U.S. dollars.
On
December 3, 2001, the Argentine government imposed a number of monetary and
currency exchange control measures through Decree 1570/01, which included
restrictions on the free disposition of funds deposited with banks and tight
restrictions on transferring funds abroad (including the transfer of funds to
pay dividends) without the Central Bank’s prior authorization subject to
specific exceptions for transfers related to foreign trade. Since January 2003,
the Central Bank has gradually eased these restrictions and expanded the list of
transfers of funds abroad that do not require its prior authorization (including
the transfer of funds to pay dividends). In June 2003, the Argentine government
set restrictions on capital flows into Argentina, which mainly consisted of a
prohibition against the transfer abroad of any funds until 180 days after their
entry into the country. In June 2005, the government established further
restrictions on capital flows into Argentina, including increasing the period
that certain incoming funds must remain in Argentina to 365 calendar days and
requiring that 30% of incoming funds be deposited with a bank in Argentina in a
non-assignable, non-interest-bearing account for 365 calendar days. Under the
exchange regulations currently in force, restrictions exist in respect of the
repatriation of funds or investments by non-Argentine residents. For instance,
subject only to limited exceptions, the repatriation by non-Argentine residents
of funds received as a result of the sale of the Class D shares in the secondary
market is subject to a limit of U.S.$500,000 per person per calendar month. In
order to repatriate such funds abroad, non-Argentine residents also are required
to demonstrate that the funds used to make the investment in the Class D shares
were transferred to Argentina at least 365 days before the proposed
repatriation. The transfer abroad of dividend payments is currently authorized
by applicable regulations to the extent that such dividend payments are made in
connection with audited financial statements and are approved by a shareholders’
meeting.
Risk
Factors
Risks
Relating to Argentina
Argentina’s economy may not continue to grow at
current rates or may contract in the future
The Argentine economy has experienced
significant volatility in recent decades, including numerous periods of low or
negative growth and high and variable levels of inflation and devaluation. Since
the most recent crisis of 2001 and 2002, the Argentine economy has grown at a
rapid pace during recent years, with GDP increasing on a real basis by
8.7% in 2003, 9.0% in 2004, 9.2% in 2005, 8.5% in 2006 and 8.7%, based on
preliminary data, in 2007. However, no assurances can be given that current
rates of growth will continue. The Argentine economy remains susceptible to,
among other things, a decline in commodity prices, limited international
financing and investment in infrastructure and an increase in inflation.
Sustained inflation in
Argentina could increase our costs of operation,
in particular labor costs, and without a corresponding increase in the price of
our products, may negatively impact our results of operations and financial
condition. Substantially
all of our operations, properties and customers are located in Argentina, and, as a result, our business is to a
large extent dependent upon economic conditions prevailing in Argentina. If economic conditions in Argentina were to deteriorate, it would likely
have an adverse effect on our financial condition and results of
operations.
Political and regulatory developments in
Argentina may affect our domestic
operations
The Argentine government exercises
significant influence over the economy. In particular, the oil and gas industry
is subject to extensive government regulation and control. As a result, our
business is to a large extent dependent upon regulatory and political conditions
prevailing in Argentina and our results of operations may be
materially and adversely affected by regulatory and political changes in
Argentina. We currently face risks and challenges
relating to government regulation and control of the energy sector, including
those set forth below and elsewhere in these risk factors:
·
|
limitations on our ability to pass
increases in international prices of crude
oil and other hydrocarbon fuels and exchange rate fluctuations through to
domestic prices, or to increase local prices of natural gas (in particular
for residential customers), gasoline and
diesel;
|
·
|
higher taxes on exports of
hydrocarbons;
|
·
|
restrictions on hydrocarbon export
volumes driven mainly by the requirement to satisfy domestic
demand;
|
·
|
in connection with the Argentine
government’s policy to provide absolute priority to domestic demand,
regulatory orders to supply natural gas and other hydrocarbon products to
the domestic retail market in excess of previously contracted
amounts;
|
·
|
the
import of certain hydrocarbon fuels at international market prices to
satisfy domestic demand at significantly lower domestic
prices;
|
·
|
regulatory developments leading to
the imposition of stricter supply requirements, fines or other actions by
governmental authorities in response to fuel shortages at service
stations;
|
·
|
the implementation or imposition
of stricter quality requirements for petroleum products in Argentina;
and
|
·
|
higher taxes on domestic fuel
sales not compensated by price
increases.
|
The Argentine government has made
certain changes in regulations and policies governing the energy sector to give
absolute priority to domestic supply at low, stable prices in order to sustain
economic recovery. As a result of the above-mentioned changes, for example, on
days during which a gas shortage occurs, exports of natural gas (which are also
affected by other government curtailment orders) and the provision of gas
supplies to industries, electricity generation plants and service stations
selling compressed natural gas are interrupted for priority to be given to
residential consumers at lower prices. We cannot assure you that changes in
applicable laws and regulations, or adverse judicial or administrative
interpretations of such laws and regulations, will not adversely affect our
results of operations. See “Item 4. Information on the
Company—Regulatory
Framework and Relationship with the Argentine Government.” Similarly, we cannot assure you that
future government policies aimed at sustaining economic recovery or in response
to domestic needs will not adversely affect the oil and gas
industry.
In January 2007, Law No. 26,197 was
enacted, which, in accordance with Article 124 of the National Constitution,
provided that Argentine provinces shall be the owners of the hydrocarbon
reservoirs located within their territories. Pursuant to the law, the Argentine
Congress is charged with enacting laws and regulations aimed at developing
mineral resources within Argentina, while the provincial governments are
responsible for enforcing these laws and administering hydrocarbon fields that
fall within the territories of their respective provinces. Certain provincial
governments, however, have construed the provisions of Law No. 26,197 and
Article 124 to empower the provinces to enact their own regulations concerning
exploration and production of oil and gas within their territories. There can be
no assurance that regulations or taxes (including royalties) enacted or
administered by the provinces will not conflict with federal law, and such taxes
or regulations may adversely affect our operations and financial
condition.
Limitations on local pricing in Argentina may adversely affect our
results of
operations
In recent years, due to regulatory,
economic and government policy factors, our domestic gasoline, diesel and other
fuel prices have lagged substantially behind prevailing international and
regional market prices for such products, and our ability to increase prices has
been limited. For example,
in January 2008, diesel import prices were approximately U.S.$700/cubic meter,
while the average domestic sales prices were approximately U.S.$350/cubic meter
before government subsidies. Likewise, the prices at which we sell
natural gas in Argentina (particularly to the residential
sector) are subject to government regulations and currently are substantially below
regional market prices for
natural gas. For additional
information on domestic pricing for our products, see “Item 5. Operating and Financial Review
and Prospects” and
“Item 4. Information on the
Company—Regulatory
Framework and Relationship with the Argentine Government—Market
Regulation.” We
cannot assure you that we will be able to increase the prices of our products
sufficiently in the future, and limitations on our ability to do so would
continue to adversely affect our financial condition and results of
operations. Similarly, we
cannot assure you that hydrocarbon prices in Argentina will reach prevailing international or
regional levels.
We are subject to direct and indirect
export restrictions, which have affected our results of operations and caused us
to declare force majeure under certain of our export
contracts
The Argentine Hydrocarbons Law (Law No.
17,319) allows for hydrocarbon exports as long as they are not required for the
domestic market and are sold at reasonable prices. In the case of natural gas,
Law 24,076 and related regulations require that the needs of the domestic market
be taken into account when authorizing long term natural gas
exports.
During the last several years, the
Argentine authorities have adopted a number of measures that have resulted in
the substantial restriction of exports of natural gas from Argentina, and the Argentine government’s current
policy is not to allow any exports of natural gas other than to the residential
sector in certain other
countries.
Due to the foregoing, we have been obliged to sell a part of
our natural gas production previously destined for the export market in the
local Argentine market and
have not been able to meet our contractual gas export commitments in
whole or, in some cases, in part, leading to disputes with our export clients
and forcing us to declare force
majeure under our export sales agreements. We believe
that the measures mentioned above constitute force
majeure events that relieve
us from any contingent liability for the failure to comply with our contractual
obligations, although no
assurance can be given that this position will prevail. See “Item 4. Information on the
Company—Exploration and
Production—The Argentine natural gas market” and “Item 8. Financial
Information—Legal
Proceedings.”
In addition, the effectiveness after
certain specific dates of certain of our natural gas export authorizations is
subject to an analysis by the Secretariat of Energy of natural gas reserves in
the Noroeste basin. The result of such analysis is uncertain and may have an
adverse impact upon our performance of the export gas sales agreements related
to such export authorizations should the Secretariat determine that reserves are
inadequate. See “Item 8.
Financial Information—Legal
Proceedings—Argentina.”
Crude oil exports, as well as the export
of most of our hydrocarbon products, currently require prior authorization from
the Secretariat of Energy (pursuant to the regime established under Resolution
S.E. No. 1679/04 as amended and supplemented by other regulation). Oil companies
seeking to export crude oil or LPG must first demonstrate that the local demand
for such product is satisfied or that an offer to sell the product to local
purchasers has been made and rejected. Oil refineries seeking to export diesel
fuel must also first demonstrate that the local demand of diesel is duly
satisfied. Because domestic diesel production does not currently satisfy
Argentine domestic consumption needs, we have been prevented since 2005 from
selling diesel production in the export market, and thereby obliged to sell in
the local market at significantly lower prices.
We are unable to predict how long these
export restrictions will be in place, or whether any further measures will be
adopted that adversely affect our ability to export gas, crude oil and diesel fuel or other
products and, accordingly, our results of operations.
The imposition of new export duties and
other taxes could adversely affect our results
In recent years, new duties have been
imposed on exports. In March 2002, oil and gas companies were levied with a
five-year, 20% tax on proceeds from the export of crude oil and a five-year, 5% tax on proceeds from the
export of oil products. These duties on exports were increased on May 11, 2004
to the following taxation rates: 25% on exports of crude oil, 20% on exports of butane, methane and
LPG, and 5% on exports of gasoline and
diesel. On May 26, 2004, a 20% duty on natural gas and natural gas liquids
exports was imposed. On August 4, 2004, the Ministry of Economy and Production
issued a resolution establishing a progressive scheme of export duties for crude
oil, with rates ranging from 25% to 45%, depending on the quotation of the WTI
reference price at the time of export and thereby modifying the fixed 25% tax
rate established in May of that year.
Resolution 394/2007 of the Ministry of
Economy and Production, published on November 16, 2007, amends the export duties
on crude oil and other crude derivative products. The new regime provides that
when the WTI international price exceeds the reference price, which is fixed at
U.S.$60.9/barrel, the producer shall be allowed to collect at U.S.$42/barrel,
with the remainder being withheld by the Argentine government as an export tax.
If the WTI international price is under the reference price but over
U.S.$45/barrel, a 45% withholding rate will apply. If such price is under
U.S.$45/barrel, the applicable export tax is to be determined within a term of
90 business days. The withholding rate determined as indicated above also
currently applies to diesel, gasoline and other crude derivative products. In
addition, the calculation procedure described above also applies to other
petroleum products and lubricants based upon different withholding rates,
reference prices and prices allowed to producers. See “Item 4. Information on the
Company—Regulatory
Framework and Relationship with the Argentine Government—Market
Regulation.”
With respect to natural gas products, in
July 2006, the Ministry of Economy and Production issued Resolution 534/06,
which increased to 45% the export duty on natural gas. This resolution also
required the Customs General Administration to apply the natural gas price set
by the Framework Agreement between Argentina and Bolivia (the “Framework
Agreement”), which was approximately U.S.$6/mmBtu in December 2007, as the
valuation basis for calculating export duties on natural gas sales, irrespective
of the actual price of such sales. In 2006, exports from the Tierra del Fuego province, which were previously
exempted from taxes, were made subject to export duties at the prevailing rates.
Moreover, in May 2007 the Ministry of Economy and Production increased to 25%
the export duty on exports of butane, propane and LPG.
Resolution No. 127/2008 of the Ministry
of Economy and Production increased export duties applicable to natural gas
exports from 45% to 100%, mandating a valuation basis for the calculation of the
duty as the highest price established in any contract of any Argentine importer
for the import of gas, abandoning the previously applicable reference price set
by the Framework Agreement between Argentina and Bolivia mentioned above.
Resolution No. 127/2008 provides with respect to LPG products (including butane,
propane and blends thereof) that if the international price of the relevant LPG
product, as notified daily by the Secretariat of Energy, is under the reference
price established for such product in the Resolution (U.S.$338/m3 for propane,
U.S.$393/m3 for butane and U.S.$363/m3 for blends of the two), the applicable
export duty for such product will be 45%. If the international price exceeds the
reference price, the producer shall be allowed to collect the maximum amount
established by the Resolution for the relevant product (U.S.$223/m3 for propane,
U.S.$271/m3 for butane and U.S.$250/m3 for blends of the two), with the
remainder being withheld by the Argentine government as an export
tax.
As a result of the aforementioned export
tax increases, we may be and, in certain cases, have already been forced to seek
the renegotiation of our export contracts, despite, in most cases, the prior
authorization of such contracts by the Argentine government. We cannot provide
assurances that we will be able to renegotiate such contracts on terms
acceptable to us.
The imposition of these export taxes has
adversely affected our results of operations. We cannot assure you that these
taxes will not continue or be increased in the future or that other new taxes
will not be imposed.
We may be exposed to
fluctuations in foreign
exchange rates
Our results of operations are exposed to
currency fluctuation and any devaluation of the peso against the U.S. dollar and
other hard currencies may adversely affect our business and results of
operations. The value of the peso has fluctuated significantly in the past and
may do so in the future. We are unable to predict whether, and to what extent,
the value of the peso may further depreciate or appreciate against the U.S.
dollar and how any such fluctuations would affect our
business.
We may be subject to exchange and
capital controls
In 2001 and 2002, as a result of the
economic crisis, Argentina imposed exchange controls and transfer restrictions
substantially limiting the ability of companies to retain foreign currency or
make payments abroad. Under current Argentine law, exporters are required to
convert proceeds from export operations into domestic currency, subject to
certain exceptions applicable to the oil and gas industry that permit us to
retain abroad 70% of export proceeds. See “Item 4. Information on the
Company—Regulatory
Framework and Relationship with the Argentine Government—Repatriation of Foreign
Currency.” There can be no assurances regarding future modifications
to exchange and capital controls. The imposition of stricter exchange and
capital controls could adversely affect our financial condition or results of
operations and our ability to meet our foreign currency obligations and execute
our financing plans.
Our access to international capital
markets is influenced by the perception of risk in Argentina and other emerging economies, which may
affect our ability to finance our operations and the trading values of our
securities.
International investors consider
Argentina to be an emerging market. Economic and
market conditions in other emerging market countries, especially those in Latin
America, influence the market for securities issued by Argentine companies.
Volatility in securities markets in Latin America and in other emerging market countries
may have a negative impact on the trading value of our securities and on our
ability and the terms on which we are able to access international capital
markets.
Risks Relating to the Argentine Oil and
Gas Business and Our Business
Oil and gas prices could affect our level
of capital expenditures
The prices that we are able to obtain for
our hydrocarbon products
affect the viability of investments in new exploration, development and
refining, and as a result the timing and amount of our projected capital
expenditures for such purposes. We budget capital expenditures related to
exploration, development, refining and distribution activities by taking into
account, among other things, market prices for our hydrocarbon products. In the
event that current domestic prices prevail or decrease, our ability to improve our hydrocarbon
recovery rates, find new reserves and carry out certain of our other capital
expenditure plans is likely to be adversely affected, which in turn would have
an adverse effect on our results of operations.
Our reserves and production are likely
to decline
Argentina’s oil and gas fields are mature and our
reserves and production are declining as reserves are depleted. In the last two
years our proved reserves declined by approximately 20%, and we replaced 51% of our production with new proved reserves during 2007; average daily production
in 2007 declined by approximately 4.1% from 2006. We are engaged in efforts to
mitigate these declines by adding reserves through technological enhancements
aimed at improving our recovery factors as well as through deepwater offshore
exploration and development of tight gas. These efforts are subject to material
risks and may prove unsuccessful due to risks inherent to the oil and gas
industry.
Our oil and natural gas reserves are
estimates, in accordance with the guidelines established by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
(SEC)
Our oil and gas proved reserves are
estimated in accordance with the guidelines established by the SEC. Proved
reserves are estimated using geological and engineering data to determine with
reasonable certainty whether the crude oil or natural gas in known reservoirs is
recoverable under existing economic and operating
conditions.
The accuracy of proved reserve estimates
depends on a number of factors, assumptions and variables, among which the most
important are:
·
|
the results of drilling, testing
and production after the date of the estimates, which may require
substantial revisions;
|
·
|
the quality of available
geological, technical and economic data and the interpretation and
judgment of such
data;
|
·
|
the production performance of our
reservoirs;
|
·
|
developments such as acquisitions
and dispositions, new discoveries and extensions of existing fields and
the application of improved recovery
techniques;
|
·
|
changes in oil and natural gas
prices, which could have an effect on the size of our proved reserves
because the estimates of reserves are based on prices and costs at the
date when such estimates are made, and a decline in the price of oil or
gas could make reserves no longer economically viable to exploit and
therefore not classifiable as proved;
and
|
·
|
whether the prevailing tax rules,
other government regulations and contractual conditions will remain the
same as on the date estimates are made (as changes in tax rules and other government
regulations could make reserves no longer economically viable to
exploit).
|
Many of the factors, assumptions and
variables involved in estimating proved reserves are beyond our control and are
subject to change over time. See “Item 4. Information on the
Company—Exploration and
Production—Reserves.” Consequently, measures of reserves are not precise and are
subject to revision. Any downward revision in our estimated quantities of proved
reserves could adversely impact our financial results, leading to increased
depreciation, depletion and amortization charges and/or impairment charges,
which would reduce earnings and shareholders’ equity.
The oil and gas industry is subject to
particular economic and operational risks
Oil and gas exploration and production
activities are subject to particular economic and industry-specific operational
risks, some of which are beyond our control, such as production, equipment and
transportation risks, and natural hazards and other uncertainties, including
those relating to the physical characteristics of onshore and offshore oil or
natural gas fields. Our operations may be curtailed, delayed or cancelled due to
bad weather conditions, mechanical difficulties, shortages or delays in the
delivery of equipment, compliance with governmental requirements, fire, explosions, blow-outs, pipe
failure, abnormally pressured formations, and environmental hazards, such as oil
spills, gas leaks, ruptures or discharges of toxic gases. If these risks materialize, we may
suffer substantial operational losses and disruptions. Drilling may be
unprofitable, not only with respect to dry wells, but also with respect to wells
that are productive but do not produce sufficient net revenues to return a
profit after drilling, operating and other costs are taken into
account.
Argentine
oil and gas production concessions and exploration permits are subject to
certain conditions and may not be renewed
The Federal Hydrocarbons Law provides
for oil and gas concessions to remain in effect for 25 years as from the date of
their award, and further provides for the concession term to be extended for up
to 10 additional years, subject to terms and conditions approved by the grantor
at the time of the extension. The expiration of a substantial part of
our and other Argentine oil companies’
concessions occurs in 2017. The authority to extend the terms of current and new
permits, concessions and contracts has been vested in the governments of the
provinces in which the relevant area is located (and the federal government in
respect of offshore areas beyond 12 nautical miles). In order to be eligible for
the extension, any concessionaire and permit holder must have complied with its
obligations under the Federal Hydrocarbons Law and the terms of the particular
concession or permit, including evidence of payment of taxes and royalties, the
supply of the necessary technology, equipment and labor force and compliance
with various environmental, investment and development obligations. Under the
Federal Hydrocarbons Law, non-compliance with these obligations and standards
may also result in the imposition of fines and in the case of material breaches,
following the expiration of applicable cure periods, the revocation of the
concession or permit. We cannot provide assurances that our concessions will be
extended or that additional investment, royalty payment or other requirements
will not be imposed on us in order to obtain extensions. The termination of, or
failure to obtain the extension of, a concession or permit could have a material
adverse effect on our business and results of our
operations.
Our acquisition of exploratory acreage
and crude oil and natural gas reserves is subject to heavy
competition
We face intense competition in bidding
for crude oil and natural gas production areas, which are typically auctioned by
governmental authorities, especially those areas with the most attractive crude oil and
natural gas reserves. Some provinces of Argentina, including La Pampa, Neuquén and
Chubut, have created provincial
government-owned companies to develop activities in the oil and gas industry.
Energía Argentina S.A. (ENARSA), the Argentine state-owned energy company, has
also entered the market, particularly in the context of offshore exploration. As
a result, the conditions under which we are able to access new exploratory or
productive areas could be adversely affected.
We may incur significant costs and
liabilities related to environmental, health and safety
matters
Our operations, like those of other
companies in the oil and gas industry, are subject to a wide range of
environmental, health and safety laws and regulations in the countries in which
we operate. These laws and regulations have a substantial impact on our
operations and those of our subsidiaries, and could result in material adverse
effects on our financial position and results of operation. A number of events
related to environmental, health and safety matters, including changes in
applicable laws and regulations, adverse judicial or administrative
interpretations of such laws and regulations, changes in enforcement policy, the
occurrence of new litigation or development of pending litigation, and the
development of information concerning these matters, could result in new or
increased liabilities, capital expenditures, reserves, losses and other impacts
that could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results
of operations. See “Item 8.
Financial Information―Legal
Proceedings,” “Item 4.
Information on the Company—Regulatory Framework and Relationship
with the Argentine Government—Argentine Environmental Regulations” and
“Item 4. Information on the
Company—Regulatory Framework and Relationship
with the Argentine Government—U.S. Environmental Regulations.”
Environmental, health and safety regulation and jurisprudence in Argentina is developing at a rapid pace and no
assurance can be provided that such developments will not increase our cost of
doing business and liabilities.
The cessation of natural gas deliveries
from Bolivia may have a material adverse effect on
our long-term natural gas supply commitments
We rely on imports of natural gas from
Bolivia pursuant to the Framework Agreement
between the Bolivian and Argentine governments. See “Item 4. Information on the
Company―Exploration and Production—the Argentine natural gas
market.” The
current delivery capacity from Bolivia is 7.7mmcm/d, and the delivery of
volumes exceeding 7.7mmcm/d is subject to the construction of the North East
Pipeline, which has not yet commenced. Bolivian natural gas imports pursuant to
the Framework Agreement are performed under a gas supply agreement between YPFB
(the Bolivian state-owned oil and gas company) and ENARSA, which establishes a
guaranteed delivery volume of 4.6mmcm/d. The price charged by Bolivia pursuant to this agreement was
approximately U.S.$6/mmBtu in December 2007 (approximately U.S.$6.98/mmBtu in
March 2008). We have entered into a gas supply contract with ENARSA to buy a
portion of such gas (with a guaranteed volume of 2.6mmcm/d) through December 31,
2009 at a price of approximately U.S.$1.8/mmBtu. The difference between
our
contractual price and cost of the
natural gas purchased pursuant to the Framework Agreement is currently absorbed
by ENARSA and financed by the Argentine government with the collection of export
duties on natural gas.
Any suspension of natural gas deliveries
from Bolivia under these contracts, or an increase in the subsidized price of
gas currently charged by ENARSA, could have a material adverse effect on our
financial condition and results of operations, including our inability to
provide gas to certain clients, since we plan to fulfill our supply contracts of
natural gas in part through import volumes from Bolivia.
We are party to a number of legal
proceedings
As described under “Item 8. Financial
Information—Legal Proceedings,” we are party to a number of labor, commercial,
civil, tax, criminal, environmental and administrative proceedings that, either
alone or in combination with other proceedings, could, if resolved in whole or
in part adversely to us, result in the imposition of material costs, fines,
judgments or other losses. While we believe that we have provisioned such risks
appropriately based on the opinions and advice of our external legal advisors
and in accordance with applicable accounting rules, certain loss contingencies,
particularly those relating to environmental matters, are subject to change as
new information develops and it is possible that losses resulting from such
risks, if proceedings are decided in whole or in part adversely to us, could
significantly exceed any reserves we have established.
Our business depends to a significant
extent on our production and refining facilities and logistics
network
Our oil and natural gas field
facilities, refineries and logistics network are our principal production
facilities and distribution network on which a significant portion of our
revenues depends. Although we insure our properties on terms we consider prudent
and have adopted and maintain safety measures, any significant damage to,
accident or other production stoppage at our facilities or network could
materially and adversely affect our production capabilities, financial condition
and results of operations.
We
could be subject to organized labor action
Although
we consider our current relations with our workforce
to be good, we have experienced organized work disruptions and stoppages
in the past and we cannot assure you that we will not experience them in the
future, which could adversely affect our business and revenues.
Risks Relating to Our Class D Shares and
ADSs
Repsol YPF controls a significant majority of
our shares and voting rights
Following the Petersen
Transaction, as defined in “Item 7. Major
Shareholders and Related Party Transactions,”
Repsol YPF controls
approximately 84% of our capital stock and voting rights and Petersen
Energía S.A. (“Petersen
Energía”) controls
approximately 15% of our shares and voting rights, in each case subject to the
shareholders’ agreement described below. In addition, Repsol YPF has granted
certain affiliates of Petersen Energía options to purchase an additional 10.1%
of our capital stock held by Repsol YPF. A number of YPF corporate
matters are subject to the voting and other procedures set forth in a
shareholders’ agreement entered into between Repsol YPF, certain affiliates of
Repsol YPF and Petersen Energía. Repsol YPF will be able to determine
substantially all other matters requiring approval by a majority of our
shareholders, including the election of a majority of our directors. Subject to
the terms of the shareholders’ agreement, Repsol YPF will also direct our operations and
may be able to cause or prevent a change in our control.
See “Item 7. Major Shareholders and Related Party Transactions―Shareholders’
Agreement.” Repsol YPF’s and
Petersen Energía’s
interests may differ from those of our other shareholders.
Certain
strategic transactions require
the approval of the holder of our Class A shares or may entail a cash tender
offer for all of our outstanding capital
stock
Under our bylaws,
the approval of the holder of our Class A shares is required to undertake
certain strategic transactions, including a merger, an acquisition that results
in the purchaser holding 15% or more of our capital stock or an acquisition that
results in the purchaser holding a majority of our capital stock. The interests
of our Class A shareholder, the Argentine government, may differ from those of
our other shareholders, and, as result, we may not be able to undertake certain
transactions on terms that are advantageous to our other shareholders or at
all.
In addition,
under our bylaws, an acquisition that results in the purchaser holding 15% or
more of our capital stock would require such purchaser to make a public cash
tender offer for all of our outstanding shares and convertible securities, which
could discourage certain investors from acquiring significant stakes in our
capital stock. See “Item 10. Additional Information—Certain Provisions Relating
to Acquisitions of Shares.”
Active markets
may not develop for our Class D shares or the ADSs
As of the date of
this annual report, less than 1% of our capital stock is held by non-affiliates.
As a result, the public markets for our Class D shares and ADSs have had limited
trading volume. Although the ADSs will continue to be listed on the NYSE and the
underlying Class D shares will continue to be listed on the BASE, we cannot
assure you that more active and liquid markets will develop or of the price at
which the Class D shares or the ADSs may be sold.
Restrictions on the movement of capital
out of Argentina may impair your ability to receive
dividends and distributions on, and the proceeds of any sale of, the Class D
shares underlying the ADSs
Argentine law currently permits the
government to impose temporary restrictions on capital movements in
circumstances where a serious imbalance develops in Argentina’s balance of payments or where there
are reasons to foresee such an imbalance. Although the transfer of funds abroad
in order to pay dividends currently does not require Central Bank approval,
restrictions on the movement of capital to and from Argentina such as those that
previously existed during the recent economic crisis could, if reinstated,
impair or prevent the conversion of dividends,
distributions, or the proceeds from any
sale of Class D shares, as the case may be, from pesos into U.S. dollars and the
remittance of the U.S. dollars abroad. We cannot assure you that the Argentine
government will not take such measures in the future.
Under the terms of our deposit agreement
with the depositary for the ADSs, the depositary will convert any cash dividend
or other cash distribution we pay on the shares underlying the ADSs into U.S.
dollars, if it can do so on a reasonable basis and can transfer the U.S. dollars
to the United
States. If this conversion
is not possible for any reason, including restrictions of the type described in
the preceding paragraph, the deposit agreement allows the depositary to
distribute the foreign currency only to those ADR holders to whom it is possible
to do so. If the exchange rate fluctuates significantly during a time when the
depositary cannot convert the foreign currency, you may lose some or all of the
value of the dividend distribution.
Under Argentine law, shareholder rights
may be different from other jurisdictions
Our corporate affairs are governed by
our bylaws and by Argentine corporate law, which differ from the legal
principles that would apply if we were incorporated in a jurisdiction in the
United States or in other jurisdictions outside
Argentina. In addition, rules governing the
Argentine securities markets are different and may be subject to different
enforcement in Argentina than in other
jurisdictions.
Actual or anticipated sales of a
substantial number of Class D shares could decrease the market prices of our
Class D shares and the ADSs
Repsol YPF
owns Class D shares and ADSs representing a significant majority of our capital
stock (which may be reduced by approximately 10% if the Petersen Options
described under “Item 7. Major
Shareholders and Related Party Transaction—Option
Agreements”
are exercised). Petersen Energía owns ADSs
representing up to approximately 15% of our capital stock (which may be
increased up to approximately 25% if the Petersen Options described under “Item
7. Major Shareholders and Related Party Transaction—Option Agreements”
are exercised). In
addition, as described in greater detail under “Item 7. Major Shareholders and
Related Party Transactions—Registration Rights and Related Agreements,” we have
filed and undertaken to maintain an effective shelf registration statement for
the benefit of the lenders under the senior secured term loan facility provided
to Petersen Energía to enable it to enter into the Petersen Transaction. The
lenders under the senior secured term loan facility, upon the acceleration of
such facility following the occurrence and continuation of an event of default
under such facility, will be able to freely sell up to approximately 15% of our
outstanding capital stock (which may be increased to approximately 25% if the
Petersen Options are exercised) under the shelf registration statement. Sales of a substantial number of Class D
shares or ADSs after the consummation of this offering by Repsol YPF,
Petersen Energía, such lenders or any other significant shareholder,
or the anticipation of such sales, could decrease the trading price of our Class
D shares and the ADSs. See “Item 7. Major Shareholders and Related Party
Transactions.”
You may be unable to exercise
preemptive, accretion or other rights with respect to the Class D shares
underlying your ADSs
You may not be able to exercise the
preemptive or accretion rights relating to the shares underlying your ADSs (see
“Item 10. Additional Information—Preemptive and Accretion Rights”) unless a
registration statement under the U.S. Securities Act of 1933 (the “Securities
Act”) is effective with respect to those rights or an exemption from the
registration requirements of the Securities Act is available. We are not
obligated to file a registration statement with respect to the shares relating
to these preemptive rights, and we cannot assure you that we will file any such
registration statement. Unless we file a registration statement or an exemption
from registration is available, you may receive only the net proceeds from the
sale of your preemptive rights by the depositary or, if the preemptive rights
cannot be sold, they will be allowed to lapse. As a result, U.S. holders of Class D shares or ADSs may
suffer dilution of their interest in our company upon future capital
increases.
In addition, under the Argentine
Corporations Law, foreign companies that own shares in an Argentine corporation
are required to register with the Superintendency of Corporations (Inspección General
de Justicia, or “IGJ”) in
order to exercise certain shareholder rights, including voting rights. If you
own our Class D shares directly (rather than in the form of ADSs) and you are a
non-Argentine company and you fail to register with IGJ, your ability to
exercise your rights as a holder of our Class D shares may be
limited.
You may be unable to exercise voting
rights with respect to the Class D shares underlying your ADSs at our
shareholders’ meetings
The depositary will be treated by us for
all purposes as the shareholder with respect to the shares underlying your ADSs.
As a holder of ADRs representing the ADSs being held by the depositary in your
name, you will not have direct shareholder rights and may exercise voting rights
with respect to the Class D shares represented by the ADSs only in accordance
with the deposit agreement relating to the ADSs. There are no provisions under
Argentine law or under our bylaws that limit the exercise by ADS holders of
their voting rights through the depositary with respect to the underlying Class
D shares. However, there are practical limitations on the ability of ADS holders
to exercise their voting rights due to the additional procedural steps involved
in communicating with these holders. For example, holders of our shares will
receive notice of shareholders’ meetings through publication of a notice in an
official gazette in Argentina, an Argentine newspaper of general
circulation and the bulletin of the Buenos Aires Stock Exchange, and will be
able to exercise their voting rights by either attending the meeting in person
or voting by proxy. ADS holders, by comparison, will not receive notice directly
from us. Instead, in accordance with the deposit agreement, we will provide the
notice to the depositary. If we ask it to do so, the depositary will mail to
holders of ADSs the notice of the meeting and a statement as to the manner in
which instructions may be given by holders. To exercise their voting rights, ADS
holders must then instruct the depositary as to voting the Class D shares
represented by their ADSs. Due to these procedural steps involving the
depositary, the process for exercising voting rights may take longer for ADS
holders than for holders of Class D shares, and Class D shares represented by
ADSs may not be voted as you desire. Class D shares represented by ADSs for
which the depositary fails to receive timely voting instructions may, if
requested by us, be voted as we instruct at the corresponding
meeting.
Shareholders
outside of Argentina may face additional investment risk from currency exchange
rate fluctuations in connection with their holding of our Class D shares or the
ADSs
We are an
Argentine company and any future payments of dividends on our Class D shares
will be denominated in pesos. The peso has historically fluctuated significantly
against many major world currencies, including the U.S. dollar. A depreciation
of the peso would likely adversely affect the U.S. dollar or other currency
equivalent of any dividends paid on our Class D shares and could result in a
decline in the value of our Class D shares and the ADSs as measured in U.S.
dollars.
ITEM
4. Information on the Company
History
and Development of YPF
Overview
We are
Argentina’s leading energy company, operating a fully integrated oil and gas
chain with leading market positions across the domestic upstream and downstream
segments. Our upstream operations consist of the exploration, development and
production of crude oil, natural gas and liquefied petroleum gas. Our downstream
operations include the refining, marketing, transportation and distribution of
oil and a wide range of petroleum products, petroleum derivatives,
petrochemicals, liquid petroleum gas and bio-fuels. Additionally, we are active
in the gas separation and natural gas distribution sectors both directly and
through our investments in several affiliated companies. In 2007, we had
consolidated net sales of Ps.29,104 million (U.S.$9,239 million) and
consolidated net income of Ps.4,086 million (U.S.$1,297 million).
Most of
our predecessors were state-owned companies with operations dating back to the
1920s. In November 1992, the Argentine government enacted the Privatization Law
(Law No. 24,145), which established the procedures for our privatization. In
accordance with the Privatization Law, in July 1993, we completed a worldwide
offering of 160 million Class D shares that had previously been owned by the
Argentine government. As a result of that offering and other transactions, the
Argentine government’s ownership interest in our capital stock was reduced from
100% to approximately 20% by the end of 1993.
Since
1999, we have been controlled by Repsol YPF, an integrated oil and gas company
headquartered in Spain with global operations. Repsol YPF owned approximately
99% of our capital stock from 2000 until February 21, 2008, when Petersen
Energía, S.A. purchased 58,603,606 of our ADSs, representing 14.9% of our
capital stock, from Repsol YPF for U.S.$2,235 million. In addition, Repsol YPF
also granted certain affiliates of Petersen Energía options to purchase up to an
additional 10.1% of our outstanding capital stock within four years. See “Item
7. Major Shareholders and Related Party Transactions.” We believe
that Petersen Energía’s participation in our capital stock and management will
strengthen our Argentine ties and expertise.
Upstream
Operations
·
|
We
operate more than 70 oil and gas fields in Argentina, accounting for
approximately 42% of the country’s total production of crude oil,
excluding natural gas liquids, and approximately 42% of its total natural
gas production, including natural gas liquids, in 2007, according to the
Argentine Secretariat of Energy.
|
·
|
We
had proved reserves, as estimated as of December 31, 2007, of
approximately 623 mmbbl of oil and 3,708 bcf of gas, representing
aggregate reserves of 1,283 mmboe.
|
·
|
In
2007, we produced 120 mmbbl of oil (329 mbbl/d) and 635 bcf of gas
(1,740 mmcf/d).
|
Downstream
Operations
·
|
We
are Argentina’s leading refiner with operations conducted at three wholly
owned refineries with combined annual refining capacity of approximately
116 mmbbl (319.5 mbbl/d). We also have a 50% interest in Refinor, a
jointly controlled entity operated by Petrobras Energía S.A., which has a
refining capacity of 26.1 mbbl/d.
|
·
|
Our
retail distribution network for automotive petroleum products as of
December 31, 2007 consisted of 1,692 YPF-branded service stations, which
we believe represented approximately 31.1% of all service stations in
Argentina.
|
·
|
We
are a leading petrochemical producer in Argentina and in the Southern Cone
of Latin America, with operations conducted through our Ensenada plant. In
addition, Profertil, a company that we jointly control, is a leading
producer of urea in the Southern
Cone.
|
The
following chart illustrates our organizational structure, including our
principal subsidiaries, as of the date of this annual report.
The map
below illustrates the location of our productive basins, refineries, storage
facilities and crude oil and multi-product pipeline networks.
The
Argentine Market
Argentina
is the second largest producer of natural gas and the fourth largest producer of
crude oil in Latin America based on 2006 production, according to the BP
Statistical Review.
In
response to the economic crisis of 2001 and 2002, the Argentine government,
pursuant to the Public Emergency Law (Law No. 25,561), established export taxes
on certain hydrocarbon products. In subsequent years, in order to satisfy
growing domestic demand and abate inflationary pressures, this policy was
supplemented by constraints on domestic prices, temporary export restrictions
and subsidies on imports of natural gas and diesel. As a result, local prices
for oil and natural gas products have remained significantly below those
prevalent in neighboring countries and international commodity exchanges,
heightening domestic demand for such products. For example, in January 2008,
diesel import prices were approximately U.S.$700/cubic meter, while the average
domestic sales prices were approximately U.S.$350/cubic meter before government
subsidies. In addition, the price at which Bolivia exports natural gas to
Argentina was approximately U.S.$6/mmBtu in December 2007 (U.S.$6.98/mmBtu in
March 2008), while our average sales price for such gas in Argentina was
approximately U.S.$2.29/mmBtu.
Argentina’s
gross domestic product, or GDP, has grown at an average annual real rate of
approximately 9% from 2003 to 2006, after declines during the economic crisis of
2001 and 2002. Driven by this economic expansion and low domestic prices, energy
demand has increased significantly during the same period, outpacing energy
supply (which in the case of oil declined). For example, Argentine natural gas
and diesel consumption grew at average annual rates of 6.5% and 6.9%,
respectively, during this period, according to the BP Statistical Review and the
Argentine Secretariat of Energy. As a result of this increasing demand and
actions taken by the Argentine regulatory authorities to support domestic
supply, exported volumes of hydrocarbon products, especially natural gas and
diesel, declined steadily over this period. At the same time, Argentina has
increased hydrocarbon imports, becoming a net importer of certain products, such
as diesel, and increased imports of natural gas. In 2003, Argentina’s net
exports of diesel amounted to approximately 1,349 thousand cubic meters, while
in 2007 its net imports of diesel amounted to approximately 800 thousand cubic
meters, according to the Argentine Secretariat of Energy. Significant
investments in the energy sector are expected to be required in order to support
continued economic growth, as the industry is currently operating near
capacity.
Demand for
diesel in Argentina exceeds domestic production. In addition, the import prices
of refined products substantially exceed the domestic sales prices of such
products, rendering the import and resale of such products uneconomic. As a
result, service stations experience temporary shortages and are required to
suspend or curtail diesel sales. While we are operating our refineries at or
above capacity, during peak demand periods we are forced to prorate supplies
among our service stations according to historical sales levels.
As the
largest integrated oil and gas company in Argentina, we believe that we are well
positioned to benefit from potential reform in the energy sector, although we
cannot assure that reforms will be implemented or, if implemented, that they
will be advantageous to our business. We also believe that, as a result of
limitations on the prices of our products, our margins should be less sensitive
to declines, if any, in international prices of oil and gas.
History
of YPF
Beginning
in the 1920s and until 1990, both the upstream and downstream segments of the
Argentine oil and gas industry were effectively monopolies of the Argentine
government. During this period, we and our predecessors were owned by the state,
which controlled the exploration and production of oil and natural gas, as well
as the refining of crude oil and marketing of refined petroleum products. In
August 1989, Argentina enacted laws aimed at the deregulation of the economy and
the privatization of Argentina’s state-owned companies, including us. Following
the enactment of these laws, a series of presidential decrees were promulgated,
which required, among other things, us to sell majority interests in our
production rights to certain major producing areas and to undertake an internal
management and operational restructuring program.
In
November 1992, Law No. 24,145 (referred to as the Privatization Law), which
established the procedures by which we were to be privatized, was enacted. In
accordance with the Privatization Law, in July 1993, we completed a worldwide
offering of 160 million Class D shares that had previously been owned by the
Argentine government. As a result of that offering and other transactions, the
Argentine government’s ownership percentage in our capital stock was reduced
from 100% to approximately 20% by the end of 1993.
In January
1999, Repsol YPF acquired 52,914,700 Class A shares in block (14.99% of our
shares) which were converted to Class D shares. Additionally, on April 30, 1999,
Repsol YPF announced a tender offer to purchase all outstanding Class A, B, C
and D shares (the “Offer”). Pursuant to the Offer, in June 1999, Repsol YPF
acquired an additional 82.47% of our outstanding capital stock. Repsol YPF
acquired additional stakes in us from minority shareholders and other
transactions in 1999 and 2000. As of December 31, 2007, Repsol YPF controlled
99.04% of our share capital.
Between
2004 and 2005 we made non-strategic asset divestitures totaling U.S.$239.5
million.
On
February 21, 2008, Petersen Energía purchased 58,603,606 of our ADSs,
representing 14.9% of our capital stock, from Repsol YPF for U.S.$2,235 million.
In addition, Repsol YPF also granted certain affiliates of Petersen Energía
options to purchase up to an additional 10.1% of our outstanding capital stock
within four years. Repsol YPF will retain a majority of our capital stock and,
subject to the shareholders’ agreement entered into between Repsol YPF and
Petersen Energía, will be able to determine substantially all issues decided by
our shareholders. See “Item 7. Major Shareholders and Related Party
Transactions.”
Business
Segments
We
organize our business along the following segments:
·
|
Exploration
and Production;
|
·
|
Refining
and Marketing; and
|
The
Exploration and Production segment’s sales to third parties in Argentina and
abroad include sales of natural gas and services fees (primarily for the
transportation, storage and treatment of hydrocarbons and products). In
addition, crude oil produced by us in Argentina, or received from third parties
in Argentina pursuant to service contracts, is transferred from Exploration and
Production to Refining and Marketing at transfer prices established by us, which
generally seek to approximate Argentine market prices.
The
Refining and Marketing segment purchases crude oil from the Exploration and
Production segment and from third parties. Refining and Marketing activities
include crude oil refining and transportation, as well as the marketing and
transportation of refined fuels, lubricants, LPG, compressed natural gas and
other refined petroleum products in the domestic wholesale and retail markets
and the export markets.
The
Chemical segment sells petrochemical products both in the domestic and export
markets.
Additionally,
we record certain assets, liabilities and costs under the Corporate and Other
segment, including corporate administration costs and assets, certain building
construction activities and environmental remediation activities related to YPF
Holdings’ discontinued operations.
The
following table sets forth net sales and operating income for each of our lines
of business for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005:
|
|
For
the Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in
millions of pesos)
|
|
Net
Sales(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exploration
and Production(2)(3)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To
unrelated parties
|
|
|
3,288 |
|
|
|
3,076 |
|
|
|
2,910 |
|
To
related parties
|
|
|
724 |
|
|
|
774 |
|
|
|
626 |
|
Intersegment
sales and fees(3)
|
|
|
14,056 |
|
|
|
14,033 |
|
|
|
11,659 |
|
Total
Exploration and Production
|
|
|
18,068 |
|
|
|
17,883 |
|
|
|
15,195 |
|
Refining
and Marketing(4)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To
unrelated parties
|
|
|
20,375 |
|
|
|
17,651 |
|
|
|
15,791 |
|
To
related parties
|
|
|
2,045 |
|
|
|
1,624 |
|
|
|
1,425 |
|
Intersegment
sales and fees
|
|
|
1,858 |
|
|
|
1,526 |
|
|
|
962 |
|
Total
Refining and Marketing
|
|
|
24,278 |
|
|
|
20,801 |
|
|
|
18,178 |
|
Chemical
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To
unrelated parties
|
|
|
2,563 |
|
|
|
2,401 |
|
|
|
2,062 |
|
Intersegment
sales and fees
|
|
|
892 |
|
|
|
647 |
|
|
|
207 |
|
Total
Chemical
|
|
|
3,455 |
|
|
|
3,048 |
|
|
|
2,269 |
|
Corporate
and Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To
unrelated parties
|
|
|
109 |
|
|
|
109 |
|
|
|
87 |
|
Intersegment
sales and fees
|
|
|
440 |
|
|
|
282 |
|
|
|
243 |
|
Total
Corporate and Others
|
|
|
549 |
|
|
|
391 |
|
|
|
330 |
|
Less
intersegment sales and fees
|
|
|
(17,246 |
) |
|
|
(16,488 |
) |
|
|
(13,071 |
) |
Total
net sales(5)
|
|
|
29,104 |
|
|
|
25,635 |
|
|
|
22,901 |
|
Operating
Income (Loss)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exploration
and Production
|
|
|
5,679 |
|
|
|
6,564 |
|
|
|
7,140 |
|
Refining
and Marketing
|
|
|
1,234 |
|
|
|
258 |
|
|
|
1,900 |
|
Chemical
|
|
|
500 |
|
|
|
572 |
|
|
|
542 |
|
Corporate
and Other
|
|
|
(620 |
) |
|
|
(540 |
) |
|
|
(451 |
) |
Consolidation
adjustments
|
|
|
(136 |
) |
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
Total
operating income
|
|
|
6,657 |
|
|
|
6,883 |
|
|
|
9,161 |
|
(1)
|
Net
sales are net to us after payment of a fuel transfer tax, turnover tax and
customs duties on exports. Royalties with respect to our production are
accounted for as a cost of production and are not deducted in determining
net sales. See Note 2 (g) to the Audited Consolidated Financial
Statements.
|
(2)
|
Includes
exploration and production operations in Argentina and the United
States.
|
(3)
|
Intersegment
sales of crude oil to Refining and Marketing are recorded at transfer
prices established by us, which generally seek to approximate Argentine
market prices.
|
(4)
|
Includes
LPG activities.
|
(5)
|
Total
net sales include export sales of Ps.8,400 million, Ps.8,649 million, and
Ps.8,644 million for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005,
respectively. The export sales were mainly to the United States,
Brazil and Chile.
|
Exploration
and Production
Principal
properties
Argentine
properties
Our
production is concentrated in Argentina and our domestic operations are subject
to numerous risks. See “Item 3. Key Information—Risk Factors.”
Argentina
is the fourth largest hydrocarbon producing nation in Latin America and the
fourth largest in terms of reserves, after Mexico, Venezuela and Brazil. Oil has
historically accounted for the majority of the country’s hydrocarbon production
and consumption, although the relative share of natural gas has increased
rapidly in recent years. According to the Secretariat of Energy,
19 sedimentary basins have been identified in the country. Five of these are
combined onshore/offshore and three are entirely offshore. Total onshore acreage
is composed of approximately 334 million acres, and total offshore acreage includes 99
million acres on the South
Atlantic shelf within the
200-meter depth line. A substantial portion of the 432 million acres in
sedimentary basins has yet to be evaluated by exploratory
drilling. Commercial
production is concentrated in five basins: Neuquina, Cuyana and Golfo San Jorge
in central Argentina, Austral in southern Argentina (which includes onshore and
offshore fields), and the Noroeste basin in northern Argentina. The Neuquina and
Golfo San Jorge basins are the most significant basins for our activities in
Argentina. As of December 31, 2007, we had an interest in 18.6 million net acres
onshore and offshore (within the 200-meter depth line), of which 6.4 million net
acres were under production concessions and 12.2 million net acres were under
exploration permits.
The
following table shows our gross and net interests in productive oil and gas
wells and exploration permits and production concessions in Argentina by basin,
as of December 31, 2007.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Production
Concessions(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Onshore
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(thousands
of acres)
|
|
Neuquina
|
|
|
3,288 |
|
|
|
2,811 |
|
|
|
575 |
|
|
|
418 |
|
|
|
4,008 |
|
|
|
3,114 |
|
|
|
1,478 |
|
|
|
1,246 |
|
Golfo
San Jorge
|
|
|
6,805 |
|
|
|
5,975 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
2,472 |
|
|
|
2,347 |
|
|
|
4,927 |
|
|
|
2,464 |
|
Cuyana
|
|
|
805 |
|
|
|
627 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
427 |
|
|
|
375 |
|
|
|
2,157 |
|
|
|
1,861 |
|
Noroeste
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
1,329 |
|
|
|
372 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
Austral
|
|
|
120 |
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
602 |
|
|
|
181 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
Offshore
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
115 |
|
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
18,920 |
|
|
|
6,625 |
|
____________
(1)
|
Production
concessions are granted after commercially exploitable quantities of oil
or gas are discovered, are based upon the estimated field size as
determined by geological and geophysical techniques and are subject to
adjustment based upon new information concerning the reservoir.
Accordingly, not all acreage covered by production concessions is, in
fact, producing. Acreage held under exploration permits is unproved and
non-producing.
|
(2)
|
“Gross”
wells and acreage include all wells and acreage in which we have an
interest. “Net” wells and acreage equals gross wells and acreage after
deducting third party interests.
|
The table
below provides certain information with respect to our principal oil and gas
fields in Argentina at December 31, 2007, all of which are mature:
|
|
|
|
|
Production
2007
|
|
|
Reserves
as December 31, 2007
|
|
|
Development
stage of the area
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Barrancas
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
2,218 |
|
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
16,377 |
|
|
|
574 |
|
|
|
16,479 |
|
Cuyana
|
Mature
Field
|
Cerro
Fortunoso
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
1,871 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
9,287 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
9,287 |
|
Neuquina
|
Mature
Field
|
La
Ventana
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
1,988 |
|
|
|
269 |
|
|
|
13,983 |
|
|
|
1,896 |
|
|
|
14,321 |
|
Cuyana
|
Mature
Field
|
Vizcacheras
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
3,594 |
|
|
|
351 |
|
|
|
25,748 |
|
|
|
2,117 |
|
|
|
26,125 |
|
Cuyana
|
Mature
Field
|
El
Portón-Chihuido La Salina
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
12,661 |
|
|
|
58,660 |
|
|
|
58,416 |
|
|
|
351,645 |
|
|
|
121,042 |
|
Neuquina
|
Mature
Field
|
Chihuido
Sierra Negra
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
10,783 |
|
|
|
1,903 |
|
|
|
45,817 |
|
|
|
7,548 |
|
|
|
47,161 |
|
Neuquina
|
Mature
Field
|
Paso
Bardas Norte
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
302 |
|
|
|
13,367 |
|
|
|
329 |
|
|
|
45,086 |
|
|
|
8,359 |
|
Neuquina
|
Mature
Field
|
Señal
Picada
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
2,156 |
|
|
|
150 |
|
|
|
18,323 |
|
|
|
1,135 |
|
|
|
18,525 |
|
Neuquina
|
Mature
Field
|
Aguada
Toledo – Sierra Barrosa
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
813 |
|
|
|
52,909 |
|
|
|
7,690 |
|
|
|
177,190 |
|
|
|
39,247 |
|
Neuquina
|
Mature
Field
|
Loma
la Lata
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
17,066 |
|
|
|
271,057 |
|
|
|
92,411 |
|
|
|
1,840,126 |
|
|
|
420,127 |
|
Neuquina
|
Mature
Field
|
El
Trébol
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
2,132 |
|
|
|
318 |
|
|
|
11,285 |
|
|
|
1,075 |
|
|
|
11,477 |
|
Golfo
San Jorge
|
Mature
Field
|
Manantiales
Behr
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
5,885 |
|
|
|
3,998 |
|
|
|
23,428 |
|
|
|
9,843 |
|
|
|
25,182 |
|
Golfo
San Jorge
|
Mature
Field
|
Seco
León
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
3,502 |
|
|
|
3,812 |
|
|
|
19,953 |
|
|
|
16,069 |
|
|
|
22,815 |
|
Golfo
San Jorge
|
Mature
Field
|
Barranca
Baya
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
4,157 |
|
|
|
853 |
|
|
|
20,757 |
|
|
|
3,767 |
|
|
|
21,428 |
|
Golfo
San Jorge
|
Mature
Field
|
Lomas
del Cuy
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
3,344 |
|
|
|
2,079 |
|
|
|
13,415 |
|
|
|
6,946 |
|
|
|
14,652 |
|
Golfo
San Jorge
|
Mature
Field
|
Los
Perales
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
7,962 |
|
|
|
22,149 |
|
|
|
34,680 |
|
|
|
46,150 |
|
|
|
42,899 |
|
Golfo
San Jorge
|
Mature
Field
|
(2)
|
69.6%
for crude oil and 60% for natural gas liquids and natural
gas.
|
Approximately
84% of our proved crude oil reserves in Argentina are concentrated in the
Neuquina (50%) and Golfo San Jorge (34%) basins, and 96% of our proved gas
reserves in Argentina are concentrated in the Neuquina (79%), Noroeste (13%) and
Austral (4%) basins.
As of
December 31, 2007, YPF held 109 production concessions and exploration permits
in Argentina. YPF directly operates 73 of them, including 61 production
concessions and 12 exploration permits.
As of
December 31, 2007, we held 18 exploration permits in Argentina, 11 of which
are onshore exploration permits and seven of which are offshore exploration
permits. We have has
100% ownership of five onshore permits and one offshore permit, and our
participating interests in the rest vary between 27% and 90%. Our interests in
the offshore permits vary between 30% and 50%.
As of
December 31, 2007, we had 91 production concessions. we have a
100% ownership interest in 54 production concessions, and our participating
interests in the remaining 37 production concessions vary between 12% and
70%.
Joint
ventures and contractual arrangements in Argentina
We
participate in 18 exploration and production joint ventures in Argentina. Our
interests in these joint ventures range from 12% to 70%, and our obligations to
share exploration and development costs vary under these agreements. In
addition, under the terms of some of these joint ventures, we have agreed to
indemnify our joint venture partners in the event that our rights with respect
to such areas are restricted or affected in such a way that the purpose of the
joint venture cannot be achieved. For a list of the exploration and production
joint ventures in which we participate, see Note 6 to the Audited Consolidated
Financial Statements. We are also a party to a number of other contractual
arrangements that arose through the renegotiation of service contracts and risk
contracts and their conversion into production concessions and exploration
permits, respectively.
International
properties – United States
Our
foreign operations, through YPF Holdings, are subject to certain environmental
claims. See “—Environmental Matters—YPF Holdings—operations in the United
States.”
As of
December 31, 2007, we had mineral rights in 56 blocks in the United States,
comprised of 51 exploratory blocks, with a net surface area of 863 square
kilometers and five development blocks, with a net surface area of 17 square
kilometers.
Our U.S.
subsidiaries’ net petroleum production in the United States for 2007 was 100
mboe, while in 2006 the net production for the year was 105 mboe.
Our U.S.
subsidiaries net proved reserves in the United States as of December 31, 2007
were 6,935 mboe.
Our U.S.
subsidiaries have entered into various operating agreements and capital
commitments associated with the exploration and development of their oil and gas
properties. Such contractual, financial and/or performance commitments are not
material, except those commitments related to the development of the Neptune
Field.
The
Neptune Field is located in deep water in the Central Gulf of Mexico,
approximately 120 miles from the Louisiana coast. The field is comprised of
Atwater Blocks 573, 574, 575, 617 and 618. The Sigsbee Escarpment is the
dominant sub-sea feature of the field, with water depths ranging from 4,200 ft.
to 6,500 ft. The host facility is located above the escarpment in 4,250 ft. of
water, in Green Canyon Block 613. BHP Billiton is the operator of the Neptune
Field. The joint venture participants are BHP Billiton (35%), Marathon Oil Corp.
(30%), Woodside Petroleum Ltd (20%), and our indirect subsidiary Maxus (US)
Exploration (15%).
The
Neptune reserves will be produced using a standalone tension leg platform (TLP).
The facility will have the design capacity to produce up to 60,000 bpd and 50
mmcf/day. Sub-sea development wells will be tied back to the TLP. The oil and
gas will be exported via new lateral pipelines into the existing Caesar and
Cleopatra trunk lines. The new lateral pipelines will be installed, owned and
operated by Enbridge Offshore LLC.
On March
16, 2008, we were notified that a structural anomaly had been identified on at
least one of the pontoons on the Neptune Platform. As a result, commencement of
operations has been delayed while the facility is inspected, the structural
anomaly is evaluated, and any necessary corrective actions are implemented. As
of the date of this annual report, no information as to the timing or potential
cost of these actions was available, nor did we know when such information may
become available.
Exploration
and Development Activities
The
following table shows the number of wells drilled by us in Argentina, or in
which we participated, and the results obtained, for the periods
indicated.
|
|
For
the Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
wells drilled(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exploratory
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oil
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
Gas
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Dry
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
Total
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
Development
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oil
|
|
|
622 |
|
|
|
703 |
|
|
|
632 |
|
Gas
|
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
42 |
|
|
|
34 |
|
Dry
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
Total
|
|
|
711 |
|
|
|
757 |
|
|
|
684 |
|
Net
wells drilled(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exploratory
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oil
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Gas
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
– |
|
Dry
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Total
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
Development
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oil
|
|
|
488 |
|
|
|
580 |
|
|
|
485 |
|
Gas
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
Dry
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
Total
|
|
|
552 |
|
|
|
605 |
|
|
|
518 |
|
(1)
|
“Gross”
wells means all wells in which we have an interest. “Net” wells means
gross wells after deducting interests of
others.
|
Our
principal exploration activities in 2007 focused mainly on underexplored areas
within currently producing onshore regions. In 2007, we also completed all of
our planned seismic acquisition and site surveys in shallow and deep water
basins in Argentine offshore areas in which we plan to commence our drilling
operations in 2008.
Three-dimensional
seismic testing is being extensively used in several basins to increase
exploratory success, improve the quality of exploratory prospects, optimize
positioning of the wells and decrease development risk. In 2006, 2,960 km2 of
three-dimensional seismic testing were recorded and evaluated, including 2,523
km2 of onshore seismic testing (1,593 km2 exploratory and 930 km2 for
development) and 437 km2 of offshore seismic testing in the offshore Colorado
Marina basin (as part of an 1,974 square kilometers survey completed in February
2007). In 2007, a total of 2,611 km2 of three-dimensional seismic testing were
recorded in the Austral basin and the offshore Colorado Marina
basin.
During
2007, 23 exploratory wells (operated and non-operated areas) were drilled: 18 in
the Neuquina basin, 4 in the Golfo San Jorge basin and one in the Austral basin.
Successful wells included the Borde Sur del Payún (oil), Borde Sur del
Payún Shallow (oil ), Los Cavados Este (oil), Rincon Amarillo x-5
(gas) (located in the Neuquina
basin),
Estancia Baltaza (oil) (located in the Golfo San Jorge basin) and Arroyo Gamma
Sureste (gas) located in Austral basin.
With
respect to production initiatives, we continued to improve our facilities and
focus our efforts to improve operating efficiencies at our key oil and gas
properties. For example, our U.S.$30 million Low Pressure Compression Project at
the Loma La Lata natural gas field became fully operational in August 2007. In
addition, a new natural gas processing and compression plant with a total
capacity of 21 mmcf/d was completed at the Loma La Lata field during the first
half of 2007, at a total cost of U.S.$13 million. This plant fed from 10 high
CO2-content wells and has been operating since June 30, 2007, processing 10.6
mmcf/d. We expect that the new plant will help YPF to keep the Huincul Methanol
plant in service for at least three years.
Our key
ongoing production asset capital improvement projects include the Ramos Low
Pressure Project in the northwest of Argentina, which is expected to increase
compression capacity at that site from 23,680 HP to 38,500 HP (this project is
expected to be completed during the first quarter of 2008 at a total cost of
approximately U.S.$22 million) and a water injection project at Rincón de los
Sauces in the Neuquina basin, in the Chihuido de la Sierra Negra field, to
mitigate the natural production decline attributable to the maturity of that
field (this project is expected to be completed in 2009 at a total cost of
approximately U.S.$133 million). In the year ended December 31, 2007, we also
repaired 30 wells, drilled eleven new wells to replace collapsed wells and
commenced the revamping of the water treatment plant in Chihuido de la Sierra
Negra (we invested U.S.$21.8 million in these projects in 2007). We also
continued our work on the Water Alternating GAS (WAG) project in Chihuido de la
Sierra Negra in 2007, where a pilot project is expected to be completed in the
first half of 2008. Due to the development of new fields, 55 new wells were
drilled in Desfiladero Bayo, Bayo Este and Cañadón Amarillo during the year
2007.
In the
block CNQ 7A, operated by Petroandina Resources, in which we have a 50%
interest, the delineation of the El Corcobo Norte, Jagüel Casa de Piedra, Cerro
Huanunl Sur and Puesto Pinto Reservoirs has been completed and the development
of those reservoirs has begun. The El Corcobo Norte and Jagüel Casa de Piedra
water injection projects also have begun, and a steam injection project in
Puesto Pinto has started.
We are
also working on a pipeline installation from Corcobo Norte to Puesto Hernandez,
which will facilitate the transport of crude to our refinery in Lujan de Cuyo,
replacing the current truck transport to the Medanito Plant.
In UNAS
(the minor South Business Unit in the Golfo San Jorge basin), 434 injection
wells were closed due to the application of new state and provincial
regulations, which established tighter anular space control parameters. As a
result, the water injection volume was reduced by 91 mbbls/d during 2007,
resulting in a reduction in production of an estimated 4 mbbls/d net of oil.
Both the Las Heras and Chubut Cañadón Seco economic units have started a
remediation campaign, performing overhauls on 71 wells and drilling five
replacement wells. The total capital expenditure for these jobs was U.S.$15
million.
Our
production declines in recent periods are attributable mainly to the continuing
maturity of our fields, although work stoppages and pipeline issues have on
occasion contributed to production and capital project delays. During 2007, in
the UNAS and UNAO (the West Business Unit in the Neuquina and Cuyana basin), a
series of labor and community conflicts halted the production of approximately
1.32 million of barrels of oil equivalent. In December 2006, due to some
problems that affected the main pipeline of Magallanes UTE located in the Tierra
del Fuego province, oil and gas production was stopped. At the beginning of
2007, our joint venture partner began to replace 18.6 km of pipeline (17 km
offshore and 1.6 km onshore), which connects the A3 platform and the battery. In
addition, 3.7 km of pipeline that links the AM2 and AM3 platforms will be
replaced. These works were long-delayed by unfavorable weather conditions, and
are expected to be completed in the first half of 2008. The total contribution
by YPF for this project is estimated to be U.S.$20.9 million.
As of
March 31, 2008, we had 35 gross and 25 net wells in the process of
drilling.
We are
engaged in efforts, through the PLADA program, to mitigate the decline in our
reserves and production by adding reserves through technological enhancements
aimed at improving our recovery factors, including through better reserve
delineation, secondary and tertiary recovery, and infill drilling. PLADA was
implemented, beginning in 2007, under the Front End Loading (“FEL”) methodology,
and visualization stage studies have so far been conducted on 41 areas of
reserves.
Reserves
In each
concession, we or the consortium of which we are a part are entitled to the
reserves that can be produced over the license period, which may be the life of
the field.
The
following table sets forth our estimated proved reserves and proved developed
reserves of crude oil and natural gas at December 31, 2005, 2006, and 2007,
which are subject to the explanations and qualifications that
follow.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(millions
of barrels)
|
|
|
(Bcf)
|
|
|
(boe
in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proved
Developed and Undeveloped Reserves
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reserves
as of December 31, 2005
|
|
|
777 |
|
|
|
4,683 |
|
|
|
1,611 |
|
Revisions
of previous estimates(3)
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
(63 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
Extensions,
discoveries and improved recovery
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
Production
for the year
|
|
|
(126 |
) |
|
|
(651 |
) |
|
|
(242 |
) |
Reserves
as of December 31, 2006
|
|
|
680 |
|
|
|
4,015 |
|
|
|
1,396 |
|
Revisions
of previous estimates(3)
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
319 |
|
|
|
100 |
|
Extensions,
discoveries and improved recovery
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
Production
for the period
|
|
|
(120 |
) |
|
|
(635 |
) |
|
|
(232 |
) |
Reserves
as of December 31, 2007
|
|
|
623 |
|
|
|
3,708 |
|
|
|
1,283 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proved
Developed Reserves
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As
of December 31, 2005
|
|
|
604 |
|
|
|
3,201 |
|
|
|
1,174 |
|
As
of December 31, 2006
|
|
|
521 |
|
|
|
2,571 |
|
|
|
979 |
|
As
of December 31, 2007
|
|
|
460 |
|
|
|
2,441 |
|
|
|
895 |
|
_____________
(1)
|
Includes
crude oil, condensate and natural gas
liquids.
|
(2)
|
Volumes
of gas in the table above and elsewhere in this annual report have been
converted to boe at 5.615 mcf per
barrel.
|
(3)
|
Revisions
in estimates of reserves are performed at least once a year. Revision of
oil and gas proved reserves are considered prospectively in the
calculation of depreciation.
|
Net crude
oil and gas proved reserves as of December 31, 2007 were 1,283 million boe (49%
oil, and 51% gas), a 8% decrease compared to net crude oil and gas proved
reserves of 1,396 million boe reported as of December 31, 2006.
Changes
in our estimated net proved reserves
—
Changes in our estimated net
proved reserves during 2006
1. Revisions
of previous estimates
During
2006, the proved reserves were revised downwards by 2.5 million boe (a decrease
of 63.0 billion cubic feet of gas and an increase of 8.7 million barrels of
oil).
Revision
of previous estimates of proved reserves in UNAO assets not operated by us
resulted in the removal of 53.5 billion cubic feet of proved reserves of gas and
1.5 million barrels of proved reserves of oil. Revisions were immaterial for the
assets not operated by us in UNAS areas. Revision on the minor UNAO areas
resulted in the removal of 5.4 billion cubic feet of proved gas reserves and the
inclusion of 2.7 million barrels of
proved
reserves of oil. The reserves of all the productive areas were externally
audited by GCA (Gaffney, Cline & Associates) and D&M (DeGolyer &
MacNaughton) over a period of two years (2005-2006).
Main
changes to proved reserves have been due to:
·
|
In
the Noroeste basin, 9.2 billion cubic feet of gas were removed
fundamentally due to the low production behavior of the Campo Durán
(Tupambi) deposit in the Aguaragüe
area.
|
·
|
In
the Cuyana basin, except for the inclusion of 0.7 million barrels of oil
due to the upgrading of recovery systems at the Estructura Cruz de Piedra
deposit, all the other areas showed low production behavior and gave rise
to an overall removal of 4.6 million barrels of
oil.
|
·
|
In
the Neuquina basin, the primary upward revisions were made in the Aguada
Toledo-Sierra Barrosa area, where 52.9 billion cubic feet of gas reserves
were added due to the implementation of low compression, the repair of a
well and the adjustment update of the material
balance.
|
·
|
In
the Paso Bardas Norte area, 3.7 billion cubic feet of gas reserves were
added due to the adjustment of the Materials Balance in the Huitrín La
Tosca deposit and in the Piedras Negras area, and 3.1 billion cubic feet
of gas were reclassified as proved following the signing of a gas contract
for electric power generation.
|
·
|
The
primary downward revisions in this basin occurred in the Puesto Cortadera,
Rincón del Mangrullo and Loma La Lata-Lotena deposits. Overall, 56.1
billion cubic feet of proved gas reserves were removed due to the adverse
effect of some wells and the corresponding adjustment of estimates. In the
Filo Morado area within the Faja Plegada, a downward revision of 23
billion cubic feet of gas and 1.6 million barrels of oil was made due to
production behavior.
|
·
|
In
Southern Argentina, the positive results of development drilling
(primarily in the areas of Manantiales Behr, Zona Cental-Bella Vista Este,
Escalante, El Trébol, Las Heras and Lomas del Cuy) in locations adjacent
to the production areas, classified as not proved due to their geological
uncertainty and to the fields’ improved production response, resulted in
the inclusion of 5.5 million barrels of oil and 4.2 billion cubic feet of
gas into proved reserves.
|
2. Improved
recovery
Additions
of net proved reserves for improvements in the recovery were largely due to: the
successful completion of technical/economic feasibility studies for the
expansion of existing projects at UNAS, which will be implemented within the
next three years; the improvement of response from ongoing projects in UNAS; and
the response from physical activity performed at UNAO that have added 8.7
million barrels of oil.
3. Extensions
and discoveries
In the
Neuquina basin, in the Malargüe area, 1.9 million barrels were added as proved
oil reserves due to the outlining activity performed at the Loma de La Mina and
Loma Alta areas.
In the
Rincón de los Sauces area, the outlining projects of Desfiladero Bayo Este and
the Pata Mora fields, and the discoveries in the area of the CNQ 7A exploration
permit, resulted in the addition of 1.9 million barrels of proved oil
reserves.
Proved gas
reserves have been added in the Loma La Lata area as the result of offset wells
in the areas Aguada Toledo-Sierra Barrosa, Lindero Atravesado, Rincón del
Mangrullo and Aguada Pichana for a total of 33.8 billion cubic feet of
gas.
In the
Golfo San Jorge basin, offset wells in the vicinity of proved areas (principally
at Manantiales Behr, Barranca Baya, Seco León, Lomas del Cuy and Cañadon Yatel)
added 6.0 million barrels of proved oil reserves.
An
anticlinical structure of Tertiary sandstone which contains dry gas was
discovered at the Cerro Piedra field. The production started at the end of 2006
with one well, and the field will be fully developed after working-over three
other wells. Estimated proved reserves were 8.1 billion of cubic feet of gas
(1.4 million boe).
—
Changes in our estimated net
proved reserves during 2007
1. Revisions
of previous estimates
During
2007, the proved reserves were revised upwards by 100 million boe (an increase
of 319 billion cubic feet of gas and 46 million barrels of oil).
Main
changes to proved reserves have been due to:
·
|
In
the Noroeste basin, in the Acambuco area, 74.7 billion cubic feet of
natural gas and 1.5 million barrels of oil, condensate and natural gas
liquids were added to proved reserves by the production performance of
well Mac-1001-bis in Macueta reservoir, which in turn provided a basis for
considering the two neighboring wells, Mac.x-1002 and Mac.e-1003, as
proved undeveloped reserves. The reserves of San Pedrito reservoir were
revised downwards as a result of a more extensive material-balance study
performed by YPF and 28.4 billion cubic feet of gas and 0.1 million
barrels of condensate were removed from proved
reserves.
|
·
|
In
the Aguaragüe area, 23.7 billion cubic feet of gas were added to proved
reserves in Santa Rosa–Icla reservoir. The increase was mainly in proved
undeveloped reserves and is related to volumetric studies conducted in
areas where new drilling activity is to be performed in 2009 and
2010.
|
·
|
In
the Loma La Lata-Sierras Blancas reservoir, the revision of the
development plan for the southeastern and northeastern parts of the field,
in conjunction with a general improvement in production performance,
resulted in the addition of 168.8 billion cubic feet of gas and 9.1
million barrels of associated liquids to proved
reserves.
|
·
|
In
the San Roque area, in accordance with a new evaluation of the fields,
54.0 billion cubic feet of gas and 3.0 million barrels of associated
liquids in Aguada San Roque reservoir, as well as 50.0 billion cubic feet
of gas and 3.2 million barrels of associated liquids in Loma las Yeguas
reservoir, were added to proved reserves. The addition was mostly to
proved undeveloped reserves and in both cases was related to the planned
installation of compression facilities scheduled for mid
2008.
|
·
|
In
the CNQ7A area, proved reserves were increased by 6.7 million barrels of
oil because of the general revaluation of reserves performed in conformity
with the development plans for the four reservoirs. These plans, which
include the drilling and workover of more than 350 wells, are being
implemented by the operator.
|
·
|
In
Golfo San Jorge basin fields, the positive results of development drilling
(primarily in the areas of Manantiales Behr, Cañadón Vasco and Cañadón
Perdido) in locations adjacent to the production areas, previously
classified as non-proved due to their geological uncertainty, and to the
fields’ improved production response, resulted in the inclusion of 2.3
million barrels of oil in proved
reserves.
|
·
|
The
production performance in some of the south areas has been adversely
affected by the closing of injection wells due to corrosion problems which
has caused a downward deviation in current production estimates. Secondary
production decreased for that reason in some areas, but primary production
increased in others, mainly in Barranca Baya, Escalante and Tierra del
Fuego areas, with these effects practically offsetting one another. The
temporary closing of injector wells resulted in the recategorization of
certain proved developed production oil reserves into proved developed
non-productive and proved undeveloped oil reserves. The downward revisions
resulted in a reduction of 1.2 million barrels of oil in proved
reserves.
|
·
|
Those
reserves that were booked since 2003, without a development program for
the next two years, were taken out, resulting in the removal of 4.0
million barrels from proved oil reserves, mainly in Los Perales, Barranca
Baya and Manantiales Behr fields.
|
·
|
The
anti-clinical structure of Tertiary sandstone discovered in 2006 in the
Cerro Piedra field in the Southern region has been in production
throughout 2007. The new pressure analysis shows that dry gas reserves
increased by 4.2 billion cubic
feet.
|
·
|
The
delay in various development plans resulted in the removal of 1.6 million
barrels of proved oil reserves because production would be beyond the
concession expiration date.
|
·
|
In
Austral basin, in CAM 2 A Sur area, the well Poseidón-112 was flooded and
thus closed down, resulting in a net proved reserve decrease of 0.6
million boe.
|
·
|
In
Neptune (USA), the delineation and development activity carried out has
produced new information about the geological and petrophysical parameters
which differs, in some cases, from previous estimates, leading to a
negative revision of 574 mboe of proved reserves, comprised of negative
revisions of 0.7 billion cubic feet of gas and 452 mbbl of oil. The
revised figures are in line with the estimate of
GCA.
|
2. Improved
recovery
In the
Cuyana basin, in the Barrancas area 0.3 million barrels of oil were added to
proved reserves as a result of the successful drilling of wells B-499 and B-501
as part of the secondary recovery project for the Cabras/Brecha Verde
reservoir.
In the
Neuquina basin, in the Desfiladero Bayo area, 2.2 million barrels of oil were
added to proved reserves due to the drilling of 14 new wells as part of the
Centro Infill Project in the Agrio + Troncoso and Rayoso
reservoirs.
In the
Chihuido de la Sierra Negra area, 1.3 million barrels of oil were added to
proved reserves due to the commencement of drilling during 2007 and the
establishment of drilling plans for 2008 for the Lomita-Rayoso
reservoir.
In the
CNQ7A area, definition for a secondary recovery project in the Jaguel Casa de
Piedra reservoir as part of the overall development plan established for the
field resulted in the addition of 1.0 million barrels of oil to proved reserves
based on the successful results of a pilot injection project started in November
2005.
In the
Señal Picada area, 0.7 million barrels of oil were added to proved reserves
because of the expansion of the secondary recovery project to the eastern part
of the SP-Quintuco reservoir.
In the
Golfo San Jorge oil fields, 1.8 million barrels of oil were added to net proved
reserves as a result of improvements in recovery through water injection
projects.
3. Extensions
and discoveries
In the
Cuyana basin, in the area La Ventana Central, 0.2 million barrels of oil were
added to proved reserves as a result of the extension of well RV-35 in the Rio
Viejas reservoir.
In the
Neuquina basin, the most important upward revision was in the Aguada
Toledo-Sierra Barrosa area, where 3.4 billion cubic feet of gas were added to
proved reserves in the Cupén Mahuida Precuyano reservoir as a result of the
appraisal of well CuM.a-13.
In the
Loma Alta Sur area, 1.4 million barrels of oil and 1.1 billion cubic feet of gas
were added to proved reserves as a result of the appraisal of wells LA.a-16 and
LA.a-17.
In the
Desfiladero Bayo area, 0.3 million barrels of oil were added to proved reserves
in the reservoir Agrio + Troncoso as a result of the appraisal of well DB.a-185
and 0.5 million barrels of oil in the Desfiladero Bayo Este reservoir as a
result of the appraisal of well DBE.a-90.
In the
Cañadón Amarillo area, 0.5 million barrels of oil were added to proved reserves
in the reservoir Barda Negra + Tordillo as a result of the appraisal of well
Cam.x-1002.
In the
Señal Picada area, 0.3 million barrels of oil were added to proved reserves in
the reservoir SP-Quintuco as a result of the appraisal of well SP.a-299 together
with the definition of a development plan for the eastern part of the
field.
In the
Golfo San Jorge basin, offset wells in the vicinity of proved areas (principally
at Manantiales Behr, Barranca Baya and Cañadon Yatel) added 4.2 million of
barrels of proved oil reserves.
In the
Manantiales Behr area, 1.6 million barrels of oil were added to proved reserves
in the Grimbeek field as a result of several appraisals of wells in the Grimbeek
north zone.
A new
small anticlinal structure of Tertiary sandstone which contains dry gas was
discovered at the Cerro Piedra field in the south last year. Estimated proved
reserves were 0.6 billion cubic feet of gas and the field was connected to
existing facilities and is currently in production.
— Additional
Information—Restatement of Previously Reported Reserves as of December 31,
2004
On January
26, 2006, we announced that we would reduce our prior proved reserve estimates
by 509 million boe (55% gas), including 493 million boe corresponding to our
proved developed and undeveloped reserves and 16 million boe corresponding to
proved developed and undeveloped reserves of affiliated companies. The Audit and
Control Committee of our parent company, Repsol YPF, undertook an independent
review of the facts and circumstances of the reduction in proved reserves. The
Audit and Control Committee presented the final conclusions to the Board of
Directors of Repsol YPF at its meeting of June 15, 2006. According to the
independent review, the process for determining reserves with respect to our
fields in Argentina was flawed from 2003 to 2004, and our personnel at times
failed to apply properly SEC criteria for reporting proved
reserves.
The
independent review reported that this was principally due to:
·
|
lack
of proper understanding of and training on the requirements of the SEC for
booking proved reserves;
|
·
|
undue
optimism regarding the technical performance of the fields and focus on
replacement ratio;
|
·
|
absence
of a meaningful deliberative process for determining proved reserves and
resolving disputes; and
|
·
|
unwillingness
to accept personal responsibility for reporting internally adverse facts
regarding reserves and a corresponding tendency to view such issues as
falling within another person’s or department’s jurisdiction. Over time,
problems emerged and grew in the absence of delineation of
responsibilities for booking proved reserves and in the absence of clear
directives pre-2005.
|
This
notwithstanding, no evidence was found that any personnel involved in the
reporting of proved reserves were motivated by personal gain.
The tables
below reflect the reconciliation of proved reserves as restated with proved
reserves as originally reported for the year 2004:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proved
developed and undeveloped reserves
|
|
|
Proved
developed reserves
|
|
|
|
(Millions
of barrels)
|
|
As
originally reported as of December 31
|
|
|
1,114 |
|
|
|
908 |
|
Effect
of the adjustment
As
of beginning of year
|
|
|
(67 |
) |
|
|
(63 |
) |
Movement
during the year
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
Total
|
|
|
(50 |
) |
|
|
(45 |
) |
As
restated as of December 31
|
|
|
1,064 |
|
|
|
863 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proved
developed and undeveloped reserves
|
|
|
Proved
developed reserves
|
|
|
|
(Billions
of cubic feet)
|
|
As
originally reported as of December 31
|
|
|
6,820 |
|
|
|
5,041 |
|
Effect
of the adjustment
As
of beginning of year
|
|
|
(1,531 |
) |
|
|
(1,383 |
) |
Movement
during the year
|
|
|
387 |
|
|
|
387 |
|
Total
|
|
|
(1,144 |
) |
|
|
(996 |
) |
As
restated as of December 31
|
|
|
5,676 |
|
|
|
4,045 |
|
As of
December 31, 2004, the aggregate effect on proved reserves volumes of the
reserves restatement was 254 million boe, comprising 50 million barrels of oil
and 1,144 billion cubic feet of gas. This amounted to 11% of the total proved
reserves originally stated at that date (2,330 million boe). Of the total
aggregate effect 87% had been in the proved developed reserves category and 13%
had been categorized as proved undeveloped reserves. The reserves restatement
gave rise to an estimated reduction of Ps.1,132 million in the standardized
measure of discounted future net cash flow for us. This effect represented
approximately 3% of the total standardized measure that was originally stated at
that date.
Internal
controls on reserves and reserves audits
All of our
oil and gas reserves held in consolidated companies have been estimated by our
petroleum engineers.
All the
assumptions made, and the basis for the technical calculations used, in the
estimates regarding our oil and gas proved reserves are based on the guides and
definitions established by the SEC’s Rule 4-10(a) of Regulation
S-X.
In order
to meet the high standard of “reasonable certainty,” reserves evaluations are
stated taking into consideration additional guidance as to reservoir economic
productivity requirements, acceptable proved area extensions, recovery factors
and improved recovery methods, marketability under existing economic and
operating conditions and project maturity.
Where
applicable, the volumetric method is used to determine the original quantities
of petroleum in place. Estimates are made by using various types of logs, core
analysis and other available data. Formation tops, gross thickness, and
representative values for net pay thickness, porosity and interstitial fluid
saturations are used to prepare structural maps to delineate each reservoir and
isopachous maps to determine reservoir volume. Where adequate data is available
and where circumstances are justified, material-balance and other engineering
methods are used to estimate the original hydrocarbon in place.
Estimates
of ultimate recovery are obtained by applying recovery efficiency factors to the
original quantities of petroleum in place. These factors are based on the type
of energy inherent in the reservoir, analysis of the fluid and rock properties,
the structural position of the properties and their production history. In some
instances, comparisons are made with similar production reservoirs in the areas
where more complete data is available.
Where
adequate data is available and where circumstances are justified,
material-balance and other engineering methods are used to estimate recovery
factors. In these instances, reservoir performance parameters such as cumulative
production, production rate, reservoir pressure, gas oil ratio behavior and
water production are considered in estimating recovery efficiency used in
determining gross ultimate recovery.
In certain
cases where the above methods could not be used, reserves are estimated by
analogy to similar reservoirs where more complete data are
available.
Proved
reserves are limited to:
|
a.
|
the
portion of the reservoir delineated by drilling and defined by gas-oil
and/or oil-water contacts, if any, and in the absence of information on
fluid contacts, the lowest known structural occurrence of hydrocarbons
controls the lower proved limit of the reservoir;
and
|
|
b.
|
the
economic limit, the expiration data of a production license or, in the
case of gas reserves, the expiration of applicable gas sales
contracts.
|
All proved
reserves estimates are also evaluated and tested based on all technical
constraints and restrictions, including, but not limited to:
·
|
For
depletion-type reservoir or other reservoirs where performance has
disclosed a reliable decline in production-rate trends or other diagnostic
characteristics, reserves are estimated by the application of appropriate
decline curves or other performance relationships. In analyzing decline
curves, reserves are estimated to the calculated economic limits based on
current economic conditions.
|
·
|
Reserves
on undrilled acreage are limited to those drilling units offsetting
productive units that were reasonably certain of production when drilled.
Proved reserves for other undrilled units are claimed only where it could
be demonstrated with certainty that there was continuity of production
from the existing productive
formation.
|
·
|
The
reserves estimated are typically expressed as gross and net reserves.
Gross reserves are defined as the total estimated petroleum to be produced
from the properties at the year end. Net reserves are defined as that
portion of the gross reserves attributable to our interest after deducting
interests owned by third parties.
|
·
|
Historical
cost of operations and development of the properties evaluated, as well as
product prices, including agreements affecting revenues and future
operations, form an integral part of the estimates and form the basis for
the economic evaluation for the engineer to assist in its
estimates.
|
To control
the quality of reserves booking, we and Repsol YPF have established a process
that is integrated into the internal control system of Repsol YPF. Repsol YPF’s
process to manage reserves booking is centrally controlled and has the following
components:
a) The
Quality Reserve Coordinator (QRC), which is a professional assigned at each
Exploration and Production Business Unit of Repsol YPF to ensure that there are
effective controls in the proved reserves estimation and approval process of the
estimates of the Group (Repsol YPF and its consolidated subsidiaries, which
include us) and the timely reporting of the related financial impact of proved
reserves changes. These QRCs are responsible for reviewing proved reserves
estimates and ensuring integrity and accuracy of reporting.
b) A
formal review through technical review committees to ensure that both technical
and commercial criteria are met prior to the commitment of capital to
projects.
c) The
Internal Audit, which examines the effectiveness of the Group’s financial
controls, designed to assure the reliability of reporting and safeguarding of
all the assets and examining the Group’s compliance with the law, regulations
and internal standards.
d) A
quarterly internal review from the Reserves Control Direction of Repsol YPF
which is separate and independent from the operating business units, over the
movement of proved reserves submitted by the Business Unit and associated with
properties where technical, operational or commercial issues have
arisen.
e) Booking
proved reserves in any given property at any given time requires central
authorization. Furthermore, the volumes booked are externally audited on a
periodic basis. The initial selection of the properties for external audit is
performed by the Reserves Control Direction with the approval of Repsol YPF’s
Audit and Control Committee. The properties for external audit in any given year
are selected on the following basis:
|
i.
|
all
properties on a three year cycle, with properties audited in the first
year of the cycle corresponding to those audited in the first year of the
previous cycle;
|
|
ii.
|
recently
acquired properties not audited in the previous cycle and properties with
respect to which there is new information which could materially affect
prior reserves estimates; and
|
|
iii.
|
approximately
one-third of the volume of the net proved reserves at the end of the year
of the audit.
|
The
properties to be externally audited in any given year may be modified for
various reasons, such as the presence of new technical or production information
or legal, tax or regulatory changes.
For those
areas audited by independent firms, Repsol YPF’s proved reserves figures have to
be within 7% or 10 million boe of the independent auditor figures for Repsol YPF
to declare that the volumes have been ratified by an external auditor. In the
event that the difference, above or below, is greater than the tolerance, Repsol
YPF will reestimate its proved reserves to achieve this tolerance level or
should disclose the figures of the external auditor.
For
external audit purposes, the reserves areas in Argentina are grouped into three
segments: “main areas” to refer to those areas with greater volumes of reserves
for each economic unit, so as to achieve a total amount audited equivalent to
one-third of the total reserves of Repsol YPF, in accordance with the objective
of auditing 100% of Repsol YPF group reserves in a three-year cycle. The amount
of one-third of Repsol YPF’s total reserves equals approximately 62% of our
total reserves in Argentina.
In 2007, a
new external auditing cycle began. D&M audited the “main areas” operated by
us in the Noroeste, Cuyana and Neuquina basins, and GCA audited the “main areas”
operated by us in the Golfo San Jorge basin. All these external audits in 2007
were performed as of September 30, 2007, and cumulatively covered 68.4% of our
proved reserves in Argentina as of that date.
Our total
estimated proved reserves as of December 31, 2007 were 1,283 million boe. As of
September 30, 2007, external reservoir engineers audited fields which, in our
estimates as of such date, contained proved reserves of 896.7 million boe in the
aggregate.
We are
required, in accordance with Resolution S.E. No. 324/06 of the Secretariat of
Energy, to file annually and by March 31 of every year details of our
estimates of reserves of oil and gas and resources with the Argentine
Secretariat of Energy, as defined in that resolution and certified by an
independent reserves auditor, although the relevant deadline relating to the
filing of information for the year ending December 31, 2007 has been extended to
April 30, 2008. The aforementioned certification only has the meaning
established by Resolution S.E. No. 324/06, and is not to be interpreted as a
certification of oil and gas reserves under the SEC rules. We last filed such a
report for the year ended December 31, 2006 and the estimates of our proved oil
and gas reserves filed with the Argentine Secretariat of Energy are
materially higher than the estimates of our proved oil and gas
reserves contained in this annual report mainly because: i) information filed
with the Secretariat of Energy includes all properties of which we are
operators, irrespective of the level of our ownership interests in such
properties; ii) information filed with the Secretariat of Energy includes other
categories of reserves and resources different to proved reserves that are not
included in this annual report, which contains estimates of proved
reserves consistent with the SEC’s guidance; and iii) the definition of
proved reserves under Resolution S.E. No. 324/06 is different from the
definition of “proved oil and gas reserves” established in Rule 4-10(a)(2) of
Regulation S-X. Accordingly, all proved oil and gas reserve
estimates
included in this annual report reflect only proved oil and gas reserves
consistent with the rules and disclosure requirements of the SEC.
Production
The
following table shows our historical average net daily oil (including crude oil,
condensate and natural gas liquids) and gas production in Argentina by basin and
average sales prices for the years indicated, as well as total average daily oil
and gas production.
|
|
For
the Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(thousands
of barrels per day)
|
|
|
|
|
Oil
production(1)(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Neuquina
|
|
|
192 |
|
|
|
201 |
|
|
|
213 |
|
Golfo
San Jorge
|
|
|
101 |
|
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
108 |
|
Cuyana
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
Noroeste
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
Austral
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Total
oil production
|
|
|
329 |
|
|
|
346 |
|
|
|
366 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(millions
of cubic feet per day)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gas
production(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Neuquina
|
|
|
1,381 |
|
|
|
1,392 |
|
|
|
1,439 |
|
Golfo
San Jorge
|
|
|
126 |
|
|
|
112 |
|
|
|
112 |
|
Cuyana
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
Noroeste
|
|
|
167 |
|
|
|
172 |
|
|
|
163 |
|
Austral
|
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
102 |
|
Total
gas production
|
|
|
1,737 |
|
|
|
1,779 |
|
|
|
1,827 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
sales price
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oil
(U.S.$ per barrel)(3)
|
|
|
44.57 |
|
|
|
42.81 |
|
|
|
35.53 |
|
Gas
(U.S.$ per mcf)
|
|
|
1.66 |
|
|
|
1.63 |
|
|
|
1.34 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
Oil
and gas production amounts are stated before making any deductions with
respect to royalties. Royalties are accounted for as a cost of production
and are not deducted in determining net sales (see Note 2 (g) to the
Audited Consolidated Financial
Statements).
|
(2)
|
Includes
crude oil, condensate and natural gas
liquids.
|
(3)
|
The
average sales price per barrel of oil represents the transfer price
established by us, which approximates the Argentine market
price.
|
In 2007,
crude oil and natural gas production, on a boe basis, decreased by 4.1% compared
to 2006. As compared to 2006, crude oil (including condensate and natural gas
liquids production) decreased by 4.8% in 2007. With respect to natural gas, the
production decreased by 2.5% in 2007 compared to 2006.
The
composition of the crude oil produced by us in Argentina varies by geographic
area. Almost all crude oil produced by us in Argentina has very low or no sulfur
content. We sell substantially all the crude oil we produce in Argentina to our
Refining and Marketing business line. Most of the natural gas
produced by us is of pipeline quality. All of our gas fields produce commercial
quantities of condensate, and substantially all of our oil fields produce
associated gas.
Our
lifting cost per boe amounted to Ps.15.7, Ps.11.8 and Ps.8.4 in 2007, 2006 and
2005, respectively. We calculate our lifting costs based on the figures
presented in the results of operations of oil and gas producing activities under
“Supplemental information on oil and gas producing activities (unaudited)” in
the Audited Consolidated Financial Statements. We calculate lifting cost as the
quotient of production costs (excluding royalties, local taxes, and other costs)
divided by annual production (in terms of boe). In 2007, production costs
amounted to Ps.6,996; royalties, local taxes, and other costs amounted to
Ps.3,361; and our annual production was 232 mmboe.
Natural
gas transportation and storage capacity
Decree No.
180/2004 created two trust funds to help finance an expansion of the North
Pipeline operated by TGN (Transportadora Gas del Norte), whose capacity
increased by 1.8 million cubic meters per day (63.6 mmcf/d) in 2005, and an
expansion of the San Martín Pipeline operated by TGS (Transportadora Gas del
Sur), whose capacity increased by 2.9 million cubic meters per day (102.4
mmcf/d) in 2005. Both expansions are currently operating. We contributed
approximately U.S.$100 million in loans to the expansion of TGN’s North
Pipeline. We believe this expansion will enable us to obtain an increased volume
of Bolivian gas imports. Our loans have since been fully repaid.
Natural
gas is delivered by us through our own gathering systems to the trunk lines from
each of the major basins. The firm capacity of the natural gas transportation
pipelines in Argentina is mainly used by the distribution companies under
long-term firm transportation contracts. All of the available capacity of the
transportation pipelines is taken by firm customers mainly during the winter,
leaving capacity available for interruptible customers in varying degrees
throughout the rest of the year.
We have
continued to analyze the possible utilization of natural underground structures
located near consuming markets as underground natural gas storage facilities,
with the objective of storing natural gas during periods of low demand and
selling the natural gas stored during periods of high demand. The most advanced
gas storage project undertaken by us in Argentina is “Diadema”, which is located
in the Patagonia region, near Comodoro Rivadavia City. The injection of natural
gas into the reservoir started in January 2001, and we have now completed our
fourth season of gas withdrawal. We have recently abandoned a gas
injection/withdrawal pilot project in Lunlunta Carrizal, located 60 kilometers
southeast of Mendoza, because of an inadequate gas cap. Accordingly, the assets
corresponding to this project have been reduced to their recovery
value.
Natural
gas supply contracts and exports
As a
consequence of the energy crisis in Argentina, since 2002 the Argentine
government has established resolutions and regulations which regulate both the
export and internal market. These regulations have affected Argentine producers’
ability to export natural gas. We have appealed the validity of the
aforementioned regulations and resolutions and have invoked the occurrence of a
force majeure event
under certain export natural gas purchase and sales agreements, although certain
counterparties to such agreements have rejected our position. See “Item 4.
Information on the Company—Regulatory Framework and Relationship with the
Argentine Government—Market Regulation” and “Item 8. Financial
Information—Legal Proceedings.”
We have
entered into a number of natural gas purchase and sale agreements pursuant to
which we are frequently required to “deliver or pay” or under which our
customers are required to “take or pay.” Such contracts have been
entered into only with domestic industrial users and power plants and in the
export markets, while the domestic residential market is served through the
injection of natural gas into the Argentine pipeline system, often pursuant to
regulatory requirements (and not on a contractual basis with
customers).
We have
recently had trouble meeting certain of our principal contractual supply
obligations as a result of export restrictions imposed by the
government. See “Item 8. Financial Information—Legal
Proceedings—Argentina.” The principal contracts among these are
described briefly below.
We are
currently committed to supply a daily quantity of 104 mmcf/d to the Methanex
plant in Cabo Negro, Punta Arenas, in Chile (under three 20-year agreements
entered into in 1997, 1999 and 2005). In 2010, we are scheduled to begin to
supply an additional 21 mmcf/d of natural gas to the plant.
We have a
12-year contract (entered into in 1999 and subsequently modified) to supply 26
mmcf/d of natural gas to the Termoandes power plant located in Salta,
Argentina. The natural gas comes from the Noroeste basin. This power
plant provides power to a high voltage line running from Salta to Región II in
Chile.
We
currently have several supply contracts with Chilean electricity producers
(through the Gas Andes pipeline linking Mendoza, Argentina, to Santiago, Chile,
which has a transportation capacity of 353 mmcf/d), including a 15-year contract
(signed in 1998) to provide 63 mmcf/d to the San Isidro Electricity Company
(Endesa) in Quillota, Chile (all of this plant’s natural gas needs), a 15-year
contract (signed in 1999) to supply 20% of the natural gas requirements of the
electricity company, Colbun (approximately 11 mmcf/d), and a 15-year contract
(signed in 2003) to supply 35 mmcf/d to Gas Valpo. We also have an
18-year contract (entered into in 1999) to deliver 99 mmcf/d of natural gas to a
Chilean distribution company that distributes natural gas to residential and
industrial clients through a natural gas pipeline (with a capacity of 318
mmcf/d) connecting Loma La Lata (Neuquén, Argentina) with
Chile. Finally, in Chile we also have natural gas supply contracts
with certain thermal power plants in northern Chile utilizing two natural gas
pipelines (with a carrying capacity of 300 mmcf/d each) connecting Salta,
Argentina, to Northern Chile (Región II).
In Brazil,
we have a 20-year supply contract (entered into in 2000) to provide 99 mmcf/d of
natural gas to AES’s thermal power plant through pipeline linking Aldea
Brasilera, Argentina, to Uruguayana, Brazil (with a capacity of 560
mmcf/d). We also have a contract to supply Petrobras with natural gas
for its planned natural gas pipeline from Uruguayana to Porto Alegre, although
the project has been delayed as a result of the excess of energy currently
offered in the Southern and South-eastern parts of Brazil.
The
Argentine natural gas market
We
estimate (based on preliminary reports of amounts delivered by transport
companies) that natural gas consumption in Argentina totaled approximately 1,428
Bcf in 2007. We estimate that the number of users connected to distribution
systems throughout Argentina amounted to approximately 6.9 million as of
December 31, 2007. The domestic natural gas market has grown significantly over
recent years, driven by the forces of economic growth and domestic price and
export constraints, although we do not believe that the natural gas market will
continue to grow at the same rate as it has recently unless significant new
discoveries are made or more gas is imported.
In 2007,
we sold approximately 35% of our natural gas to local residential distribution
companies, approximately 58% to industrial users (including Mega (Compañía Mega S.A.) and
Profertil (Profertil S.A.)) and power plants, and approximately 7% in exports to
foreign markets (principally Chile). Approximately 79% of our natural gas sales
were produced in the Neuquina basin.
Demand for
natural gas is currently driven by domestic constraints on natural gas prices
that commenced in 2002 following the currency devaluation, which created very
low prices for natural gas as compared to alternative fuels. Consequently,
demand for natural gas has soared.
In January
2004, Decree No. 181/04 authorized the Secretariat of Energy to negotiate with
producers a pricing mechanism for natural gas supplied to industries and
electric generation companies. Domestic market prices at the retail market level
were excluded from these negotiations. Subsequently, the Argentine government
has taken a number of additional steps aimed at satisfying domestic natural gas
demand, including pricing regulations, export controls and higher export taxes
and domestic market injection requirements. See “Item 4. Information on the
Company—Regulatory Framework and Relationship with Argentine
Government.”
During the last several years the
Argentine authorities have
adopted a number of measures restricting exports of natural gas from Argentina,
including issuing injection orders pursuant to Resolutions No. 659 and No. 752
(which require exporters to increase supply of natural gas into the Argentine
domestic market), issuing express instructions
to suspend exports, suspending processing of natural gas and adopting
restrictions on natural gas exports imposed through transportation companies
and/or emergency committees created to address crisis
situations.
These restrictions were imposed on all
Argentine exporting producers, affecting natural gas exports from every
producing basin. Exporting producers, such as us, have no choice but to comply
with the government’s directions to
curtail exports in order to
supply gas to the domestic market, whether
such directions are issued pursuant to resolutions or otherwise. The
above-mentioned Resolutions provide penalties for non-compliance. Rule SSC No.
27/2004 issued by the Undersecretary of Fuels (“Rule 27”), for example, punishes the violation of any order
issued thereunder by suspending or revoking the production concession.
Resolutions No. 659 and No. 752 also provide that producers not complying with
injection orders will have their concessions and export permits suspended or revoked and state that pipeline
operators are prohibited from shipping any natural gas injected by a
non-complying exporting producer.
The government began suspending natural
gas export permits pursuant to Rule 27 in April 2004, and in June 2004
the government began
issuing injection orders to us under Resolution No. 659. Thereafter, the volumes
of natural gas required to be provided to the domestic market under the
different mechanisms described above have continued to increase substantially.
The regulations pursuant to which the
government has restricted natural gas export volumes in most cases do not have
an express expiration date. Likewise, we have not received any documentation
indicating that the government will suspend or withdraw these actions. Accordingly, we are unable to
predict how long these measures will be in place, or whether such measures or
any further measures adopted will affect additional volumes of natural
gas.
Because of the Argentine
government’s restrictions, we could not
meet our export commitments
and were forced to declare force
majeure under our natural
gas export sales agreements. As a result of actions taken by the Argentine
authorities, through actions described in greater detail under “Item 4.
Information on the Company—Regulatory Framework and
Relationship with Argentine
Government,” we have been
forced to reduce the export volumes authorized to be provided under the relevant
agreements and permits as shown in the chart below:
|
|
Maximum
Contracted Volumes (MCV)(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage
of Restricted Volumes vs MCV
|
|
|
|
(in
million cubic meters)
|
|
|
(in
million cubic meters)
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
5,995.2 |
|
|
|
875 |
|
|
|
14.5 |
% |
2006
|
|
|
6,015.1 |
|
|
|
1,240 |
|
|
|
20.6 |
% |
2007
|
|
|
5,979.1 |
|
|
|
3,682 |
|
|
|
61.6 |
% |
(1)
|
Reflects
the maximum quantities committed under our natural gas export contracts.
Includes all of our natural gas export contracts pursuant to which natural
gas is exported to Chile and
Brazil.
|
(2)
|
Reflects
the volume of contracted quantities of natural gas for export that were
not delivered.
|
In June
2007, we were compelled pursuant to Resolution No. 599/07 of the Secretariat of
Energy to enter into an agreement with the government regarding the supply of
natural gas to the domestic market during the period 2007 through 2011 (the
“Agreement 2007-2011”). The purpose of the Agreement 2007-2011 is to guarantee
the supply of the domestic market demand at the levels registered in 2006, plus
the growth in demand by residential and small commercial customers (the “agreed
demand levels”). Producers that have signed the Agreement 2007-2011, such as us,
would commit to supply a part of the agreed demand levels according to certain
shares determined for each producer based upon such producers’ shares of total
Argentine production for the 36 months prior to April 2004. For this period, our
share of production was approximately 36.5%, or 36.8 mmcm/d The Agreement
2007-2011 also provides guidelines for the terms of supply agreements for each
market segment, and certain pricing limitations for each market
segment.
Argentine
natural gas supplies
Most of
our proved natural gas reserves in Argentina are situated in the Neuquina basin
(approximately 77% as of December 31, 2007), which is strategically located in
relation to the principal market of Buenos Aires and is supported by sufficient
pipeline capacity during most of the year. Accordingly, we believe that natural
gas from this region has a competitive advantage compared to natural gas from
other regions. The capacity of the natural gas pipelines in Argentina has proven
in the past to be inadequate at times to meet peak-day winter demand, and there
is no meaningful storage capacity in Argentina. Since 1993, local pipeline
companies have added capacity allowing for
approximately
an additional 63 million cubic meters per day of natural gas to be provided,
improving their ability to satisfy peak-day winter demand but no assurances can
be given that this additional capacity will be sufficient to meet
demand.
On June
29, 2006, the Bolivian and Argentine governments executed the Framework
Agreement, pursuant to which they agreed that the natural gas imports from
Bolivia to Argentina should be managed by ENARSA. The Framework Agreement
establishes a 20-year delivery plan of between 7.7 and 27.7 mmcm/d of Bolivian
gas to Argentina. The delivery of volumes exceeding 7.7 mmcm/d is subject to the
construction of the North East Pipeline, with an expected capacity of 20 mmcm/d.
The agreed upon price was approximately U.S.$6.98/mmBtu in March 2008, and is
periodically adjusted according to a formula based upon a basket of fuels. The
increased cost of the natural gas purchased pursuant to the Framework Agreement
is currently absorbed by ENARSA and financed by the Argentine government with
the collection of export duties on natural gas. In the context of the Framework
Agreement, on April 25, 2007, we accepted the offer made by ENARSA for the sale
of natural gas obtained by ENARSA from the Republic of Bolivia through December
31, 2009. The principal terms and conditions of our agreement with ENARSA are as
follows: (i) maximum contracted quantity of up to 4.4 mmcm/d; (ii) guaranteed
quantity equal to 60% of the maximum contracted quantity; (iii) annual
take-or-pay quantity equal to 60% of the maximum contracted quantity; (iv) price
of U.S.$1.6/mmBtu for the natural gas plus U.S.$0.237/mmBtu for the liquid
components contained therein; (v) price reopening at any time in relation to
changes in Argentine government’s compensation to ENARSA; and (vi) limited
allowed curtailments or interruptions of supply due to operative conditions and
scheduled maintenance. This agreement is effective through December 31, 2009.
See “Item 3. Key Information—Risk Factors—Risks Relating to the Argentine Oil
and Gas Business and Our Business—The cessation of natural gas deliveries from
Bolivia may have a material adverse effect on our long-term natural gas supply
commitments.”
During
2007, our domestic natural gas sales volumes were basically unchanged from the
volumes sold in 2006. The customer mix in the two periods was also similar,
although we have had to increase our provisions to the domestic residential
market segment in 2007.
Other
investments and activities
Natural
gas liquids
We
participated in the development of Mega to increase its ability to separate
liquid petroleum products from natural gas. Mega allowed YPF, through the
fractionation of gas liquids, to increase production at the Loma La Lata gas
field by approximately 5.0 million cubic meters per day in 2001.
We own 38%
of Mega, while Petrobras and Dow Chemical have stakes of 34% and 28%,
respectively.
Mega
operates:
·
|
A
separation plant, which is located in Loma La Lata, in the province of
Neuquén.
|
·
|
A
natural gas liquids fractionation plant, which produces ethane, propane,
butane and natural gasoline. This plant is located in the city of Bahía
Blanca in the province of Buenos
Aires.
|
·
|
A
pipeline that links both plants and that transports natural gas
liquids.
|
·
|
Transportation,
storage and port facilities in the proximity of the fractionation
plant.
|
Mega
required a total investment of approximately U.S.$715 million and commenced
operations at the beginning of 2001. Mega’s maximum annual production capacity
is 1.35 million tons of natural gasoline, LPG and ethane. YPF is Mega’s main
supplier of natural gas. The production of the fractionation plant is used
mainly in the petrochemical operations of Petroquímico Bahía Blanca (“PBB”) and
is also exported by tanker to Petrobras’ facilities in Brazil.
Electricity
market – Generation
We participate
in three power stations with an aggregate installed capacity of 1,622 megawatts
(“MW”):
·
|
A
45% interest in Central Térmica Tucumán (410 MW combined cycle) through
Pluspetrol Energía;
|
·
|
A
45% interest in Central Térmica San Miguel de Tucumán (370 MW combined
cycle);
|
·
|
A
40% interest in Central Dock Sud (775 MW combined cycle and 67 MW gas
turbines), directly and through our investment in Inversora Dock Sud
S.A.
|
Additionally,
we operate assets that are part of Filo Morado, which has an installed capacity
of 63 MW.
In 2007,
these plants collectively generated approximately 10,220 GWh in the
aggregate.
We also
own and operates power plants supplied with natural gas produced by us, which
produce power for use by us in other business units:
·
|
Los
Perales power plant (74 MW), which is located in the Los Perales natural
gas field;
|
·
|
Chihuido
de la Sierra Negra power plant (40
MW);
|
·
|
The
power plant located at the Plaza Huincul refinery (40
MW).
|
We currently
hold through our subsidiary YPF Inversora Energética S.A. a 45.33% stake in
Gas Argentino S.A. (“GASA”), which in turn holds a 70% stake in Metrogas S.A.
(“Metrogas”), which is a natural gas distributor in southern Buenos Aires and
one of the main distributors in Argentina. During 2007, Metrogas distributed
approximately 23.75 million cubic meters of natural gas per day to 2 million
customers in comparison with approximately 23.35 million cubic meters of natural
gas per day distributed to 2 million customers in 2006. The economic crisis that
affected the country at the end of 2001 and beginning of 2002 caused a severe
deterioration of the financial and operational situation of GASA. Thus the
decision was made on March 25, 2002 to suspend payment of principal and interest
on its entire financial debt. From then on, Metrogas’ management has focused on
an efficient and rational use of its cash flow in order to be able to comply
with all of the legal requirements agreed with the Argentine government with
respect to its services. After negotiating a restructuring of its outstanding
debt with its creditors, GASA has reached and executed on December 7, 2005 an
agreement (the Master Restructuring Agreement, or “MRA”) with its creditors, by
which such creditors would exchange debt for equity in GASA and/or Metrogas.
After this exchange is completed, YPF Inversora Energética S.A. will hold a
31.7% stake in GASA. The agreement has been presented to the National Antitrust
Protection Board (Comisión
Nacional de Defensa de la Competencia
or “CNDC”) and the National Gas Regulatory Authority (Ente Nacional Regulador del Gas or “ENARGAS”) both Argentine
governmental entities, and is subject to their approval as condition precedent
to the closing of the MRA. The MRA included a creditors’ option to terminate
that agreement if, by December 7, 2006, the closing of the debt restructuring
had not occurred. While ENARGAS approval has been obtained, the CNDC has not yet
granted its approval, and the closing is still pending. As of the date of this
annual report, however, the creditors have not communicated their intention to
terminate the MRA.
At the
same time, Metrogas has reached an agreement with its main creditors in order to
restructure its financial debt and align its future financial commitments to the
expected generation of funds. The main objective of the restructuring process is
to modify certain terms and conditions included in its outstanding loans and
negotiable agreements by adjusting interest rates and the amortization period so
as to align them with the expected cash flow required for repayment of the
indebtedness. Accordingly, on April 20, 2006, Metrogas entered into an
out-of-court preventive agreement with creditors representing approximately 95%
of its unsecured indebtedness, which became effective in May 2006.
Refining
and Marketing
During
2007, our Refining and Marketing activities included crude oil refining and
transportation, and the marketing and transportation of refined fuels,
lubricants, LPG, compressed natural gas and other refined petroleum products in
the domestic wholesale and retail markets and certain export
markets.
The
Refining and Marketing segment is organized into the following
divisions:
·
|
Refining
and Logistic Division;
|
- Refining
Division
- Logistic
Division
·
|
Domestic
Marketing Division;
|
We market
a wide range of refined petroleum products throughout Argentina through an
extensive network of sales personnel, YPF-owned and independent distributors,
and a broad retail distribution system. In addition, we export refined products,
mainly from the port at La Plata. The refined petroleum products marketed by us
include gasoline, diesel, jet fuel, kerosene, heavy fuel oil and other crude oil
products, such as motor oils, industrial lubricants, LPG and
asphalts.
Refining
division
We wholly
own and operate three refineries in Argentina:
·
|
La
Plata Refinery, located in the province of Buenos
Aires;
|
·
|
Luján
de Cuyo Refinery, located in the province of Mendoza;
and
|
·
|
Plaza
Huincul Refinery, located in the province of Neuquén (together referred as
the “Refineries”).
|
Our three
wholly-owned refineries have an aggregate refining capacity of approximately
319,500 barrels per calendar day. The refineries are strategically located along
our crude oil pipeline and product pipeline distribution systems. In 2007, 82.0
% of the crude oil processed by our refineries was supplied by our upstream
operations. Through our stake in Refinor, we also own a 50% interest in a 26,100
barrel-per-calendar-day refinery located in the province of Salta, known as
Campo Durán.
The
following table sets forth the throughputs and production yields for our
refineries for each of the three years ended December 31, 2007:
|
|
For
the Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(millions
of barrels)
|
|
Throughput
crude/Feedstock
|
|
|
122.0 |
|
|
|
118.1 |
|
|
|
113.1 |
|
Production
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diesel
fuel
|
|
|
46.9 |
|
|
|
47.7 |
|
|
|
43.9 |
|
Gasoline
|
|
|
32.6 |
|
|
|
31.1 |
|
|
|
32.3 |
|
Jet
fuel
|
|
|
6.1 |
|
|
|
5.7 |
|
|
|
6.6 |
|
Base
oils
|
|
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
2.8 |
|
|
|
2.7 |
|
|
|
(thousands
of tons)
|
|
Fuel
oil
|
|
|
2,132 |
|
|
|
1,548 |
|
|
|
1,198 |
|
|
|
For
the Year Ended December 31,
|
|
Coke
|
|
|
919 |
|
|
|
929 |
|
|
|
967 |
|
LPG
|
|
|
607 |
|
|
|
595 |
|
|
|
596 |
|
Asphalt
|
|
|
201 |
|
|
|
186 |
|
|
|
204 |
|
In 2007,
overall volumes of crude oil / feedstock processed increased by 3.3% compared
with 2006, and sales volumes in foreign markets decreased 4.5% compared with
2006. In 2007, refinery capacity utilization reached over 100%, compared with
98.4% in 2006.
In 2006,
overall volumes of crude oil processed increased by 4.4% compared with 2005, and
volumes sales in foreign markets were 25% lower than in 2005. Refinery capacity
utilization in 2006 reached 98.4%, compared with 94.4% in 2005 and 93.1% in
2004.
The La
Plata refinery is the largest refinery in Argentina, with a capacity of 189,000
barrels of crude oil per calendar day. The refinery includes three distillation
units, two vacuum distillation units, two catalytic cracking units, two coking
units, a coker naphtha hydrotreater unit, a platforming unit, a gasoline
hydrotreater, a diesel fuel hydrofinishing unit, an isomerization unit, an FCC
(Fluid Cracking Catalysts) naphtha splitter and desulfuration unit, and a
lubricants complex. The refinery is located at the port in the city of La Plata,
in the province of Buenos Aires, approximately 60 kilometers from the City of
Buenos Aires. In 2007 the refinery processed approximately 192,500 barrels of
crude oil per calendar day. The capacity utilization rate at the La
Plata refinery for 2007 was 7.4% higher than in 2006. The capacity utilization
rate at the La Plata refinery for 2006 was 3.9% higher than in 2005. The crude
oil processed at the La Plata refinery comes mainly from our own production in
the Neuquina and Golfo San Jorge basins. Crude oil supplies for the La Plata
refinery are transported from the Neuquina basin by pipeline and from the Golfo
San Jorge basin by vessel, in each case to Puerto Rosales, and then by pipeline
from Puerto Rosales to the refinery.
In
September 2003, we commenced the construction of a new FCC naphtha splitter and
a desulfuration unit in the La Plata refinery, and in 2004, we commenced the
construction of a new naphtha splitter in the Luján de Cuyo refinery. Both
projects, which were completed during 2006, have allowed us to meet higher
technical requirements imposed by legislation in Argentina that limit the level
of sulfur in fuels (gasoline). In 2006, we began revamping the FCC unit in the
La Plata refinery and expect to finish during 2008. When completed, this project
will allow to us to process reduced crude for the first time in order to
increase the production of gasoline and diesel.
The Luján
de Cuyo refinery has an installed capacity of 105,500 barrels per calendar day,
the third largest capacity among Argentine refineries. The refinery includes two
distillation units, a vacuum distillation unit, two coking units, one catalytic
cracking unit, a platforming unit, a Methyl TerButil Eter (“MTBE”) unit, an
isomerization unit, an alkylation unit, a naphtha splitter, and hydrocracking
and hydrotreating units. In 2007, the refinery processed approximately
106,300 barrels of crude oil per calendar day. In 2007 the
capacity utilization rate was 2.5% lower than in 2006. The capacity utilization
rate for 2006 was 4.0% higher than in 2005. Because of its location in the
western province of Mendoza and its proximity to significant distribution
terminals owned by us, the Luján de Cuyo refinery has become the primary
facility responsible for providing the central provinces of Argentina with
petroleum products for domestic consumption. The Luján de Cuyo refinery receives
crude supplies from the Neuquina and Cuyana basins by pipeline directly into the
facility. Approximately 88% of the crude oil processed at the Luján de Cuyo
refinery is produced by us. Most of the crude oil purchased from
third parties comes from oil fields in Neuquén or in Mendoza.
The Plaza
Huincul refinery, located near the town of Plaza Huincul in the province of
Neuquén, has an installed capacity of 25,000 barrels per calendar day. In 2007,
the refinery processed approximately 27,100 barrels of crude oil per calendar
day. In 2007, the capacity utilization rate was 4.9% higher than in
2006. The capacity
utilization rate for 2006 was 8.7% higher than in 2005. The only products
currently produced commercially at the refinery are gasoline, diesel fuel and
jet fuel, which are sold primarily in nearby areas and in the southern regions
of Argentina. Heavier products, to the extent production exceeds local demand,
are blended with crude oil and transported by pipeline from the refinery to La
Plata refinery for further processing. The Plaza Huincul refinery receives its
crude
supplies
from the Neuquina basin by pipeline. Crude oil processed at the Plaza Huincul
refinery is mostly produced by us. In 2007, 24% of the refinery’s crude supplies
were purchased from third parties.
During
1997 and 1998, each of our refineries and our Applied Technology Center were
certified under ISO (International Organization for Standardization) 9002 and
ISO 14000 (environmental performance) and were recertified under ISO 9001
(version 2000) in 2003.
Capital
expenditures in 2007 for efficiency and environmental projects and other
improvements at the three refineries amounted to U.S.$74.8 million.
Logistic
division
Crude
oil and products transportation and storage
We have
available for our use a network of five major pipelines, two of which are wholly
owned by us. The crude oil transportation network includes nearly 2,700
kilometers of crude oil pipelines with approximately 640,000 barrels of
aggregate daily transportation capacity of refined products. We have total crude
oil tankage of approximately seven million barrels and maintain terminal
facilities at five Argentine ports.
Information
with respect to YPF’s interests in its network of crude oil pipelines is set
forth in the table below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Puesto
Hernández
|
|
Luján
de Cuyo Refinery
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
528 |
|
|
|
85,200 |
(3) |
Puerto
Rosales
|
|
La
Plata Refinery
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
585 |
|
|
|
316,000 |
|
La
Plata Refinery
|
|
Dock
Sud
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
106,000 |
|
Brandsen
|
|
Campana
|
|
|
30 |
% |
|
|
168 |
|
|
|
120,700 |
|
Puesto
Hernández/ P. Huincul/Allen
|
|
Puerto
Rosales
|
|
|
37 |
% |
|
|
888 |
(1) |
|
|
232,000 |
|
Puesto
Hernández
|
|
Concepción
(Chile)
|
|
|
36 |
% |
|
|
428 |
(2) |
|
|
114,000 |
|
|
(1)
|
Includes
two parallel pipelines of 513 kilometers each from Allen to Puerto
Rosales, with a combined daily throughput of 232,000
barrels.
|
|
(2)
|
This
pipeline ceased operating on December 29,
2005.
|
|
(3)
The incorporation of new pumps in 2007 allowed an
increase in the pumping volume of the Puesto Hernandez-Luján de Cuyo
pipeline.
|
We own two
crude oil pipelines in Argentina. One connects Puesto Hernández to the Luján de
Cuyo refinery (528 kilometers), and the other connects Puerto Rosales to the La
Plata refinery (585 kilometers ) and extends to Shell’s refinery in Dock Sud at
the Buenos Aires port (52 kilometers). We also own a plant for the storage and
distribution of crude oil in the northern province of Formosa with an operating
capacity of 19,000 cubic meters, and two tanks in the city of Berisso, in the
province of Buenos Aires, with 60,000 cubic meters of capacity. We own 37% of
Oleoductos del Valle S.A., operator of an 888-kilometer pipeline network, its
main pipeline being a double 513 kilometer pipeline that connects the Neuquina
basin and Puerto Rosales.
As of
December 31, 2007, we had a 36% interest in the 428-kilometer Transandean
pipeline, which transported crude oil from Argentina to Concepción in Chile.
This pipeline ceased operating on December 29, 2005, as a consequence of the
interruption of oil exports resulting from decreased production in the north of
the province of Neuquén. At present, the future of the pipeline is under
evaluation and the assets related to this pipeline were reduced to their
recovery value.
We also
own 33.15% of Terminales Marítimas Patagónicas S.A., operator of two storage and
port facilities: Caleta Córdova (province of Chubut), which has a capacity of
314,000 cubic meters, and Caleta Olivia (province of Santa Cruz), which has a
capacity of 246,000 cubic meters. We also have a 30% interest in Oiltanking
Ebytem S.A., operator of the maritime terminal of Puerto Rosales, which has a
capacity of 480,000 cubic meters, and of the crude oil pipeline that connect
Brandsen (60,000 cubic meters of storage capacity) to the ESSO refinery in
Campana (168 km), in the province of Buenos Aires.
In
Argentina, we also operate a network of multiple pipelines for the
transportation of refined products with a total length of 1,801 kilometers. We
also own 16 plants for the storage and distribution of refined products with an
approximate aggregate capacity of 983,620 cubic meters. Three of these plants
are annexed to the refineries of Luján de Cuyo, La Plata and Plaza Huincul. Ten
of these plants have maritime or river connections. We operate 53 airplane
refueling facilities (40 of them are wholly owned) with a capacity of 24,000
cubic meters, own 27 trucks, 112 suppliers and 16 dispensers. These facilities
provide a flexible countrywide distribution system and allow us to facilitate
exports to foreign markets, to the extent allowed pursuant to government
regulations. Products are shipped mainly by truck, ship or river
barge.
Domestic
marketing division
Through
our Marketing Division, we market gasoline, diesel fuel and other petroleum
products to retail and wholesale customers. We also sell convenience food
products through our service stations, although such sales do not account for a
material amount of our revenues.
In 2007,
retail, wholesale, lubricants and specialties and aviation sales reached
Ps.14,433 million, representing 59.4% of the Refining and Marketing segment’s
consolidated revenue, with Ps.7,332 million generated by retail
customers.
As of
December 31, 2007, the Marketing Division’s sales network in Argentina included
1,692 retail service stations (compared to 1,731 at December 31, 2006), of which
98 are directly owned by us, and the remaining 1,594 are affiliated service
stations. Operadora de
Estaciones de Servicio S.A. (“OPESSA”) (a wholly owned subsidiary of
ours), operates 162 of our retail service stations, 75 of which are directly
owned by us, 25 of which are leased to ACA (Automovil Club Argentino),
and 62 of which are leased to independent owners. Additionally, we have a 50%
interest in Refinor, which operates 77 retail service stations, 13 of which are
directly owned by Refinor. We will continue our efforts to eliminate
nonstrategic existing stations, and dealer-operated stations which do not comply
with the level of operational efficiency that we require.
We
estimate that, as of December 31, 2007 and as of December 31, 2006, our points
of sale accounted for 31.1% and 31.1% of the Argentine market,
respectively. In
Argentina, Shell, Petrobras and Esso are our main competitors and own
approximately 15.6%, 12.7% and 10.5%, respectively, of the points of sale in
Argentina, according to the latest information available to us. During 2007 all oil
companies decreased the number of their points of sales. Additionally, the
number of non-branded stations decreased substantially.
During
2007, we slightly decreased our market share in the diesel fuel and gasoline
markets from 54.8% to 54.7%, according to our analysis of data provided by the
Secretariat of Energy.
The “Red
XXI” marketing program, launched in October 1997, which has significantly
improved operational efficiency and provides us with immediate performance data
from each station, is aimed at connecting most of our service stations network.
As of December 31, 2007, 1,480 stations were linked to the Red XXI
system.
In 2007,
we launched the Escuela
Comercial YPF (YPF Business School), which focuses on performance,
employability, operational excellence and customer satisfaction. The YPF
Business School is aligned with our business strategy to promote a sense of
belonging and common vision shared by all the members of our business chain. In
2007, the YPF Business School had carried out 1,300 didactic activities, within
its four branches of study, involving 1,764 of our employees or business
partners (owned and branded service stations and distributors).
We began
an ISO 9001 certification process involving our gas station network in 1998.
Currently, we allow each gas station operator to certify its management system.
YPF-owned service stations have been certified under ISO 9001 and 14000
standards for the past ten years, and a small number of such service stations
have been certified under OHSAS (Occupational Health and Safety Assessment
Series) 18001 and ISO 22000 in the past two years.
Our sales
to the agricultural sector are principally conducted through a network of 133
distribution bases operated by 119 distributors (eight of which are owned by
us).
Sales to
transportation, industrial, utility, and mining sectors are made primarily
through our direct sales efforts. The main products sold in the domestic
wholesale market include diesel fuel and fuel oil. During 2006, the direct sales
unit has expanded its offering to the sale of products such as bags for storing
grains, fertilizers and glyphosate.
Sales to
the aviation sector are made directly by us. The products sold in this market
are jet fuel and aviation gasoline.
Our
lubricants and specialties unit markets a wide variety of products that includes
lubricants, greases, asphalt, paraffin, base lubricant, decanted oil, carbon
dioxide and coke. This unit is responsible for the production, distribution and
commercialization of the products in the domestic and exports markets. These
operations are ISO 9001: 2000 and Tierra 16949 certified. The lubricants
production facilities are also ISO 14001 certified.
During
2007, our lubricants and specialties sales to domestic markets increased by 10%
from 1,216 million in 2006 to Ps.1,335 million in 2007. We export lubricants to
20 countries, including the United States. Sales to export markets increased by
10% from Ps.212 million in 2006 to Ps.234 million in 2007. During 2007, total
lubricants sales increased by 20%, total asphalt sales increased by 8% and total
derivatives sales increased by 7%.
In a
market of increasing costs, the strategy of differentiation followed by our
lubricants and specialties unit allowed it to maintain its position of
leadership in the Argentine market despite experiencing a slightly decreased
market share, from 36.9% in 2006 to 36.4% in 2007. Lead domestic automotive
manufacturers Ford, VW, Scania, Seat, Porsche and General Motors, which
represent more than 60% of the automotive industry in Argentina, exclusively use
and recommend YPF-branded lubricant products.
With
respect to biofuels, our main objectives in this area are to secure our biofuel
needs for the domestic market and to create associations for the production and
marketing of biofuels in light of Argentina’s potential as a biofuels exporter
to the European Union and other international markets.
In January
2010, every oil company in Argentina will be obligated under Argentine law (Law
26,093) to blend all fuels with 5% of biofuels.
In
addition, and in line with our commitment to the environment and the development
of alternative fuels, we have launched the Bioenergy Program 2007-2010 through
the Biofuels Unit under its Lubricants and Specialties Division. This nationwide
research and development program is being developed together with a university
and other official entities with the objective of developing alternative crops
to be used in the production of biofuels, thereby also promoting development in
regional economies in Argentina.
Trading
division
Our
Trading Division sells crude oil and refined products to international customers
and oil to domestic oil companies. Sales to international companies for the
years 2007 and 2006 totaled Ps.4,664 million (U.S.$1,495 million) and Ps.4,945
million (U.S.$1,606 million), respectively, 90% and 80% of which,
respectively, represented sales of refined products, 2% and 12% of
which, respectively, represented crude oil deliveries and the remaining 8% of
which (for both years) represented sales of marine fuels. On a volume basis,
sales consisted of 2.68 million and 5.50 million barrels of crude oil, 14.7
million and 21.2 million barrels of refined products and 1.42 million and 1.67
million barrels of marine fuels, respectively. Exports include crude oil,
unleaded gasoline, diesel fuel, fuel oil, liquefied petroleum gases, light
naphtha and virgin naphtha. This Division’s export sales are made principally to
the United States, Brazil and Mexico. Domestic sales of crude oil reached Ps.438
million (U.S.$140 million) and Ps.677 million (U.S.$221 million), and 3,45
million and 5.6 million barrels in the years 2007 and 2006, respectively.
Domestic sales of marine fuels, reached Ps.255 million (U.S.$82 million) and
Ps.258 million (U.S.$84 million), and 1.3 and 1.5 million barrels,
respectively.
LPG
general division
Production
We are one
of the largest LPG producers in Argentina, with a yearly production
of 789,011 tons in 2007 (including 260,754 tons of LPG
destined for petrochemical usage).
We also
have a 50% interest in Refinor, a jointly-controlled company, which produced
365,464 tons of LPG in 2007.
The LPG
division obtains LPG from natural gas processing plants and from its refineries
and petrochemical plant. It also purchases LPG from third parties as detailed in
the following table:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LPG from Natural Gas Processing
Plants:(1)
|
|
|
|
General
Cerri
|
|
|
13,983 |
|
Filo
Morado
|
|
|
14,022 |
|
El
Portón
|
|
|
124,851 |
|
San
Sebastián
|
|
|
16,311 |
|
Total
Upstream
|
|
|
169,167 |
|
LPG
from Refineries and Petrochemical Plants:
|
|
|
|
|
La
Plata Refinery
|
|
|
247,238 |
|
Luján
de Cuyo Refinery
|
|
|
93,079 |
|
Ensenada
Petrochemical Plant
|
|
|
18,773 |
|
Total
Refineries & Petrochemical Plants(2)
|
|
|
359,090 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
LPG purchased from jointly
controlled companies:(3)
|
|
|
125,539 |
|
LPG
purchased from unrelated parties (4)
|
|
|
69,456 |
|
Total
|
|
|
723,252 |
|
(1)
|
The
San Sebastian plant is a joint-venture in which we own a 30% interest; El
Portón is 100% owned by us; General Cerri belongs to a third party with
which we have a processing agreement. Filo Morado comprises assets that
are operated by us.
|
(2)
|
This
production is net of 260,754 tons of LPG used as petrochemical feedstock
(olefins derivatives, polybutenes and
maleic).
|
(3)
|
Purchased
from Refinor.
|
(4)
|
Includes
imports of 24,167 tons of LPG
|
LPG
marketing
We sell
LPG to the foreign market, the domestic wholesale market and to distributors
that supply the domestic retail market. The LPG general division does not
directly supply the retail market and such market is supplied by Repsol YPF Gas,
which is not a YPF company.
Our LPG
sales for the years 2007 and 2006 can be broken down by market as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(tons)
|
|
Domestic
market
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retail
to related parties under common control
|
|
|
245,429 |
|
|
|
237,362 |
|
Other
bottlers/propane network distributors
|
|
|
106,608 |
|
|
|
105,000 |
|
Other
wholesales
|
|
|
101,877 |
|
|
|
79,813 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign
market/exports
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exports
|
|
|
247,115 |
|
|
|
359,501 |
|
Total
sales
|
|
|
701,029 |
|
|
|
781,676 |
|
Total
sales of LPG (excluding LPG used as petrochemical feedstock) to all markets
(domestic and foreign markets combined) were Ps.889 million and Ps.820 million
in 2007 and in 2006, respectively.
Chemicals
In 2007
and 2006, our revenues from chemical sales were Ps.3,455 million and Ps.3,048
million, respectively, and our operating income of the Chemicals segment was
Ps.500 million and Ps.572 million, respectively.
Petrochemicals
are produced at five different facilities at our petrochemical complexes in
Ensenada and Plaza Huincul.
Our
petrochemical production operations in Ensenada are closely integrated with our
refining activities (La Plata Refinery). This close integration allows for a
flexible supply of feedstock, the efficient use of byproducts (such as hydrogen)
and others synergies.
The main
petrochemical products and production capacity per year are as
follows:
|
|
|
|
Ensenada:
|
|
(tons
per year)
|
|
Aromatics
|
|
|
|
BTX
(Benzene, Toluene, Mixed Xylenes)
|
|
|
244,000 |
|
Paraxylene
|
|
|
38,000 |
|
Orthoxylene
|
|
|
25,000 |
|
Cyclohexane
|
|
|
95,000 |
|
Solvents
|
|
|
66,100 |
|
Olefins
Derivatives
|
|
|
|
|
MTBE
|
|
|
60,000 |
|
Butene
I
|
|
|
25,000 |
|
Oxoalcohols
|
|
|
35,000 |
|
TAME
|
|
|
105,000 |
|
LAB/LAS
|
|
|
|
|
LAB
|
|
|
52,000 |
|
LAS
|
|
|
25,000 |
|
Polybutenes
|
|
|
|
|
PIB
|
|
|
26,000 |
|
Maleic
|
|
|
|
|
Maleic
Anhydride
|
|
|
17,500 |
|
Plaza
Huincul:
|
|
|
|
|
Methanol
|
|
|
411,000 |
|
Natural gas, the raw material for
methanol, is supplied by our upstream unit. The use of natural gas as a raw material
allows us to monetize reserves, demonstrating the integration between the
petrochemical and the upstream units.
We also use high carbon dioxide-content
natural gas in our methanol production. We completed a project for the treatment
and conditioning of natural gas in Sierra Barrosa for this purpose. This project
was completed in record time (commenced in August 2006 and completed in June
2007), allowing us to keep our methanol plant working at 50% of its production
capacity during the winter period. The project enables us to process high carbon
dioxide-content natural gas that could have not been otherwise
commercialized.
The raw materials for petrochemical
production in Ensenada, including virgin naphtha, propane,
butane and kerosene, are supplied mainly by the La Plata refinery.
In 2007 and 2006, 57% and 50%, respectively, of our petrochemicals
sales were made in the
domestic market and 43% and 50%, respectively, were made in the export market. During 2007, the
petrochemicals exports were destined to Mercosur
countries, Latin America, Europe, and the United States.
We also
participate in the fertilizer business directly and through Profertil, our
50%-owned subsidiary.
Profertil
is jointly controlled by us and Agrium (a worldwide leader in fertilizers), that
produces urea and ammonia and started operations in 2001. We are Profertil’s
principal supplier of natural gas, supplying approximately 29% of Profertil’s
feedstock.
Our
Ensenada petrochemical plant was certified under ISO 9001 in 1996 and
recertified in October 2007. The La Plata petrochemical plant was certified
under ISO 14001 in 2001 and recertified (version 2004) in October 2007. The
plant was also certified under OHSAS 18001 in 2005 and recertified in October
2007.
Our
Methanol plant was certified under ISO 9001 (version 2000) and under ISO 14001
(Version 2000) in October 2007.
Repsol
YPF’s presence has strengthened our position in the global markets, improving
our access to these markets due to a better negotiating position derived from
Repsol YPF’s ability to offer a more complete portfolio of products and a sales
force of its own, now located in regions previously served only by
distributors.
Research
and Development
We have a
research and development facility in La Plata, Argentina, which works in
cooperation with research and development activities of Repsol YPF. To carry out
research and development programs of mutual interest, Repsol YPF maintains
different cooperation agreements with universities, companies and other
technological centers, both public and private. In 2007, Repsol YPF spent more
than U.S.$12 million under these agreements (240 of which were in
place).
Repsol YPF
participates actively in the research and development programs sponsored by
different government administrations, taking part during 2007 in 19 projects
sponsored by the Spanish Administration and in seven European Union
projects.
The
research and development projects and activities apply to the entire value chain
of the business – including exploration of new deposits of crude or gas,
extraction and conditioning for transportation, transformation and manufacture
of products at industrial complexes, and distribution to the end customer.
Repsol YPF’s two technology centers, one in Spain (Móstoles) and another in
Argentina (La Plata), together employ a total of 450 people. In 2007, the Repsol
YPF Technology Unit allocated U.S.$96 million to the activity, to which another
U.S.$9 million were added in projects executed through the business
units.
In the
Hydrocarbon Exploration and Production area, the projects are focused towards
three main objectives: (i) increasing the production of crude oil and gas
towards improving the petroleum recovery factor (both for heavy and
extra-heavy
crudes, as well as for conventional ones); (ii) exploiting natural gas reserves
through the liquefied natural gas chain and other alternatives; and (iii)
reducing the environmental impact of operations and optimizing production and
decreasing operating costs.
In
Petroleum Product Refinery and Marketing, the Technology Unit provides
specialized technological support to the refineries to produce gasoline and gas
oil of the best quality, complying ahead of time with the requirements of
international standards. In addition, new products are also being developed,
such as bio-fuels or better performing lubricants and asphalts.
In
Petrochemicals, Repsol YPF continued its significant effort with resources
geared toward the consolidation of the proprietary technology developed in the
last few years.
Repsol YPF
develops its own technology when it has a competitive advantage and acquires
available technology (optimizing and adapting them for the markets in which it
competes) when it proves to be more advantageous to its business goals. Repsol
YPF’s goal is to increase the collaboration with the surrounding technological
environment, universities and centers of public investigation, as well as with
other companies, for a better use of and flexibility in the employment of
resources and to decrease the risks in those areas in which it is
involved.
Competition
The
deregulation and privatization process created a competitive environment in the
Argentine oil and gas industry. In our Exploration and Production business, we
encounter competition from major international oil companies and other domestic
oil companies in acquiring exploration permits and production concessions. Our
Exploration and Production business may also encounter competition from oil and
gas companies created and owned by certain Argentine provinces, including La
Pampa, Neuquén and Chubut, as well as from ENARSA, the Argentine state-owned
energy company, especially in light of the recent transfer of hydrocarbon
properties to ENARSA and the provinces described under “Item 4. Information on
the Company—Regulatory Framework and Relationship with the Argentine
Government—Law No. 26,197.” In our Refining and Marketing and Chemicals
businesses, we face competition from several major international oil companies,
such as Esso (a subsidiary of ExxonMobil), Shell and Petrobras, as well as
several domestic oil companies. In our export markets, we compete with numerous
oil companies and trading companies in global markets.
We operate
in a dynamic market in the Argentine downstream industry and the crude oil and
natural gas production industry. Crude oil and most refined products prices are
subject to international supply and demand and Argentine regulations and,
accordingly, may fluctuate for a variety of reasons. Some of the prices in the
internal market are controlled by local authorities. See “Item 4. Information on
the Company—Regulatory Framework and Relationship with the Argentine
Government.” Changes in the domestic and international prices of crude oil and
refined products have a direct effect on our results of operations and on our
levels of capital expenditures. See “Item 3. Key Information—Risk Factors— Risks
Relating to the Argentine Oil and Gas Business and Our Business—Oil and gas
prices could affect our level of capital expenditures.”
Environmental
Matters
YPF
– Argentine operations
Our
operations are subject to a wide range of laws and regulations relating to the
general impact of industrial operations on the environment, including emissions
into the air and water, the disposal or remediation of soil or water
contaminated with hazardous or toxic waste, fuel specifications to address air
emissions and the effect of the environment on health and safety. We have made
and will continue to make expenditures to comply with these laws and
regulations. In Argentina, local, provincial and national authorities are moving
toward more stringent enforcement of applicable laws. In addition, since 1997,
Argentina has been implementing regulations that require
our
operations to meet stricter environmental standards that are comparable in many
respects to those in effect in the United States and in countries within the
European Community. These regulations establish the general framework for
environmental protection requirements, including the establishment of fines and
criminal penalties for their violation. We have undertaken measures to achieve
compliance with these standards and are undertaking various abatement and
remediation projects, the more significant of which are discussed below. We
cannot predict what environmental legislation or regulation will be enacted in
the future or how existing or future laws will be administered or enforced.
Compliance with more stringent laws or regulations, as well as more vigorous
enforcement policies of regulatory agencies, could require additional
expenditures in the future by us for the installation and operation of systems
and equipment for remedial measures and could affect our operations generally.
In addition, violations of these laws and regulations may result in the
imposition of administrative or criminal fines or penalties and may lead to
personal injury claims or other tort liabilities.
In 2007,
we continued to make investments in order to comply with new Argentine fuel
specifications that are expected to come into effect between 2008 and 2016,
pursuant to Resolution No. 1283/06 of the Secretariat of Energy (which replaces
the Resolution No. 398/03) relating, among other things, to the purity of diesel
fuels. In addition, we have completed basic engineering studies and begun
detailed engineering studies for the construction of diesel fuel oil
desulfuration units at La Plata and Luján de Cuyo refineries. These projects
have been delayed due to the postponement of the implementation of fuel
specification regulations. We currently plan to invest a total of approximately
U.S.$795 million between 2008 and 2012 to comply with the above-mentioned
gasoline quality environmental specifications.
At each of
our refineries, we are performing, on a voluntary basis, remedial investigations
and feasibility studies and pollution abatement projects, which are designed to
address liquid effluent discharges and air emissions. In addition, we have
implemented an environmental management system to assist our efforts to collect
and analyze environmental data in its upstream and downstream
operations.
In
addition to the projects related to the new specification standards mentioned
above, we have begun to implement a broad range of environmental projects in the
Domestic Exploration and Production and Refining and Marketing and Chemical
segments. Capital expenditures for those environmental projects associated with
Refining and Marketing segment’s projects during 2007 were approximately U.S.$62
million. The primary projects at La Plata include installation of separation and
water treatment systems to replace existing systems, air pollution control
devices, flare gas recovery systems, hydrocarbon recovery systems, double
bottoms in several tanks and site remediation. In addition, during 2007, the
storage facilities at certain service stations were replaced by new and safer
technologies, such as double wall tanks, and hot oil furnaces were replaced by
gas boilers.
Capital
expenditures associated with Domestic Exploration and Production environmental
projects during 2007 were approximately U.S.$151 million and included oil and
gas recovery systems, flowlines and components construction, and remediation of
well sites, tank batteries and oil spills in the gathering systems of fields.
Expenditures will also be made to improve technical assistance and training and
to establish environmental contamination remediation plans, air emissions
monitoring plans and ground water investigation and monitoring
programs.
We and
several other industrial companies operating in the La Plata area have entered
into a community emergency response agreement with three municipalities and
local hospitals, firefighters and other health and safety service providers to
implement an emergency response program. This program is intended to prevent
damages and losses resulting from accidents and emergencies, including
environmental emergencies. Similar projects and agreements were developed at
other refineries as well.
In 1991,
we entered into an agreement (Convenio de Cooperación
Interempresarial, or “CCI”) with certain other oil and gas companies to
implement a plan to reduce and assess environmental damage resulting from oil
spills in Argentine waters to reduce the environmental impact of potential oil
spills offshore. This agreement involves consultation on technological matters
and mutual assistance in the event of any oil spills in rivers or at sea due to
accidents involving tankers or offshore exploration and production
facilities.
Regarding
climate change, we have been developing a strategy since 2002 to address the
requirements of the Kyoto Protocol. The main elements of this plan are the
following:
·
|
actively
promote the identification and pursuit of opportunities to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions within our operations. For that, we take into
account the cost of carbon in our business decisions;
and
|
·
|
intensify
the execution of internal projects for generating credit by the clean
development mechanisms that help our parent company, Repsol YPF, meet its
obligations. We collaborate with competent authorities from the countries
in which we operate, in particular the Argentina Clean Development
Mechanism Office (“OAMDL”).
|
Our
estimated capital expenditures and future investments are based on currently
available information and on current laws, and future changes in laws or
technology could cause a revision of such estimates. In addition, while we do
not expect environmental expenditures to have a significant impact on our future
results of operations, changes in management’s business plans or in Argentine
laws and regulations may cause expenditures to become material to our financial
position, and may affect results of operations in any given year.
YPF
Holdings—Operations in the United States
Laws and
regulations relating to health and environmental quality in the United States
affect YPF Holdings’ operations in the United States. See “Item 4.
Information on the Company—Regulatory Framework and Relationship with the
Argentine Government—U.S. Environmental Regulations.”
In
connection with the sale of Diamond Shamrock Chemicals Company (“Chemicals”) to
a subsidiary of Occidental Petroleum Corporation (“Occidental”) in 1986, Maxus
agreed to indemnify Chemicals and Occidental from and against certain
liabilities relating to the business and activities of Chemicals prior to the
September 4, 1986 closing date (the “Closing Date”), including certain
environmental liabilities relating to certain chemical plants and waste disposal
sites used by Chemicals prior to the Closing Date.
In
addition, under the agreement pursuant to which Maxus sold Chemicals to
Occidental, Maxus is obligated to indemnify Chemicals and Occidental for certain
environmental costs incurred on projects involving remedial activities relating
to chemical plant sites or other property used to conduct Chemicals’ business as
of the Closing Date and for any period of time following the Closing Date which
relate to, result from or arise out of conditions, events or circumstances
discovered by Chemicals and as to which Chemicals provided written notice prior
to September 4, 1996, irrespective of when Chemicals incurs and gives notice of
such costs.
Tierra
Solutions Inc. (“Tierra”) was formed to deal with the results of the alleged
obligations of Maxus, as described above, resulting from actions or facts that
occurred primarily between the 1940s and 1970s while Chemicals was controlled by
other companies.
See “Item
8. Financial Information—Legal Proceedings—YPF Holdings” below for a description
of environmental matters in connection with YPF Holdings.
Property,
Plant and Equipment
Most of
our property, consisting of interests in crude oil and natural gas reserves,
refineries, storage, manufacturing and transportation facilities and service
stations, is located in Argentina. We also own property in the United States.
See “—Exploration and Production—Principal properties—International
properties—United States.”
There are
several classes of property which we do not own in fee. Our petroleum
exploration and production rights are in general based on sovereign grants of
concession. Upon the expiration of the concession, our exploration and
production assets associated with the particular property subject to the
relevant concession revert to the government. In addition, as of December 31,
2007, we leased 87 service stations to third parties and also had activities
with service stations that are owned by third parties and operated by them under
a supply contract with us for the distribution of our products.
Regulatory
Framework and Relationship with the Argentine
Government
Overview
The
Argentine oil and gas industry is currently subject to certain policies and
regulations that have resulted in domestic prices that are substantially lower
than prevailing international market prices, export restrictions, domestic
supply requirements that oblige us from time to time to divert supplies from the
export or industrial markets in order to meet domestic consumer demand, and
increasingly heavy export duties on the volumes of hydrocarbons allowed to be
exported. These governmental pricing limitations, export controls and tax
policies have been implemented in an effort to satisfy increasing domestic
market demand at prices below international market prices.
The
Argentine oil and gas industry is regulated by Law No. 17,319, referred to as
the “Hydrocarbons Law,” which was adopted in 1967 and amended by Law No. 26,197
in 2007, which established the general legal framework for the exploration and
production of oil and gas, and Law No. 24,076, referred to as the “Natural Gas
Law,” enacted in 1992, which established the basis for deregulation of natural
gas transportation and distribution industries.
The
executive branch of the Argentine government issues the regulations to
complement these laws. The regulatory framework of the Hydrocarbons Law was
established on the assumption that the reservoirs of hydrocarbons would be
national properties and Yacimientos Petrolíferos Fiscales Sociedad del Estado,
our predecessor, would lead the oil and gas industry and operate under a
different framework than private companies. In 1992, Law No. 24,145, referred to
as the “Privatization Law,” privatized YPF and provided for transfer of
hydrocarbon reservoirs from the Argentine government to the provinces, subject
to the existing rights of the holders of exploration permits and production
concessions.
The
Privatization Law granted us 24 exploration permits covering approximately
132,735 square kilometers and 50 production concessions covering approximately
32,560 square kilometers. The Hydrocarbons Law limits to five the number of
concessions that may be held by any one entity, and also limits the total area
of exploration permits that may be granted to a single entity. Based on our
interpretation of the law, we were exempted from such limit with regard to the
exploration permits and production concessions awarded to us by the
Privatization Law. Nevertheless, the National Department of Economy of
Hydrocarbons (Dirección
Nacional de Economía de los Hidrocarburos), applying a restrictive
interpretation of Section 25 and 34 of the Hydrocarbons Law, has objected to the
award of new exploration permits and production concessions in which we have a
100% interest. As a result, our ability to acquire
100% of new exploration permits and/or production concessions has been hindered,
although this interpretation has not impeded our ability to acquire any permits
or concessions where an interest is also granted to other parties. As a
consequence of the transfer of ownership of certain hydrocarbons areas to the
provinces, we participate in competitive bidding rounds organized since the year
2000 by several provincial governments for the award of contracts for the
exploration of hydrocarbons.
In October
2004, the Argentine Congress enacted Law No. 25,943 creating a new state-owned
energy company, Energía Argentina S.A. The corporate purpose of ENARSA is the
exploration and exploitation of solid, liquid and gaseous hydrocarbons, the
transport, storage, distribution, commercialization and industrialization of
these products, as well as the transportation and distribution of natural
gas, and the
generation, transportation, distribution and sale of electricity. Moreover, Law
No. 25,943 granted to ENARSA all exploration concessions in respect to offshore
areas located beyond 12 nautical miles from the coast line up to the outer
boundary of the continental shelf that were vacant at the time of the
effectiveness of this law (i.e., November 3, 2004).
In
addition, in October 2006, Law No. 26,154 created a regime of tax incentives
aimed at encouraging hydrocarbon exploration and which apply to new exploration
permits awarded in respect of the offshore areas granted to ENARSA and those
over which no rights have been granted to third parties under the Hydrocarbons
Law, provided the provinces in which the hydrocarbon reservoirs are located
adhere to this regime. Association with ENARSA is a precondition to qualifying
for the benefits provided by the regime created by Law No. 26,154. The benefits
include: early reimbursement of the value added tax for investments made and
expenses incurred during the exploration period and for investments made within
the production period; accelerated amortization of investments
made in
the exploration period and the accelerated recognition of expenses in connection
with production over a period of three years rather than over the duration of
production; and exemptions to the payment of import duties for capital assets
not manufactured within Argentina. As of the date of this annual report, we have
not used the tax incentives previously mentioned.
Ownership
of hydrocarbons reserves was transferred to the provinces through the enactment
of the following legal provisions that effectively amended the Hydrocarbons
Law:
·
|
In
1992, the Privatization Law approved the transfer of the ownership of
hydrocarbons reserves to the provinces where they are located. However,
this law provided that the transfer was conditioned on the enactment of a
law amending the Hydrocarbons Law to contemplate the privatization of
Yacimientos Petrolíferos Fiscales Sociedad del
Estado.
|
·
|
In
October 1994, the Argentine National Constitution was amended and pursuant
to Article 124 thereof, provinces were granted the primary control of
natural resources within their
territories.
|
·
|
In
August 2003, Executive Decree No. 546/03 transferred to the provinces the
right to grant exploration permits, hydrocarbons exploitation and
transportation concessions in certain locations designated as “transfer
areas,” as well as in other areas designated by the competent provincial
authorities.
|
·
|
In
January 2007, Law No. 26,197 acknowledged the provinces’ ownership of the
hydrocarbon reservoirs in accordance with Article 124 of the National
Constitution (including reservoirs to which concessions were granted prior
to 1994) and granted provinces the right to administer such
reservoirs.
|
Law
No. 26,197
Law No.
26,197, which amended the Hydrocarbons Law, transferred to the provinces and the
City of Buenos Aires the ownership over all hydrocarbon reservoirs located
within their territories and in the adjacent seas up to 12 nautical miles from
the coast. Law No. 26,197 also provides that the hydrocarbon reservoirs located
beyond 12 nautical miles from the coast to the outer limit of the continental
shelf shall remain within the ownership of the federal government.
Pursuant
to Law No. 26,197, the Argentine Congress shall continue to enact laws and
regulations to develop oil and gas resources existing within all of the
Argentine territory (including its sea), but the governments of the provinces
where the hydrocarbon reservoirs are located shall be responsible for the
enforcement of these laws and regulations, the administration of the hydrocarbon
fields and shall act as granting authorities for the exploration permits and
production concessions. However, the administrative powers granted to the
provinces shall be exercised within the framework of the Hydrocarbons Law and
the regulations which complement this law.
Consequently,
even though Law No. 26,197 established that the provinces shall be responsible
for administering the hydrocarbon fields, the Argentine Congress retained its
power to issue rules and regulations regarding the oil and gas legal framework.
Additionally, the Argentine government retained the power to determine the
national energy policy.
It is
expressly stated that the transfer will not affect the rights and obligations of
exploration permit and production concession holders, or the basis for the
calculation of royalties, which shall be calculated in accordance with the
concession title and paid to the province where the reservoirs are
located.
Law No.
26,197 provides that the Argentine government shall retain the authority to
grant transportation concessions for: (i) transportation concessions located
within two or more provinces territory and (ii) transportation concessions
directly connected to export pipelines for export purposes. Consequently,
transportation concessions which are located within the territory of only one
province and which are not connected to export facilities shall be transferred
to the provinces.
Finally,
Law No. 26,197 grants the following powers to the provinces: (i) the exercise in
a complete and independent manner of all activities related to the supervision
and control of the exploration permits and production
concessions
transferred by Law No. 26,197; (ii) the enforcement of all applicable legal
and/or contractual obligations regarding investments, rational production and
information and surface fee and royalties payment; (iii) the extension of legal
and/or contractual terms; (iv) the application of sanctions provided in the
Hydrocarbons Law; and (v) all the other faculties related to the granting power
of the Hydrocarbons Law.
Public
Emergency
On January
6, 2002, the Argentine Congress enacted Law No. 25,561, the Public Emergency and
Foreign Exchange System Reform Law (“Public Emergency Law”), which represented a
profound change of the economic model effective as of that date, and rescinded
the Convertibility Law No. 23,928, which had been in effect since 1991 and had
pegged the peso to the dollar on a one-to-one basis. In addition, the Public
Emergency Law granted the executive branch of the Argentine government authority
to enact all necessary regulations in order to overcome the economic crisis in
which Argentina was then immersed.
After the
enactment of the Public Emergency Law, several other laws and regulations have
been enacted. The following are the most significant measures enacted to date in
Argentina to overcome the economic crisis:
·
|
Conversion
into pesos of (i) all funds deposited in financial institutions at an
exchange rate of Ps.1.40 for each U.S.$1.00 and (ii) all obligations
(e.g., loans) with financial institutions denominated in foreign currency
and governed by Argentine law at an exchange rate of Ps.1.00 for each
U.S.$1.00. The deposits and obligations converted into pesos would be
thereafter adjusted by a reference stabilization index, the Coeficiente de Estabilidad de
Referencia (“CER”), to be published by the Argentine Central Bank.
Obligations governed by non-Argentine law have not been converted to pesos
under the new laws. Substantially all of our dollar-denominated debt is
governed by non-Argentine law.
|
·
|
Conversion
into pesos at an exchange rate of Ps.1.00 for each U.S.$1.00 of all
obligations outstanding among private parties at January 6, 2002 that are
governed by Argentine law and payable in foreign currency. The obligations
so converted into pesos would be adjusted through the CER index, as
explained above. In the case of non-financial obligations, if as a result
of the mandatory conversion into pesos the resulting intrinsic value of
goods or services that are the object of the obligation are higher or
lower than their price expressed in pesos, either party may request an
equitable adjustment of the price. If they cannot agree on such equitable
price adjustment, either party may resort to the courts. Executive Decree
No. 689/02 established an exception to the Public Emergency Law and
regulations and provides that the prices of long-term natural gas sale and
transportation agreements executed before the enactment of the Decree and
denominated in U.S. dollars will not be converted into pesos (Ps.1.00 for
each U.S.$1.00) when the natural gas is
exported.
|
·
|
Conversion
into pesos at an exchange rate of Ps.1.00 for each U.S.$1.00 of all
tariffs of public services, the elimination of the adjustment of tariffs
by foreign indexes such as the Purchaser Price Index (PPI)/Consumer Price
Index (CPI) index, and the imposition of a period of renegotiation with
the governmental authorities
thereafter.
|
·
|
Imposition
of customs duties on the export of hydrocarbons with instructions to the
executive branch of the Argentine government to set the applicable rate
thereof. See also “—Taxation”
below.
|
Exploration
and Production
The
Hydrocarbons Law establishes the basic legal framework for the regulation of oil
and gas exploration and production in Argentina. The Hydrocarbons Law empowers
the executive branch of the Argentine government to establish a national policy
for development of Argentina’s hydrocarbon reserves, with the principal purpose
of satisfying domestic demand.
Pursuant
to the Hydrocarbons Law, exploration and production of oil and gas is carried
out through exploration permits, production concessions, exploitation contracts
or partnership agreements. The Hydrocarbons Law also permits surface
reconnaissance of territory not covered by exploration permits or production
concessions upon
authorization
of the Secretariat of Energy and/or competent provincial authorities, as
established by Law No. 26,197, and with permission of the private property
owner. Information obtained as a result of surface reconnaissance must be
provided to the Secretariat of Energy and/or competent provincial authorities,
which may not disclose this information for two years without permission of the
party who conducted the reconnaissance, except in connection with the grant of
exploration permits or production concessions.
Under the
Hydrocarbons Law, the federal and/or competent provincial authorities may grant
exploration permits after submission of competitive bids. Permits granted to
third parties in connection with the deregulation and demonopolization process
were granted in accordance with procedures specified in Executive Decrees No.
1055/89, 1212/89 and 1589/89 (the “Oil Deregulation Decrees”), and permits
covering areas in which our predecessor company, Yacimientos Petrolíferos
Fiscales S.A., was operating at the date of the Privatization Law and that were
granted to us by such law. In 1991, the executive branch of the Argentine
government established a program under the Hydrocarbons Law (known as Plan Argentina) pursuant to
which exploration permits were auctioned. The holder of an exploration permit
has the exclusive right to perform the operations necessary or appropriate for
the exploration of oil and gas within the area specified by the permit. Each
exploration permit may cover only unproved areas not to exceed 10,000 square
kilometers (15,000 square kilometers offshore), and may have a term of up to 14
years (17 years for offshore exploration). The 14-year term is divided into
three basic terms and one extension term. The first basic term is up to four
years, the second basic term is up to three years, the third basic term is up to
two years and the extension term is up to five years. At the expiration of each
of the first two basic terms, the acreage covered by the permit is reduced, at a
minimum, to 50% of the remaining acreage covered by the permit, with the permit
holder deciding which portion of the acreage to keep. At the expiration of the
three basic terms, the permit holder is required to revert all of the remaining
acreage to the Argentine government, unless the holder requests an extension
term, in which case such grant is limited to 50% of the remaining
acreage.
If the
holder of an exploration permit discovers commercially exploitable quantities of
oil or gas, the holder has the right to obtain an exclusive concession for the
production and development of this oil and gas. The Hydrocarbons Law provides
that oil and gas production concessions shall remain in effect for 25 years as
from the date of the award of the production concession, in addition to any
remaining exploration term at the date of such award. The Hydrocarbons Law
further provides for the concession term to be extended for up to 10 additional
years, subject to terms and conditions approved by the grantor at the time of
the extension. Under Law No. 26,197, the authority to extend the terms of
current and new permits and concessions and has been vested in the governments
of the provinces in which the relevant block is located (and the Argentine
government in respect of offshore blocks beyond 12 nautical miles). In order to
be entitled to the extension, a concessionaire, such as us, must have complied
with all of its obligations under the Hydrocarbons Law, including, without
limitation, evidence of payment of taxes and royalties and compliance with
environmental, investment and development obligations. Upon the expiration of
the 10-year extension period of the current concessions, the provinces are
entitled to award new concessions or contracts in respect of the relevant
blocks.
A
production concession also confers on the holder the right to conduct all
activities necessary or appropriate for the production of oil and gas, provided
that such activities do not interfere with the activities of other holders of
exploration permits and production concessions. A production concession entitles
the holder to obtain a transportation concession for the oil and gas produced.
See “—Transportation of Liquid Hydrocarbons” below.
Exploration
permits and production concessions require holders to carry out all necessary
work to find or extract hydrocarbons, using appropriate techniques, and to make
specified investments. In addition, holders are required to:
·
|
avoid
damage to oil fields and waste of
hydrocarbons;
|
·
|
adopt
adequate measures to avoid accidents and damage to agricultural
activities, fishing industry, communications networks and the water table;
and
|
·
|
comply
with all applicable federal, provincial and municipal laws and
regulations.
|
According
to the Hydrocarbons Law, holders of production concessions, including us, also
are required to pay royalties to the province where production occurs. A 12%
royalty is payable on the value at the wellhead (equal to the price upon
delivery of the product, less transportation, treatment costs and other
deductions) of crude oil production and the natural gas volumes commercialized.
The value is calculated based upon the volume and the sale price of the crude
oil and gas produced, less the costs of transportation and storage. In addition,
if a concession holder allots crude oil production for further industrialization
processes at its plants, the concession holder is required to agree with the
provincial authorities or the Secretariat of Energy, as applicable, on the
reference price to be used for purposes of calculating royalties.
However,
in January 2008, the Secretariat of Energy passed Disposition No. 1, which
provided guidelines for the calculation of royalties. Disposition No. 1 sets a
minimum reference price for the calculation of royalties and does not permit
downward adjustments of this price based upon the quality of crude oil. As a
result, the reference price for some of our production calculated according to
Disposition No. 1 is approximately U.S.$10 per barrel higher than the price
calculated according to the methodology set forth in the Hydrocarbons Law,
as discussed above. We are currently evaluating Disposition No.
1.
In
addition to the above, the Public Emergency Law, which created the export
withholdings, established that export withholdings were not to be deducted from
the export price for purposes of calculating the 12% royalties. The royalty
expense is accounted for as a production cost. Any oil and gas produced by the
holder of an exploration permit prior to the grant of a production concession is
subject to the payment of a 15% royalty. See “Item 8. Financial
Information—Legal Proceedings—Argentina—Neuquén royalty disputes.”
Furthermore,
pursuant to Sections 57 and 58 of the Hydrocarbons Law, holders of exploration
permits and production concessions must pay an annual surface fee that is based
on acreage of each block and which varies depending on the phase of the
operation, i.e., exploration or production, and in the case of the former,
depending on the relevant period of the exploration permit. Executive Decree No.
1,454/07, dated October 17, 2007, which significantly increased the amount of
exploration and production surface fees expressed in Argentine pesos that are
payable to the provinces in which the hydrocarbon fields are located or, in the
case of offshore and certain other fields, to the Argentine government. In all
cases, the surface fee increased by at least eight times, although the effect of
this increase is not material to us due to the relatively low sums involved. For
example, in 2007 we paid a total of approximately Ps.33 million in surface fees.
In 2008, we expect to pay approximately Ps.90 million in such fees pursuant to
Sections 57 and 58 of the Hydrocarbons Law, due to the application of the recent
increases for a full year.
Exploration
permits and production or transportation concessions may be terminated upon any
of the following events:
·
|
failure
to pay annual surface taxes within three months of the due
date;
|
·
|
failure
to pay royalties within three months of the due
date;
|
·
|
substantial
and unjustifiable failure to comply with specified production,
conservation, investment, work or other
obligations;
|
·
|
repeated
failure to provide information to, or facilitate inspection by,
authorities or to utilize adequate technology in
operations;
|
·
|
in
the case of exploration permits, failure to apply for a production
concession within 30 days of determining the existence of commercially
exploitable quantities of
hydrocarbons;
|
·
|
bankruptcy
of the permit or concession holder;
|
·
|
death
or end of legal existence of the permit or concession holder;
or
|
·
|
failure
to transport hydrocarbons for third parties on a non-discriminatory basis
or repeated violation of the authorized tariffs for such
transportation.
|
The
Hydrocarbons Law further provides that a cure period, of a duration to be
determined by the Secretariat of Energy and/or the competent provincial
authorities, must be provided to the defaulting concessionaire prior to the
termination.
When a
production concession expires or terminates, all oil and gas wells, operating
and maintenance equipment and facilities automatically revert to the province
where the reservoir is located or to the Argentine government in the case of
reservoirs under federal jurisdiction (i.e., located on the continental shelf or
beyond 12 nautical miles offshore), without compensation to the holder of the
concession.
Substantially
all of our production concessions expire in 2017. The granting of an extension
is an unregulated process and normally involves lengthy negotiations between the
applicant and the relevant government. Although the Hydrocarbons Law provides
that applications must be submitted at least six months prior to the concession
expiration date, it is industry practice to commence the process far earlier,
typically as soon as the technical and economic feasibility of new investment
projects beyond the concession term become apparent.
On March
16, 2006, the Secretariat of Energy issued Resolution S.E. No. 324/06
establishing that holders of exploration permits and hydrocarbon concessions
must file with such agency details of their proved reserves existing in each of
their areas, certified by an external reserves auditor, each year. Holders of
hydrocarbon concessions that export hydrocarbons are obliged to certify their
oil and gas proved reserves. The aforementioned certification only has the
meaning established by Resolution S.E. No. 324/06, according to which it is not
to be interpreted as a certification of oil and gas reserves under the SEC
rules. See “Item 4. Information on the Company—Exploration and
Production—Reserves”.
Security
Zones Legislation
Argentine
law restricts the ability of non-Argentine companies to own real estate, oil
concessions or mineral rights located within, or with respect to areas defined
as, security zones (principally border areas). Prior approval of the Argentine
government is required:
·
|
for
non-Argentine shareholders to acquire control of us;
or
|
·
|
if
and when the majority of our shares belong to non-Argentine shareholders,
such as is currently the case, for any additional acquisition of real
estate, mineral rights, oil or other Argentine government concessions
located within, or with respect to, security
zones.
|
Because
approval of Class A shareholders is required for a change in our control under
our bylaws, and approval of the executive branch of the Argentine government or
provincial governments is required for the grant or transfer of hydrocarbon
permits and concessions, we believe that possible additional requirements under
the security zone legislation will not have a significant impact on our
operations.
Natural
Gas Transportation and Distribution
In June
1992, the Natural Gas Law was passed, providing for the privatization of Gas del
Estado and the deregulation of the price of natural gas. To effect the
privatization of Gas del Estado, the five main trunk lines of the gas
transmission system were divided into two systems principally on a geographical
basis (the northern and the southern trunk pipeline systems). This was designed
to give both systems access to gas sources and to the main centers of demand in
and around Buenos Aires. These systems were transferred into two new
transportation companies. The Gas del Estado distribution system was divided
into eight regional distribution companies, including two distribution companies
serving the greater Buenos Aires area. Shares of each of the transportation and
distribution companies were sold to consortiums of private bidders. Likewise, in
1997, a distribution license for the provinces of Chaco, Formosa, Entre Ríos,
Corrientes and Misiones was granted to private bidders.
The
regulatory structure for the natural gas industry creates an open-access system,
under which gas producers, such as us, will have open access to future available
capacity on transmission and distribution systems on a non-discriminatory
basis.
Cross-border
gas pipelines were built to interconnect Argentina, Chile, Brazil and Uruguay,
and producers such as us are currently exporting natural gas to the Chilean and
Brazilian markets, to the extent permitted by the Argentine government. During the last several years the Argentine authorities have
adopted a number of measures restricting exports of natural gas from Argentina,
including issuing domestic supply instruction pursuant to Resolutions Nos. 659
and 752 (which require exporters to supply natural gas to the Argentine domestic market), issuing
express instructions to suspend exports, suspending processing of natural gas
and adopting restrictions on natural gas exports imposed through transportation
companies and/or emergency committees created to address crisis
situations. See “―Market
Regulation―Natural
gas export restrictions and domestic supply preferences.”
Transportation
of Liquid Hydrocarbons
The
Hydrocarbons Law permits the executive branch of the Argentine government to
award 35-year concessions for the transportation of oil, gas and petroleum
products following submission of competitive bids. Pursuant to Law No. 26,197,
the relevant provincial governments have the same powers. Holders of production
concessions are entitled to receive a transportation concession for the oil, gas
and petroleum products that they produce. The term of a transportation
concession may be extended for an additional ten-year term upon application to
the executive branch. The holder of a transportation concession has the right
to:
·
|
transport
oil, gas and petroleum products;
and
|
·
|
construct
and operate oil, gas and products pipelines, storage facilities, pump
stations, compressor plants, roads, railways and other facilities and
equipment necessary for the efficient operation of a pipeline
system.
|
The holder
of a transportation concession is obligated to transport hydrocarbons for third
parties on a non-discriminatory basis for a fee. This obligation, however,
applies to producers of oil or gas only to the extent that the concession holder
has surplus capacity available and is expressly subordinated to the
transportation requirements of the holder of the concession. Transportation
tariffs are subject to approval by the Secretariat of Energy for oil and
petroleum pipelines and by the Argentine natural gas regulatory authority
ENARGAS (Ente Nacional
Regulador del Gas) for gas pipelines. Upon expiration of a transportation
concession, the pipelines and related facilities automatically revert to the
Argentine government without payment to the holder. The Privatization Law
granted us a 35-year transportation concession with respect to the pipelines
operated by Yacimientos Petrolíferos Fiscales S.A. at the time. Gas pipelines
and distribution systems sold in connection with the privatization of Gas del
Estado are subject to a different regime under the Natural Gas Law.
Additionally,
pursuant to Law No. 26,197, all transportation concessions located entirely
within a province’s jurisdiction and not directly connected to any export
pipeline are to be transferred to such province. The executive branch retains
the power to regulate and enforce all transportation concessions located within
two or more provinces and all transportation concessions directly connected to
export pipelines.
Refining
Crude oil
refining activities conducted by oil producers or others are subject to the
prior registration of oil companies in the registry maintained by the
Secretariat of Energy and compliance with safety and environmental regulations,
as well as to provincial environmental legislation and municipal health and
safety inspections. In January
2008, the Secretariat of Domestic Commerce issued Resolution No. 14/2008,
whereby the refining companies were instructed to optimize their production in
order to obtain maximum volumes according to their capacity.
Market
Regulation
Overview
Under the
Hydrocarbons Law and the Oil Deregulation Decrees, holders of production
concessions, such as us, have the right to produce and own the oil and gas they
extract and are allowed to dispose of such production in the domestic or export
markets, in each case subject to the conditions described below.
The
Hydrocarbons Law authorizes the executive branch of the Argentine government to
regulate the Argentine oil and gas markets and prohibits the export of crude oil
during any period in which the executive branch finds
domestic
production to be insufficient to satisfy domestic demand. If the executive
branch restricts the export of crude oil and petroleum products or
the free disposition of natural gas, the Oil Deregulation Decrees provide that
producers, refiners and exporters shall receive a price:
·
|
in
the case of crude oil and petroleum products, not lower than that of
imported crude oil and petroleum products of similar quality;
and
|
·
|
in
the case of natural gas, not less than 35% of the international price per
cubic meter of Arabian light oil, 34°
API.
|
Furthermore,
the Oil Deregulation Decrees expressly required the executive branch to give
twelve months’ notice of any future export restrictions. Notwithstanding the
above provisions, certain subsequently-enacted Resolutions (Resolution S.E.
1679/04, Resolution S.E. 532/04 and Resolution of the Ministry of Economy and
Production 394/07) have modified the aforementioned price mechanism, resulting,
in certain cases, in prices to producers below the levels described
above.
Refined
products
In April
2002, the Argentine government and the main oil companies, including us, reached
an agreement on a subsidy provided by the Argentine government to public bus
transportation companies. The Agreement on Stability of Supply of Diesel Fuel
(Convenio de Estabilidad de Suministro de Gas
Oil) was approved by Executive Decree No. 652/02 and assured the
transportation companies their necessary supply of diesel fuel at a fixed price
of Ps.0.75 per liter from April 22, 2002 to July 31, 2002. Additionally, it
established that the oil companies are to be compensated for the difference
between the fixed price and the market price through export duty credits. This
agreement was extended through August 31, 2002. Through new price-stabilization
agreements, the subsidy was extended through June 30, 2005 and the fixed price
was increased up to Ps.0.82 per liter. After June 25, 2005, the price paid by
transporters was reduced to Ps.0.42 for local public transportation and to
Ps.0.62 for the rest of public transportation. On November 11, 2007, the price
paid by transporters was increased to Ps.0.45 per liter, and on
January 11, 2008, it was increased to Ps.0.50 per liter, the price for the rest
of public transportation remaining at Ps.0.62. In March 2008, Executive Decree
No. 449/2008 empowered the Chief of Cabinet to sign annual agreements extending
the diesel fuel subsidy to transportation companies for the fiscal year 2008 and
instructed such official to incorporate the necessary modifications in order to
extend the possibility to compensate with export duty credits on all hydrocarbon
products currently exported and in defect thereof, in cash. As of the date of
this annual report, such annual agreement for the fiscal year 2008 is under
negotiation.
The
Secretariat of Energy has issued a series of resolutions affecting the fuel
market. For example, Resolution S.E. No. 1,102/04 created the Registry of Liquid
Fuels Supply Points, Self Consumption, Storage, Distributors and Bulk Sellers of
Fuels and Hydrocarbons, and of Compressed Natural Gas; Resolution S.E. No.
1,104/04 created a bulk sales price information module as an integral part of
the federal fuel information system, as well as a mechanism for communication of
volumes sold by fuel manufacturers and by sellers; Resolution S.E. No. 1,834/05
compels service stations and/or supply point operators and/or self consumption
of liquid fuels and hydrocarbons who have requested supply, and have not been
supplied, to communicate such situation to the Secretariat of Energy; and
Resolution S.E. No. 1,879/05 established that refining companies registered by
the Secretariat of Energy, who are parties to contracts that create any degree
of exclusivity between the refining company and the fuel seller, shall assure
continuous, reliable, regular and non-discriminatory supply to its
counterparties, giving the right to the seller to obtain the product from a
different source, and thereupon, charging any applicable overcosts to the
refining company.
Disposition
S.S.C. No. 157/06 of the Undersecretariat of Fuels provides that fuel sellers
who are parties to contracts that create any degree of exclusivity between the
refining company and the fuel seller, and which for any reason are seeking to
terminate such contract, shall report the termination in advance with the
Undersecretariat of Fuels in order to inform the Secretary of Domestic Commerce
of the situation. In that case, the Secretary of Domestic Commerce is to: (i)
issue a statement regarding the validity of the termination of the contract and
(ii) use all necessary means to allow the fuel seller terminating the contract
to execute another agreement with a refining company and/or fuel broker in order
to guarantee its fuel supply.
Resolution
S.E. No. 1,679/04 reinstalled the registry of diesel fuel and crude oil export
transactions created by Executive Decree No. 645/2002, and mandated that
producers, sellers, refining companies and any other market agent that wishes to
export diesel fuel or crude oil to register such transaction and to demonstrate
that domestic demand has been satisfied and that they have offered the product
to be exported to the domestic market. In addition,
Resolution
S.E. No. 1338/06 added other petroleum products to the registration regime
created by Executive Decree No. 645/2002, including gasoline, fuel oil and its
derivatives, aviation fuel, coke coal, asphalts, certain petrochemicals and
certain lubricants. Resolution No. 715/2007 of the Secretariat of Energy
empowered the National Refining and Marketing Director to determine the amounts
of diesel fuel to be imported by each company, in specific periods of the year,
to compensate exports of products included under the regime of Resolution No.
1679/04; the fulfillment of this obligation to import diesel fuel is necessary
to obtain authorization to export the products included under Decree No.
645/2002 (crude, fuel oil, diesel fuel, coke coal and gasoline, among others).
In addition, Resolution No. 25/06 of the Secretariat of Domestic Commerce,
issued within the framework of Law No. 20, 680, imposes on each Argentine
refining company the obligation to supply all reasonable diesel fuel demand, by
supplying certain minimum volumes (established pursuant to the resolution) to
their usual customers, mainly service station operators and
distributors.
Resolution
SE No. 459/07, of July 12, 2007, created the “Energy Substitution
Program,” which is intended to mitigate gas and electricity shortages.
This program encourages industrial users to substitute natural gas and
electricity use with diesel, fuel oil and LPG. The Argentine government
allocated approximately U.S.$310 million in 2007 in subsidies to fund the gap
between the price of natural gas and electricity on the one hand, and the
price of the substitute fuel on the other hand.
Resolution SE No. 121/2008 extended
until December 31, 2008 the Energy Substitution Program and Rule No. 30/2008,
issued by the Sub-secretary of Coordination and Control on April 1, 2008,
approved the following general plans for implementation of the Energy
Substitution Program:
1) General Plan for the Supply of
Gaseous Fuels, including:
(i) a plan for the supply of regasified
liquefied natural gas (LNG), which provides for the construction, maintenance,
management and administration of a system for the regasification of LNG and the
supply of natural gas to the Argentine market, and empowers ENARSA, directly or
through third parties, to take all necessary actions, including the purchase of
the LNG, for such purpose; and
(ii) a plan for the supply of propane,
which provides for the management of a system to acquire and deliver propane to
be injected into the natural gas distribution network of the province of Buenos
Aires, and empowers ENARSA, directly or through third parties, to take all
necessary actions, including the purchase of propane, for such
purpose.
2) General Plan for the Supply Liquid
Fuels, including:
(i) a plan designed to guarantee that
demand for liquid fuel in the Argentine market is met. For such purpose, ENARSA,
directly or through third parties, is empowered to buy and sell liquid
fuels.
(ii) a plan to encourage and subsidize
replacement of natural gas and/or electric power consumption with the use of
alternative fuels in productive activities. ENARSA, directly or through third
parties, is empowered to manage the mechanisms for the supply of liquid fuels to
replace the natural gas.
Natural
gas
In January
2004, Executive Decree No. 180/04 (i) created the Mercado Electrónico del Gas
(MEG) for the trade of daily spot sales of gas and a secondary market of
transportation and distribution services and (ii) established information duties
for buyers and sellers of natural gas in relation to their respective commercial
operations, required as a condition to be authorized to inject into and
transport through the transportation system any volume of natural gas (further
regulated by Resolution No. 1,146/04 issued on November 9, 2004 and Resolution
No. 882/05 issued by the Secretariat of Energy). According to Executive Decree
No. 180/04, all daily spot sales of natural gas must be traded within the
MEG.
In January
2004, Executive Decree No. 181/04 authorized the Secretariat of Energy to
negotiate with natural gas producers a pricing mechanism for natural gas
supplied to industries and electric generation companies. On April 2, 2004, the
Secretariat of Energy and gas producers signed an agreement which was ratified
by Resolution
No. 208/04
issued by the Ministry of Federal Planning, Public Investment and Services. The
aim of the agreement was to implement a scheme for the normalization of natural
gas prices following the 2001 crisis. The main aspects of the agreement were:
(i) initial price adjustments applied exclusively to gas supplied by producers
to industrial users, new direct consumers and electricity generators (to the
extent that electricity was destined for the domestic market); (ii) prices were
adjusted as of May 10, 2004; and (iii) the Secretariat of Energy would implement
a progressive scheme for the normalization of the price of natural gas destined
to residential end-users and small commercial users, which was never
implemented. This agreement expired on December 31, 2006.
On June
14, 2007, Resolution No. 599/07 of the Secretariat of Energy approved a proposal
of agreement with natural gas producers regarding the supply of natural gas to
the domestic market during the period 2007 through 2011 (the “Propuesta de Acuerdo,” or
“Agreement 2007-2011”), giving such producers a five-business-day term to enter
into the Agreement 2007-2011. If within that term, the Agreement 2007-2011 was
not executed by a sufficient number of producers to make it viable, the
Secretariat of Energy would disregard the Agreement and enact the Procedures for
Complementary Supply of the Internal Market 2007-2011 (Procedimientos de Abastecimiento
Complementario al Mercado Interno 2007-2011) (not described in Resolution
No. 599/07). We executed the agreement taking into account that natural gas
exports and certain domestic sales of producers that do not enter into the
Agreement 2007-2011 are to be called upon first in order to satisfy domestic
demand, before the export sales of the producers that have signed the Agreement
2007-2011 are affected. While producers are authorized to withdraw from the
Agreement 2007-2011 under its terms, if they do so such producers will be
treated as any producer that has not entered into the Agreement 2007-2011 in the
first place.
The
purpose of the Agreement 2007-2011 is to guarantee the supply of the domestic
market demand at the levels registered in 2006, plus the growth in demand by
residential and small commercial customers (the “agreed demand levels”).
Producers that have entered into the Agreement 2007-2011 would commit to supply
a part of the agreed demand levels according to certain shares determined for
each producer based upon its share of production for the 36 months prior to
April 2004. For this period, our share of production was approximately 36.5%, or
36.8 mmcm/d (or 1,300 mmcf/d), which in 2007 represented approximately 72% of
our production and was sold at an average price of U.S.$1.52 per mmBtu (or
approximately U.S.$55 per cubic meter). The Agreement 2007-2011 also provides
guidelines for the terms of supply agreements for each market segment, and
certain pricing limitations for each market segment of the agreed demand levels.
In order to guarantee any domestic market demand of natural gas in excess of the
agreed demand levels, Resolution S.E. No. 599/07 maintains the effectiveness
of the Resolutions that implemented the curtailment of natural gas export
commitments and the re-routing of such natural gas volumes to certain sectors of
the domestic market. See “―Natural gas export restrictions and domestic
supply priorities.” The Resolution also states that the Agreement
2007-2011 does not prevent the possible suspension or termination of export
permits.
We were
compelled to execute the Agreement 2007-2011, among other reasons, in order to
mitigate our potential damages. Producers failing to sign the Agreement
2007-2011 could be penalized and subject to other unfavorable measures by
regulatory authorities. However, we expressly stated that the execution of the
Agreement 2007-2011 did not entail any recognition by us of the validity of the
terms and conditions of the various Resolutions of the Secretariat of Energy
establishing programs for the curtailment or re-routing of exports to satisfy
domestic demand. We challenged
Resolution No. 599/07 and stated that we signed the Agreement 2007-2011 taking
into account the potential consequences of not doing so. While the challenge is
pending, we are complying with the terms of the Agreement.
The
Argentine Secretariat of Energy, by its Resolution S.E. No. 459/07 of July 12,
2007, created the “Energy Substitution Program,” which was designed to mitigate
shortages of gas and electricity during the Argentine winter of 2007. The
program encouraged industrial users to substitute natural gas and electricity
use with diesel, fuel oil and LPG. In connection with the program, the Argentine
government allocated approximately U.S.$310 million to compensate for the higher
cost of the substitute fuels.
The
Argentine Secretariat created, by its Resolution No. 24/2008 issued on March 13,
2008, a program named “GAS PLUS” to encourage natural gas production resulting
from new reserves discoveries, new fields and tight gas, among other factors.
The natural gas produced under the GAS PLUS program will not be subject to
Agreement 2007-2011 and will not be subject to the price conditions
established under such Agreement.
Natural
gas export restrictions and domestic supply priorities
In March
2004, the Secretariat of Energy issued Resolution S.E. No. 265/04 adopting
measures intended to ensure the adequate supply of natural gas to the domestic
market and regulate its consequences on electricity wholesale prices. Among the
measures adopted were:
·
|
the
suspension of all exports of surpluses of natural
gas;
|
·
|
the
suspension of automatic approvals of requests to export natural
gas;
|
·
|
the
suspension of all applications for new authorizations to export natural
gas filed or to be filed before the Secretariat of Energy;
and
|
·
|
authorizing
the Undersecretariat of Fuels to create a rationalization plan of gas
exports and transportation
capacity.
|
In March
2004, the Undersecretariat of Fuels, pursuant to the authority given to it under
Resolution S.E. No. 265/04, issued Regulation S.S.C. No. 27/04 establishing a
rationalization plan of gas exports and transportation capacity. Among other
things, Regulation No. 27/04 established a limit on natural gas export
authorizations, which, absent an express authorization by the Undersecretariat
of Fuels, may not be executed for volumes exceeding exports registered during
2003.
In June
2004, the Secretariat of Energy issued Resolution S.E. No. 659/04, which
established a new program to assure natural gas supply to the domestic market
(which substitutes for the program created by Regulation No. S.S.C. 27/04).
Under Resolution S.E. No. 659/04 (amended by Resolution S.E. No. 1,681/04),
natural gas exports may be restricted due to shortages of natural gas in the
domestic market, because exporting producers may be required to supply
additional volumes of natural gas to the domestic market beyond those that they
are contractually committed to supply. The export of natural gas under current
export permits is conditioned on the fulfillment of additional supply
requirements imposed on exporting producers by governmental
authorities.
This
program was further amended and supplemented by Resolution S.E. No. 752/05
issued by the Secretariat of Energy in May 2005, which further reduced the
ability of producers to export natural gas, and created a mechanism under which
the Secretariat of Energy may require exporting producers to supply additional
volumes to domestic consumers during a seasonal period (Permanent Additional
Supply), which volumes of natural gas are also not committed by the exporting
producers. Based on the provisions of Rule No. 27/04, Resolution S.E. No. 659/04
and Resolution S.E. No. 752/05, the Secretariat of Energy and/or the
Undersecretariat of Fuels have instructed us to re-direct natural gas export
volumes to the internal market, thereby affecting natural gas export
commitments. We have challenged the validity of the aforementioned regulations
and resolutions, and has invoked the occurrence of a force majeure event under the
corresponding natural gas export purchase and sale agreements. The
counterparties to such agreements have rejected our position. See “Item 8.
Financial Information―Legal
Proceedings.”
Resolution
S.E. No. 752/05 also establishes (i) a special market, open and anonymous, for
compressed natural gas stations to purchase natural gas under regulated
commercial conditions, with the demand being ensured by the Secretariat of
Energy through Permanent Additional Supply required of exporting producers, and
(ii) a mechanism of standardized irrevocable offers for electric power
generators and industrial and commercial consumers to obtain supply of natural
gas, with the demand being ensured by the Secretariat of Energy through the
issuance of the Permanent Additional Supply mentioned above.
Pursuant
to the standardized irrevocable offers procedure mentioned above, which operates
at the MEG, any direct consumer may bid for a term gas purchase at the export
average gas price net of withholdings by basin. The volume necessary to satisfy
the standardized irrevocable offers which have not been satisfied will be
required as a Permanent Additional Supply only until the end of the seasonal
period during which the unsatisfied requests should be made (October–April or
May–September). Such Additional Supply will be requested from the producers that
export gas and that inject the natural gas from the basins that are able to
supply those unsatisfied irrevocable offers. Resolution of the Secretariat of
Energy S.E. No. 1886/2006, published on January 4, 2007, extended the term of
effectiveness
of this mechanism of standardized irrevocable offers until 2016, and empowered
the Undersecretariat of Fuels to suspend its effectiveness subject to the
satisfaction of internal demand of natural gas achieved by means of regulations,
agreements or due to the discovery of reserves.
By means
of Resolution S.E. No. 1329/06, later supplemented by Note SSC No. 1011/07, the
Secretariat of Energy forced producers to give first priority in their
injections of natural gas into the gas pipelines to certain preferential
consumers and obligates transportation companies to guarantee these priorities
through the allocation of transportation capacity. In general, these regulations
subordinate all exports of natural gas to the prior delivery of natural gas
volumes that are sufficient to satisfy domestic market demand.
Also,
beginning during the severe Argentine winter in 2007 and continuing thereafter,
we and most of gas producers as well as the transportation companies received
instructions from the government to cut off all exports to zero, except for
certain volumes addressed to satisfy Chilean residential consumptions and other
specific consumptions.
Liquefied
petroleum gas
Law No.
26,020 enacted on March 9, 2005 sets forth the regulatory framework for the
industry and commercialization of LPG. This law regulates the activities of
production, bottling, transportation, storage, distribution, and
commercialization of LPG in Argentina and declares such activities to be of
public interest. Among other things, the law:
·
|
creates
the registry of LPG bottlers, obliging LPG bottlers to register the
bottles of their property;
|
·
|
protects
the trademarks of LPG bottlers;
|
·
|
creates
a reference price system, pursuant to which, the Secretariat of Energy
shall periodically publish reference prices for LPG sold in bottles of 45
kilograms or less;
|
·
|
required
the Secretariat of Energy to comply with the following tasks: (i) create
LPG transfer mechanisms, in order to guarantee access to the product to
all the agents of the supply chain; (ii) establish mechanisms for the
stabilization of LPG prices charged to local LPG bottlers; and (iii)
together with the Antitrust Agency, make an analysis of the composition of
the LPG market and its behavior, in order to establish limitations on the
concentration of the market in each phase, or limitations to the vertical
integration throughout the chain of the LPG industry. Such limitations
must include affiliates, subsidiaries and controlled companies;
and
|
·
|
grants
open access to LPG storage
facilities.
|
The
Secretariat of Energy established, through several subsequent resolutions,
reference prices applicable to sales of LPG bottles of less than 45 kilograms,
and to sales of bulk LPG exclusively to LPG bottlers. Also, the Secretariat of
Energy approved the method for calculating the LPG export parity to be updated
monthly by the Undersecretariat of Fuels. The Secretariat of Energy in 2007
increased the LPG volumes to be sold to bottlers at the reference prices set
forth in the above-mentioned resolutions.
Rule 168/04 requires companies intending
to export LPG to first obtain an authorization from the Secretariat of Energy.
Companies seeking to export LPG must first demonstrate that the local demand is
satisfied or that an offer to sell LPG to local demand has been made and
rejected.
Argentine
Environmental Regulations
The
enactment of Articles 41 and 43 in the National Constitution, as amended in
1994, as well as new federal, provincial and municipal legislation, has
strengthened the legal framework dealing with damage to the environment.
Legislative and government agencies have become more vigilant in enforcing the
laws and regulations regarding the environment, increasing sanctions for
environmental violations.
Under the
amended Articles 41 and 43 of the National Constitution, all Argentine
inhabitants have both the right to an undamaged environment and a duty to
protect it. The primary obligation of any person held liable for environmental
damage is to rectify such damage according to and within the scope of applicable
law. The federal government sets forth the minimum standards for the protection
of the environment and the provinces and municipalities establish specific
standards and implementing regulations.
Federal,
provincial and municipal laws and regulations relating to environmental quality
in Argentina affect our operations. These laws and regulations set standards for
certain aspects of environmental quality, provide for penalties and other
liabilities for the violation of such standards, and establish remedial
obligations in certain circumstances.
In
general, we are subject to the requirements of the following federal
environmental regulations (including the regulations issued
thereunder):
·
|
National
Constitution (Articles 41 and 43);
|
·
|
Law
No. 25,675 on National Environmental
Policy;
|
·
|
Law
No. 25,612 on Integrated Management of Industrial and Service Industry
Waste;
|
·
|
Law
No. 24,051 on Hazardous Waste;
|
·
|
Law
No. 20,284 on Clean Air;
|
·
|
Law
No. 25,688 on Environmental Management of
Waters;
|
·
|
Law
No. 25,670 on the Management and Elimination of Polychlorinated
Biphenyls;
|
·
|
Civil
Code, which sets forth the general rules of tort
law.
|
These laws
address environmental issues, including limits on the discharge of waste
associated with oil and gas operations, investigation and cleanup of hazardous
substances, workplace safety and health, natural resource damages claims and
toxic tort liabilities. Furthermore, these laws typically require compliance
with associated regulations and permits and provide for the imposition of
penalties in case of non-compliance.
In
addition, we are subject to various other provincial and municipal regulations,
including those relating to gas venting, oil spills and well abandonment, among
other matters.
By
Resolution No. 404/94, the Secretariat of Energy amended Resolution No. 419/93,
and created the Registry of Independent Professionals and Safety Auditing
Companies (Registro de
Profesionales Independientes y Empresas Auditoras de Seguridad), which
may act with respect to areas of hydrocarbons storage, oil refineries, gas
stations, fuel commercialization plants and plants for fractionation of LPG in
containers or cylinders. The Resolution provides that external audits of oil
refineries, gas stations and all fuel storage plants must be carried out by
professionals registered in the Registry. Domestic fuel manufacturing companies
and companies that sell fuels are prohibited from supplying these products to
any station failing to comply with its obligations. Penalties for failure to
perform the audits and remedial or safety tasks include the disqualification of
plants or gas stations. In addition, a set of obligations is established in
relation to underground fuel storage systems, including a mechanism for instant
notification in cases of loss or suspicion of loss from the storage
facilities.
On July
19, 2001, the Secretariat of Environmental Policy of the province of Buenos
Aires issued Resolution No. 1037/01 ordering us to clean up certain areas
adjacent to the La Plata refinery. The resolution was appealed through an
administrative procedure which has not yet been resolved. Nevertheless, we have
commenced certain works in order to identify potential technical solutions for
the treatment of the historical contamination, while reserving that the
remediation must be made by the parties responsible for the environmental
damage. Under current
law, the
Argentine government has the obligation to indemnify us against any liability
and hold us harmless for events and claims arising prior to January 1, 1991,
according to Law No. 22,145.
During
2005, the Secretariat of Energy, by means of Resolution No. 785/05, created the
National Program of Hydrocarbons Warehousing Aerial Tank Loss Control, a measure
aimed at reducing and correcting environmental pollution caused by hydrocarbons
warehousing-aerial tanks. We have commenced the development and implementation
of a technical and environmental audit plan as required by this
Resolution.
The above
description of the material Argentine environmental regulations is only a
summary and does not purport to be a comprehensive description of the Argentine
environmental regulatory framework. The summary is based upon Argentine
regulations related to environmental issues as in effect on the date of this
annual report, and such regulations are subject to change.
U.S.
Environmental Regulations
In
addition, federal, state and local laws and regulations relating to health,
safety and environmental quality in the United States, where YPF Holdings Inc.
(“YPF Holdings”) operates, affect the operations of this subsidiary. YPF
Holdings’ U.S. operations, conducted primarily through Maxus Energy Corporation
(“Maxus”), are subject to the requirements of the following U.S. environmental
laws:
·
|
Safe
Drinking Water Act;
|
·
|
Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act;
|
·
|
National
Environmental Policy Act;
|
·
|
Occupational
Safety and Health Act;
|
·
|
Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act;
and
|
·
|
various
other federal, state and local
laws.
|
These laws
and regulations set various standards for many aspects of health, safety and
environmental quality (including limits on discharges associated with oil and
gas operations), provide for fines and criminal penalties and other consequences
(including limits on operations and loss of applicable permits) for the
violation of such standards, establish procedures affecting siting of facilities
and other operations, and in certain circumstances impose obligations concerning
reporting, investigation and remediation, as well as liability for natural
resource damages and toxic tort claims.
Taxation
Holders of
exploration permits and production concessions are subject to federal,
provincial and municipal taxes and regular customs duties on imports. The
Hydrocarbons Law grants such holders a legal guarantee against new taxes and
certain tax increases at the provincial and municipal levels.
Pursuant
to Sections 57 and 58 of the Federal Hydrocarbons Law, holders of exploration
permits and production concessions must pay an annual surface fee that is based
on acreage of each block and which varies depending on the phase of the
operation, i.e., exploration or production, and in the case of the former,
depending on the relevant period of the exploration permit. On October 17, 2007,
the Official Gazette
published Executive Decree No. 1,454/07, which significantly increased
the amount of exploration and production surface fees expressed in
Argentine
pesos that are payable to the different jurisdictions where the hydrocarbon
fields are located. See “—Exploration and Production.”
In
addition, “net profit” (as defined in the Hydrocarbons Law) of holders of
permits or concessions accruing from activity as such holders might be subject
to the application of a special 55% income tax. This tax has never been applied.
Each permit or concession granted to an entity other than us has provided that
the holder thereof is subject instead to the general Argentine tax regime, and a
decree of the executive branch of the Argentine government provides that we are
also subject to the general Argentine tax regime.
Following
the introduction of market prices for downstream petroleum products in
connection with the deregulation of the petroleum industry, Law No. 23,966
established a volume-based tax on transfers of certain types of fuel, replacing
the prior regime, which was based on the regulated price. Law No. 25,745,
modified, effective as of August 2003, the mechanism for calculating the tax,
replacing the old fixed value per liter according to the type of fuel for a
percentage to apply to the sales price, maintaining the old fixed value as the
minimum tax.
Dividends
distributed by us to our shareholders, regardless of their country of residence,
are exempt from income tax in Argentina. However, dividends distributed in
excess of the accumulated earnings, determined according to the provisions of
the Argentine Income Tax Law by the end of the fiscal year prior to the year
when the dividends are distributed, shall be subject to a 35% tax on such
excess. The tax must be withheld by the distributing company.
Holding of
our shares by individuals resident in Argentina or abroad and corporations, any
type of legal entity, enterprise, permanent establishment, estate or resident
abroad shall be subject to personal assets tax on the holdings by December 31st
every year. The tax basis shall be the percentage net equity of each
shareholder, and the tax rate is 0.5%. We shall act as a substitute obligor and
pay the tax. It shall be entitled to recover the amount paid even withholding
and/or foreclosing the assets that generated the tax liability.
Export
taxes
In 2002,
the Argentine government began to impose customs duties on the export of
hydrocarbons. Export tax rates were increased on crude oil 20%, on butane,
methane and LPG to 20% and gasoline and diesel fuel to 5%. In May 2004,
Resolution No. 337/04 of the Ministry of Economy and Production increased export
duties on crude oil to 25%. These export tax rates were increased again in 2004,
when the Ministry of Economy and Production issued Resolution No. 532/04,
establishing a progressive scheme of export duties for crude oil, with rates
ranging from 25% to 45%, depending on the quotation of the WTI reference price
at the time of the exportation. In addition, in May 2004, pursuant to Resolution
No. 645/04 of the Ministry of Economy and Production, an export duty on natural
gas and natural gas liquids was established at a rate of 20%. The export duty on
natural gas was increased again in July 2006, when the Ministry of Economy and
Production increased the rate to 45% and instructed the Customs General
Administration to apply the price fixed by the Framework Agreement between
Argentina and Bolivia (approximately U.S.$6/mmBtu in December 2007) as the base
price to which to apply the new tax rate, irrespective of the actual sales
price. In addition, on October 10, 2006, the Ministry of Economy and Production
imposed prevalent export duties on exports from the Tierra del Fuego province,
which were previously exempted from taxes. Moreover, in May 2007 the Ministry of
Economy and Production increased to 25% the export duty on butane, propane and
LPG. There can be no assurances as to future levels of export
taxes.
Resolution
No. 394/07 of the Ministry of Economy and Production, effective as of November
16, 2007, increased export duties on Argentine oil exports (as defined by the
regulator) on crude oil and other crude derivatives products. The new regime
provides that when the international price exceeds the reference price, which is
fixed at U.S.$60.9/barrel, the producer shall be allowed to collect
U.S.$42/barrel, with the remainder being withheld by the Argentine government as
an export tax. If the international price of Argentine oil exports (as defined
by the regulator) is under the reference price but over U.S.$45/barrel, a 45%
withholding rate will apply. If such price is under U.S.$45/barrel, the
applicable export tax is to be determined within 90 business days.
Resolution No. 127/2008 of the Ministry
of Economy and Production increased export duties applicable to natural gas
exports from 45% to 100%, mandating a valuation basis for the calculation of the
duty as the highest
price established in any contract of any
Argentine importer for the import of gas (including the reference price set by
the Framework Agreement between Argentina and Bolivia mentioned above).
Resolution No. 127/2008 provides with respect to LPG products (including butane,
propane and blends thereof) that if the international price of the relevant LPG
product, as notified daily by the Secretariat of Energy, is under the reference
price established for such product in the Resolution (U.S.$338/m3 for propane,
U.S.$393/m3 for butane and U.S.$363/m3 for blends of the two), the applicable
export duty for such product will be 45%. If the international price exceeds the
reference price, the producer shall be allowed to collect the maximum amount
established by the Resolution for the relevant product (U.S.$223/m3 for propane,
U.S.$271/m3 for butane and U.S.$250/m3 for blends of the two), with the
remainder being withheld by the Argentine government as an export
tax.
In
addition, the calculation procedure described above also applies to other
petroleum products and lubricants based upon different withholding rates,
reference prices and prices allowed to producers. See “—Market
Regulation.”
Antitrust
Agreement
On June
16, 1999, the Argentine Ministry of Economy and Public Works delivered a letter
to Repsol YPF setting forth a series of obligations that Repsol YPF was required
to assume after the acquisition of the majority of our share
capital.
Repsol YPF
met all of the requirements upon execution of the asset swap agreement entered
into with Petrobras in December 2001.
Repsol YPF
believes that the acquisition of YPF will not be subject to further antitrust
scrutiny in Argentina under existing law. However, the Ministry has not stated
that there will be no further antitrust scrutiny and no assurances can be given
that Repsol YPF will not be required to accept additional undertakings or other
measures intended to address any perceived anti-competitive effects of the YPF
acquisition.
Repatriation
of Foreign Currency
Executive
Decree No. 1,589/89, relating to the deregulation of the upstream oil industry,
allows us and other companies engaged in oil and gas production activities in
Argentina to freely sell and dispose of the hydrocarbons they produce.
Additionally, under Decree No. 1,589/89, we and other oil producers are entitled
to keep out of Argentina up to 70% of foreign currency proceeds they receive
from crude oil and gas export sales, but are required to repatriate the
remaining 30% through the exchange markets of Argentina.
In July
2002, Argentina’s Attorney General issued an opinion (Dictamen No. 235) which
would have effectively required us to liquidate 100% of our export receivables
in Argentina, instead of the 30% provided in Decree No. 1,589/89. The Attorney
General’s opinion was based on the assumption that Decree No. 1,589/89 had been
superseded by other decrees (Decree No. 530/91 and 1,606/01) issued by the
government. Subsequent to this opinion, however, the government issued Decree
No. 1,912/02 ordering the Central Bank to apply the 70%/30% regime set out in
Decree No. 1,589/89. Nevertheless, on December 5, 2002, representatives of the
Central Bank of Argentina, responding formally to an inquiry from the Argentine
Bankers Association, stated that the Central Bank would apply the Attorney
General’s opinion. On December 9, 2002, we filed a declaratory judgment action
(acción declarativa de
certeza) before a federal court requesting the judge to clarify the
uncertainty generated by the opinion and statements of the Attorney General and
the Central Bank of Argentina, and requesting confirmation of our right to
freely dispose of up to 70% of our export receivables. On December 9, 2002, the
federal judge issued an injunction ordering the Argentine government, the
Central Bank and the Ministry of the Economy to refrain from interfering with
our access to and use of 70% of the foreign exchange proceeds from our exports.
This decision was appealed by the Central Bank and the Ministry of Economy and
Production.
On
December 27, 2002, the government issued Decree No. 2,703/02, effective as of
January 1, 2003, setting forth a minimum repatriation limit of 30% with respect
to proceeds from the export of hydrocarbons and byproducts, with the remaining
portion freely disposable. However, when referring to the minimum repatriation
limit of 30%, the decree only mentions the foreign exchange proceeds from freely
disposable exports of crude oil and its
byproducts.
Although the recitals and the first part of Section 1 of Decree No. 2,703/02
mention natural gas and LPG as covered by this regime, there are no express
references to natural gas or LPG in the rest of Section 1. However, taking into
account the rights granted by Decree No. 1,589/89, we apply this regime to the
export of crude oil, LPG and natural gas. It is worth noting that the recitals
of Decree No. 2,703/02 restate the interpretation maintained by the Attorney
General in the sense that Decree No. 1,589/89 has been repealed by Decree No.
530/91 and No. 1,606/01. This interpretation prompted the filing of the
above-mentioned declaratory judgment action. Moreover, since Decree No. 2,703/02
is effective as from January 1, 2003, and, in light of the Attorney General’s
opinion, it is unclear whether hydrocarbon exporters would be required to
repatriate the total amount of their 2002 export proceeds or whether the
existing hydrocarbons regulatory framework will prevail, we have expanded the
object of the declaratory judgment action before the federal court to request
that the judge expressly state that Decree No. 530/91 did not abrogate Decree
No. 1,589/89 and, thus, that the right of free disposal of export receivables
was effective between the issuance of Decree No. 1,606/01 and Decree 2,703/02.
On December 1, 2003, the National Administrative Court of Appeals decided that
the issuance of Decree No. 2,703/02, which allows companies in the oil and gas
sector to keep abroad up to 70% of the export proceeds, rendered the injunction
unnecessary. On December 15, 2003, we filed a motion for clarification asking
the court to clarify whether the exemption was available to oil and gas
companies during the period between the issuance of Decree No. 1,606/01 and the
issuance of Decree 2,703/02. On February 6, 2004, the Court of Appeals dismissed
our motion for clarification, indicating that the regulations included in Decree
2,703/02 were sufficiently clear, and confirmed the lifting of the injunction
that prohibited the Central Bank and the Ministry of Economy and Production from
interfering with our access to foreign exchange proceeds, as described above. On
February 19, 2004, we filed an extraordinary appeal before the Supreme Court
challenging the December 1, 2003 decision of the Court of Appeals and requesting
the restatement of the injunction against the Central Bank and the Ministry of
Economy and Production. The Federal Court of Appeals dismissed the extraordinary
appeal. Taking into account the fact that there is a new special system in place
allowing for the free disposal of up to 70% of the foreign currency proceeds
from the exports of crude oil and its derivatives, it was deemed advisable to
abandon the suit as a procedural strategy.
On October
12, 2007, we were notified of the initiation of an administrative summary
proceeding for alleged late repatriation of foreign currency proceeds, and lack
of repatriation of the remaining 70%, in connection with some hydrocarbon export
transactions made in 2002. In this administrative summary proceeding, charges
were brought against us in the amount of U.S.$1.6 million, and the tribunal has
advised that the conduct of a bank that handled other of our export transactions
made in 2002 be investigated, which could give rise to the initiation of further
proceedings. Nevertheless, a judicial judgment recently issued by a First
Instance Court in Criminal Economic Matters in a similar administrative summary
proceeding against a different company for an alleged violation of the criminal
exchange law (lack of repatriation of 70% of foreign currency proceeds)
regarding export transactions made in 2002 resolved the matter in favor of that
company based on legal arguments that were not challenged by the prosecutor. See
“Item 8. Financial Information—Legal Proceedings—Argentina.”
ITEM
4A. Unresolved Staff Comments.
We do not
have any unresolved staff comments.
ITEM
5. Operating and Financial Review and Prospects
The
following discussion should be read in conjunction with, and is qualified in its
entirety by reference to, our audited consolidated financial statements as of
December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005 and for the years then ended (the “Audited
Consolidated Financial Statements”).
Overview
We are
Argentina’s leading energy company, operating a fully integrated oil and gas
chain with leading market positions across the domestic upstream and downstream
segments. Our upstream operations consist of the exploration, development and
production of crude oil, natural gas and liquefied petroleum gas. Our downstream
operations include the refining, marketing, transportation and distribution of
oil and a wide range of petroleum products, petroleum derivatives,
petrochemicals, liquid petroleum gas and bio-fuels. Additionally, we are active
in the gas separation and natural gas distribution sectors both directly and
through our investments in several affiliated companies. In 2007, we had
consolidated net sales of Ps.29,104 million (U.S.$9,239 million) and
consolidated net income of Ps.4,086 million (U.S.$1,297 million).
Most of
our predecessors were state-owned companies with operations dating back to the
1920s. In November 1992, the Argentine government enacted the Privatization Law
(Law No. 24,145), which established the procedures for our privatization. In
accordance with the Privatization Law, in July 1993, we completed a worldwide
offering of 160 million Class D shares that had previously been owned by the
Argentine government. As a result of that offering and other transactions, the
Argentine government’s ownership interest in our capital stock was reduced from
100% to approximately 20% by the end of 1993.
Since
1999, we have been controlled by Repsol YPF, an integrated oil and gas company
headquartered in Spain with global operations. Repsol YPF owned approximately
99% of our capital stock from 2000 until February 21, 2008, when Petersen
Energía purchased 58,603,606 of our ADSs, representing 14.9% of our capital
stock, from Repsol YPF for U.S.$2,235 million. In addition, Repsol YPF also
granted certain affiliates of Petersen Energía options to purchase up to an
additional 10.1% of our outstanding capital stock within four years. See “Item
7. Major Shareholders and Related Party Transactions.” We believe
that Petersen Energía’s participation in our capital stock and management will
strengthen our Argentine ties and expertise.
Upstream
Operations
·
|
We
operate more than 70 oil and gas fields in Argentina, accounting for
approximately 42% of the country’s total production of crude oil,
excluding natural gas liquids, and approximately 42% of its total natural
gas production, including natural gas liquids, in 2007, according to the
Argentine Secretariat of Energy.
|
·
|
We
had proved reserves, as estimated as of December 31, 2007, of
approximately 623 mmbbl of oil and 3,708 bcf of gas, representing
aggregate reserves of 1,283 mmboe.
|
·
|
In
2007, we produced 120 mmbbl of oil (329 mbbl/d) and 635 bcf of gas
(1,740 mmcf/d).
|
Downstream
Operations
·
|
We
are Argentina’s leading refiner with operations conducted at three wholly
owned refineries with combined annual refining capacity of approximately
116 mmbbl (319.5 mbbl/d). We also have a 50% interest in Refinor, a
jointly controlled entity operated by Petrobras Energía S.A., which has a
refining capacity of 26.1 mbbl/d.
|
·
|
Our
retail distribution network for automotive petroleum products as of
December 31, 2007 consisted of 1,692 YPF-branded service stations, which
we believe represented approximately 31.1% of all service stations in
Argentina.
|
·
|
We
are a leading petrochemical producer in Argentina and in the Southern Cone
of Latin America, with operations conducted through our Ensenada plant. In
addition, Profertil, a company that we jointly control, is a leading
producer of urea in the Southern
Cone.
|
Presentation
of Financial Information
We prepare
our audited consolidated financial statements in accordance with Argentine GAAP,
which differ in certain significant respects from U.S. GAAP. Notes 13, 14 and 15
to the Audited Consolidated Financial Statements provide a summary of the effect
of these significant differences on net income and shareholders’ equity under
Argentine GAAP and U.S. GAAP.
We fully
consolidate the results of subsidiaries in which we have a sufficient number of
voting shares to control corporate decisions and proportionally consolidate the
results of companies that we control jointly. The financial information
corresponding to Refinor and Profertil, both jointly controlled entities,
includes the last financial information approved by those companies, which in
each case corresponds to a date and period ending three months prior to the date
of our consolidated financial statements; however, such information, if
material, is adjusted according to applicable accounting principles to reflect
these companies’ results as of the date of the issuance of our consolidated
financial statements.
Under
Argentine GAAP, we currently are not required to record the effects of inflation
in our financial statements. However, because Argentina experienced a high rate
of inflation in 2002, with the wholesale price index increasing by approximately
118%, we were required by Decree No. 1269/2002 and CNV Resolution No. 415/2002
to remeasure our financial statements in constant pesos in accordance with
Argentine GAAP. On March 25, 2003, Decree No. 664/2003 rescinded the requirement
that financial statements be prepared in constant currency, effective for
financial periods on or after March 1, 2003. According to the Argentine statistics and census agency
(Instituto Nacional
de Estadísticas y
Censos, or “INDEC”), the wholesale price index
increased 7.9% in 2004, 10.6% in 2005, 7.1% in 2006 and 14.4% in 2007. As a result, our results of operations
and financial position may not be directly comparable from period to period. We
cannot assure you that in the future we will not be again required to record the
effects of inflation in our financial statements (including those covered by the
financial statements included in this annual report) in constant pesos, which may affect
the comparability of our results of operations and financial position to those
recorded in prior periods. See “—Critical Accounting Policies—U.S. GAAP
Reconciliation” for an explanation of how the effect of inflation is treated
under U.S. GAAP.
Additionally,
certain oil and gas disclosures are included in this annual report under
the heading “Supplemental information on oil and gas producing activities
(unaudited).”
Segment
Reporting
We
organize our business into the following four segments: (i) exploration and
production, which includes exploration and production activities, natural gas
and crude oil purchases, sales of natural gas, and to a lesser extent crude oil,
to third parties and intersegment sales of crude oil, natural gas and its
byproducts and to a lesser extent electric power generation (“Exploration and
Production”); (ii) the production, transport and marketing of crude oil that we
sell to third parties and of refined products that we sell to third parties and
other segments of our business (“Refining and Marketing”); (iii) the production,
transport and marketing of petrochemical products (“Chemical”); and (iv) other
activities not falling into the previously described categories (“Corporate and
Other”), principally including corporate administration costs and assets,
construction activities and environmental remediation activities related to YPF
Holdings Inc.
Sales
between business segments are made at internal transfer prices established by
us, which generally seek to approximate market prices.
Summarized
Income Statement
|
|
For
the Year
Ended
December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
sales
|
|
|
29,104 |
|
|
|
25,635 |
|
|
|
22,901 |
|
Cost
of sales
|
|
|
(19,000 |
) |
|
|
(15,821 |
) |
|
|
(11,258 |
) |
Gross
profit
|
|
|
10,104 |
|
|
|
9,814 |
|
|
|
11,643 |
|
Administrative
expenses
|
|
|
(805 |
) |
|
|
(674 |
) |
|
|
(552 |
) |
Selling
expenses
|
|
|
(2,120 |
) |
|
|
(1,797 |
) |
|
|
(1,650 |
) |
Exploration
expenses
|
|
|
(522 |
) |
|
|
(460 |
) |
|
|
(280 |
) |
Operating
income
|
|
|
6,657 |
|
|
|
6,883 |
|
|
|
9,161 |
|
Income
on long-term investments
|
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
183 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
Other
expenses, net
|
|
|
(439 |
) |
|
|
(204 |
) |
|
|
(545 |
) |
Financial
income, net and holding gains
|
|
|
518 |
|
|
|
454 |
|
|
|
102 |
|
Income
from sale of long-term investments
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
Impairment
of other assets
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
(69 |
) |
|
|
— |
|
Net
income before income tax
|
|
|
6,844 |
|
|
|
7,258 |
|
|
|
8,772 |
|
Income
tax
|
|
|
(2,758 |
) |
|
|
(2,801 |
) |
|
|
(3,410 |
) |
Net
income
|
|
|
4,086 |
|
|
|
4,457 |
|
|
|
5,362 |
|
Factors
Affecting Our Operations
Our
operations are affected by a number of factors, including:
·
|
the
volume of crude oil, oil byproducts and natural gas we produce and
sell;
|
·
|
domestic
price limitations;
|
·
|
export
restrictions and domestic supply
requirements;
|
·
|
international
prices of crude oil and oil
products;
|
·
|
our
capital expenditures;
|
·
|
inflation
and cost increases;
|
·
|
domestic
market demand for hydrocarbon
products;
|
·
|
taxes,
including export taxes;
|
·
|
the
Argentine peso/U.S. dollar exchange
rate;
|
·
|
dependence
on the infrastructure and logistics network used to deliver our
products;
|
·
|
laws
and regulations affecting our operations;
and
|
Our
consolidated operating profits and margins have recently trended downwards. This
has principally been the result of: production declines and increased asset
depreciation principally due to the increasing maturity of our oil and gas
fields; increases in other operating costs, due in part to higher domestic
demand and local market supply
obligations
(which required us to purchase certain hydrocarbon inputs from third parties);
inflation and higher labor costs; and limitations on our ability to offset those
increased costs due to, among other things, domestic limitations on the prices
at which we sell gas and refined products.
Our
operating income in 2007 decreased 3.3% compared with 2006 mainly as a result
of: our continuing decline in production, principally as a result of the
maturity of our fields; increased export taxes; increased depreciation of fixed
assets as a result of increased assets subject to depreciation (principally
exploration and production assets that entered into production) and also
considering the decline in our proved reserves and increasing domestic fuel
demand, which, as a result of regulatory requirements, obliged us to decrease
exports and import certain products (such as diesel) in order to satisfy
domestic demand at substantially lower prices. Domestic prices for diesel, for
example, in January 2008, were approximately U.S.$250/cubic meter lower, after
tax refunds, than international market prices, ensuring a loss on diesel imports
that are used to satisfy domestic diesel demand.
Our
operating income in 2006 decreased 24.9% compared to 2005 mainly as a result of:
our decline in production, which led us to purchase more crude oil from third
parties in order to maintain our pace of refining activity; increased
depreciation of fixed assets resulting from declines in our proved reserves; the
imposition of higher export taxes on most refined products; significant
increases in imports of diesel at international market prices in order to
satisfy domestic demand at substantially lower prices; and limitations on the
prices at which we sell gas and refined products in the domestic
market.
Macroeconomic
conditions
The Argentine economy has experienced
significant volatility in recent decades, characterized by periods
of low or negative growth and high variable levels of inflation. Inflation
reached its peak in the late 1980s and early 1990s. The annual inflation rate as
measured by the consumer price index was approximately 388% in 1988, 4,924% in 1989 and 1,344% in
1990. Due to inflationary pressures prior to the 1990s, the Argentine currency
was devalued repeatedly and macroeconomic instability led to broad fluctuations
in the real exchange rate of the Argentine currency relative to the U.S. dollar. To address these
pressures, past Argentine governments implemented various plans and utilized a
number of exchange rate systems.
With the enactment of the Convertibility
Law in 1991, inflation declined progressively and the Argentine economy enjoyed seven years of growth.
In the fourth quarter of 1998, adverse international financial conditions caused
the Argentine economy to enter into a recession and GDP to decrease in real
terms by 3.4% in 1999, 0.8% in 2000 and 4.4% in 2001. By the end of 2001, Argentina suffered a profound deterioration in
social and economic conditions, accompanied by high political and economic
instability. The restrictions on the withdrawal of bank deposits, the imposition
of exchange controls, the suspension of the payment of Argentina’s public debt and the abrogation of the
peso’s one-to-one peg to the dollar (with the
consequent depreciation of the peso against the dollar) caused a decline in economic
activity. Real GDP declined
by 10.9% in 2002, annual inflation rose to 41%, the exchange rate
continued to be highly volatile, and the unemployment rate rose to more than
20%. The political and
economic instability not only curtailed commercial and financial activities in
Argentina but also severely restricted
the country’s access to international
financing.
Strong economic growth in the
world’s developed economies and favorable raw
material pricing from 2003
through 2007 paved the way for Argentina’s economic recovery. Real GDP grew by
8.7% in 2003, 9.0% in 2004, 9.2% in 2005, 8.5% in 2006 and 8.7%, based
on preliminary data, in 2007. Public finances both at national and provincial
levels recorded a consolidated primary surplus of approximately 5.5% of GDP in
2004, 4.5% in 2005, 3.5% in 2006 and 3.2%,
based on preliminary data,
in 2007. Argentina has also maintained a trade surplus, which from 2003
to 2007 averaged approximately 7% of GDP.
The annual wholesale price index,
according to the INDEC, increased by 2% in 2003, 7.9% in 2004, 10.6% in
2005, 7.1% in 2006
and 14.4% in 2007.
According to a recent
report published by the International Monetary Fund, however, most private
sector analysts believe that actual inflation is considerably higher than
reflected in official data. The government’s main strategy to fight increasing inflation has been the
establishment of agreed price controls with private
companies.
With its economic recovery well under
way, in 2005, Argentina successfully completed the restructuring of a substantial
portion of its bond indebtedness and cancelled all of its debt with the
International Monetary Fund
(“IMF”). The country is actively working to
renegotiate the remaining portion of its external public debt and to resolve the
claims brought before international courts by foreign companies
affected during the
crisis.
Global
macroeconomic conditions have a direct effect on economic conditions in
Argentina and, in particular, on Argentine domestic energy consumption trends.
Global economic growth remained solid during the first half of 2007, but the
downside risks and uncertainty surrounding growth prospects have recently
increased. Latin America continued to expand vigorously, driven by strong
commodity prices and growing domestic demand. However, there are some signs that
the improved fundamentals may erode if certain regulatory policies are not
strengthened. Fiscal and external surpluses are forecast to weaken in many
countries, and inflation has been rising, exacerbated by rising international
food prices, as output has come closer to potential.
According
to the IMF, world output is expected to expand by 4.8% in 2008. The global
economy is being supported by the expansion in emerging market countries. In
particular, the economies of the leading emerging Asian countries, China and
India, are expected to grow by approximately 10% and 8.5%, respectively, in
2008. United States growth is projected at 1.9% in 2008, reflecting the
continuing housing correction and the negative impact on confidence of the
recent financial turmoil. The rate of expansion is expected to slow to 2.1% and
1.7% in the euro area and Japan, respectively. The U.S. dollar has continued to
depreciate against the euro and a broad range of other currencies, including
those of emerging market countries. The exchange market pressures in emerging
economies have generally been reflected in exchange rate appreciation, rapid
accumulation of international reserves and strong domestic credit
growth.
Worldwide
oil prices continued to increase during 2007 and 2008 to date, reaching over
U.S.$110 per barrel (WTI) in April 2008, driven by strong demand, the decrease
in the United States’ reserves, the decrease in the value of the U.S. dollar,
and social and political conflicts in producing areas.
Within the
above-mentioned international and regional context, the economic growth rate of
Argentina remained strong during 2007. Preliminary data show that real GDP
increased 8.7% compared with 2006, driven by fixed investment and private
consumption.
Total
exports from Argentina increased by 20% year over year (YoY) to U.S.$55,933
million in 2007, mainly driven by an increase in exports of agricultural
products, while imports increased by 31% in the same period due to higher growth
in consumption and investment. The trade surplus decreased by 9.4%, falling from
U.S.$12,306 million in 2006 to U.S.$11,154 million in 2007.
The
unemployment rate continued to fall, consistent with economic growth. The data
corresponding to the fourth quarter of 2007 showed that 7.5% of the active
population was unemployed, 1.2 percentage points lower than the 8.7% rate in the
prior year. Average real wages of the economy increased by 13% (YoY) between
December 2006 and December 2007, according to the INDEC’s inflation rate based
on the consumer price index (8.5%).
The
Central Bank continued its policy of accumulating international reserves and
maintaining a competitive exchange rate during 2007. Central Bank reserves were
at U.S.$46 billion at the end of the year, and the peso/dollar buying exchange
rate increased to Ps.3.15 per dollar, a 2.9% (YoY) nominal depreciation. The
real exchange rate of the Argentine peso against a basket of currencies,
measured using the INDEC'S inflation rate based on the consumer price
index showed a 10% real depreciation throughout the year.
Government
fiscal revenues increased by 33% (YoY) in 2007 and extraordinary revenues of
Ps.7,814 million were generated as a result of pension
reform, but an even higher rise in public expenditures (46%) led to a reduction
in the national primary fiscal surplus from 3.5% of GDP in 2006 to 3.2% of GDP,
based on preliminary data, in 2007. In relation to public debt, two issues are
still pending: (i) a portion of the defaulted debt that was not included in the
2005 debt swap (the so-called “Paris Club”) has not yet been resolved and (ii)
certain government bondholders have not accepted the government’s debt
restructuring proposal.
The
Argentine economy has begun 2008 with favorable prospects in terms of economic
growth, but with concerns over inflation, energy supply and the international
economic context in the near future. However, we cannot predict the evolution of
future macroeconomic events, or the effect that they are likely to have on our
business, financial condition and results of operations. See “Item 3. Key
Information—Risk Factors—Risks Relating to Argentina.”
Energy
consumption in Argentina has increased significantly since 2003, driven in part
by price limitations that have kept Argentine energy prices substantially below
international prices. Continued growth in demand and a particularly harsh winter
in 2007 have recently led to fuel shortages and power outages, prompting the
Argentine government to take additional measures to assure domestic supply. At
the same time, growth in the production of certain hydrocarbon products has
slowed, and in the case of crude oil production has recently declined, due to
Argentina’s maturing oil and gas fields. As a result of this increasing demand
and actions taken by the Argentine regulatory authorities to prioritize domestic
supply, exported volumes of hydrocarbon products, especially natural gas,
declined steadily over this period. At the same time, Argentina has increased
hydrocarbon imports.
The table
below shows Argentina’s total sales, production, exports and imports of crude
oil, natural gas, diesel and gasoline products for the periods
indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Crude
Oil in Argentina
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Production
(mmbbl)
|
|
|
234.7 |
|
|
|
240.7 |
|
|
|
243.0 |
|
Exports
(mmbbl)
|
|
|
20.8 |
|
|
|
32.0 |
|
|
|
54.6 |
|
Imports
(mmbbl)
|
|
|
0.3 |
|
|
|
0.6 |
|
|
|
1.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Natural
Gas in Argentina
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales
(mmcm)(1)
|
|
|
38,532.0 |
|
|
|
36,362.0 |
|
|
|
34,685.0 |
|
Production
(mmcm)
|
|
|
51,007.0 |
|
|
|
51,779.0 |
|
|
|
51,573.0 |
|
Exports
(mmcm)
|
|
|
1,245.0 |
|
|
|
2,487.0 |
|
|
|
6,600.1 |
|
Imports
(mmcm)
|
|
|
1,239.5 |
|
|
|
1,428.5 |
|
|
|
1,610.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diesel
in Argentina
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales
(mcm)(2)
|
|
|
14,754.9 |
|
|
|
13,903.4 |
|
|
|
13,074.4 |
|
Production
(mcm)
|
|
|
12,915.6 |
|
|
|
12,570.3 |
|
|
|
11,673.4 |
|
Exports
(mcm)
|
|
|
46.6 |
|
|
|
108.8 |
|
|
|
276.4 |
|
Imports
(mcm)
|
|
|
847.1 |
|
|
|
446.9 |
|
|
|
678.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gasoline
in Argentina
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales
(mcm)(2)
|
|
|
5,285.6 |
|
|
|
4,608.4 |
|
|
|
4,028.6 |
|
Production
(mcm)
|
|
|
5,965.2 |
|
|
|
5,889.3 |
|
|
|
6,043.1 |
|
Exports
(mcm)
|
|
|
1,400.9 |
|
|
|
1,732.0 |
|
|
|
2,955.2 |
|
Imports
(mcm)
|
|
|
23.0 |
|
|
|
33.2 |
|
|
|
14.1 |
|
(1)
|
Includes
total domestic market deliveries.
|
(2)
|
Includes
domestic market sales.
|
|
Sources:
Argentine Secretariat of Energy and Ente Nacional Regulador del Gas
(ENARGAS)
|
Policy
and regulatory developments in Argentina
The
Argentine oil and gas industry is currently subject to certain governmental
policies and regulations that have resulted in: domestic prices that are
substantially lower than prevailing international market prices; export
restrictions; domestic supply requirements that oblige us from time to time to
divert supplies from the export or industrial markets in order to meet domestic
consumer demand; and increasingly higher export duties on the
volumes of
hydrocarbons allowed to be exported. See “Item 4. Information on the
Company—Regulatory Framework and Relationship with the Argentine Government.”
These governmental pricing limitations, export controls and tax policies have
been implemented in an effort to satisfy increasing domestic market demand at
prices below international market prices. As discussed in “Item 3. Key
Information—Risk Factors” and
elsewhere in this annual report, actions by the Argentine government have had
and will continue to have a significant effect on Argentine companies, including
us.
Policy and
regulatory developments relating to the oil and gas industry in Argentina
include, among others:
·
|
Price limitations. In
order to support economic growth, the Argentine government has sought to
limit increases in hydrocarbons prices through a number of policies and
measures. As a result, Argentina’s domestic hydrocarbon prices have not
increased at the pace of international and regional prices, as described
in “—Differences between Argentine and international prices for
hydrocarbon products.”
|
·
|
Export restrictions.
Since 2004, the Argentine government has prioritized domestic demand and
adopted policies and regulations restricting the export of certain
hydrocarbon products. These restrictions have impacted our export sales as
described in “—Declining export
volumes.”
|
·
|
Export duties. Since
the economic crisis in 2002, the Argentine government has imposed export
taxes on certain hydrocarbon products. These taxes have increased
substantially in the following years as international prices have surged.
For a description of the most recent export duties on hydrocarbon exports,
see “—International oil and gas prices and Argentine export
taxes.”
|
·
|
Domestic supply
requirements. The Argentine government has at times issued
regulatory orders requiring producers to inject natural gas in excess of
contractual commitments and supply other hydrocarbon products to the
domestic market. As a result, we have had to limit our exports. In
addition, we have imported diesel in order to satisfy domestic demand,
which has increased our operating costs, as described in “—Increasing cost
of sales.”
|
·
|
Energy Substitution
Program. The Argentine Secretariat of Energy, by Resolution SE No.
459/07 of July 12, 2007, created the “Energy Substitution Program” (Programa de Energía
Total), which is designed to mitigate shortages of natural gas and
electricity by encouraging industrial users to substitute natural gas and
electricity during the Argentine winter with imported diesel, fuel oil and
LPG subsidized by the government. See “Item 4. Information on the
Company—Regulatory Framework and Relationship with the Argentine
Government—Market Regulation—Refined Products.” Under this program, we and
other companies import diesel, fuel oil and LPG that we then sell to
industrial users in Argentina at the prevailing domestic natural gas
prices, with the difference refunded to us by the Argentine government. As
a result, this program has the effect of increasing our net sales and
volumes sold, but is operating income-neutral since we do not earn any
margin on products sold under this
program.
|
Declining
export volumes
The
exported volumes of many of our hydrocarbon products have declined significantly
in recent years, driven mainly by increasing domestic demand and export
restrictions, as well as by declines in production. This shift from exports to
domestic sales has impacted our results of operations as the prices for
hydrocarbons in the domestic market have, due to price limitations, generally
not kept pace with international and regional prices.
The table
below presents, for the periods indicated, the exported volumes of certain of
our principal hydrocarbon products.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(units
sold)
|
|
Oil
(mcm)
|
|
|
425 |
|
|
|
874 |
|
|
|
1,776 |
|
Natural
gas (mmcm)
|
|
|
1,358 |
|
|
|
3,090 |
|
|
|
3,071 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(units
sold)
|
|
Diesel
(mcm)
|
|
|
133 |
|
|
|
149 |
|
|
|
327 |
|
Gasoline
(mcm)
|
|
|
1,272 |
|
|
|
1,695 |
|
|
|
2,385 |
|
Fuel
oil (mtn)
|
|
|
1,187 |
|
|
|
903 |
|
|
|
696 |
|
Petrochemicals
(mtn)
|
|
|
689 |
|
|
|
700 |
|
|
|
749 |
|
Due to the
decreased export product volumes indicated above and increasing export duties,
the portion of our net sales accounted for by exports decreased steadily between
2005 and 2007. Exports accounted for 28.9%, 33.7% and
37.7% of our consolidated net sales in 2007, 2006 and 2005,
respectively.
The
Argentine government’s current policy is not to allow any exports of natural gas
other than to the residential sector in certain other countries. In addition,
the Argentine government requires companies intending to export crude oil,
diesel and LPG to obtain prior authorization from the Secretariat of Energy by
demonstrating that local demand for those products has been satisfied. Since
2005, because domestic diesel production has generally not been sufficient to
satisfy Argentine consumption needs, exports of diesel have been substantially
restricted.
International
oil and gas prices and Argentine export taxes
Since the
economic crisis in 2002, in order to prioritize domestic demand, the Argentine
government has imposed export taxes on certain hydrocarbon products. These taxes
have increased substantially in the following years as international prices have
surged. For a description of these taxes, see “Item 4. Information on the
Company—Regulatory Framework and Relationship with the Argentine
Government—Taxation.” These export taxes have significantly affected
the profitability of hydrocarbon exportation. They have also contributed to a
shift away from exports and towards domestic sales, as described in “—Declining
export volumes,” and reduced the export parity prices.
The
average export sales price per barrel of oil realized by us from Argentina was
U.S.$51.67 in 2007, U.S.$53.11 in 2006 and U.S.$41.31 in 2005. The average
export price per barrel of WTI was U.S.$72.23, U.S.$66.18 and U.S.$56.58 in
2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
On
November 16, 2007, the Ministry of Economy and Production published Resolution
394/07, modifying the duties on exports of crude oil and other crude oil
derivative products. The new regime provides that when the WTI international
price exceeds the reference price, which is fixed at U.S.$60.9/barrel, the
producer shall be allowed to collect U.S.$42/barrel, with the remainder being
withheld by the Argentine government as an export tax. If the WTI international
price is under the reference price but over U.S.$45/barrel, a 45% withholding
rate will apply. If such price is under U.S.$45/barrel, the applicable export
tax is to be determined within a term of 90 business days. The withholding rate
determined as indicated above also currently applies to diesel, gasoline and
other crude derivative products. In addition, the calculation procedure
described above also applies to other petroleum products and lubricants based
upon different withholding rates, reference prices and prices allowed to
producers. See “Item 4. Information on the Company—Regulatory Framework and
Relationship with the Argentine Government—Market Regulation.”
Resolution
534/06 of the Ministry of Economy and Production increased the tax on natural
gas export sales to 45% and required the Customs General Administration to apply
this tax rate to the price for natural gas set by the Framework Agreement
between Argentina and Bolivia (approximately U.S.$6/mmBtu in December 2007),
irrespective of the actual price of such natural gas export sales. Because we
entered into certain long-term natural gas supply contracts several years ago,
our average natural gas export prices are generally substantially lower than the
price set by the Framework Agreement between Argentina and Bolivia, although
higher than the price at which we purchase gas from ENARSA (approximately U.S.
$1.8/mmBtu in December 2007).
In addition, in the first quarter of
2008, Resolution No. 127/2008 of the Ministry of Economy and Production
increased export duties applicable to natural gas exports from 45% to 100%,
mandating a valuation basis for the
calculation of the duty as the highest
price established in any contract of any Argentine importer for the import of
gas, abandoning the previously applicable reference price set by the Framework
Agreement between Argentina and Bolivia mentioned above. Resolution No. 127/2008
provides with respect to LPG products (including butane, propane and blends
thereof) that if the international price of the relevant LPG product, as
notified daily by the Secretariat of Energy, is under the reference price
established for such product in the Resolution (U.S.$338/m3 for propane,
U.S.$393/m3 for butane and U.S.$363/m3 for blends of the two), the applicable
export duty for such product will be 45%. If the international price exceeds the
reference price, the producer shall be allowed to collect the maximum amount
established by the Resolution for the relevant product (U.S.$223/m3 for propane,
U.S.$271/m3 for butane and U.S.$250/m3 for blends of the two), with the
remainder being withheld by the Argentine government as an export
tax.
Taxes for
a number of other hydrocarbon products have also increased in recent months. See
“Item 4. Information on the Company—Regulatory Framework and Relationship with
the Argentine Government—Taxation.”
Certain of
these recent export tax increases were not yet in effect in 2007 or were not in
effect during the entire year. As a result, the effects of these export taxes
are not fully reflected in our financial information included in this annual
report. While some parts of these Resolutions have yet to be definitively
interpreted, we expect these recent export tax increases to continue to
adversely affect our export net sales and margins in future financial periods,
especially with respect to any exports of natural gas, diesel, gasoline and
petrochemical products. We exported 1,358 mmcm of natural gas, 133 mcm of
diesel, 1,273 mcm of gasoline and 689 mtn of petrochemical products in 2007, and
our exports accounted for 28.9% of our consolidated net sales in this
period.
Differences
between Argentine and international prices for hydrocarbon products
In recent
years, domestic prices for our products have fallen significantly below
international prices as a result of regulatory policies that have resulted in
limitations on our ability to increase domestic prices sufficiently to keep pace
with international market prices. The following table sets forth the average
prices at which we sold our principal products in the domestic market (net of
taxes passed through to consumers, such as value added and fuel transfer taxes)
for the periods indicated:
|
|
For
the Year Ended
December
31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Peso
|
|
|
|
U.S.
$ |
(1) |
|
Peso
|
|
|
|
U.S.
$ |
(1) |
|
Peso
|
|
|
|
U.S.
$ |
(1) |
Natural
gas(2)(3)
|
|
|
171 |
|
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
156 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
127 |
|
|
|
44 |
|
Diesel(4)(5)
|
|
|
1,060 |
|
|
|
337 |
|
|
|
862 |
|
|
|
282 |
|
|
|
839 |
|
|
|
289 |
|
Gasoline
products(6)
|
|
|
978 |
|
|
|
310 |
|
|
|
887 |
|
|
|
291 |
|
|
|
879 |
|
|
|
302 |
|
(1)
|
Amounts
translated from Argentine pesos at the average exchange rate for the
period.
|
(2)
|
Per
thousand cubic meters.
|
(3)
|
Reflects
the average of residential prices (which are generally lower than prices
to other segments) and industrial
prices.
|
(4)
|
Per
cubic meter. Does not include sales by Refinor, in which we have a 50%
interest and which is proportionally consolidated in our consolidated
financial statements.
|
(5)
|
Our
average price for diesel in 2007 was positively affected by sales at
import parity prices under the Energy Substitution Program. Such sales
accounted for 59 mcm of our total of 8,352 mcm of diesel sold in the
domestic market during this period.
|
(6)
|
Per
cubic meter. Does not include sales by Refinor, in which we have a 50%
interest, and which is proportionally consolidated in our consolidated
financial statements. The average price shown for each period is the
volume-weighted average price of the various grades of gasoline products
sold by us in the domestic market during such
period.
|
The
disparity between the prices at which hydrocarbon products are sold in Argentina
and the prevailing international prices for such products has been mainly due to
limitations on our ability to pass increases in international prices of crude
oil and hydrocarbon fuels and adverse exchange rate movements through to
domestic
prices or
to increase local prices of natural gas (in particular for residential
customers), gasoline and diesel. In a framework of increasing international
prices, and notwithstanding our leading market position, domestic liquid fuel
prices are still well below the level consistent with export/import parity
prices.
For
example, in January 2008, diesel import prices were approximately U.S.$700/cubic
meter, while the average domestic sales prices were approximately U.S.$350/cubic
meter before government subsidies. In addition, the price at which Bolivia
exports natural gas to Argentina (which is purchased by ENARSA) was
approximately U.S.$6/mmBtu in December 2007 (approximately U.S.$6.98/mmBtu in
March 2008), while the price at which we purchase natural gas from ENARSA was
approximately U.S.$1.8/mmBtu and our average sales price for such gas in
Argentina was approximately U.S.$2.29/mmBtu.
In
addition, pursuant to Resolution 599/2007 of the Secretariat of Energy dated
June 14, 2007 (see “Item 4. Information on the Company—Regulatory Framework and
Relationship with the Argentine Government—Market Regulation—Natural gas”), the
Argentine government and gas producers, including us, entered into an agreement
for the supply of certain volumes of gas to each segment of the domestic market
during the period 2007 through 2011. Under this agreement, we have supplied a
total volume of 2,674 million cubic meters of gas from August through December
2007 (representing 34% of our total gas volume sales for the same period) to
domestic residential and small commercial consumers at a price of approximately
Ps.0.50/mmBtu for that period.
Relative
maturity of our oil and gas assets
Argentina’s
oil and gas fields are mature and, as a result, our reserves and production are
declining as reserves are depleted. Because we mainly have concessions for
mature oil and gas fields that are undergoing natural production declines, it is
difficult to replace our proved reserves from other categories of reserves. In
2007, our estimated proved oil reserves and oil production declined by 8.38% and
4.76%, respectively, over the preceding year, while our estimated proved gas
reserves and gas production declined by 7.65% and 2.46%, respectively, over the
same period. As a result, in an effort to maintain our high refinery utilization
rates and because of regulatory requirements to supply certain hydrocarbon
products to the domestic market, we purchased crude oil and natural gas from
third parties. In 2007 and 2006, our crude production, substantially all of
which was destined to our refineries, represented approximately 83% and 90%,
respectively, of the total crude oil processed by our refineries, and in 2007
and 2006, our natural gas production represented approximately 99% and 93%,
respectively, of our total natural gas sales. We expect our oil and gas proved
reserves and production rates to continue their decline. See “Item 4.
Information on the Company—Exploration and Production—Reserves” for more
information on our proved reserves.
We are
currently developing a plan to increase our recovery factors. This plan, known
by its Spanish acronym “PLADA,” includes comprehensive reviews of each field,
including its development strategy, to identify opportunities in the light of
new technologies. We have also become increasingly active in exploratory
offshore drilling projects, as well as onshore fields through extended reach
wells to find gas. We have budgeted approximately U.S.$2 billion in total
capital expenditures for 2008, a significant portion of which will be dedicated
to our exploration and production activities. While our oil and gas reserves
have recently declined, we increased our investment in recovery technology and
exploration in 2007 and, based on our current expectations of increased prices,
expect to continue to do so in the future, with the goal of improving our
recovery factors. Many of our fields have characteristics similar to mature
fields in other regions (including the United States) that have achieved
substantially higher reserve recovery factors through the application of new
technologies similar to those we are currently studying. We cannot assure you,
however, that we will be able to improve our recovery factors. In addition, the
financial viability of these investments and reserve recovery efforts generally
will depend on the prevailing economic and regulatory conditions in
Argentina.
Increasing
cost of sales
Our cost
of sales accounted for 65.3%, 61.7% and 49.2% of our consolidated net sales in
2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively. Our cost of sales increased significantly
between 2005 and 2007, mainly as a result of: increased purchases of crude oil
from third parties, driven by our efforts to maintain our high refinery
utilization rates in light of our declining production; increased purchases of
natural gas and diesel from third parties to fulfill our domestic
supply
requirements and avoid penalties under certain delivery contracts; higher labor
costs; higher costs related to the renegotiation of certain service contracts;
and inflation. Due to prevailing Argentine price limitations, we were unable to
pass many of these cost increases to our customers in the form of higher
hydrocarbon product prices.
Seasonality
Historically,
our results have been subject to seasonal fluctuations during the year,
particularly as a result of greater natural gas sales during the winter. After
the 2002 devaluation and as a consequence of the natural gas price freeze
imposed by the Argentine government, the use of this fuel has diversified,
generating an increase in its long-term demand throughout the year. However,
sales of natural gas are still typically much higher in the winter to the
residential sector of the Argentine domestic market, the prices for which are
significantly lower than other sectors of the Argentine market.
Critical
Accounting Policies
Our
accounting policies are described in Notes 1 and 2 to the Audited Consolidated
Financial Statements. Argentine GAAP requires us to make estimates and
assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, revenues
and expenses and disclosures of contingent assets and liabilities in our
financial statements. Actual results could differ from those estimates. We
consider the following policies to be most critical in understanding the
judgments that are involved in preparing our financial statements and the
uncertainties that could impact our results of operations, financial condition
and cash flows.
Functional
currency
We have
determined the U.S. dollar as our functional currency in accordance with the
Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) 52. For U.S. GAAP
reconciliation purposes, financial statements are re-measured into U.S. dollars
and the assets and liabilities are translated into Argentine pesos (“reporting
currency”) at the exchange rate prevailing at year end and revenues, expenses,
gains and losses are translated at the exchange rate existing at the time of
each transaction, or, if appropriate, at a weighted average of the exchange
rates during the year.
In
determining the functional currency, we make judgments based on the collective
economic indicators affecting us. The economic indicators we review include the
currency in which cash flows are denominated, how sales prices are determined,
the sales markets in which we operate, how our operating costs are derived, how
financing is obtained and the level of intra-group transactions with Repsol YPF,
our controlling shareholder. A significant change in the facts and circumstances
over the long-term relating to the collective economic indicators discussed
above would result in our reassessing the functional currency.
The
determination of the functional currency to be applied to a business for
accounting purposes is a decision that impacts, among other things, the reported
results of operations, the exchange income or losses recorded and the
translation differences arising from the conversion of its financial statements
from the functional currency to the company’s reporting currency.
Oil
and gas reserves
The
estimation of oil and gas reserves is an integral part of the decision-making
process about oil and gas assets, such as whether development should proceed or
enhanced recovery methods should be implemented. As further explained below, oil
and gas reserve quantities are used for calculating depreciation of the related
oil and gas assets using the unit-of-production rates and also for evaluating
the impairment of our investments in upstream assets.
At YPF,
all the assumptions made and the basis for the technical calculations used in
the estimates regarding oil and gas proved reserves are based on the guides and
definitions established by Rule 4-10(a) of Regulation S-X promulgated by the
SEC.
See “Item
4. Information on the Company—Exploration and Production—Reserves” for a
detailed discussion on reserves estimates internal control and
audits.
We follow
the “successful effort” method of accounting for our oil and gas exploration and
production operations. Accordingly, exploratory costs, excluding the costs of
exploratory wells, have been charged to expense as incurred. Costs of drilling
exploratory wells, including stratigraphic test wells, have been capitalized
pending determination as to whether the wells have found proved reserves that
justify commercial development. If such reserves were not found, the mentioned
costs are charged to expenses. Occasionally, however, an exploratory well may be
determined to have found oil and gas reserves, but classification of those
reserves as proved cannot be made when drilling is completed. In those cases,
the cost of drilling the exploratory well continues to be capitalized if the
well has found a sufficient quantity of reserves to justify its completion as a
producing well and the enterprise is making sufficient progress assessing the
reserves and the economic and operating viability of the project. If any of the
mentioned conditions are not met, the cost of drilling exploratory wells is
charged to expenses.
Intangible
drilling costs applicable to productive wells and to developmental dry holes, as
well as tangible equipment costs related to the development of oil and gas
reserves, have been capitalized.
The
capitalized costs related to producing activities, including tangible and
intangible costs, have been depreciated by field on the unit-of-production basis
by applying the ratio of produced oil and gas to estimated recoverable proved
and developed oil and gas reserves.
The
capitalized costs related to acquisitions of properties with proved reserves
have been depreciated by field on the unit-of-production basis by applying the
ratio of produced oil and gas to proved oil and gas reserves.
Revisions
of crude oil and natural gas proved reserves are considered prospectively in
calculating depreciation.
Foreign
unproved properties have been valued at costs translated as detailed in Note 1
to the Audited Consolidated Financial Statements. Capitalized costs related to
unproved properties are reviewed periodically by management to ensure that their
carrying value does not exceed their estimated recoverable value.
Impairment
of long-lived assets
We assess
the recoverability of our held-for-use assets on a business segment basis for
Argentine GAAP purposes. With respect to operations that are held as pending
sale or disposal, our policy is to record these assets at amounts that do not
exceed net realizable value.
For
Argentine GAAP, held-for-use properties, grouped by business segment, are
reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate
that the carrying amounts may not be recoverable. An asset would be impaired if
the discounted cash flows were less than its carrying value.
The
impairment of oil and gas producing properties is calculated as the difference
between the market value or, if appropriate, the discounted estimated future
cash flows from its proved reserves and unproved reserves, adjusted for risks
related to such reserves, in each field owned at the year end with the net book
value of the assets relating thereto. Expected future cash flows from the sale
or production of reserves are calculated considering crude oil prices based on a
combination of market forward quotes and standard long-term projections. The
discounted values of cash flows are determined using a reasonable and
supportable discount rate based on standard WACC-CAPM (weighted average cost of
capital—capital asset pricing model) assumptions including, if appropriate, a
risk premium related to this type of asset. The estimated cash flows are based
on future levels of production, the future commodity prices, lifting and
development costs, estimates of future expenditures necessary with respect to
undeveloped oil and gas reserves, field decline rates, market demand and supply,
economic regulatory conditions and other factors.
The
impairment of assets corresponding to our Refining and Marketing and
Chemical business segments is calculated as the difference between the
discounted estimated future cash flows from the use of those assets and the net
book value of the assets related thereto. The discounted values of cash flows
are determined using a discount rate we believe to be reasonable and supportable
based on standard WACC-CAPM (weighted average cost of capital—capital asset
pricing model) assumptions including, if appropriate, a risk premium related to
the type of asset. The estimated cash flows are based on future levels of
production, the future
estimated
prices of our products and costs, other estimates of future expenditures,
estimated useful life of the respective asset, market demand and supply,
economic regulatory conditions and other factors for each business
segment.
Charges
for impairment are recognized in our results from time to time as a result of,
among other factors, adverse changes in the recoverable reserves from oil and
natural gas fields, and changes in economic regulatory conditions. If proved
reserves estimates were revised downward, net income could be negatively
affected by higher impairment charges on the property’s book value.
Therefore,
our management must make reasonable and supportable assumptions and estimates
with respect to: (i) the market value of reserves, (ii) oil fields’ production
profiles and future production of refined and chemical products, (iii) future
investments, taxes and costs, (iv) risk factors for unproved reserves which are
measured based on the profile and potential of each specific exploration and
production asset, (v) future capital expenditures and useful life for properties
corresponding to our Refining and Marketing and Chemical business segments, and
(vi) future prices, among other factors. As such, any change in the variables
used to prepare such assumptions and estimates may have a significant effect on
the impairment tests relating to investments in areas with oil and gas
reserves.
Impact
of oil and gas reserves and prices on testing for impairment
Proved oil
and gas properties held and used by us are reviewed for impairment whenever
events or circumstances indicate that the carrying amounts may not be
recoverable. Impairments are measured by the amount by which the carrying value
exceeds its fair value.
We perform
asset valuation analyses on an ongoing basis as a part of our asset management
program. In general, we do not view temporarily low oil prices as a triggering
event for conducting the impairment tests. Accordingly, any impairment tests
that we perform make use of our long-term price assumptions for the crude oil
and natural gas markets and petroleum products.
Depreciation
of oil and gas producing properties
Volumes
produced and asset costs are known, while proved reserves have a high
probability of recoverability and are based on estimates that are subject to
some variability. The impact of changes in estimated proved reserves is treated
prospectively by depreciating the remaining book value of the assets over the
future expected production, affecting the following year’s net income. In 2007,
2006 and 2005 we recorded depreciation of fixed assets associated with
hydrocarbon reserves amounting to Ps. 3,564 million, Ps.3,223 million and
Ps.2,180 million, respectively.
Asset
retirement obligations
Future
costs related to hydrocarbon wells abandonment obligations are capitalized along
with the related assets, and are depreciated using the unit-of-production
method. As compensation, a liability is recognized for this concept at the same
estimated value of the discounted payable amounts. Future estimated retirement
obligations and removal costs are based on management’s best estimate of the
time that the event will occur and the assertion of costs to be incurred upon
the retirement or removal of the asset. Asset removal technologies and costs, as
well as political, environmental, safety and other requirements and public
expectations, are frequently changing. Consequently, the timing and future cost
of dismantling and abandonment are subject to significant modification. As such,
any change in variables used to prepare such assumptions and estimates can have,
as a consequence, a significant effect on the liability and the related
capitalized asset and future charges related to the retirement obligations. Future
obligations are reviewed at the end of each fiscal year upon consideration of
the current costs incurred in abandonment obligations on a field-by-field basis
or other external available information if abandonment obligations were not
performed. Due to the number of the wells in operation and/or not abandoned and
the complexity with respect to different geographic areas where the wells are
located, the current costs incurred in plugging are extrapolated to the wells
pending abandonment. Management believes that current plugging costs incurred
are the best source of information at the end of each fiscal year to estimate
asset retirement obligations.
Environmental
liabilities, litigation and other contingencies
Environmental
liabilities are recorded when environmental assessments and/or remediation are
probable, material and can be reasonably estimated. Such estimates are based on
either detailed feasibility studies of remediation approach and cost for
individual sites, or on our estimate of costs to be incurred based on historical
experience and available information for the stage of assessment and/or
remediation of each site. As additional information becomes available regarding
each site or as environmental standards change, we revise our estimate of costs
to be incurred in environmental assessment and/or remediation.
Reserves
are established to cover litigation and other contingencies, including counsel
fees and judicial expenses, which are probable and can be reasonably estimated.
The final costs arising from litigation and other contingencies may vary from
our estimates due to changes in laws or differing interpretations of laws, the
issuance of court decisions or other opinions and final assessments on the
amount of claims. Changes in the facts or circumstances related to these types
of contingencies, as well as the future outcome of these disputes, can have, as
a consequence, a significant effect on the reserves for litigation and other
contingencies recorded.
Reserves
totaling Ps.2,319 million, Ps.1,952 million and Ps.1,561 million as of December
31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively, have been established in connection with
contingencies which were probable and could be reasonably estimated as of those
dates.
U.S.
GAAP reconciliation
The
recurrent difference between our net income under Argentine GAAP and our net
income under U.S. GAAP for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005 is
primarily due to the remeasurement into functional currency and translation into
reporting currency, the elimination of the remeasurement into Argentine constant
pesos, the effects of the reorganization of entities under common control, the
impairment of long-lived assets, capitalization of financial expenses,
accounting for assets retirement obligations, proportional consolidation of
investments in jointly controlled companies, and the consolidation of variable
interest entities.
Under
Argentine GAAP, financial statements are presented in constant Argentine pesos
(“reporting currency”). Foreign currency transactions are recorded in Argentine
pesos by applying to the foreign currency amount the exchange rate between the
reporting and the foreign currency at the date of the transaction. Exchange rate
differences arising on monetary items in foreign currency are recognized in the
income statement of the period.
Under U.S.
GAAP, a definition of the functional currency is required which may differ from
the reporting currency. Management has determined, for us and certain of our
subsidiaries and investees, the U.S. dollar to be the functional currency in
accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No.52 “Foreign
Currency Translation” (“SFAS No. 52”). Therefore, we have re-measured into U.S.
dollars the Audited Consolidated Financial Statements as of December 31, 2007,
2006 and 2005, in each case prepared in accordance with Argentine GAAP by
applying the procedures specified in SFAS No. 52. The objective of the
re-measurement process is to produce the same results that would have been
reported if the accounting records had been kept in the functional currency.
Accordingly, monetary assets and liabilities are re-measured at the balance
sheet date (current) exchange rate. Amounts carried at prices in past
transactions are re-measured at the exchange rates in effect when the
transactions occurred. Revenues and expenses are re-measured on a monthly basis
at the average rates of exchange in effect during the period, except for
consumption of non-monetary assets, which are re-measured at the rates of
exchange in effect when the respective assets were acquired. Translation gains
and losses on monetary assets and liabilities arising from the re-measurement
are included in the determination of net income (loss) in the period such gains
and losses arise. For certain of our subsidiaries and investees, we have
determined the Argentine peso as the functional currency. Translation
adjustments resulting from the process of translating the financial statements
of the mentioned subsidiaries into U.S. dollars are not included in determining
net income and are reported in other comprehensive income, as a component of
shareholders’ equity.
The
amounts obtained from the re-measurement process referred to above are
translated into Argentine pesos under the provisions of SFAS No. 52. Assets and
liabilities are translated at the current selling exchange rate of Ps.3.15,
Ps.3.06 and Ps.3.03 to U.S.$1, as of December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005,
respectively. Revenues, expenses,
gains and
losses reported in the income statement are translated at the exchange rate
existing at the time of each transaction or, if appropriate, at the weighted
average of the exchange rates during the period. Translation effects of exchange
rate changes are included as a cumulative translation adjustment in
shareholders’ equity. For the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, the
re-measurement into functional currency and the translation into reporting
currency decreased net income determined according to Argentine GAAP by Ps.1,513
million, Ps.2,065 million and Ps.1,479 million, respectively.
Under
Argentine GAAP, we have proportionally consolidated, net of intercompany
transactions, assets, liabilities, net revenues, cost and expenses of investees
in which joint control is held. Under U.S. GAAP, these investees are accounted
for by the equity method. The proportional consolidation mentioned above
generated an increase of Ps.486 million, Ps.446 million and Ps.381 million in
total assets and total liabilities as of December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005,
respectively, and an increase of Ps.1,350 million, Ps.1,451 million and Ps.1,216
million in net sales and Ps.690 million, Ps.774 million and Ps.681 million in
operating income for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005,
respectively.
Under
Argentine GAAP, in order to perform the recoverability test, long-lived assets
are grouped with other assets at business segment level, and they would be
impaired if the discounted cash flows, considered at business segment level,
were less than its carrying value. With respect to assets that were held pending
sale or disposal, our policy was to record these assets on an individual basis
at amounts that did not exceed net realizable value.
Under U.S.
GAAP, for proved oil and gas properties, we perform the impairment review on an
individual field basis. Other long-lived assets are aggregated, so that the
individual cash flows produced by each group of assets may be separately
analyzed. Each asset is tested following the guidelines of SFAS No. 144,
“Accounting for the Impairment of Long-Lived Assets,” by comparing the net book
value of such an asset with the expected cash flow. Impairment losses are
measured as the amount by which the carrying amount of the assets exceeds the
fair value of the assets. When fair values are not available, we estimate fair
value using the expected future cash flows discounted at a rate commensurate
with the risks associated with the recovery of the assets. The accumulated
adjustments under U.S. GAAP of the impairment provisions as of December 31,
2007, 2006 and 2005 were Ps.554 million, Ps.491 million and Ps.611 million,
respectively, mainly corresponding to our Exploration and Production segment.
Impairment charges under U.S. GAAP amounted to Ps.111 million, Ps.80
million and Ps.2 million for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005,
respectively. In 2007, the impairment recorded was mainly the result of a
decrease in oil and gas reserves affecting certain long-lived assets of our
Exploration and Production business segment. In 2006, the impairment recorded
was mainly the result of the downward revision in reserves made by us in
December 2006, as well as to certain non-strategic Exploration and Production
areas that were available for sale at that time, and accordingly were valued at
fair value less cost to sell. The impairment recorded in 2005 was mainly the
result of the downward revision in reserves made by us in December 2005. See
“Item 4. Information on the Company—Exploration and Production.” The impairment
reversal of Ps.69 million for the year ended December 31, 2007 and impairment
charge of Ps.69 million for the year ended December 31, 2006 discussed in Note
2(c) to the Audited Consolidated Financial Statements were eliminated for U.S.
GAAP purposes.
The
adjusted basis after impairment resulted in lower depreciation under U.S. GAAP
Ps.132 million, Ps.137 million and Ps.170 million for the years ended December
31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
Under U.S.
GAAP, only interest expense on qualifying assets must be capitalized, regardless
of the asset’s construction period. Under Argentine GAAP, for those assets that
necessarily take a substantial period of time to get ready for its intended use,
borrowing costs (including interest and exchange differences) should be
capitalized.
SFAS No.
143, Accounting for Assets Retirement Obligations, requires that the fair value
of a liability for an asset retirement obligation be recognized in the period in
which it is incurred, if a reasonable estimate of fair value can be made. The
asset retirement obligations liability is built up in cash flow layers, with
each layer being discounted using the discount rate as of the date that the
layer was created. Remeasurement of the entire obligation using current discount
rates is not permitted. Each cash flow layer is added to the carrying amount of
the associated asset. This additional carrying amount is then depreciated over
the life of the asset. The liability is increased due to the passage of time
based on the time value of money (“accretion expense”) until the obligation is
settled. Argentine
GAAP is
similar to SFAS No. 143, except a change in the discount rate is treated as a
change in estimates, so the entire liability must be recalculated using the
current discount rate, being the change added or reduced from the related
asset.
Under U.S.
GAAP, results on reorganization of entities under common control are eliminated
and related accounts receivables are considered as a capital (dividend)
transaction. Under Argentine GAAP, results on reorganization of entities under
common control and accounts receivables are recognized in the statement of
income and the balance sheet, respectively.
FIN No.
46R, Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities (“FIN 46R”), clarifies the
application of Accounting Research Bulletin No. 51 to certain entities in which
equity investors do not have the characteristics of a controlling financial
interest or do not have sufficient equity at risk for the entity to finance its
activities without additional subordinated financial support from other parties.
The interpretations explain how to identify variable interest entities and how
an enterprise assesses its interests in a variable interest entity to decide
whether to consolidate that entity. These interpretations require existing
unconsolidated variable interest entities to be consolidated by their primary
beneficiaries if the entities do not effectively disperse risks among parties
involved. Under Argentine GAAP, consolidation is based on the control of
corporate decisions through shareholding (Note 1 to the Audited Consolidated
Financial Statements).
As of
December 31, 2007, we had operations with one variable interest entity (“VIE”),
which has been created in order to structure our future deliveries of oil
(“FOS”). Additionally, up to September 2005, we had operations with a VIE
related to another FOS transaction, which was settled in advance. For a further
description refer to “—Transactions with unconsolidated variable interest
entities” below.
The
effects before taxes of such consolidation as of December 31, 2007, 2006 and
2005 were (i) an increase in loans by Ps.68 million, Ps.186 million and Ps.297
million, respectively, (ii) an increase in current assets by Ps.24 million,
Ps.19 million and Ps.18 million, respectively, (iii) the elimination of net
advances from crude oil purchasers from balance sheets by Ps.9 million, Ps.103
million and Ps.196 million respectively, and (iv) a decrease in shareholders’
equity by Ps.35 million, Ps.65 million and Ps.83 million,
respectively.
YPF
Holdings has non-contributory defined-benefit pension plans and postretirement
and postemployment benefits. On December 31, 2006, under U.S. GAAP the Company
adopted SFAS No. 158, “Employers’ Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension and
Other Postretirement Plans—an amendment of FASB Statements No. 87, 88, 106, and
132 (R).” Under provisions of SFAS No. 158, the Company fully recognized the
underfunded status of defined-benefit pension and postretirement plans as a
liability in the financial statements, reducing the Company’s shareholders’
equity through the accumulated OCI account. Unrecognized gains and losses are
recognized in the income statement during the expected average remaining working
lives of the employees participating in the plans and the life expectancy of
retired employees. Under Argentine GAAP, the benefits related to the plans were
valued at net present value and accrued based on the years of active service of
employees. The net liability for defined-benefits plans is the amount resulting
from the sum of: the present value of the obligations, net of the fair value of
the plan assets and net of the unrecognized actuarial losses generated since
December 31, 2003. These unrecognized actuarial losses and gains are recognized
in the statement of income during the expected average remaining working lives
of the employees participating in the plans and the life expectancy of retired
employees. Unrecognized actuarial losses are not considered in the amount of the
net liability. For a more detailed discussion of the most significant
differences between Argentine GAAP and U.S. GAAP, please refer to Notes 13, 14
and 15 to the Audited Consolidated Financial Statements.
Principal
Income Statement Line Items
The
following is a brief description of the principal line items of our income
statement.
Net
sales
Net sales
include primarily our consolidated sales of unrefined and refined fuel and
chemical products net of the payment of applicable fuel transfer taxes, turnover
taxes and custom duties on exports. Royalties with respect to our production are
accounted for as a cost of production and are not deducted in determining net
sales.
Cost
of sales
The
following table presents, for each of the years indicated, a breakdown of our
consolidated cost of sales by category:
|
|
For
the Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in
millions of pesos)
|
|
Inventories
at beginning of year
|
|
|
1,697 |
|
|
|
1,315 |
|
|
|
1,134 |
|
Purchases
for the period
|
|
|
6,637 |
|
|
|
4,351 |
|
|
|
2,755 |
|
Production
costs(1)
|
|
|
12,788 |
|
|
|
11,458 |
|
|
|
8,440 |
|
Holding
gains on inventories
|
|
|
451 |
|
|
|
394 |
|
|
|
244 |
|
Inventories
at end of period
|
|
|
(2,573 |
) |
|
|
(1,697 |
) |
|
|
(1,315 |
) |
Cost
of sales
|
|
|
19,000 |
|
|
|
15,821 |
|
|
|
11,258 |
|
(1)
|
The
table below presents, for each of the years indicated, a breakdown of our
consolidated production costs by
category:
|
|
|
For
the Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in
millions of pesos)
|
|
Salaries
and social security taxes
|
|
|
824 |
|
|
|
649 |
|
|
|
492 |
|
Fees
and compensation for services
|
|
|
174 |
|
|
|
114 |
|
|
|
63 |
|
Other
personnel expenses
|
|
|
283 |
|
|
|
215 |
|
|
|
158 |
|
Taxes,
charges and contributions
|
|
|
226 |
|
|
|
191 |
|
|
|
158 |
|
Royalties
and easements
|
|
|
1,989 |
|
|
|
2,095 |
|
|
|
1,745 |
|
Insurance
|
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
102 |
|
|
|
73 |
|
Rental
of real estate and equipment
|
|
|
331 |
|
|
|
258 |
|
|
|
212 |
|
Depreciation
of fixed assets
|
|
|
3,989 |
|
|
|
3,598 |
|
|
|
2,563 |
|
Industrial
inputs, consumable material and supplies
|
|
|
535 |
|
|
|
485 |
|
|
|
564 |
|
Operation
services and other service contracts
|
|
|
535 |
|
|
|
566 |
|
|
|
315 |
|
Preservation,
repair and maintenance
|
|
|
1,674 |
|
|
|
1,329 |
|
|
|
948 |
|
Contractual
commitments
|
|
|
596 |
|
|
|
519 |
|
|
|
131 |
|
Transportation,
products and charges
|
|
|
790 |
|
|
|
622 |
|
|
|
521 |
|
Fuel,
gas, energy and miscellaneous
|
|
|
736 |
|
|
|
715 |
|
|
|
497 |
|
Total
|
|
|
12,788 |
|
|
|
11,458 |
|
|
|
8,440 |
|
Other
expenses, net
Other
expenses principally include reserves for pending lawsuits and other claims,
provisions for environmental remediation and provisions for defined benefit
pension plans and other post-retirement benefits.
Finance
income/(expense), net and holding gains
Finance
income/(expense), net and holding gains consist of the net of gains and losses
on interest paid and interest earned, currency exchange differences and the
periodic revaluation of inventories.
Taxes
The
statutory corporate income tax rate in Argentina was 35% during each of the
periods presented in this annual report. Our effective tax rates for the periods
discussed in this annual report exceed the Argentine corporate income tax rate
mainly due to the non-deductibility of the amortization of the effect of
inflation indexation on fixed assets, offset in part by income on
non-consolidated long-term investments (which is included in our consolidated
financial statements net of corporate income tax as payable by investees) and
tax-free income from the sale of hydrocarbons produced in Tierra del Fuego. See
Note 3(k) to the Audited Consolidated Financial Statements.
Results
of Operations
Consolidated
results of operations for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and
2005
The
following table sets forth certain financial information as a percentage of net
sales for the years indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(percentage
of net sales)
|
|
Net
sales
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
Cost
of sales
|
|
|
(65.3 |
) |
|
|
(61.7 |
) |
|
|
(49.2 |
) |
Gross
profit
|
|
|
34.7 |
|
|
|
38.3 |
|
|
|
50.8 |
|
Administrative
expenses
|
|
|
(2.8 |
) |
|
|
(2.6 |
) |
|
|
(2.4 |
) |
Selling
expenses
|
|
|
(7.3 |
) |
|
|
(7.0 |
) |
|
|
(7.2 |
) |
Exploration
expenses
|
|
|
(1.8 |
) |
|
|
(1.8 |
) |
|
|
(1.2 |
) |
Operating
income
|
|
|
22.9 |
|
|
|
26.9 |
|
|
|
40.0 |
|
The tables
below present, for the years indicated, volume and price data with respect to
our consolidated sales of our principal products in the domestic and export
markets, respectively. The data presented below does not include sales by
Compañía Mega S.A.
("Mega"), Refinor or Profertil, jointly controlled companies in which we have
38%, 50% and 50% interests, respectively, and which are proportionally
consolidated in our consolidated financial statements. Mega contributed, after
consolidation adjustments, 1.6%, 1.6% and 1.6%, respectively, of our
consolidated net sales for 2007, 2006 and 2005. Refinor contributed, after
consolidation adjustments, 1.5%, 2.0% and 1.9%, respectively, of our
consolidated net sales for 2007, 2005 and 2005. Profertil contributed, after
consolidation adjustments, 1.5%, 2.1% and 1.8%, respectively, of our
consolidated net sales for 2007, 2006 and 2005.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
price
per
unit(1)
|
|
|
|
Average
price
per
unit(1)
|
|
|
|
Average
price
per
unit(1)
|
|
|
|
|
(in
pesos)
|
|
|
|
(in
pesos)
|
|
|
|
(in
pesos)
|
|
Natural
gas
|
16,771
mmcm
|
|
171/mcm
|
|
16,686
mmcm
|
|
156/mcm
|
|
17,609
mmcm
|
|
127/mcm
|
|
Diesel
(2)
|
8,352
mcm
|
|
1,060/m3
|
7,757
mcm
|
|
862/m3
|
|
6,959
mcm
|
|
839/m3
|
|
Gasoline
|
2,691
mcm
|
|
978/m3
|
|
2,246
mcm
|
|
887/m3
|
|
1,854
mcm
|
|
879/m3
|
|
Fuel
oil (3)
|
910
mtn
|
|
961/ton
|
|
458
mtn
|
|
939/ton
|
|
283
mtn
|
|
817/ton
|
|
Petrochemicals
|
754
mtn
|
|
1,510/ton
|
|
606
mtn
|
|
1,390/ton
|
|
595
mtn
|
|
1,187/ton
|
|
(1)
|
Average
prices shown are net of applicable domestic fuel transfer taxes payable by
consumers.
|
(2)
|
Includes
59 mcm sold under the Energy Substitution Program in
2007.
|
(3)
|
Includes
220 mtn sold under the Energy Substitution Program in
2007.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
price
per
unit(1)
|
|
|
|
Average
price
per
unit(1)
|
|
|
|
Average
price
per
unit(1)
|
|
|
|
|
(in
pesos)
|
|
|
|
(in
pesos)
|
|
|
|
(in
pesos)
|
|
Natural
gas
|
1,358 mmcm
|
|
354/mcm
|
|
3,090
mmcm
|
|
280/mcm
|
|
3,071 mmcm
|
|
196/mcm
|
|
Diesel
|
133 mcm
|
|
1,883/m3
|
|
149
mcm
|
|
1,686/m3
|
|
327 mcm
|
|
1,321/m3
|
|
Gasoline
|
1,273 mcm
|
|
1,746/m3
|
|
1,695
mcm
|
|
1,481/m3
|
|
2,385
mcm
|
|
1,220/m3
|
|
Fuel
oil
|
1,187
mtn
|
|
1,175/ton
|
|
903
mtn
|
|
967/ton
|
|
696
mtn
|
|
818/ton
|
|
Petrochemicals(2)
|
689 mtn
|
|
2,249/ton
|
|
700
mtn
|
|
2,010/ton
|
|
749
mtn
|
|
1,497/ton
|
|
|
(1)
|
Average
prices shown are gross of applicable export withholding taxes payable by
us, and, as a result, may not be indicative of amounts recorded by us as
net sales. See “—Factors Affecting Our Operations—International oil and
gas prices and Argentine export taxes” for more information on the export
tax withholding rates applicable to our principal
products.
|
(2) Includes
exports of refined paraffinic.
Net
sales
Net sales
in 2007 were Ps.29,104 million, representing a 13.5% increase compared to
Ps.25,635 million in 2006. This increase was primarily attributable to greater
sales volumes of diesel, gasoline, fuel oil and petrochemicals in the domestic
market (which increased 7.7%, 19.8%, 98.7% and 24.4%, respectively), as well as
to significant increases in average domestic diesel, gasoline and fuel oil
prices (which increased 23.0%, 10.3% and 2.3%, respectively). As a result, our
domestic sales increased 21.9% to Ps.20,704 million in 2007 from Ps.16,986
million in 2006. In addition, diesel and fuel oil sold under the Energy
Substitution Program also contributed to the increase in sales. Export sales
declined by 2.9% to Ps.8,400 million in 2007 from Ps.8,649 million in 2006,
driven by declines in the exported volumes of natural gas, gasoline and crude
oil (which decreased 56.1%, 24.9% and 51.4%, respectively), partially offset by
an increase in international gasoline prices. Our export sales in both periods
were made mainly to the United States, Brazil and Chile.
Net sales
for 2006 were Ps.25,635 million, representing an 11.9% increase from Ps.22,901
million in 2005. This increase was primarily attributable to the greater volume
of domestic sales of diesel (which increased 11.5%) and gasoline products (which
increased 21%), slight increases in the average domestic prices of these
products, as well as a 16% increase in the average domestic price of natural gas
attributable to the significantly increased portion of sales to industrial
segments of the Argentine market, which more than offset a 5% decrease in the
domestic volume of natural gas sold. As a result, domestic market sales
increased 19.1% to Ps.16,986 million in 2006 from Ps.14,257 million in 2005.
Exports were Ps.8,649 million in 2006 compared to Ps.8,644 million in
2005.
For
further information on our net sales for the periods discussed above, see
“—Results of operations by business segment for the years ended December 31,
2007, 2006 and 2005.”
Cost
of sales
Cost of
sales in 2007 was Ps.19,000 million, compared to Ps.15,821 million in 2006,
representing a 20.0% increase, which was mainly attributable to a 45% increase
in the volume of crude oil purchased from third parties, driven by our efforts
to maintain our high refinery utilization rates notwithstanding our declining
production, as well as to an increase in the volume of other products purchased
from third parties. In addition, depreciation of fixed assets increased 10.9%,
mainly as a result of increased asset values attributable to (i) higher
capitalized well abandonment obligations at the end of 2006, according to the
new estimates performed as of that time based on new information concerning
future costs associated with those activities, which began to be depreciated in
2007 based on the unit of production method and (ii) increased assets
(principally related to our Exploration and Production business segment) subject
to depreciation in 2007. Salaries and social security taxes, maintenance costs,
contract services and certain other production costs also increased, driven
mainly by inflation and the renegotiation of certain labor and service
contracts. Our contractual commitments contributed Ps.77 million to the increase
in cost of sales,
principally
due to an increase in penalties recorded for contractual liabilities (including
in connection with certain export contracts) to Ps.596 million in 2007 from
Ps.519 million in 2006.
Cost of
sales in 2006 was Ps.15,821 million compared to Ps.11,258 million in 2005,
representing a 40.5% increase, which was mainly attributable to a 21% increase
in average crude oil prices and a 147% increase in crude oil volume purchased
from third parties, partly in response to our declining production, to maintain
the operating pace of our refineries, and a 44% increase in average natural gas
prices and a 7% increase in the volume of natural gas imports to meet domestic
demand, as well as sharply increasing depreciation of fixed assets due to a
reduced base of proved reserves when computing depreciation rates. Additionally,
maintenance costs and contract services increased, we incurred penalties
resulting from our inability to deliver natural gas pursuant to our contractual
commitments (for further information, see “Item 8. Financial Information—Legal
Proceedings”), and royalties increased due to WTI price increases.
Selling
expenses
Our
selling expenses were Ps.2,120 million in 2007, Ps.1,797 million in 2006 and
Ps.1,650 million in 2005, representing an increase of 18.0% from 2006 to 2007
and an increase of 8.9% from 2005 to 2006.
Operating
income
Operating
income in 2007 was Ps.6,657 million, compared to Ps.6,883 million in 2006,
representing a decrease of 3.3%. Operating income decreased primarily due to the
increased purchases of crude oil and diesel from third parties described above,
as well as increased depreciation of fixed assets and other
expenses.
Operating
income in 2006 was Ps.6,883 million compared to Ps.9,161 million in 2005,
representing a decrease of 24.9%. Operating income decreased primarily due to
the previously mentioned increase in expenses (higher crude oil and natural gas
purchases and increased depreciation of fixed assets, maintenance costs and
contract services, among others) that were not offset by corresponding increases
in domestic prices, which increased at a substantially slower pace compared to
international prices.
Our
operating margins (operating income dividend by net sales) were 22.9%, 26.9% and
40.0% in 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively. Increased volumes of crude oil
purchases in 2007 and 2006 adversely affected our margins because we lost the
margin earned on our internal exploration and production
activities.
Other
expenses, net
Other
expenses, net increased 115.2% to Ps.439 million in 2007 from Ps.204 million in
2006, mainly as a result of increased reserves for lawsuits, due mainly to new
developments in our existing lawsuits and our reassessment of certain
environmental obligations. See Note 3(j) to our Audited Consolidated Financial
Statements.
Other
expenses, net decreased 62.6% to Ps.204 million in 2006 from Ps.545 million in
2005, mainly as a result of reduced insurance premiums attributable to the
non-recurrence in 2006 of payments made in 2005 attributable to the termination
of our membership in OIL Insurance Ltd., an industry insurance pool, and a
variety of other factors. The principal expenses during 2006 derived from
provisions for lawsuits, environmental remediation and other contingencies. See
Note 3 to the Audited Consolidated Financial Statements.
Financial
income (expense), net and holding gains
In 2007,
financial income (expense), net and holding gains increased 14.1% to Ps.518
million from Ps.454 million in 2006. This increase was attributable principally
to higher positive exchange rate differences on our net non-peso denominated
financial assets, as well as to holding gains on inventories from stock
revaluation for increasing production costs compared with the prior period.
These positive results were offset in part by higher financial expense
attributable to increased accruals related to our well abandonment obligations
resulting from an increase in such obligations.
In 2006,
financial income, net and holding gains increased 345% to Ps.454 million from
Ps.102 million in 2005. This increase was attributable to a sharp rise in
holding gains on inventories due to stock revaluation for increasing production
costs. In addition, income from short-term investment increased and interest
expense from liabilities decreased.
Taxes
Income tax
expense in 2007 decreased 1.5% to Ps.2,758 million from Ps.2,801 million in
2006. The effective income tax rates for 2007 and 2006 were 40.3% and 38.6%,
respectively, compared to the statutory income tax rate of 35%. Our effective
tax rates exceed the Argentine corporate income tax rate mainly due to the
non-deductibility of the amortization of the effect of inflation indexation on
fixed assets, which is not deductible from income tax under prevailing Argentine
tax legislation. See Note 3(k) to the Audited Consolidated Financial
Statements.
Income tax
expense during 2006 decreased 17.9% to Ps.2,801 million from Ps.3,410 million in
2005. The effective income tax rates for 2006 and 2005 were 38.59% and 38.87%,
respectively, compared to the statutory income tax rate of 35%.
Net
income
Net income
for 2007 was Ps.4,086 million, compared to Ps.4,457 million in 2006, a decrease
of 8.3%. This decrease is mainly attributable to the 3.3% decline in operating
income and the increase in other expenses, net described above.
Net income
for the year ended December 31, 2006 was Ps.4,457 million, compared to Ps.5,362
million in 2005, a decrease of 16.9%. This decrease is mainly attributable to
the 24.9% decline in operating income, partially offset by lower other expenses,
net and improved financial income, net.
Results
of operations by business segment for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006
and 2005
The
following table sets forth net sales and operating income for each of our lines
of business for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005:
|
|
For
the Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in
millions of pesos)
|
|
Net
sales(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exploration
and production(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To
unrelated parties
|
|
|
3,288 |
|
|
|
3,076 |
|
|
|
2,910 |
|
To
related parties
|
|
|
724 |
|
|
|
774 |
|
|
|
626 |
|
Intersegment
sales and fees(3)
|
|
|
14,056 |
|
|
|
14,033 |
|
|
|
11,659 |
|
Total
exploration and production
|
|
|
18,068 |
|
|
|
17,883 |
|
|
|
15,195 |
|
Refining
and marketing(4)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To
unrelated parties
|
|
|
20,375 |
|
|
|
17,651 |
|
|
|
15,791 |
|
To
related parties
|
|
|
2,045 |
|
|
|
1,624 |
|
|
|
1,425 |
|
Intersegment
sales and fees
|
|
|
1,858 |
|
|
|
1,526 |
|
|
|
962 |
|
Total
refining and marketing
|
|
|
24,278 |
|
|
|
20,801 |
|
|
|
18,178 |
|
Chemical
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To
unrelated parties
|
|
|
2,563 |
|
|
|
2,401 |
|
|
|
2,062 |
|
Intersegment
sales and fees
|
|
|
892 |
|
|
|
647 |
|
|
|
207 |
|
Total
chemical
|
|
|
3,455 |
|
|
|
3,048 |
|
|
|
2,269 |
|
|
|
For
the Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in
millions of pesos)
|
|
Corporate
and Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To
unrelated parties
|
|
|
109 |
|
|
|
109 |
|
|
|
87 |
|
Intersegment
sales and fees
|
|
|
440 |
|
|
|
282 |
|
|
|
243 |
|
Total
corporate and others
|
|
|
549 |
|
|
|
391 |
|
|
|
330 |
|
Less
intersegment sales and fees
|
|
|
(17,246 |
) |
|
|
(16,488 |
) |
|
|
(13,071 |
) |
Total
net sales(5)
|
|
|
29,104 |
|
|
|
25,635 |
|
|
|
22,901 |
|
Operating
income (loss)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exploration
and production
|
|
|
5,679 |
|
|
|
6,564 |
|
|
|
7,140 |
|
Refining
and marketing
|
|
|
1,234 |
|
|
|
258 |
|
|
|
1,900 |
|
Chemical
|
|
|
500 |
|
|
|
572 |
|
|
|
542 |
|
Corporate
and Other
|
|
|
(620 |
) |
|
|
(540 |
) |
|
|
(451 |
) |
Consolidation
adjustments
|
|
|
(136 |
) |
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
Total
operating income
|
|
|
6,657 |
|
|
|
6,883 |
|
|
|
9,161 |
|
(1)
|
Net
sales are net to us after payment of a fuel transfer tax, turnover tax and
custom duties on exports. Royalties with respect to our production are
accounted for as a cost of production and are not deducted in determining
net sales (see Note 2(g) to the Audited Consolidated Financial
Statements).
|
(2)
|
Includes
exploration and production operations in Argentina and the United
States.
|
(3)
|
Intersegment
sales of crude oil to Refining and Marketing are recorded at transfer
prices that reflect our estimates of Argentine market
prices.
|
(4)
|
Includes
LPG activities.
|
(5)
|
Total
net sales include export sales of Ps.8,400 million, Ps.8,649 million and
Ps.8,644 million for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005,
respectively. The export sales were mainly to the United States, Brazil
and Chile.
|
Exploration and production
Exploration
and Production net sales in 2007 were Ps.18,068 million, representing a 1.0%
increase from Ps.17,883 million in 2006. Overall segment crude oil sales,
substantially all of which were intersegment sales, increased Ps.23 million in
2007. This increase was due to a 9% increase in average international crude oil
prices that set the internal price of transfer between business segments prior
to the implementation of a new regime for withholding rates on exports in
November 2007, which more than offset the 6% decrease in the volume of crude oil
sales that resulted mainly from a 5% decrease in our production attributable to
the increasing maturity of our fields. Additionally, in 2007, the average price
of natural gas sold in the domestic market increased 9.6% from 2006, due mainly
to increases in the price of natural gas sold to industrial customers and
thermal power plants, which more than offset the significant increase in the
portion of gas sold to the residential segment of the market, the prices for
which are significantly lower than those for other segments of the market, and
the decline in exports of natural gas attributable to lower export volumes
(which decreased 56.1% from 2006). Sales of gas by-products and other products
remained stable.
Exploration
and Production operating income declined 13.5% to Ps.5,679 million in 2007 from
Ps.6,564 million in 2006, due to the above-mentioned decline in crude oil sales
volumes and to higher operating expenses. Segment operating expenses increased
9.5% due to significant increases in contract works and services, driven mainly
by the renegotiation of certain service contracts in line with industry-wide
cost increases in such service contracts in Argentina, as well as by higher
labor costs resulting from renegotiations of labor contracts with petroleum
workers’ unions based on higher inflation and increasing oil prices.
Additionally, we recorded a Ps.353 million, or 10.8%, increase in depreciation
of fixed assets mainly due to the decline in our reserves combined with the
increase in assets
related to
well abandonment obligations. Furthermore, new exploration initiatives, mainly
in offshore areas, contributed a further Ps.117 million to the increase in
segment operating expenses in 2007.
Average
oil production during 2007 decreased 4.6% to 329 thousand barrels per day from
345 thousand barrels per day in 2006. Natural gas production in 2007 decreased
2.3% to 1,740 million cubic feet per day from 1,784 million cubic feet per day
in 2006. These declines were attributable to the natural decline in the
production curve resulting from the continuing overall maturity of our fields
and the cessation of production at our Magallanes field in January 2007 due to
pipeline problems. It is currently estimated that production will begin in this
field in the first half of 2008.
Exploration
and Production net sales in 2006 were Ps.17,883, representing a 17.7% increase
from Ps.15,195 million in 2005. Oil sales increased Ps.2,191 million in 2006,
due to increasing international crude oil prices that contributed to the higher
internal price of transfer between business segments. This effect was partially
offset by a 6% decrease in the volume of crude oil sales resulting from lower
production. Additionally, natural gas sales increased by Ps.292 million due to a
22% increase in our average domestic price of natural gas in 2006, the effect of
which was partially offset by a 5% decrease in the domestic volumes of natural
gas sold and an increased natural gas export tax rate (the effect of which more
than offset a 43% increase in our average international natural gas sales
prices).
Exploration
and Production operating income declined 8.1% to Ps.6,564 million in 2006 from
Ps.7,140 million in 2005 due to higher operating expenses. The decrease mainly
reflects a Ps.1,033 million, or 46%, increase in depreciation of fixed assets
attributable to a higher applicable rate resulting from a reduced base of proved
reserves as well as an increase in assets resulting from a significant increase
in our well abandonment obligations at the beginning of the year. Contract works
and services and repair and maintenance expenses also increased due to higher
costs of services rendered resulting from the renegotiation of certain of our
service contracts in line with industry-wide increases in the cost of such
contracts in Argentina. In addition, the volume of natural gas imported from
third parties to meet previous sales commitments increased 7% while the average
price of such purchases increased 44%.
Oil
production during 2006 decreased 6.0% to 345 thousand barrels per day from 367
thousand barrels per day in 2005, while natural gas production in 2006 decreased
2.3% to 1,784 million cubic feet per day from 1,827 million cubic feet per day
in 2005, in each case mainly as a consequence of a production decrease due to
the natural decline in the production curve attributable to the continuing
overall maturity of our fields, as well as a labor strike at our production
facilities in southern Argentina during the early months of 2006.
Refining
and marketing
Refining
and marketing net sales in 2007 were Ps.24,278 million, 16.7% higher than the
Ps.20,801 million net sales recorded in 2006. This increase was mainly
attributable to increases in the volumes and average prices of diesel and
gasoline sold in the domestic market, the segment’s two principal products.
Domestic diesel volumes and average prices increased by 7.7% and 23.0%,
respectively, while domestic gasoline volumes and average prices increased by
19.8% and 10.3%, respectively. Higher domestic sales were offset by lower export
sales of many of our products, especially gasoline, as the Argentine
government’s requirement that we fulfill domestic demand resulted in a 24.9%
decrease in our exported volume of gasoline, the segment’s principal export
product. Gasoline prices were on average significantly higher in international
markets than in Argentina during 2007.
Refining
and marketing operating profit increased 378.3% to Ps.1,234 million in 2007,
from Ps.258 million in 2006. This increase was due to the above-mentioned
increases in volumes and prices of domestic sales of diesel and gasoline,
partially offset by an approximately 5% increase in the average price paid for
crude oil to our Exploration and Production business segment and higher
crude oil volumes purchased from third parties to satisfy the increase in daily
production of our refineries. Purchases of crude oil
accounted for over 90% of the segment’s operating costs in both years. The
increased domestic sales described above were also partially offset by a 15.1%
increase in refining costs (excluding crude oil costs), mainly due to higher
contract service costs as a result of the renegotiation of certain service
contracts and inflation adjustments, and the implementation in November 2007 of
a new regime for withholding rates on exports. Refining cost per barrel, which
we calculate as the segment’s cost of sales for the
period
less crude oil purchase costs and depreciation of fixed assets, divided by the
number of barrels produced during the period, was Ps.10.7 in 2007, compared to
Ps.9.3 in 2006.
Refinery output in 2007, including 50%
of Refinor’s output (we own 50% of Refinor), reached 334 thousand
barrels per day, representing a 3.4% increase over the
323 thousand barrels per day processed in 2006 and a utilization rate
over 100% of the existing processing capacity of 332.5 thousand barrels per
day.
Net sales
in 2006 were Ps.20,801 million, 14.4% higher than the Ps.18,178 million net
sales recorded in 2005, resulting mainly from increases in the domestic volume
of diesel and gasoline products sold of 11.5% and 21%, respectively, in 2006
compared to the prior year. The increases in the domestic volumes of diesel and
gasoline products sold were reinforced by increases in the average domestic
prices of diesel and gasoline of approximately 3% and 1%, respectively, in 2006
compared to 2005. In addition, the volumes of diesel and gasoline products sold
in the international market decreased by 54% and 29%, respectively, as a result
of the need to satisfy increasing domestic demand. This decrease was offset in
part by increases in the international prices of all refined products and by the
increase in the exported volume and price of fuel oil.
Operating
profit was Ps.258 million in 2006, representing an 86.4% decrease from Ps.1,900
million in 2005. This decrease was due mainly to the higher prices of crude oil,
which accounted for over 90% of the operating costs of the segment. The segment
recorded a 28% increase in the average price of crude oil purchased from the
Exploration and Production business segment and a 21% increase in the average
price of crude oil purchased from third parties. Refining cost per barrel was
Ps.9.3 in 2006 compared to Ps.7.6 in 2005.
Refinery output in 2006, including 50%
of Refinor’s output (we own 50% of Refinor), reached 323 thousand barrels per
day, representing a utilization rate of 97.14% of the existing processing
capacity of 332.5 thousand barrels per day.
Chemical
Net sales
in 2007 increased by 13.4% to Ps.3,455 million from Ps.3,048 million in 2006,
while operating income in 2007 decreased 12.6% to Ps.500 million from Ps.572
million in 2006. The increase in net sales was attributable mainly to a 24.4%
increase in the domestic sales volumes of petrochemicals, driven mainly by
higher demand for fertilizers (the prices for which also increased) and certain
other products, an 8.6% increase in the average domestic sales prices of
petrochemicals, and an increase in the average price of exported petrochemicals,
partially offset by the 2% decrease in the volume of exported
petrochemicals. The decrease in operating income was attributable to
the significantly lower results of Profertil (which contributed Ps.191 million
to the segment’s operating income in 2007 compared to Ps.310 million in 2006),
which were attributable mainly to lower production of urea (a fertilizer)
resulting from reduced availability of natural gas during the winter months, an
increase in maintenance and contract services costs, and the effects of the new
withholding tax regime for exports that came into effect in November 2007, which
collectively outpaced the increase in net sales described above.
Net sales
in 2006 increased 34.3% to Ps.3,048 million from Ps.2,269 million in 2005.
Operating income in 2006 was Ps.572 million, a 5.5% increase from Ps.542 million
in 2005, attributable mainly to higher domestic and international prices of
methanol, which on average increased 42%, which more than offset the decrease in
methanol sales volumes, significant increases in raw material prices
(principally virgin naphtha) and price limitations in respect of domestic sales
of a certain fertilizer in the second half of 2006.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
Financial
condition
Total debt
outstanding, net of cash, as of December 31, 2007 and 2006 was U.S.$253 million
(Ps.798 million) and U.S.$415 million (Ps.1,307 million), respectively,
consisting of short-term debt (including the current portion of long-term debt)
of U.S.$87 million (Ps.275 million) and long-term debt of U.S.$166 million
(Ps.523 million) as of December 31, 2007, and short-term debt of U.S.$253
million (Ps.797 million) and long-term debt of U.S.$162 million (Ps.510 million)
as of December 31, 2006. As of December 31, 2007 and 2006, almost all of our
debt was
denominated
in U.S. dollars. The use of derivatives is detailed in “Item 11. Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosure about Market Risk.”
Since
September 2001, we have repurchased certain of our publicly-traded bonds in open
market transactions on an arms-length basis. As of December 31, 2007, we had
repurchased approximately U.S.$159 million of our outstanding bonds. We may from
time to time make additional purchases of, or affect other transactions relating
to, our publicly-traded bonds if in our own judgment the market conditions are
attractive.
The
following tables set forth our consolidated cash flow information for the
periods indicated.
|
|
For
the Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in
millions of pesos)
|
|
Net
cash flows provided by operating activities
|
|
|
8,756 |
|
|
|
8,019 |
|
|
|
8,251 |
|
Net
cash flows used in investing activities
|
|
|
(6,187 |
) |
|
|
(5,109 |
) |
|
|
(3,262 |
) |
Net
cash flows used in financing activities
|
|
|
(2,809 |
) |
|
|
(2,338 |
) |
|
|
(5,361 |
) |
Net
increase/(decrease) in cash and equivalents
|
|
|
(240 |
) |
|
|
572 |
|
|
|
(372 |
) |
Cash
and equivalents at the beginning of period
|
|
|
1,087 |
|
|
|
515 |
|
|
|
887 |
|
Cash
and equivalents at the end of period
|
|
|
847 |
|
|
|
1,087 |
|
|
|
515 |
|
Net cash
flow provided by operating activities was Ps.8,756 million in 2007, compared to
Ps.8,019 million in 2006, an increase of 9.2% attributable mainly to higher
operating income, excluding amortization of fixed assets in 2007, and lower tax
payments. Additionally, net cash flow provided by operating activities was
Ps.8,019 million in 2006, compared to Ps.8,251 million in 2005, a decrease of
3%, attributable mainly to lower operating income in 2006 that was partially
offset by lower tax payments.
The
principal uses of cash in investing and financing activities in 2007 included
Ps.6,163 million in fixed asset acquisitions relating mainly to drilling
equipment used by our Exploration and Production business unit, Ps.2,360 million
in dividend payments and Ps.449 million in net repayments of outstanding loans.
The principal uses of cash in investing and financing activities in 2006
included Ps.5,002 million in fixed asset acquisitions relating mainly to
drilling equipment used by our Exploration and Production business unit and
Ps.2,360 million in dividend payments. In 2005, the principal uses of cash in
investing and financing activities included Ps.3,722 million in fixed asset
acquisitions, Ps.4,878 million in dividend payments and Ps.483 million in net
repayments of outstanding loans. The cash provided by these activities included
mainly the sale of Petroken and PBB, which generated Ps.454
million.
Our
current financing policy is to use cash flows provided by operating activities
and debt to fund both our investing and operating activities.
In
addition, Repsol YPF and Petersen Energía have agreed in the shareholders’
agreement entered into by them in connection with the Petersen Transaction to
effect the adoption of a dividend policy under which we would distribute 90% of
our net income as dividends, starting with our net income for 2007. They have
also agreed to vote in favor of requiring us to distribute an additional
dividend of U.S.$850 million, of which half will be paid in 2008 and half will
be paid in 2009. See “Item 8. Financial Information—Dividends Policy” and “Item
7. Major Shareholders and Related Party Transactions—Shareholders’
Agreement.”
The
shareholder’s meeting held on January 8, 2008 approved a notes program for an
amount up to U.S.$1 billion. The proceeds of any offerings under this program
must be used exclusively to invest in fixed assets and working capital in
Argentina.
The
following table sets forth our commitments for the periods indicated below with
regard to the principal amount of our debt, as of December 31, 2007, plus
accrued but unpaid interest through December 31, 2007:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in
millions of pesos)
|
|
Debt
|
|
|
994 |
|
|
|
471 |
|
|
|
318 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
205 |
|
Contractual
obligations
The
following table sets forth information with regard to our commitments, expressed
in U.S. dollars at the exchange rate of Ps.3.15 to U.S.$1.00, under commercial
contracts for the years indicated below, as of December 28, 2007 (the last
rate quoted in December 2007):
Contractual
Obligations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in
millions of U.S.$)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt(1)
|
|
|
469 |
|
|
|
163 |
|
|
|
124 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
169 |
|
Operating
Lease Obligations
|
|
|
340 |
|
|
|
72 |
|
|
|
126 |
|
|
|
86 |
|
|
|
56 |
|
Purchase
Obligations(2)
|
|
|
2,964 |
|
|
|
558 |
|
|
|
764 |
|
|
|
549 |
|
|
|
1,093 |
|
Purchases
of services
|
|
|
1,301 |
|
|
|
279 |
|
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
217 |
|
|
|
440 |
|
Purchases
of goods
|
|
|
1,663 |
|
|
|
279 |
|
|
|
399 |
|
|
|
332 |
|
|
|
653 |
|
LPG
|
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
Electricity
|
|
|
386 |
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
66 |
|
|
|
203 |
|
Gas
|
|
|
157 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
Oil
|
|
|
762 |
|
|
|
110 |
|
|
|
190 |
|
|
|
171 |
|
|
|
291 |
|
Steam
|
|
|
211 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
121 |
|
Others
|
|
|
67 |
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
Liabilities(3)
|
|
|
2,771 |
|
|
|
1,906 |
|
|
|
279 |
|
|
|
201 |
|
|
|
385 |
|
Total(3)
|
|
|
6,544 |
|
|
|
2,699 |
|
|
|
1,293 |
|
|
|
849 |
|
|
|
1,703 |
|
(1)
|
These
projected amounts include interest due during all the periods presented.
Interest on variable rate instruments is calculated using the rate as of
December 31, 2007 for all periods.
|
(2)
|
Includes
purchase commitments under commercial agreements that do not provide for a
total fixed amount, which have been valued using our best estimates.
Accordingly, our actual purchase obligations may differ from the estimated
amounts shown in the table.
|
(3)
|
Reserves
for contingent liabilities under commercial contracts, which amounted to
U.S.$736 million as of December 31, 2007, are not included in the table
above since we cannot, based on available evidence, reasonably estimate
the settlement dates of such
contingencies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sale
Commitments
|
|
(in
millions of U.S. dollars)
|
|
Oil
sales
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
Gas
sales
|
|
|
10,649 |
|
|
|
1,187 |
|
|
|
2,191 |
|
|
|
2,147 |
|
|
|
5,124 |
|
LPG
|
|
|
1,810 |
|
|
|
182 |
|
|
|
357 |
|
|
|
357 |
|
|
|
914 |
|
Other
petroleum and petrochemical product sales
|
|
|
4,910 |
|
|
|
1,097 |
|
|
|
1,424 |
|
|
|
1,247 |
|
|
|
1,142 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sale
Commitments
|
|
(in
millions of U.S. dollars)
|
|
Services
|
|
|
282 |
|
|
|
89 |
|
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
83 |
|
Total
|
|
|
17,663 |
|
|
|
2,567 |
|
|
|
4,045 |
|
|
|
3,788 |
|
|
|
7,263 |
|
We have
additional commitments under derivatives contracts and guarantees. For a
discussion of these additional commitments see “—Guarantees provided” below and
“Item 11. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market
Risk.”
Transactions
with unconsolidated variable interest entities
Since
1996, we have entered into three forward oil sale agreements, which we refer to
as the FOS transactions in this annual report. These agreements were entered
into in order to obtain cash to fund operations in advance of the actual sale
and delivery of oil. Under these transactions, we were advanced U.S.$381 million
in 1996, U.S.$300 million in 1998 and U.S.$383 million in 2001, against future
deliveries of oil. Our obligations under the FOS transactions are recorded as a
liability in the consolidated balance sheet as customer advances and will be
reduced and moved to income as the physical deliveries are made over the term of
the contracts. As of December 31, 2007, the amount of FOS customer advances
recorded on our consolidated balance sheet was Ps.9 million (approximately
U.S.$3 million). The obligations to deliver crude oil under the agreements
entered into in 1996 have been satisfied in their entirety, with the last
delivery having taken place in October 2003. The obligations to deliver crude
oil under the agreement entered into in 2001 were cancelled on September 30,
2005. The obligations to deliver crude oil under the 1998 agreement will
continue through May 2008.
The
structure of the remaining FOS transaction is similar to those already
cancelled. We enter into a forward oil sale agreement that calls for the future
delivery of oil for the life of the contract. We were paid in advance for the
future delivery of oil. The fixed price of the oil to be delivered was
calculated using various factors, including the expected future price and
quality of the crude oil being delivered. The counterparty to the oil supply
agreement is a special purpose entity incorporated in the Cayman Islands, which
finances itself as described below. The oil to be delivered under the supply
agreement is subsequently sold in the open market.
We are
exposed to any change in the price of the crude oil we will deliver in the
future under the FOS transaction. Our exposure derives from the crude oil swap
agreement under which we pay a fixed price with respect to the nominal quantity
of barrels of the crude oil sold, and receive the variable market price of such
barrels of crude oil. See “Item 11. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures
About Market Risk—Crude oil price exposure” and “Item 7. Major Shareholders and
Related Party Transactions.” See Note 13(i) to the Audited Consolidated
Financial Statements for a description of the treatment of the FOS transactions
under U.S. GAAP.
The
following provides an overview of the outstanding FOS transaction:
|
|
Date
|
June
24, 1998
|
Net
proceeds(1)
|
U.S.$299,967,289
|
SPE
|
Oil
Enterprises Ltd.
|
YPF
Quantified barrels liability
|
U.S.$315
million 6.239% notes
|
Purchaser
|
Oil
Enterprises Ltd.
|
Marketer
|
YPF
|
Guarantee/hedge
|
Oil
Price Hedge Agreement/
Default
Insurance
|
Total
crude oil barrels to be delivered over the life
of
the contract
|
23,933,982
|
Average
crude oil barrels per month
|
201,126
|
Term
of transaction
|
10
years
|
(1)
|
The
total sale amount under the remaining FOS transaction is U.S.$314,995,137.
The difference between the net proceeds and the sale amount is deposited
in a reserve account to cover certain contingencies and, absent an event
of default or other events set forth in the transaction documents, will be
paid to us during the last three months of the transaction
term.
|
The series
of FOS II are insured by MBIA Inc.
Total
remaining crude delivery obligations under the FOS transaction represent 0.99%
of our crude oil production for 2007. If we are not able to deliver the required
number of barrels from our own production, we may purchase oil of similar
quality in the open market.
As
described in “Item 8. Financial Information—Legal Proceedings” on March 8, 2004,
the Argentine tax authorities formally communicated to us their view that the
FOS transactions should have been treated as financial transactions carried out
in Argentina and, as such, should have been subject to the relevant tax
withholdings. We have presented our defense rejecting the claim and are
currently arguing our position.
Covenants
in our indebtedness
Our
financial debt generally contains customary covenants for contracts of this
nature, including negative pledge, material adverse change and cross-default
clauses, as well as customary acceleration provisions.
With
respect to financial debt totaling Ps.994 million (U.S.$316 million), including
accrued interest (long- and short-term debt) as of December 31, 2007, we have
agreed, among other things and subject to certain exceptions, not to establish
liens or charges on our assets. In the event of a payment default, the creditors
may declare due and immediately payable the principal and accrued interest on
amounts owed to them. Upon an event of default with respect to other matters, in
the case of outstanding negotiable obligations amounting to Ps.537 million
(U.S.$170 million) (included in the figure above), the trustee may declare due
and immediately payable the principal and accrued interest on amounts owed if
required by the holders of at least 25% of the total principal of the
outstanding obligations.
Almost all
of our total outstanding financial debt is subject to cross-default provisions.
These provisions generally may be triggered if an event of default occurs with
respect to the payment of principal amount or interest on debts equal to or
exceeding U.S.$20 million. As a result of these cross-default provisions, a
default on our part or the part of any of our consolidated subsidiaries covered
by such provisions could result in a substantial portion of our debt being
declared in default or accelerated. None of our debt or the debt of our
consolidated subsidiaries is currently in default.
Credit
rating
On April
24, 2006, FITCH upgraded our long-term debt rating to BB+. Our long-term debt
rating was upgraded to “Ba2” by Moody’s on November 21, 2005. Standard &
Poor’s maintains its rating at “BB” with a stable outlook. Each of these ratings
is in reference to foreign currency-denominated long-term debt. A security
rating is not a recommendation to buy, sell or hold securities and may be
subject to revision or withdrawal at any time by the assigning rating
organization.
We do not
have any ratings downgrade triggers that would accelerate the maturity dates of
our debt or trigger any other contractual obligation on our part. However, a
downgrade in our credit rating could have a material adverse effect on the cost
of renewing existing credit facilities, or obtaining access to new ones in the
future. In the past, our main sources of liquidity have been our cash flows from
operations, bank financings, issuances of debt securities and the proceeds from
our divestment plan. Any future downgrades will not preclude us from using any
of our existing credit lines.
Guarantees
provided
As of
December 31, 2007, we had signed guarantees in relation to the financing
activities of Pluspetrol Energy S.A., Central Dock Sud S.A. and Inversora Dock
Sud S.A. in amounts of approximately U.S.$24 million (U.S.$21
million as
of April 10, 2008), U.S.$ 81 million (U.S.$23 million as of April 10, 2008) and
Ps.5 million, respectively. The corresponding loans mature in 2011, 2013 and
2009, respectively.
Capital
investments and expenditures
Capital
investments in 2007 totaled approximately Ps.6,541 million. The table below sets
forth our capital expenditures and investments by activity for each of the years
ended 2007, 2006 and 2005.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in
millons of pesos)
|
|
|
(%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
(%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
(%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital
Expenditures and Investments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exploration
and Production
|
|
|
5,186 |
|
|
|
79 |
|
|
|
4,217 |
|
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
3,179 |
|
|
|
81 |
|
Refining
and Marketing
|
|
|
898 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
733 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
541 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
Chemical
|
|
|
143 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
137 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
104 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Corporate
and Other
|
|
|
314 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
176 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
108 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Total
|
|
|
6,541 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
5,263 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
3,932 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Future
capital expenditures and investments
We have
budgeted approximately U.S.$2 billion in investments and capital expenditures
for 2008, a significant portion of which will be dedicated to our exploration
and production activities. During the period 2008-2012, we expect to make
capital expenditures totaling 7.8 billion Euros, including 1.8 billion
Euros relating to
our PLADA project to increase recovery rates in our fields. We intend to finance
planned capital expenditures through our internally-generated cash flows and, to
the extent necessary, borrowings. For a detailed description of our principal
current investment projects, see “Item 4. Information on the
Company—Overview.”
Actual
investments and capital expenditures may differ from the above
estimates.
Off-Balance
Sheet Arrangements
We have
entered into certain off-balance sheet arrangements, as described in “—Liquidity
and Capital Resources—Transactions with unconsolidated variable interest
entities,” “—Guarantees provided” and “—Contractual obligations”
above.
ITEM
6. Directors, Senior Management and Employees
Board
of Directors
The current members of our Board of
Directors, the year in which they were appointed and the year their current term
expires are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Antonio Brufau
Niubo
|
|
Chairman and
Director
|
|
2004
|
|
2009
|
Sebastián
Eskenazi
|
|
Executive Vice-Chairman, Chief
Executive Officer and Director
|
|
2008
|
|
2009
|
Enrique
Eskenazi
|
|
Vice-Chairman and
Director
|
|
2008
|
|
2009
|
Antonio Gomis
Sáez
|
|
Chief Operating Officer and
Director
|
|
2007
|
|
2009
|
Aníbal Guillermo
Belloni
|
|
Director
|
|
2008
|
|
2009
|
Mario
Blejer
|
|
Director
|
|
2008
|
|
2009
|
Carlos
Bruno
|
|
Director
|
|
2008
|
|
2009
|
Santiago Carnero*
|
|
Director
|
|
2008
|
|
2008
|
Carlos de la
Vega
|
|
Director
|
|
1993
|
|
2009
|
Matías Eskenazi
Storey
|
|
Director
|
|
2008
|
|
2009
|
Eduardo
Elsztain
|
|
Director
|
|
2005
|
|
2009
|
Salvador Font
Estrany
|
|
Director
|
|
2008
|
|
2009
|
Federico
Mañero
|
|
Director
|
|
2005
|
|
2009
|
Fernando Ramírez
Mazarredo
|
|
Director
|
|
2008
|
|
2009
|
Luis Suárez de Lezo
Mantilla
|
|
Director
|
|
2008
|
|
2009
|
Javier
Monzón
|
|
Director
|
|
2005
|
|
2009
|
Mario
Vázquez
|
|
Director
|
|
2008
|
|
2009
|
Alejandro Quiroga
López
|
|
General Counsel and Alternate
Director
|
|
2004
|
|
2009
|
Gonzalo López
Fanjul
|
|
Alternate
Director
|
|
2005
|
|
2009
|
Alfredo
Pochintesta
|
|
Alternate
Director
|
|
2008
|
|
2009
|
Rafaél Lopez
Revuelta
|
|
Director of Chemicals and
Alternate Director
|
|
2008
|
|
2009
|
Tomás García
Blanco
|
|
Director of Exploration and
Production and Alternate Director
|
|
2008
|
|
2009
|
Fabián
Falco
|
|
Director of Communication and
External Relations and Alternate Director
|
|
2008
|
|
2009
|
Walter
Forwood
|
|
Chief Financial Officer and
Alternate Director
|
|
2008
|
|
2009
|
Fernando
Dasso
|
|
Director of Human Resources and
Alternate Director
|
|
2008
|
|
2009
|
Carlos Jimenez
López
|
|
Director of Management Control and
Alternate Director
|
|
2008
|
|
2009
|
Carlos
Alfonsi
|
|
Alternate
Director
|
|
2008
|
|
2009
|
Ezequiel Eskenazi
Storey
|
|
Alternate
Director
|
|
2008
|
|
2009
|
Mauro Renato José
Dacomo
|
|
Alternate
Director
|
|
2008
|
|
2009
|
Ignacio Cruz
Morán
|
|
Alternate
Director
|
|
2008
|
|
2009
|
Eduardo Ángel
Garrote
|
|
Alternate
Director
|
|
2008
|
|
2009
|
____________
* Representing our Class A
shares.
None of the members of the Board of
Directors owns shares in YPF. Sebastián Eskenazi, Enrique Eskenazi, Matías Eskenazi Storey and Ezequiel
Eskenazi Storey as a group control Petersen Energía, which owns 14.9% of our capital stock, and individually hold
options to purchase up to 3.84%, 2.32%, 3.84% and 0.10%, respectively, or 10.1%
collectively, of our capital stock. See “Item 7. Major Shareholders and Related
Party Transactions.”
Directors’ outside business interests
and experience
Antonio Brufau Niubo
Mr. Brufau Niubo graduated with an
economics degree from the University of Barcelona. From 1999 to 2004, he acted as
managing director for the La Caixa Group. He served as a member of the Repsol
YPF Board of Directors from 1996 until becoming chairman and CEO of Repsol YPF
in October 2004, a position he currently occupies. He was appointed chairman of
Gas Natural group in July 1997 and is now vice chairman of the group. From July
2002 to July 2005, he served as chairman of Barcelona’s Círculo de
Economía. Mr. Brufau has
served on the boards of several other companies, including Suez; Enagás;
Abertis; Aguas de Barcelona; Colonial and Caixa Holding; the CaixaBank France
and CaixaBank Andorra. Until December 2005, he was the only Spanish member of
the Executive Committee of the International Chamber of Commerce.
Sebastián Eskenazi
Mr. Eskenazi has been Executive
Vice-Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and Director of YPF since March
2008. He is also Co-Chief Executive Officer of Marviol S.R.L. and
Petersen Energía S.A. (Spain) and President of Arroyo Lindo S.A. and
Red Link S.A. Mr. Eskenazi is Vice President of Petersen Inversiones
S.A, Petersen Energía S.A. (Argentina), Petersen Thiele y Cruz S.A.,
Mantenimientos y Servicios S.A., Banco de Santa Cruz S.A., Nuevo Banco de Santa
Fe S.A. and Nuevo Banco de Entre Ríos S.A., an alternate member of the Board of
Directors of Banco de San Juan S.A. and member of the Board of Directors of
Petersen Energía S.A. (Spain), Petersen Energía Pty. Ltd. and Petersen
Inversiones S.A.
Enrique Eskenazi
Mr. Eskenazi graduated with a chemical
engineering degree from the Universidad Nacional del Litoral. Mr. Eskenazi has been Vice Chairman and
Director of YPF since 2008. He is also the Co-Chief Executive Officer of Marviol
S.R.L. and the President of Petersen Inversiones S.A., Napelgrind S.A., Banco de
San Juan S.A., Banco de
Santa Cruz S.A., Nuevo Banco de Santa Fe S.A., Nuevo Banco de Entre Ríos S.A.,
Petersen Energía S.A. (Argentina), Petersen Energía S.A. (Spain), Fundación
Banco de Santa Cruz S.A., Fundación Nuevo Banco de Santa Fe S.A. and Fundación
Nuevo Banco de Entre Ríos S.A. He is also Vice President of
Mantenimientos y Servicios S.A. and Santa Sylvia S.A. and a member of the Board
of Directors of Petersen Thiele y Cruz S.A., Estacionamientos Buenos Aires S.A.,
Petersen Energía S.A. (Spain), Petersen Energía Pty. Ltd. and Agro Franca
S.A.
Antonio Gomis Sáez
Mr. Gomis Sáez graduated with a chemical
engineering degree from the Complutense University of Madrid and a master’s in
business administration from IESE Business School – University of Navarra in Spain. He began his career in 1974 at the
Repsol YPF Petróleo refinery in Puertollano, Ciudad Real and later went to work at the
International Energy Agency in Paris founded by the Organization for
Economic Cooperation and Development (“OECD”). He served as advisor to the
General Secretary of Energy and Mineral Resources at the Spanish Ministry of
Energy. In 1986 he joined the Instituto Nacional
de Hidrocarburos, where he
was appointed managing director of international and institutional relations of
Repsol YPF. From 1997 to 2000, he was general director of energy at the Spanish
Ministry of Industry and Energy. From September 2000 to November 2004, he was
corporate director of external relations, overseeing investor and media
relations. In January 2005 he was appointed CEO of Repsol YPF Química and
managing director of Repsol YPF’s Chemicals Europe and Rest of the World. In
July 2007 he was appointed
director of our company and in August 2007 he became our Chief Executive Officer
and served in that capacity until March 2008. Since March 2008, he has served as
our Chief Operating Officer.
Aníbal Guillermo
Belloni
Mr. Belloni holds a degree in Electrical
Engineering from the Universidad de Buenos Aires, and has been a director of
Petersen, Thiele y Cruz S.A. since 1989. He has worked as
an engineer and business development manager at Sade S.A., as a general manager at Cosapi
S.A., in Lima, Peru, as a Vice President of Kanter S.A.,
and as
the Argentine representative of Foster
Wheeler Corporation. He has been an Executive Board member of the
Argentine Chamber of Construction and was a founding member and Executive Board
member of the Argentine Union of Construction.
Mario Blejer
Mr. Blejer holds a bachelor’s and a
master’s degree in Economics from the Hebrew University, and a master’s degree and a Ph.D. in
Economics from the University of Chicago. He has been a professor of
Economics at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Boston University, the Central European University, in Budapest, and the New York University Graduate
School of Business, a senior advisor to the World Bank, Europe and Central Asia region, and the International Monetary
Fund, and was a senior researcher at the Center for Latin American Monetary
Studies. From 2001 to 2002, he was the Deputy Governor and then the
Governor of the Central Bank of Argentina, and from 2003 to 2008 he was the
director of the Centre for Central Banking Studies, and advisor to the Governor,
of the Bank of England. He is currently an independent economic
consultant, professor at the Universidad de San Andrés in Buenos Aires, and is a director of Inversiones y
Representaciones S.A. and Consultants Asset Management, both
located in Buenos
Aires.
Carlos Bruno
Mr. Bruno graduated with a degree in architecture from the
University of Buenos Aires. He is president and co-founder of the
Centro
de Investigaciones para la Transformación. He has participated in the creation of the
Center of International Economy while being a member of the Ministry of
Foreign Relations. He was
the Undersecretary of
Economic Integration and Secretary of International Economy Relations from 1984
to 1989 and was
appointed Ambassador V with
the Senate’s approval.
His areas of expertise are
international economic relations and international trade.
Santiago Carnero
Mr. Carnero graduated as a certified
public accountant from the University of La Plata in Argentina. He has been a professional advisor in
accounting, taxation and labor matters, and corporate organizational and
constitutional matters. He has also served as an external auditor for public and
private organizations. Since 2004, Mr. Carnero has served as advisor to the
Bicameral Commission of Expense Control and Intelligence Activities of the
National Congress of Argentina.
Carlos de la Vega
Mr. de la Vega was director of La Caja
ART from 1996 to 2004 and director of Luncheon Tickets from 1991 to 1998. Since
April 2003 he has been president of the Argentine Chamber of Commerce, a
position he also held from 1988 to 1993. He has been a member of our Board of
Directors for Class D shares since 1993, and until 1996 he was director of
Institutional Relations of Ciba-Geigy Argentina. He has been a member of our Audit
Committee from 1993 to 1997 and from 2004 to the present.
Matías Eskenazi
Storey
Mr. Eskenazi Storey is Chief Executive
Officer of Administradora San Juan S.R.L. and Co-Chief Executive Officer of
Petersen Energía S.A. (Spain). He is President of
Estacionamientos Buenos Aires S.A. and Vice President of Comercial Latino S.A.
and Banco de Santa Cruz S.A. Mr. Storey is alternate
member of the Board of Directors of Mantenimientos y Servicios S.A., Banco de
San Juan S.A. and Red Link S.A. and member of the Board of Directors of Petersen
Energía S.A. (Spain), Petersen Energía Pty. Ltd., Petersen Inversiones S.A.,
Nuevo Banco de Santa Fe S.A., Nuevo Banco de Entre Ríos S.A. and Petersen
Energía S.A. (Argentina).
Eduardo Elzstain
Mr. Elsztain has more than 20 years of
experience in the real estate industry. In 1990, he founded Consultores Asset
Management, a leading portfolio management firm that has been a pioneer investor
in Latin
America and in
other emerging countries. He serves as
the chairman of Cresud, a leading agricultural company in Latin America devoted to the operation and formation
of a valuable portfolio of land and a producer of soybeans, corn, wheat, beef
cattle and milk. In addition he is a board member of BrasilAgro – Companhia
Brasileira de Propriedades Agrícolas, and chairman of IRSA, Argentina’s largest and most diversified real
estate company, with interests in office buildings, hotels and residential
projects. He is also chairman of IRSA’s subsidiary, Alto Palermo S.A.,
Argentina’s leading shopping center company. Mr.
Elsztain is vice-chairman of Banco Hipotecario S.A., Argentina’s largest mortgage bank.
Mr. Elsztain studied economics at the
University of Buenos Aires and is a member of the World Economic
Forum, the Group of Fifty and Asociación
Empresaria Argentina
(Argentine Business Association), among associations. Moreover, Mr. Elsztain is
president of Fundación IRSA, Endeavor Argentina, Hillel Argentina and Museo de los Niños Abasto, among
others.
Salvador Font Estrany
Mr. Font Estrany is a civil engineer. He
is currently Energy General Manager of Sacyr Vallehermoso, S.A. in Spain. He has previously served as
Commercial Director and Chairman of CAMPSA Red, Managing Director of CEPSA Red,
Cepdisa and Dispesa, Chairman of CEPSA Estaciones de Servicio, a member of the
Executive Committee of CEPSA, and was a Director of CEPSA Lubricantes, CEPSA
Gas, Petro Cat, Cepsa Portuguesa and Turyocio. He also previously
served as Commercial General Manager and member of the Operating and Executive
Committees of Iberdrola.
Federico Mañero
Mr. Mañero graduated with a law degree
from the San Sebastián Faculty of Law. He is president of Comunicación y
Gestión de Entornos, and
has more than 25 years of experience in managerial and consulting positions for
organizations and private, public and political projects. He is an expert in
strategic positioning and corporate communications, and has an international
profile with professional activities in more than 50 countries and strong
relations in Latin
America. He is the founder
of various nonprofit projects and organizations like Solidaridad
Internacional, Programa de
Cooperación Iberoamericana en Temas de Juventud (Organismo
Iberoamericano de Juventud) and Movimiento por
la
Paz, el
Desarme y la Libertad and
is a regular collaborator with the Fundación Salvador
Allende, Fundación Progreso
Global and UNICEF. Mr.
Mañero is a native speaker of Spanish and French.
Fernando Ramírez
Mazarredo
Mr. Ramírez Mazarredo received his
degree in Economic and Business Sciences from the University of Madrid and is a certified public
accountant. He was Chairman of the Spanish Financial Futures Market
(Mercado Español de
Futuros Financieros) from
April 2004 to June 2005.
Luis Suárez de Lezo
Mantilla
Mr. Suárez de Lezo Mantilla received his
degree in Law from the Universidad Complutense of Madrid and is a State Attorney (on leave)
specializing in Commercial and Administrative Law. He was Director of Legal
Affairs of CAMPSA, and has been in private legal practice, particularly in the energy industry.
Currently, he is Director of Compañía Logística de Hidrocarburos, S.A. (CLH) and
Repsol – Gas Natural LNG, S.L.
Javier Monzón
Mr. Monzón graduated with a degree in
economics from the Complutense University of Madrid. He is chairman and CEO of
Indra. He has a finance and management background. He has acted as corporate
banking director of Caja Madrid, CFO and president of Telefónica
International, executive vice president and member of the executive committee of
Telefónica, worldwide partner of Arthur Andersen, managing partner of Corporate
Finance Consulting Services and president of Alpha Corporate in Arthur Andersen
Spain. He is a member of the boards of other
companies, foundations and entrepreneurial organizations, such as our company,
ACS and the American Chamber of Commerce.
Mario E. Vázquez
Mr. Vázquez graduated as a certified
public accountant from the University of Buenos Aires. He has been a professor of auditing at
the Economics School of the University of Buenos Aires. Mr. Vázquez has acted as CEO of Grupo
Telefónica in Argentina and was a member of the Board of
Telefónica, S.A. from 2000 to 2006. Mr. Vázquez is
currently a member of the Board of Telefónica Internacional, S.A. (Spain) and of Telefónica Chile. He is also a member of the boards of
directors or a statutory auditor of several companies (including Telefónica de
Argentina S.A., Telefónica Holding de Argentina S.A., YPF S.A., Santander Río Seguros, Indra,
Universia and Sheraton Hotels). He is a member of the board of F.I.E.L. (Latin
American Foundation for Economic Investigation), Fundación Leer, the Argentine
Chamber of Commerce, IDEA, CARI (Consejo Argentino
para las Relaciones Internacionales) and Fundación Carolina. Mr. Vázquez
was also partner and general director of Arthur Andersen (Pistrelli, Díaz y
Asociados y Andersen Consulting – Accenture) for more than 20 years until his
retirement in 1993.
Alejandro Quiroga
López
Mr. Quiroga López graduated with a law
degree from the University of Buenos Aires School of Law. Since 2001, he has
been our general counsel and secretary of our Board of Directors. He was a
partner at the law firm Nicholson & Cano from 1986 to 1997, a foreign
associate at Davis Polk & Wardwell in 2000, and Undersecretary of Banking
and Insurance at the Ministry of Economy of Argentina from 1997 to 1999. He was professor of
banking and commercial law at the University of Cema. He was a member of the Executive Board
of the University of Buenos Aires School of Law. He is also a graduate of the
Wharton Advanced Management Program.
Gonzalo López Fanjul
Mr. López Fanjul graduated as a mining
engineer from the University of Oviedo. He is a deputy director and director
of certain companies in which we participate. He was previously our director of
Exploration and Production.
Alfredo Pochintesta
Mr. Pochintesta has received degrees in
public accounting and administration from the University of Buenos Aires. Mr. Pochintesta worked as a planning
and administration manager in Pluspetrol S.A., planning manager in Petrosur
S.A. and senior auditor at
PriceWaterhouseCoopers. He worked for Astra for more than 18 years as CFO and
since 1990 as head of the Gas and Electricity Division. Mr. Pochintesta joined
Repsol YPF in 1999 when Repsol YPF purchased Astra. He was in charge of the LPG
business for Latin
America from 1999 to
January 2005, when he was appointed marketing director. He also serves as
director of a number of other companies.
Rafael López
Revuelta
Mr. López Revuelta graduated as a
chemical engineer from the Complutense University of Madrid and earned a
master’s degree in business administration from IESE, Madrid. He has been a director in different
areas of Repsol YPF since 1988.
Tomás García Blanco
Mr. García Blanco graduated with a
degree in mining engineering from Oviedo University, a certificate in petroleum engineering
from Oil & Gas Consultants International in Tulsa, Oklahoma and an IMD Managing Corporate Resources
degree from Laussane University. He has developed his Exploration and
Production career internationally in Spain, the United States, Egypt, Libya, Venezuela and Argentina. Mr. García Blanco has held several
positions in Repsol YPF, including field engineer, reservoir engineer,
production engineer, development manager, production manager, operations
manager, business unit manager, director of technical staff and, since August
2006, he has been Director of Exploration and Production for Argentina and Bolivia.
Fabián Falco
Mr. Falco has been our Director of
Communication and External Relations since 2001. He was director of external
relations and corporate marketing of Aguas Argentinas and director of external
communications and press of Bridas S.A.
Walter Forwood
Mr. Forwood graduated with a bachelor’s
degree in economics from the Universidad Argentina de la Empresa and a master of
science in finance from Florida International University. He began his career at Bank of Boston
and Continental Bank, Argentina. Mr. Forwood joined Industrias
Metalúrgicas Pescarmona in 1993 and subsequently served as CFO of Corporación
Impsa. In 1997, he joined Cisneros Television Group and held the positions of
CFO of Cisneros Television Group and Ibero-American Media Partners, vice
chairman of Imagen Satelital and COO of El Sitio Inc. In 2001, Mr. Forwood
became CFO of Verizon Communications Inc., chairman and CEO of CTI, CFO of
Telefónica de Puerto Rico, general manager of Verizon Wireless of Puerto Rico, and COO of Telefónica de Puerto Rico.
Mr. Forwood is currently our Chief Financial Officer and an alternate
director.
Fernando Dasso
Mr. Dasso graduated with a labor
relations degree from the University of Buenos Aires. In 1993, he joined our company and has
held several positions within our company ever since. In 2006, he was appointed
Director of Human Resources in the Exploration and Production business unit for
Argentina, Bolivia and Brazil. Since June 2007, he has been our
Director of Human Resources.
Carlos Jiménez López
Mr. Jiménez graduated with a degree in
chemical engineering from the Complutense University of Madrid, Spain and
received a master’s degree in business administration and financial management
from the Polytechnic University of Madrid. In addition, he completed the Program
of Management Development (Programa de
Desarrollo Directivo) at
the Institut Européen
d’Administration des Affaires (INSEAD). Mr. Jiménez began his
professional career as a Process and Startup Engineer in 1980 with a leading
engineering and construction company, while also being employed as Professor at
the Complutense University of Madrid. In 1986 he joined Petronor, S.A., part of the Repsol YPF group, as head
of the Department of Technical Studies in the area of commercial planning and
coordination. In 1999, he became Director of Refining in the area of strategic
planning and development of Repsol YPF. During the period 2002 to 2004, he was
Director of the Refining and Marketing business unit in Brazil. From 2004 to 2007, he was Technical
Director of Refining and Logistics. In addition, Mr. Jiménez is a member of the
boards of directors of Oiltanking-Ebytem S.A., Oldelval S.A. and OTA and OTC S.A. He is also the President of the
Refinery Committee of ARPEL. Currently, Mr. Jimenez is our Director of
Management Control.
Carlos Alfonsi
Mr. Carlos Alberto Alfonsi graduated
with a chemistry degree from Universidad Tecnológica of Mendoza, Argentina, an IMD Managing Corporate Resources
degree from Lausanne University and studied at the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology. In 1987, he joined our company and has held several
positions in our company and Repsol YPF, including operations manager, director
of the La Plata refinery, operational planning director, trading and transport
director for Latin America, refinery and marketing director in Peru, country
manager for Peru, and R&M for Peru, Chile, Ecuador and Brazil. Since January
2008, he has been our company’s Director of Refining and Logistic
operations.
Ezequiel Eskenazi
Storey
Mr. Eskenazi Storey serves as vice
president of Agro Franca S.A. He is also an alternate member of the board of
directors of Los Boulevares S.A. and Petersen Inversiones S.A., and a member of the board of directors
of Petersen Thiele Y Cruz S.A., Santa Sylvia S.A. and Agro Franca
S.A.
Mauro Renato José
Dacomo
Mr. Dacomo graduated with a law degree
from the University of
Buenos Aires, and is
Partner at ABD law
firm. He is also President of Inwell S.A. and Los Boulevares
S.A. Mr. Dacomo serves as General
counsel to Fundación Banco de Santa Cruz S.A., Fundación Nuevo Banco de Santa Fe
S.A. and Fundación Nuevo Banco de Entre Ríos
S.A. He is an alternate member of
the Board of Directors of Petersen Energía S.A. (Argentina), Arroyo Lindo S.A.
and Nuevo Banco de Santa Fe S.A., and member of the Board of Directors of Inwell
S.A. and Nuevo Banco de Entre Ríos S.A. Mr. Dacomo is also Director
and Secretary of Petersen Energia S.A. (Spain).
Ignacio Cruz Morán
Mr. Morán has received degrees in public
accounting from the University of Buenos Aires. He is an alternate member of the Board
of Directors of Banco de Santa Cruz S.A., Nuevo Banco de Santa Fe S.A. and Red Link S.A. and member of the Board of Directors of
Banco de San Juan S.A., Nuevo Banco de Entre Ríos S.A., ACH S.A. and Petersen Energia S.A. (Spain).
Eduardo Angel
Garrote
Mr. Garrote graduated with a degree in architecture from the
University of Buenos Aires. He is a member of the Board of
Directors of Nuevo Banco de Santa Fe S.A., and alternate member of the Board of
Directors of Nuevo Banco de Entre Ríos S.A. Mr. Garrote also serves as General
Manager of Petersen, Thiele y Cruz S.A.
Board practices
In accordance with the Argentine
Corporations Law, directors have an obligation to perform their duties with
loyalty and with the diligence of a prudent business person. Directors are
jointly and severally liable to us, our shareholders and to third parties for
the improper performance of their duties, for violating the law or our bylaws or
regulations, and for any damage caused by fraud, abuse of authority or gross
negligence. Specific duties may be assigned to a director by the bylaws, company
regulations, or by resolution of the shareholders’ meeting. In such cases, a
director’s liability will be determined by reference to the performance of such
duties.
Only shareholders, through a
shareholders’ meeting may authorize directors to engage in activities in
competition with us. Transactions or contracts between directors and us in
connection with our activities are permitted to the extent they are performed
under fair market conditions. Transactions that do not comply with the Argentine
Corporations Law require prior approval of the Board of Directors or the
Supervisory Committee. In addition, these transactions must be subsequently
approved by the shareholders at a general meeting. If our shareholders do not
approve the relevant transaction, the directors and members of the Supervisory
Committee who approved such transactions are jointly and severally liable for any damages
caused to us.
Any director whose personal interests
are adverse to ours shall notify the Board of Directors and the Supervisory
Committee and abstain from voting on such matters. Otherwise, such director may
be held liable to us.
A director will not be liable if,
notwithstanding his presence at the meeting at which a resolution was adopted or
his knowledge of such resolution, a written record exists of his opposition to
such resolution and he reports his opposition to the Supervisory Committee
before any complaint against him is brought before the Board of Directors, the
Supervisory Committee, the shareholders’ meeting, the appropriate governmental
agency or the courts. Any liability of a director to us terminates upon approval
of the director’s actions by the shareholders at a general meeting, provided
that shareholders representing at least 5% of our capital stock do not object
and provided further that such liability does not result from a violation of the
law, our bylaws or other regulations.
The
Audit Committee
The Transparency Decree and Resolutions
No. 400/02 and No. 402/02 of the CNV, require that Argentine public companies
appoint an audit committee (comité de
auditoria) composed of at
least three members of the Board of Directors. The bylaws or the regulations of
the Board of Directors must set forth the composition and regulations
for the operation of the Audit Committee. A
majority of the members of the Audit Committee must be independent directors.
See “—Independence of the Members of our Board of
Directors and Audit Committee” below.
Our Audit Committee was created on May
6, 2004. The members of the Audit Committee currently are: president Mario
Vázquez, members Mario Blejer, Carlos de la Vega, Federico Mañero and Carlos Bruno, and alternate members Javier Monzón and
Eduardo Elsztain.
Mario Vázquez was determined by our Board of
Directors to be an “Audit Committee Financial Expert” pursuant to the rules and
regulations of the SEC.
Executive directors may not sit on the
Audit Committee.
Our Audit Committee, among other
things:
·
|
periodically inspects the
preparation of our financial and economic
information;
|
·
|
reviews and opines with respect to
the Board of Directors’ proposals regarding the designation of the
external auditors and
the renewal, termination and conditions of their appointment;
|
·
|
evaluates internal and external
audit work, monitors our relationship with the external
auditors, and assures their
independence;
|
·
|
provides appropriate
disclosure regarding
operations in which there exists a conflict of interest with members of
the corporate committees or controlling
shareholders;
|
·
|
opines on the reasonability of the
proposals by the Board of Directors for fees and stock option plans of the
directors and
administrators;
|
·
|
verifies compliance with
applicable national or international regulations in matters related to
behavior in the stock markets;
and
|
·
|
ensures that the internal Code of
Ethics complies with normative demands and is
adequate.
|
Activities of the audit
committee
The Audit Committee, which pursuant to
its regulations meets as many times as needed and at least once every quarter,
held eight meetings between May 2007 and March 2008.
Performing its basic function of
supporting the Board of Directors in its oversight duties, the Audit Committee
periodically reviews economic and financial information relating to us,
supervises the internal financial control systems and oversees the independence
of the external auditors.
Economic and financial
information
With the help of the Chief Financial
Officer and considering the work performed by our external and internal
auditors, the Audit Committee analyzes the consolidated annual and quarterly
financial statements before they are submitted to the Board of
Directors.
In addition, because our shares are traded on the NYSE,
pursuant to U.S. law we must include our annual
financial information in an annual report on Form 20-F, which must be filed with
the SEC. The Audit Committee reviews such annual report before it is submitted to the
SEC.
Oversight of the internal control
system
To supervise the internal financial
control systems and ensure that they are sufficient, appropriate and efficient,
the Audit Committee oversees the progress of the annual internal audit, which is
aimed at identifying our critical risks.
Throughout each year, the Audit
Committee is informed by our internal audit department of the most relevant
facts and recommendations arising out of its work, and the status of the
recommendations issued in prior years.
We have aligned the internal control
system for financial reporting with the requirements established by Section 404
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, a process supervised by the Audit Committee. These
regulations require that, along with the annual audit, a report must be
presented from our management relating to the design, maintenance and periodic
evaluation of the internal control system for financial reporting, accompanied
by a report from our external auditor. Several of our departments are involved
in this activity, including the internal audit department. Our external auditor
reported on our internal control system for financial reporting as of December
31, 2007.
Relations with the external
auditors
The Audit Committee maintains a close
relationship with the external auditors, allowing it to make a detailed analysis
of the relevant aspects of the audit of financial statements and to obtain
detailed information on the planning and progress of the
work.
The Audit Committee also evaluates the
services provided by our external auditors, determines whether the condition of
independence of the external auditors, as required by applicable
law, is met and monitors the performance of
external auditors to ensure that it is satisfactory.
The shareholders at a meeting held on
April 13, 2007 approved the designation of Deloitte & Co. S.R.L. as external
auditors of the financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2007. As of
December 31, 2007, and as a consequence of the evaluation process described in
the paragraph above, the Audit Committee had no objections to the designation of
Deloitte & Co. S.R.L. as our external auditors of the financial statements
for the year ending December 31, 2008. The shareholders’ meeting to be held on
April 24, 2008 will approve the designation of the external auditors for the
year ending December 31, 2008.
Independence
of the Members of our Board of Directors and Audit Committee
Pursuant to CNV regulations, a director
is not considered independent when such director (i) owns at least a 35% equity
interest in a company, or a lesser interest if the director has the right to
appoint one or more directors of the company, which we refer to as a
“Significant Participation,” or has a Significant Participation in another
company that in turn has a Significant Participation in the company or a
significant influence on the company (“significant influence” is defined by
Argentine GAAP); (ii) is a member of the Board of Directors of, or depends on,
shareholders, or is otherwise related to shareholders, who have a Significant
Participation in the company or another company in which these shareholders have
a direct or indirect Significant Participation or significant influence; (iii)
is or has been in the previous three years an employee of the company; (iv) has
a professional relationship with, or is a member of a company that maintains
professional relationships with, or receives remuneration (other than that
received in consideration of his performance as a director) from the company or
any of its shareholders who has a direct or indirect Significant Participation
in or significant influence on the company, or with a third-party company that
has a direct or indirect Significant Participation or a significant influence;
(v) directly or indirectly sells or provides goods or services to the company or
to any of its shareholders who has a direct or indirect Significant
Participation in or significant influence on the company for an amount exceeding
his remuneration as a member of the Board of Directors or audit committee; or
(vi) is the spouse or parent (up to second grade of affinity or up to fourth
grade of consanguinity) of persons who, if they were members of the Board of
Directors or Audit Committee, would not be independent, according to the
above-listed rules.
As of the date of this annual report, we believe that Messrs. Carlos Bruno,
Carlos de la Vega, Eduardo Elsztain, Federico Mañero, Javier Monzón, Mario
Vázquez and Mario Blejer qualify as independent
members of our Board of Directors under the above-described
criteria.
Disclosure
Committee
In February 2003, we created a Disclosure Committee
to:
·
|
monitor the overall compliance
with regulations and principles of conduct of voluntary application,
especially in relation to listed companies and their corporate
governance;
|
·
|
direct, establish and
maintain procedures
for the preparation of accounting and financial information to be approved
and filed by us or which is generally released to the markets;
|
·
|
direct, establish and maintain
internal control systems that are adequate and efficient to ensure that
our financial statements included in annual and quarterly reports, as well
as any accounting and financial information to be approved and filed by
us, are accurate, reliable and
clear;
|
·
|
identify significant risks to our
businesses and activities that may affect the accounting and financial
information to be approved and
filed;
|
·
|
assume the activities that,
according to U.S. laws and SEC regulations, are applicable to us and may
be assumed by disclosure committees or other internal committees of a
similar nature, especially those activities relating to the SEC
regulations dated August 29, 2002 (“Certification of Disclosure in
Companies’ Quarterly and Prospectus” —SEC Release number 33-8124), in
relation to the support for the certifications by our Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer as to the existence and maintenance by
us of adequate procedures and controls for the generation of the
information to be included in its annual reports on Form 20-F, and other
information of a financial
nature;
|
·
|
take on activities similar to
those stipulated in SEC regulations for a disclosure committee with
respect to the existence and maintenance by us of adequate procedures and
controls for the preparation and content of the information to be included
in the annual financial statements, and any accounting or financial
information to be filed with the CNV and other regulators of the stock
markets on which our stock is traded;
and
|
·
|
formulate proposals for an
internal code of conduct on the stock markets that follow applicable rules
and regulations or any other standards deemed appropriate.
|
In addition, the Disclosure Committee
reviews and supervises our procedures for the
preparation and filing of:
·
|
official notices to the SEC, the
Argentine stock market authorities and other regulators of the stock
markets on which our stock is
traded;
|
·
|
interim financial
reports;
|
·
|
press releases containing
financial data on results, earnings, large acquisitions, divestitures or
any other information relevant to the
shareholders;
|
·
|
general communications to the
shareholders; and
|
·
|
presentations to analysts,
investors, rating agencies and lending
institutions.
|
The Disclosure Committee is composed of
certain of our executive officers, some of whom are also members of our Board of
Directors.
The Disclosure Committee is currently
composed of the following people:
|
|
|
Sebastián
Eskenazi
|
|
Chief Executive
Officer
|
Carlos
Alfonsi
|
|
Director Refining and
Logistics
|
Fernando
Dasso
|
|
Director of Human
Resources
|
Fabián
Falco
|
|
Director of Communication and
External Relations
|
Walter
Forwood
|
|
Chief Financial
Officer
|
Tomás García
Blanco
|
|
Director Exploration and
Production
|
|
|
|
Carlos
Jiménez
|
|
Director Management
Control
|
Gabriel
Leiva
|
|
Director Accounting and
Administration
|
Rafael López
Revuelta
|
|
Director
Chemicals
|
Alfredo
Pochintesta
|
|
Director of
Marketing
|
Alejandro Quiroga
López
|
|
General
Counsel
|
Aquiles
Rattia
|
|
Director of Reserves
Control
|
Juan Carlos Rodríguez
González
|
|
Director of Internal
Audit
|
Executive
Officers
The President of the Board of Directors,
who, according to our bylaws, must be a Class D director, is elected by the
Board of Directors to serve for a two-year term, but not to exceed his term as
director. All other officers serve at the discretion of the Board of Directors
and may be terminated at any time without notice.
All of our current senior executive
officers are either members or alternate members of the Board of
Directors.
Share
Ownership of Executive Officers
None of our executive officers owns any
of our shares.
Compliance
with NYSE Listing Standards on Corporate Governance
On November 4, 2003, the SEC approved
rules proposed by the NYSE intended to strengthen corporate governance standards
for listed companies.
In accordance with the NYSE corporate
governance rules, as of July 31, 2005, all members of the Audit Committee were
required to be independent. Independence is determined in accordance with highly
detailed rules promulgated by the NYSE and SEC. Each of the members of our Audit
Committee was determined to be independent in accordance with the applicable
NYSE and SEC rules.
Significant differences between our
corporate governance practices and those required by NYSE listing
standards
Non-U.S., NYSE-listed companies may, in
general, follow their home country corporate governance practices in lieu of
most of the NYSE corporate governance requirements. The NYSE rules, however,
require that non-U.S. companies disclose any significant ways in which their
specific corporate governance practices differ from U.S. companies under the NYSE listing
standards.
The following is a summary of the
significant differences between our corporate governance practices and those
applicable to U.S. companies under the NYSE listing
standards. Because more than 50% of our voting stock is held by another company,
Repsol YPF, we would not be required to comply with the following NYSE corporate
governance requirements even if we were a U.S. company: (i) having a majority of
independent directors, (ii) corporate governance committee requirements, and
(iii) compensation committee requirements.
Independence of the directors on the Board of
Directors
In accordance with the NYSE corporate
governance rules, a majority of the Board of Directors must be composed of
independent directors, whose independence is determined in accordance with
highly detailed rules promulgated by the NYSE. Other than as described under
“—Independence of the Members of our Board of
Directors and Audit Committee,” Argentine law does not regulate the independence
of directors nor criteria for determining independence.
Compensation and nomination
committees
In accordance with the NYSE corporate
governance rules, all U.S. companies listed on the NYSE must have
a compensation committee and a nominations committee and all members of such
committees must be independent in accordance with highly detailed rules
promulgated by the NYSE. Under Argentine law, these committees are not
required.
Separate meetings for non-management
directors
In accordance with NYSE corporate
governance rules, independent directors must meet periodically outside of the
presence of the executive directors. Under Argentine law, this practice is not
required and as such, the independent directors on our Board of Directors do not
meet outside of the presence of the other directors.
Code of Ethics
We have adopted a code of ethics
applicable to the Board of Directors and all employees. Since its effective date
on August 15, 2003, we have not waived compliance with or amended the code of
ethics.
Compensation
of Directors and Officers
Argentine law provides that the
aggregate annual compensation paid to the members of the Board of Directors
(including those directors acting in an executive capacity) with respect to a
fiscal year may not exceed 5% of net income for such year if YPF is not paying
dividends in respect of such net income, which percentage is increased up to 25%
of net income based on the amount of dividends, if any, are paid. The
compensation of the president and other directors acting in an executive
capacity, together with the compensation of all other directors, requires the
ratification of an ordinary general shareholders’ meeting as provided by
Argentine law. The compensation of the members of the Supervisory Committee is
determined by the shareholders at the ordinary shareholders’
meeting.
For the period ended December 31, 2007
the aggregate compensation accrued or paid to the members of the Board of
Directors and YPF’s executive officers for services in all capacities was
Ps.34.6 million.
During 2007, YPF’s performance-based
compensation programs included a bonus plan for approximately 4,900
employees.
The bonus plan provides for cash to be
paid to the participants based on a measurable and specific set of objectives
under Repsol YPF’s Management by Objectives program and the results of the
review of individual performance. All of the participants are YPF employees
included at a specific salary level. The participation of each eligible employee
in the bonus plan ranges from 15% to 55% of such employee’s annual base salary.
Bonus percentages are fixed by the president of Repsol YPF with the approval of
Repsol YPF’s Compensation Committee at the beginning of each calendar year. The
total amount of bonuses awarded under the bonus plan cannot exceed 90% of the
individual maximum participation and will be linked to the company’s net cash
flow.
In 2007, Ps.2.0 million was accrued for
eligible members of the Board of Directors and officers pursuant to the Selected
Deferred Compensation Plan.
None of our non-executive directors has
any service contracts with YPF.
Supervisory
Committee
The Supervisory Committee is responsible
for overseeing management’s compliance with the Argentine Corporations Law, the
bylaws and regulations (if any), and shareholders’ resolutions. The functions of
the Supervisory Committee include, among others, attending all meetings of the
Board of Directors, preparing a report of the financial statements for our
shareholders, attending shareholders’ meetings and providing information upon
request to holders of at least 2% of our capital stock.
The bylaws provide for a Supervisory
Committee consisting of three to five members and three to five alternate
members, elected to one-year terms. The Class A shares are entitled to elect one
member and one alternate member of the Committee so long as one share of such
class remains outstanding. The holders of Class D shares elect up to four
members and up to four alternates. Under the bylaws, meetings of the Supervisory
Committee may be called by any member. The meeting requires the presence of all
members, and a majority vote of the members in order to make a decision. The
members and alternate members of the Supervisory Committee are not members of
our Board of Directors. The role of our Supervisory Committee is distinct from
that of the Audit Committee. See “—The Audit
Committee.” For the year 2007, the
aggregate compensation paid to the members of the Supervisory Committee was
Ps.945,000.
The current members of the Supervisory
Committee, the year in which they were appointed and the year their current term
expires are as follows:
|
|
Class of
Shares
Represented
|
|
|
|
|
Silvana Rosa
Lagrosa
|
|
A
|
|
2007
|
|
2008
|
Juan A. Gelly y
Obes
|
|
D
|
|
2005
|
|
2008
|
Israel Lipsich
|
|
D
|
|
2008
|
|
2009
|
Santiago C. Lazzati
|
|
D
|
|
2005
|
|
2008
|
Carlos María
Tombeur
|
|
D
|
|
2008
|
|
2009
|
Orlando F. Pelaya
|
|
A
|
|
2006
|
|
2008
|
Arturo F. Alonso
Peña
|
|
D
|
|
2007
|
|
2008
|
Oscar Oroná
|
|
D
|
|
2008
|
|
2009
|
Edgardo A.
Sanguineti
|
|
D
|
|
2008
|
|
2009
|
Rubén
Laizerowitch
|
|
D
|
|
2008
|
|
2009
|
Silvana Rosa Lagrosa
Mrs. Lagrosa graduated as a certified
public accountant from the University of Buenos Aires. She has been a member of the
Sindicatura General
de la Nación (SIGEN) since
2000, for which she acts as statutory auditor of our company, Lotería Nacional
S.E., Ferrocarril General Belgrano S.A., Encotesa e.l. and
LAFSA.
Juan A. Gelly y Obes
Mr. Gelly y Obes graduated as a
certified public accountant from the Belgrano University of Buenos Aires. He is
a partner of the consulting firm Otero Cano & Asociados-Accountants, and he
is a consulting accountant in legal matters to the board of directors of the
Argentine Republic Central Bank. Previously, Mr. Gelly y Obes was a member of
the statutory audit committees of Aerolineas Argentinas S.A. and Agritech
Inversora S.A.
Israel Lipsich
Mr. Lipsich graduated as a certified public
accountant from the University of Buenos Aires. He is currently a member of the
Supervisory Committee of Banco de San Juan S.A., Banco de Santa Cruz S.A., Nuevo
Banco de Santa Fe S.A., Nuevo Banco de Entre Ríos S.A., Petersen Thiele y
Cruz S.A., Santa Sylvia S.A., Turfmax S.A. y Serra Lima
S.A.
Santiago C. Lazzati
Mr. Lazzati graduated as a certified
public accountant from the University of Buenos Aires. He was a partner of Arthur Andersen
from 1974 until he retired in 1993 and was the head of the Audit and Business
Advisory Division from 1975 to 1987 and Practice Director from 1987 until his
retirement. He is currently
working as associate director in
Deloitte in Argentina and other Latin American countries in
consulting, especially in human capital services. He is a business consultant,
specializing in topics related to management and human behavior. He is the
author of fifteen books and many articles on accounting, auditing and business
administration. Additionally, Mr. Lazzatti is assessor of the International
Criminal Court in the
Hague of all matters
concerning the organization of the Office of the Prosecutor in charge, Dr. Luis
Moreno Ocampo. Mr. Lazzati is the statutory auditor of Sheraton Hotels and
Telefónica de Argentina and a full-time business administration professor of the
Universidad Católica Argentina.
Carlos María Tombeur
Mr. Tombeur graduated from the
University of Buenos Aires, School of Law and Social Sciences, with a law degree
in 1976. Previously, he was Professor of Economic Law in the School of Economic Sciences and of Commercial Law in the
School of Law, both at the University of Buenos Aires. Mr. Tombeur was also Professor of
Economic Law in the Master’s Degree program in Public Policy at the University
Di Tella. From 1999 to 2005 he served as member of the Board of Directors of YPF
S.A. Mr. Tombeur was appointed controller at Seguro de Depósitos S.A. (SEDESA) (Insurance Deposit Company) by
the Central Bank for the
period 1997-2001. He also served as legal undersecretary of the Ministry of
Economy and Public Works and Services from 1992 until 1996 and was member of the
Board of Directors of the Central Bank of the Argentine Republic, 1991-1992. Mr.
Tombeur was Partner of the firm Caride Fitte & Tombeur from 1977 until 1991.
Mr. Tombeur is currently Partner with the firm Severgnini Robiola Grinberg &
Larrechea. He is also a member of the Bar Association of the City of
Buenos Aires and the International Bar Association.
Mr. Tombeur is currently the President of the Board of Directors at EMC Computer
Systems Argentina S.A. and Williams Lea Argentina S.A.
Orlando F. Pelaya
Mr. Pelaya graduated as a certified
public accountant from the University of Lomas de Zamora in Argentina. He is a member of Sindicatura General
de la Nación (SIGEN), for
which he acts as statutory auditor of Educ.ar S.E., an educational web portal (a
state company); INdeR S.E. (e.l.), the National Reinsurance Institute (a state
company) and Interbaires S.A. In addition, he is an alternate
statutory auditor of AySA S.A., an Argentine water company; CAMMESA,
an electricity administration company; EDCADASSA S.A, a cargo airline;
L.A.F.S.A., the Argentine federal airline; LT 10, administration radio company,
and our company. He is also a control coordinator of other state
companies.
Arturo F. Alonso
Peña
Mr. Peña received his law degree from
the University of Buenos Aires School of Law in 1973. He was statutory auditor
of Banco Hipotecario Nacional from 1995 to 2001. He was partner of M&M
Bomchil law firm from 1980 to 1985, Chief of the trademark department of the
National Intellectual Property Registry in 1979, and secretary of the Court of
First Instance in commercial matters of the City of Buenos Aires from 1974 to 1978. He is currently an
attorney with Severgnini, Robiola, Grinberg & Larrechea.
Oscar Alberto Oroná
Mr. Oroná graduated from the Belgrano
University of Buenos Aires in 1975. He is a Consultant Lawyer of Cassagne
Abogados Law Firm. In 1991 Mr. Oroná completed the Petroleum Managment
Certificate Program in Boston, Massachusetts. He previously served as a
member of the Board of Directors of Astra Compañía Argentina de Petróleo S.A.,
Terminal Marítima Patagónica S.A., Pluspetrol Energy S.A., Central Dock Sud
S.A., Inversora Dock Sud S.A., Empresa Petrolera Andina S.A. (Bolivia), Apex
Petroleum Inc., Gas Argentino S.A., Metrogas S.A., Petroken Petroquimica
Ensenada S.A. and Empresa de Distribución Eléctrica de Entre Ríos
S.A. Mr. Oroná was also the Second Vice President of the Cámara
de Sociedades Anónimas and President of the Legal Comité of the Camara de la
Industria del Petróleo and of San Isidro Golf Club
S.A. He is a member of the Comisión Fiscalizadora of Oleoductos del
Valle S.A. and Metrogas S.A., as well as the Colegio de Abogados de
Buenos Aires, the American Bar Association, the
Asociación de Derecho de la Energía, the Instituto Argentino del Petróleo y Gas
IAPG and the Association of International Petroleum Negociators
AIPN.
Edgardo A.
Sanguineti
Mr. Sanguineti graduated from the
University of Buenos Aires with a degree in Business
Administration and holds a doctorate in Economic Sciences from the same
university, where he was a professor in the Economic Sciences doctoral
program. He is a Certified Public Accountant and Partner of Lazzati y
Sanguineti – Management Consulting Firm. Mr. Sanguineti is
a member of the Statutory
Audit Committee of Telefónica de Argentina, Telefónica Holding de Argentina
S.A., Televisión Federal S.A.-Telefé, Atlántida Comunicaciones S.A. and Telefónica Media Argentina S.A.,
among other companies.
Rubén Laizerowitch
Rubén Laizerowitch received his law
degree from the University of Buenos Aires. He is an alternate member of Board of Directors of
Petersen, Thiele y Cruz S.A., Estacionamientos Buenos Aires S.A. and INWELL
S.A., and is a member of Supervisory Commitee of Nuevo Banco de Santa Fe S.A.
and Nuevo Banco de Entre Ríos S.A. He is also an alternate
member of the Supervisory Committee of Banco Santa Cruz
S.A.
Employee
Matters
As of
December 31, 2007, we had approximately 11,534 employees, including
approximately 5,811 employees of the Refining and Marketing business segment,
approximately 1,848 employees of the Exploration and Production business
segment, and approximately 564 employees of the Chemical business
segment.
Approximately
51% of our employees are represented by “Federación Sindicatos Unidos Petroleros
e Hidrocarburíferos” that negotiates labor agreements with us. At the end of
2006, we began new negotiations with other labor unions that resulted in our
extending our labor agreements with those unions until year 2010. The
negotiations also involved economic and social conditions for employees of ours
and of third parties that are addressed in the labor agreement. We consider our
current relations with our workforce to be good.
As part of
its privatization, YPF restructured its internal organization and significantly
reduced the number of its employees. YPF reduced its work force from over 51,000
employees (including approximately 15,000 personnel under contract) at
December 31, 1990 to approximately 7,500 at December 31, 1993. YPF
paid to the employees affected by these reductions the termination payments
required under Argentine labor laws which amounted to Ps.686 million. In
connection with the reduction in its workforce, YPF has received notice of
approximately 1,984 lawsuits brought by former employees as
of December 31, 2007. A substantial majority of such suits have been
brought by former employees who allege that they received insufficient severance
payments in connection with their dismissal, the unsettled YPF stocks, according
to the “Regime of Participated Property” (this regulation was denominated to the
sale of employees’ YPF stocks), and various job-related illnesses, injuries,
typically seek unspecified relief. The outcome of this type of litigation
depends on factual issues that vary from case to case, and it is not always
feasible to predict the outcome of particular cases.
Based on
the number and character of the lawsuits already commenced, however, the
estimated likelihood of additional claims in view of the number of dismissed
employees, applicable statutes of limitations, the legal principles involved in
the suits and the financial statement reserves previously established.
Management does not expect the outcome of these lawsuits to have a material
adverse effect on our financial condition or future results of
operations.
Maxus (a
YPF subsidiary) has a number of trustee noncontributory pension plans covering
substantially all full-time employees. The benefits provided by these plans are
based on the number of years of employment and the compensation earned during
those years. This company has other noncontributory pension plans for executive
officers, selected key employees and former employees of the Maxus Group. The
Maxus Energy Corporation career average pension plan was frozen effective
March 1, 2007. The Maxus Energy Corporation savings plan was amended
effective March 1, 2007 to include the non-elective component, through
which the plan’s sponsor contributes 7.5% of the employees’ annual base
salary. Maxus also grants benefits for health care, life insurance and
other social benefits to some of its employees who retire early. The amounts
payable accrue over the employee’s years of service. During March 2008, YPF
Holdings purchased a group annuity contract from an insurance company to settle
the liability associated with the benefits under certain of Maxus’ defined
benefits plans, with a one-time premium payment of U.S.$115 million. The
assumption by the insurance company of liability under the plans was effective
on March 20, 2008, the date the premium was paid by YPF Holdings.
We also
had approximately 21,500 third-party employees under contract as of December 31,
2007, mostly under contract with large international service providers. Although
we have policies regarding compliance with labor and social security obligations
by its contractors, we are not in a position to ensure that contractors’
employees
will not
initiate legal actions to seek indemnification from us based upon a number of
Argentine judicial labor court precedents recognizing joint and several
liability between the contractor and the entity to which it is supplying
services under certain circumstances.
The
following table provides a breakdown of our employees by business units as of
December 31, 2007.
Employees
by Business Units
|
|
|
|
Exploration
& Production
|
|
|
1,848 |
|
Domestic
|
|
|
1,748 |
|
International
|
|
|
20 |
|
Natural
Gas & Electricity
|
|
|
80 |
|
Refining
and Marketing
|
|
|
5,811 |
|
Domestic
|
|
|
3,027 |
|
OPESSA
|
|
|
2,784 |
|
Chemical
|
|
|
564 |
|
A-Evangelista
S.A.
|
|
|
2,530 |
|
Corporate
and Other
|
|
|
781 |
|
Total
YPF
|
|
|
11,534 |
|
The
following table provides a breakdown of our employees by geographic
locations.
Employees
by geographic location
|
|
|
|
Argentina
|
|
|
11,514 |
|
USA
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
YPF
|
|
|
11,534 |
|
ITEM
7. Major Shareholders and Related Party Transactions
The
following table sets forth information relating to the beneficial ownership of
our shares as of the date of this annual report.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repsol
YPF(1)
|
|
|
330,945,294 |
|
|
|
84.14 |
% |
Petersen
Energía
|
|
|
58,603,606 |
|
|
|
14.90 |
% |
Public
|
|
|
3,646,875 |
|
|
|
0.93 |
% |
Argentine
federal and provincial governments(2)
|
|
|
11,388 |
|
|
|
<
0.01 |
% |
Employee
fund(3)
|
|
|
105,630 |
|
|
|
0.03 |
% |
(1)
|
Share
ownership amounts and percentages do not reflect the options granted to
certain members of the Eskenazi family, who are affiliates of Petersen
Energía, by Repsol YPF to purchase up to 10.1% of our capital stock
pursuant to the Petersen Options described in further detail
below.
|
(2)
|
Reflects
the ownership of 3,764 Class A shares and 7,624 Class B shares by the
Argentine federal government and provincial governments,
respectively.
|
(3)
|
Reflects
the ownership of 105,630 Class C
shares.
|
On
February 21, 2008, Petersen Energía S.A. (“Petersen Energía”) purchased
58,603,606 of our ADSs, representing 14.9% of our capital stock, from Repsol YPF
for U.S.$2,235 million (the “Petersen Transaction”). In addition, Repsol YPF
also granted certain members of the Eskenazi family, who are affiliates of
Petersen Energía, options to purchase up to an additional 10.1% of our
outstanding capital stock within four years (the “Petersen
Options”).
The following are summaries of certain
material terms of the agreements entered into by Repsol YPF, Petersen Energía
and certain of their respective affiliates in connection with the Petersen
Transaction and the Petersen Options, as described in Repsol YPF’s public
filings.
Share
Purchase Agreement and Related Financing Agreements
Pursuant
to the share purchase agreement, Petersen Energía purchased 58,603,606 ADSs,
representing 14.9% of our outstanding capital stock, from Repsol YPF for a total
purchase price of U.S.$2,235 million, or U.S.$38.13758 per ADS. Such purchase
and sale is subject to a post-closing condition of certain regulatory antitrust
approvals, consents and authorizations being obtained within 12 months from the
date of the share purchase agreement. In the event that such approvals, consents
and authorizations are not obtained, Repsol YPF has agreed with Petersen Energía
and the lenders under the senior secured term loan facility referred to below to
unwind the Petersen Transaction.
Petersen
Energía’s purchase of our securities was financed by the drawdown of U.S.$1,026
million under a senior secured term loan facility provided by certain financial
institutions, borrowing of U.S.$1,015 million under a seller credit agreement
entered into with Repsol YPF and equity provided by Petersen Energía’s
shareholders. The seller credit agreement matures on February 21, 2018.
Principal payments are required to be made at certain periodic intervals
commencing in 2013 until the maturity date. The loan under the seller credit
agreement bears interest at 8.12% per year until May 15, 2013, and thereafter at
7.0% per year, and contains other customary terms and provisions.
Securities
purchased by Petersen Energía are pledged as collateral under the senior secured
term loan facility and the seller credit agreement. The seller credit agreement
is subordinated to the senior secured term loan facility.
Option
Agreements
Repsol YPF
granted certain members of the Eskenazi family, who are affiliates of Petersen
Energía, an option to purchase the number of Class D shares or ADSs amounting to
0.1% of our capital stock, pursuant to the first option agreement, and an option
to purchase an additional number of Class D shares or ADSs amounting to 10.0% of
our capital stock (collectively, the “Option Shares”), pursuant to the second
option agreement, subject to certain terms and conditions. The Petersen Options
expire on February 21, 2012. The exercise price per Option Share shall be
determined in accordance with the following formula: (i) U.S.$15 billion multiplied by the consumer
price index published monthly by the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics
for the period from the date of the option agreements through the exercise date,
(ii) plus or minus our accumulated results
from the date of the option agreements through the exercise date (with certain
adjustments for taxes paid), determined based on our financial statements for
the fiscal years ending after the date of the option agreements, (iii) minus dividends paid from the
date of the option agreements through the exercise date, (iv) plus or minus any changes in our
share capital, (v) divided by the number of
shares outstanding on the exercise date.
The
beneficiaries of the Petersen Options may only exercise their purchase rights
under the first option agreement once and with respect to all of the Class D
shares or ADSs subject to the agreement. The beneficiaries of the Petersen
Options may exercise their purchase rights under the second option agreement on
one or more occasions during the exercise period of such second option
agreement.
Subject to
certain terms and conditions contained in the Petersen Options, Repsol YPF has
agreed to provide financing of up to 48% of the exercise price required to be
paid for the Option Shares purchased by certain members of the Eskenazi family
pursuant to the Petersen Options. Repsol YPF has also agreed to finance or
guarantee the financing of up to 100% of the price that the members of the
Eskenazi family would be required to pay to purchase shares from other
shareholders through a mandatory tender offer as a result of Petersen Energía
and its affiliates, including certain members of the Eskenazi family, acquiring
an interest in our capital stock of greater than 15%. This commitment is limited
to a maximum amount equivalent to the price necessary to purchase Class D shares
or ADSs equal to 0.9% of our capital stock, which corresponds to the percentage
of shares that were not owned by Repsol YPF prior to the Petersen
Transaction.
The
beneficiaries of the Petersen Options agreed that, if they exercise their option
under the second option agreement, they will not transfer for a period of five
years the 10% of our outstanding capital stock that is subject to that
agreement, but have not made such an agreement as to the 0.1% of our outstanding
capital stock that is subject to the first option agreement.
Shareholders’
Agreement
Petersen
Energía, Repsol YPF and certain affiliates of Repsol YPF entered into a
shareholders’ agreement on February 21, 2008 in connection with the Petersen
Transaction establishing certain rights and obligations in connection with our
governance and certain procedures for and limitations on transfers of our
shares, among other matters. The following is a summary of certain material
terms of the shareholders’ agreement based on Repsol YPF’s public
filings.
Voting
at Shareholders’ Meetings
Repsol YPF
and Petersen Energía have agreed to discuss and reach agreement on their voting
with respect to proposals presented at shareholders’ meetings involving certain
matters, including certain increases or any reductions in our capital (except
reductions that are legally required), the merger, divestiture or dissolution of
our company or certain of our subsidiaries, the divestiture of material assets
of our company or certain of our subsidiaries, the modification of our bylaws,
and the designation or removal of our external auditors, among other matters. In
the event that Repsol YPF and Petersen Energía cannot reach an agreement on any
of these matters, they have agreed to vote against such matters.
Composition
of our Board of Directors
Repsol YPF
and Petersen Energía have agreed that the composition of our Board of Directors
shall reflect a proportional representation of Repsol YPF’s and Petersen
Energía’s interests in our capital stock, with (i) Repsol YPF retaining the
right to appoint the majority of the members of our Board of Directors for so
long as it holds the majority of our capital stock, and (ii) Petersen Energía
having the right to appoint at least five members to our Board (or three members
in the case that its interest in our outstanding capital stock falls below
10%).
Appointment
of Directors and Officers and Certain Board Decisions
Repsol YPF
and Petersen Energía have agreed that the Chairman of our Board of Directors and
our Chief Operating Officer shall be designated by Repsol YPF while our Chief
Executive Officer will be designated by Petersen Energía. They have agreed that
initially Mr. Antonio Brufau will remain the Chairman of our Board of Directors,
Mr. Sebastián Eskenazi will serve as our Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Antonio
Gomis will serve as our Chief Operating Officer and Mr. Enrique Eskenazi will
serve as a director and Non-Executive Vice President of the Board. When Mr.
Enrique Eskenazi ceases to be a director, such non-executive vice presidency
will remain vacant.
Certain
decisions of our Board of Directors shall require the affirmative vote of the
directors representing Repsol YPF and Petersen Energía, including any action
that results in any of the specific matters discussed under “—Voting at
Shareholders’ Meetings” above, the reduction of our direct or indirect interest
in certain of our subsidiaries, the contracting of debts, guarantees or
investments that contractually limit the payment of dividends or cause our
consolidated debt to EBITDA ratio to reach or exceed 3:1, undertake non-budgeted
investments or acquisitions that individually exceed U.S.$250 million, and the
requesting of the declaration of insolvency or bankruptcy, among other matters.
In the event that Repsol YPF and Petersen Energía cannot reach an agreement on
any of these specific matters, they have agreed to instruct their directors to
vote against such matters.
Lock-Ups
and Transfer Restrictions
Petersen
Energía has agreed not to sell any shares of our capital stock for a period of
five years, subject to certain exceptions, including the condition that Repsol
YPF continues to hold at least 35% of our outstanding capital stock. In
addition, if our dividend payments are insufficient for Petersen Energía to meet
its obligations under the senior secured term loan facility, or if Petersen
Energía repays the senior secured term loan facility in full, Petersen Energía
may sell shares of our capital stock, so long as Petersen Energía maintains a
minimum interest in our capital stock of between 10% and 15% (depending on
whether the beneficiaries of the Petersen Options have fully exercised the
Petersen Options and excluding certain dilution events in respect of capital
increases).
Repsol YPF
has agreed to hold at least 50.01% of our capital stock for a period of at least
five years, unless Petersen Energía repays the senior secured term loan facility
in full. Once the senior secured term loan facility has been repaid in full,
Repsol YPF has agreed to hold at least 35% of our capital stock, so long as
Petersen Energía maintains a minimum interest in our capital stock of between
10% and 15% (depending on whether its affiliates that are beneficiaries of the
Petersen Options have fully exercised the Petersen Options and excluding certain
dilution events in respect of capital increases), provided that Repsol YPF may
sell shares to a purchaser that is a “first-tier” company in the oil and gas
industry and agrees to be bound by the terms of the shareholders’
agreement.
After five
years: (i) Petersen Energía may transfer its shares without limitation; and (ii)
so long as Petersen Energía maintains a minimum interest in our capital stock of
between 10% and 15% (depending on whether its affiliates that are beneficiaries
of the Petersen Options have fully exercised the Petersen Options and excluding
certain dilution events in respect of capital increases), Repsol YPF must
maintain an interest that, combined with Petersen Energía’s holdings, amounts to
40% of our outstanding capital stock, subject to certain conditions, provided
that Repsol YPF may sell shares to a purchaser that is a “first-tier” company in
the oil and gas industry and agrees to be bound by the terms of the
shareholders’ agreement.
Tag-Along
Rights, Right to Participate in Public Offering and Right of First
Refusal
If
Petersen Energía has repaid the senior secured term loan facility in full, when
Repsol YPF sells more than 5% of our outstanding capital stock, Petersen Energía
shall have a pro rata tag-along right with respect to such sale by
Repsol
YPF. Petersen Energía also has rights to participate, on a pro rata basis, in
any public offering of our outstanding capital stock conducted by Repsol
YPF.
Additionally,
when Repsol YPF or Petersen Energía sells a block of our shares representing
greater than 10% of our capital stock, the other party shall have a right of
first refusal to purchase such shares, subject to certain terms and
conditions.
Acquisition
of Certain of Repsol YPF’s Latin American Assets
Repsol YPF
and Petersen Energía have agreed to allow us to evaluate the possible
acquisition, at market price, of certain specified Latin American assets of
Repsol YPF in order to expand and diversify our business.
Dividends
Repsol YPF
and Petersen Energía have agreed to effect the adoption of a dividend policy
under which we would distribute 90% of our net income as dividends, starting
with our net income for 2007. They have also agreed to vote in favor of
requiring us to distribute an additional dividend of U.S.$850 million, of which
half will be paid in 2008 and half will be paid in 2009.
Tender
Offer by Petersen Energía
Repsol YPF
has agreed not to participate in the tender offer for our shares that Petersen
Energía or its affiliates will be required to make if they acquire 15% or more
of our outstanding capital stock (as a result of its exercise of one of the
Petersen Options, or otherwise).
Duration
and Termination
The
shareholders’ agreement shall remain in effect during our existence, but is
subject to immediate termination if Repsol YPF’s holdings of our capital stock
fall below 12.5% or Petersen Energía’s holdings of our capital stock fall below
10%. The shareholders’ agreement is also subject to termination if there are
certain defaults under the shareholders’ agreement, or if, within thirty days of
the bankruptcy of either party, the bankrupt party cannot provide a sufficient
guaranty to the other party.
Registration
Rights and Related Agreements
Under the
terms of the registration rights agreement between us, Repsol YPF and the
financial institutions providing the senior secured term loan facility, we have
agreed to file a resale shelf registration statement under the Securities Act
with respect to the ADSs sold in the Petersen Transaction, have it declared
effective by the SEC, and keep it continuously effective until certain specified
conditions have been met. On February 20, 2008, we filed such shelf registration
statement on Form F-3 with the SEC. Upon any acceleration of the senior secured
term loan facility following the occurrence and continuation of an event of
default under such facility, Credit Suisse, London Branch, the administrative
agent acting on behalf of the lenders under the senior secured term loan
facility as holders of such pledged securities, may sell such securities under
the shelf registration statement after giving us notice, provided that we may
suspend the use of the registration statement upon the occurrence of certain
specified events. Such securities and the associated registration rights may be
transferred by any holder.
In the
event that we fail to keep a continuously effective resale shelf registration
statement and an acceleration of the senior secured term loan facility following
an occurrence and continuation of an event of default under such facility
occurs, we are required to pay certain specified damages to the holders of the
securities required to be registered. The registration rights agreement provides
that the selling shareholders and we will indemnify each other and our and their
respective directors, officers, agents, employees and controlling persons
against specific liabilities in connection with the offer and sale of the ADSs,
including liabilities under the Securities Act, or will be entitled to
contribution in connection with those liabilities. In addition, Repsol YPF and
Petersen Energía PTY Ltd., the parent holding company of Petersen Energía, S.A.,
have agreed in a separate agreement to indemnify us against certain specific
losses resulting from our agreement to indemnify the selling shareholders and
their directors, officers and controlling persons pursuant to the registration
rights agreement (excluding losses resulting from a final judgment
determining
the existence of a material misstatement or omission of fact contained in our
resale shelf registration statement or a prospectus included therein, or a
settlement based on such claims). Repsol YPF or Petersen Energía S.A. will pay
all of our expenses incidental to the registration, offering and sale of the
ADSs to the public (subject to the caps and limitations set forth in the
registration rights agreement), and each selling shareholder will be responsible
for payment of commissions, concessions, fees and discounts of underwriters,
broker-dealers and agents.
We have
also entered into a separate registration rights agreement with respect to the
Option Shares, with terms and conditions that are substantially similar to those
contained in the registration rights agreement entered into with respect to the
ADSs sold in the Petersen Transaction.
Related
Party Transactions
All
material transactions and balances with related parties are set forth in Note 7
to the Audited Consolidated Financial Statements. The principal such
transactions are short-term intercompany loans granted by us at market rates of
interest (which, net of loans collected, amounted to Ps.1,317 million in 2007),
our sales of refined and other products to certain affiliates (which amounted to
Ps.2,769 million in 2007), and our purchase of petroleum and other products that
we do not produce ourselves from certain affiliates (which amounted to Ps.1,164
million in 2007). The prices of the transactions with related parties
approximate the amounts charged by and/or to us by unrelated third
parties.
In
addition, Repsol YPF and Petersen Energía PTY Ltd., the parent holding company
of Petersen Energía, have agreed to indemnify us against certain specific losses
resulting from our agreement to indemnify the selling shareholders and their
directors, officers and controlling persons pursuant to the registration rights
agreements we have entered into in connection with the Petersen Transaction
(excluding losses resulting from a final judgment determining the existence of a
material misstatement or omission of fact contained in our resale shelf
registration statement or a prospectus included therein, or a settlement based
on such claims). Repsol YPF or Petersen Energía will pay all of our expenses
incidental to the registration, offering and sale of the securities registered
hereby to the public. See “Item 7. Major Shareholders and Related Party
Transactions—Registration Rights and Related Agreements.”
For an
organizational chart demonstrating our organizational structure, including our
interests in our principal affiliates, see “Item 4. Information on the
Company—Overview.”
Argentine
Law Concerning Related Party Transactions
Section 73
of the Transparency Decree provides that before a company whose shares are
listed in Argentina may enter into an act or contract involving a “significant
amount” with a related party or parties, such company must obtain approval from
its board of directors, and obtain an opinion, prior to such board approval,
from its audit committee or from two independent valuation firms that states
that the terms of the transaction are consistent with those that could be
obtained on an arm’s-length basis.
For the
purpose of Section 73 of the Transparency Decree, as amended by Decree No.
1020/03, “significant amount” means an amount that exceeds 1% of the issuer’s
net worth as reflected in the latest approved financial statements, provided
this amount exceeds Ps.300,000. For purposes of the Transparency Decree,
“related party” means (i) directors, members of the supervisory committee,
managers; (ii) the persons or entities that control or hold a significant
participation in the company or in its controlling shareholder (at least 35% of
its capital stock, or a lesser amount when they have the right to appoint one or
more directors, or have other shareholder agreements related to the management
of the company or its controlling shareholder); (iii) any other company under
common control; (iv) direct relatives of the persons mentioned in (i) and (ii);
or (v) companies in which the persons referred to in (i) to (iv) hold directly
or indirectly significant participations.
The acts
or contracts referred to above, immediately after being approved by the board of
directors, shall be disclosed to the CNV, making express indication of the audit
committee’s or independent valuation firm’s opinion, as the case may be. Also,
beginning on the business day following the day the transaction was approved by
the
board of
directors, the audit committee’s or independent valuation firm’s reports shall
be made available to the shareholders at the company’s principal executive
offices.
If the
audit committee or the two independent valuation firms do not find that the
contract is on arm’s-length terms, prior approval must be obtained at the
company’s shareholders’ meeting.
ITEM
8. Financial Information
Financial
Statements
See Item
18 for our Consolidated Financial Statements.
Legal
Proceedings
Argentina
The
Privatization Law provides that the Argentine State shall be responsible, and
shall hold us harmless, for any liabilities, obligations or other commitments
existing as of December 31, 1990 that were not acknowledged as such in the
financial statements of Yacimientos Petrolíferos Fiscales Sociedades del Estado
as of that date arising out of any transactions or events that had occurred as
of that date, provided that any such liability, obligation or other commitment
is established or verified by a final decision of a competent judicial
authority. In certain lawsuits related to events or acts that took place before
December 31, 1990, we have been required to advance the payment of amounts
established in certain judicial decisions, and have subsequently been reimbursed
or are currently in the process of requesting reimbursement from the Argentine
government of all material amounts in such cases. We are required to keep the
Argentine government apprised of any claim against us arising from the
obligations assumed by the Argentine government. We believe we have the right to
be reimbursed for all such payments by the Argentine government pursuant to the
above-mentioned indemnity, which payments in any event have to date not been
material. This indemnity also covers fees and expenses of lawyers and technical
consultants subject, in the case of our lawyers and consultants, to the
requirement that such fees and expenses not be contingent upon the amounts in
dispute.
Reserved,
probable contingencies
In the
ordinary course of our business, we are a party to various actions, including
approximately 1,985 labor lawsuits as of December 31, 2007, for which provisions
of Ps.42 million have been made.
Reserves
totaling Ps.1,898 million, Ps.1,571 million and Ps.1,303 million as of December
31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively, have been established to provide for
contingencies which are probable and can be reasonably estimated. In the opinion
of our management, in consultation with our external counsel, the amount
reserved reflects the best estimation, based on the information available as of
the date of this annual report, of the probable outcome of the mentioned
contingencies. The most significant legal proceedings and claims reserved are
described in the following paragraphs.
CNDC anti-competitive activity
disputes. On March 22, 1999, we were notified of Resolution No. 189/99
from the former Department of Industry, Commerce and Mining of Argentina, which
imposed a fine on us of Ps.109 million, stated Argentine pesos as of that date,
based on the interpretation that we had purportedly abused our dominant position
in the bulk LPG market due to the existence of different prices between the
exports of LPG and the sales to the domestic market from 1993 through 1997. In
July 2002, the Argentine Supreme Court confirmed the fine, and we made the
claimed payment. Additionally, Resolution No. 189/99 provided for the
commencement of an investigation in order to prove whether the penalized
behavior continued from October 1997 to March 1999. On December 19, 2003, the
CNDC completed its investigation and charged us with abuse of dominant market
position during this period. On January 20, 2004, we answered the notification
by (i) claiming the application of the statutes of limitations and alleging the
existence of defects in the imputation procedure (absence of majority in the
resolution that decided the imputation and prejudgment by its signers); (ii)
arguing the absence of abuse of dominant position; and (iii) offering the
corresponding evidence.
Given that
the Argentine Supreme Court has previously established under Law No. 22,262 that
the statute of limitations for administrative infractions is two years, our
defense based on the statute of limitations having run should be successful.
Since the imputed conduct occurred before September 29, 1999, which is the
effective date of the new law, we believe that the law applicable to the
proceeding is Law No. 22,262 instead of the new Antitrust Protection Law (No.
25,156). We filed appeals with the National Economic Criminal Court: (i) on July
29, 2003, in
view of
the rejection by the CNDC of the motion to overturn the resolution that ordered
the opening of the preliminary investigations, without deciding in advance on
the prescription claimed by us; and (ii) on February 4, 2004, in view of the
rejection by the CNDC of the motion to overturn the resolution that ordered the
charge because of a lack of majority and prejudgment. On April 13, 2004, the
National Court of Appeals in Criminal Economic Matters sustained the appeal
filed by us on the grounds of lack of majority of the CNDC in passing the
objected resolution. On August 31, 2004, we appealed the resolution passed by
the CNDC that rejected the claimed prescription. The CNDC accepted the appeal
and referred the proceedings to Chamber II of the National Court of Appeals in
Federal Civil and Commercial Matters and thereby prevented the prior
intervention of Room B of the National Court of Appeals in Criminal Economic
Matters. On March 3, 2006, the CNDC decided on the evidence that we shall
produce during this proceeding. During August and September 2007,
hearings involving the testimony of witnesses proposed by us took place.
Despite the arguments expressed by us, the above-mentioned circumstances
make evident that, preliminarily, the CNDC rejects the defenses filed by us and
that the CNDC is reluctant to modify the doctrine provided by Resolution No.
189/99. Furthermore, Court of Appeals decisions tend to confirm the decisions
made by the CNDC.
Alleged defaults under natural gas
supply contracts – Innergy, et al. Since 2004, the Secretariat of Energy
and the Undersecretariat of Fuels, through Rule No. 27/04, Resolutions No.
265/04, 659/04, 752/05, 1329/06 and 599/07, have on various occasions
instructed us to supply certain quantities of natural gas to the Argentine
domestic market, in each case notwithstanding the lack of a contractual
commitment on our part to do so. In addition, the Argentine government has, at
various times since 2004, imposed direct volume limitations on natural gas
exports in different ways. As a result of these measures, from 2004 to the
present, we have been forced in many instances to partially or fully suspend
natural gas export deliveries that are contemplated by our contracts with export
customers.
We
appealed these measures, but, pending favorable final resolution of such
appeals, we have been obliged to comply in order to avoid greater losses to us
and our export customers that could be occasioned by the revocation of our
export permits or other penalties. We informed our natural gas export customers
of our position that these governmental measures constitute an event of force majeure that releases
us from any contractual or extra-contractual liability deriving from the failure
to deliver the agreed upon volumes of gas. Some of our customers have rejected
our position and three of them have sought damages and/or penalties for breach
of supply commitments under a contractual “deliver or pay” clause, which claims
have been rejected by us.
Innergy Soluciones Energéticas
S.A. has filed an arbitral claim against us
based on its “deliver or pay” clause, seeking U.S.$87.7 million in damages as of
August 2007, plus interest (as calculated by Innergy on September 17, 2007).
This amount increases as Innergy invoices “deliver or pay” amounts to
us on a monthly basis, beginning in September 2007, for partially missed
deliveries. In addition to our claim of force
majeure, we have
counterclaimed against Innergy for contract termination based upon the
“statutory hardship” exemption set forth in Article 1198 of the Argentine Civil
Code, in light of recent substantial increases in Argentine export duties on
natural gas that make our cost of delivering natural gas to Innergy
significantly higher than the price to be paid to us by Innergy for such
deliveries. Currently, we and Innergy have suspended the arbitration until April
30, 2008 to allow for settlement discussions.
We are
also currently in pre-arbitral settlement discussions with the other two clients
that have sought damages from us under the “deliver-or-pay” clause,
Electroandina S.A. and Empresa Eléctrica del Norte Grande S.A. These companies
have claimed damages through November 2006 in a total amount of approximately
U.S.$41 million and, from December 2006 through September 2007, for an
additional total amount of U.S.$52 million. We have opposed such
claims.
Alleged defaults under natural gas
supply contracts – Central Puerto. Central Puerto S.A. (“Central Puerto”)
has made claims against us for cutbacks in natural gas supply pursuant to its
contracts. We have formally denied such breach, based on the fact that, pending
the restructuring of such contracts, we are not obligated to confirm nominations
of natural gas during certain periods of the year. On March 15, 2007, Central
Puerto notified us of the commencement of pre-arbitral negotiations in relation
to the agreements for the supply of its plants located in Buenos Aires and Loma
de La Lata, province of Neuquén. On May 29, 2007, we and Central Puerto entered
into a Termination and Dispute Resolution Agreement regarding the principles of
agreement for the supply of Central
Puerto’s
plant located in Loma de La Lata. On June 6, 2007, Central Puerto notified us of
its decision to submit the controversy regarding the agreement for the supply of
natural gas to its plants located in Buenos Aires (the “Buenos Aires Gas Supply
Agreement”) to arbitration under the rules of the International Chamber of
Commerce. On June 21, 2007, we appointed our arbitrator and notified Central
Puerto of our decision to submit to arbitration the controversy regarding the
amounts due by Central Puerto under the Buenos Aires Gas Supply Agreement. On
July 23, 2007, Central Puerto filed an arbitral claim for: (i) our specific
performance of the Buenos Aires Gas Supply Agreement by continuing to deliver
volumes of natural gas of up to 3,400,000 m3/day, the applicable maximum daily
requirement under the contract, to Central Puerto’s plants located in Buenos
Aires; (ii) our payment of “deliver or pay” amounts for failure to deliver
natural gas (totaling 1,920 mmcm through December 3, 2007), without specifying
the amount claimed; and (iii) acknowledgement of Central Puerto’s right to
make-up natural gas volumes. On September 24, 2007, we answered Central Puerto’s
claim and filed counterclaims asking the tribunal for: (i) a declaration of the
termination of the contract; or (ii) as a subsidiary claim in case the tribunal
rejects the request for termination of the contract, the restructuring of the
contract under the Civil Law principles of “Teoría de la Imprevisión”
(hardship provision) and “Sacrificio Compartido”
(both-parties-effort) and (iii) payment by Central Puerto of “take or pay” amounts owed by
Central Puerto for certain amounts produced but not taken between 2002 and
2004. On December 3,
2007, Central Puerto submitted a presentation requesting that the tribunal
reject all of our claims. On February 11, 2008, a hearing took place among the
members of the arbitral tribunal and the parties at which a document setting
forth procedures for the arbitration was agreed upon and signed by the parties.
In that document, Central Puerto indicated that it could not quantify its
damages until its experts had completed their work. We estimated our damages to
be approximately U.S.$11 million plus interest, adjusted for inflation (pursuant
to the Stabilization Reference Coefficient or CER), though we also indicated
that this amount could change based on the results of work being performed by
our experts. On March 12, 2008, we and Central Puerto suspended the arbitration
for 30 days to allow for settlement discussions.
La Plata refinery
environmental disputes.
On June 29, 1999, a group
of three neighbors of the La Plata Refinery filed claims for the remediation of
alleged environmental damages in the peripheral water channels of the refinery,
investments related to contamination and compensation for alleged health and
property damages as a consequence of environmental pollution caused by YPF prior
to and after privatization. We notified the executive branch of the Argentine
government that there is a chance that the tribunal may find us responsible for
the damages. In such event, due to the indemnity provided by Law No. 24,145 and
in accordance with that law, we shall be allowed to request reimbursement of the
expenses for liabilities existing on or prior to January 1, 1991 (before
privatization) from the Argentine government.
On
December 27, 2002, a group of 264 claimants who resided near the La Plata
Refinery requested compensation for alleged quality of life deterioration and
environmental damages purportedly caused by the operation of the La Plata
Refinery. The amount claimed is approximately Ps.54 million. We filed a writ
answering the complaint. There are two similar additional claims raised by two
groups of 120 and 343 neighbors, respectively. The first group has made a claim
for compensation of Ps.14 million, and the second group has made a claim for
compensation of Ps.35 million, in addition to a request for environmental
cleanup. As of December 31, 2007, we had established a reserve of Ps.21 million
with respect to these personal or property claims.
On
December 17, 1999, a group of 37 claimants who resided near La Plata Refinery,
demanded the specific performance by us of different works, installation of
equipment, technology and execution of work necessary to stop any environmental
damage, as well as compensation for health damages alleged to be the consequence
of gaseous emissions produced by the refinery, currently under
monitoring.
We have
been informally notified that the Secretariat of Environmental Policy of the
Province of Buenos Aires has brought criminal proceedings against us on the
grounds of the purported worsening of the water quality problems in the Western
Channel adjacent to La Plata Refinery, potential health damages (on account of
the existence of volatile particles and/or hydrocarbon suspension),
non-fulfillment of a remediation schedule of canals, and the existence of
allegedly clandestine disposal sites. To our knowledge, the responsible court
has not yet made any formal accusations.
AFIP tax claims. On January
31, 2003, we received a claim from the Federal Administration of Public Revenue
(Administración Federal de
Ingresos Públicos, or “AFIP”), stating that the forward oil sale
agreements entered into by us (see “Item 5. Operating and Financial Review and
Prospects—Liquidity and Capital Resources—Transactions with unconsolidated
variable interest entities”) should have been subject to an income tax
withholding. On March 8, 2004, the AFIP formally communicated to us the claim
for approximately Ps.45 million plus interest and fines. Additionally, on June
24, 2004, we received a new formal claim from the AFIP, asserting that the
services related to these contracts should have been taxed with the Value Added
Tax. Management believes, based upon the opinion of its external counsel, that
the claim is without merit since those advances were received under crude oil
export commitments. Consequently, during 2004, we presented our defense to the
AFIP, rejecting the claims and arguing our position. However, on December 28,
2004, we received formal communication of a resolution from the AFIP confirming
its original position in both claims. We have appealed such resolution in the
National Fiscal Court. In 2006, we conditionally paid the amounts corresponding
to periods that followed those included in the claim by the AFIP and filed
reimbursement summary proceedings so as to avoid facing interest payments or a
fine. On March 18,
2008 the AFIP notified us of the rejection of the reimbursement previously
mentioned. We will appeal that decision to the National Fiscal
Court.
In
addition, we have received several other claims from the AFIP and from the
provincial and municipal fiscal authorities, which are not individually
significant.
Sale of Electricidad Argentina S.A.
and Empresa Distribuidora y Comercializadora Norte S.A. to EDF. In July
2002, EDF Internacional S.A. (“EDF”), initiated an international arbitration
proceeding under the Arbitration Regulations of the International Chamber of
Commerce against us, among others, seeking payment from us of U.S.$69 million
which was afterward increased to U.S.$103.2 million. EDF claims that under a
Stock Purchase Agreement dated March 30, 2001 among Endesa Internacional S.A.
and Astra Compañía Argentina de Petróleo S.A. (which was subsequently merged
into YPF), as sellers, and EDF, as purchaser, with respect to shares of
Electricidad Argentina S.A. and Empresa Distribuidora y Comercializadora Norte
S.A. (“Edenor”), EDF is entitled
to an adjustment in the purchase price it paid due to changes in the exchange
rate of the Argentine peso that EDF asserts to have occurred prior to December
31, 2001. Our position is that the change in the exchange rate did not occur
prior to January 2002, and, therefore, EDF is not entitled to the purchase price
adjustment. We have filed a counterclaim against EDF in the amount of U.S.$13.85
million as a purchase price adjustment. We believe that EDF’s claim is without
merit. The arbitral award dated October 22, 2007 accepted the claim against us
awarding damages against us in the amount of U.S.$40 million and also accepted
our counterclaim against EDF in the amount of U.S.$11.1 million. Consequently,
the amount payable by us should the award become final is U.S.$28.9 million plus
costs and interest. We have challenged the award by filing an extraordinary
appeal before the Federal Supreme Court and an appeal before the Federal
Appellate Court on Commercial Matters.
Non-reserved,
possible contingencies
In
addition to the probable contingencies described in the preceding paragraphs, we
have received several labor, civil, commercial and environmental claims which
had not been reserved since management, based on the evidence available to date
and upon the opinion of our external counsel, have considered them to be
possible contingencies. The most significant of such contingencies are described
below.
Capital control-related
proceedings. On December 9, 2002, we filed a declaratory judgment action
(Acción Declarativa de
Certeza) before an Argentine federal court requesting clarification as to
the uncertainty generated by opinions and statements of several organizations
providing official advice that the right of the hydrocarbon industry to freely
dispose of up to 70% of foreign currency proceeds from exports of hydrocarbons
products and byproducts, as provided by Executive Decree No. 1,589/89, had been
implicitly abolished by the new exchange regime established by Executive Decree
No. 1,606/01. On December 9, 2002, a federal judge issued an injunction ordering
the Argentine government, the Central Bank and the Ministry of the Economy to
refrain from interfering with our access to and use of 70% of the foreign
exchange proceeds from our hydrocarbon exports. Following the enactment of
Decree No. 2,703/02 in December 2002, we expanded the scope of the declaratory
judgment action before the federal court to clear any doubts and uncertainty
arising after the enactment of this decree. See “Item 4. Information on the
Company—Regulatory Framework and Relationship with the Argentine
Government—Repatriation of
Foreign
Currency.” On December 1, 2003, the National Administrative Court of Appeals
decided that the issuance of Decree No. 2,703 in 2002, which allows companies in
the oil and gas sector to keep abroad up to 70% of the export proceeds, rendered
the injunction unnecessary. Nevertheless, the Court of Appeals’ decision was
silent with respect to the availability of the exemption to convert proceeds
from export operations carried out by oil and gas companies into domestic
currency prior to the issuance of Decree 2,703. On December 15, 2003, we filed a
motion for clarification asking the court to clarify whether the exemption was
available to oil and gas companies during the period between the issuance of
Decree No. 1,606/01 and the issuance of Decree No. 2,703/02. On February 6,
2004, the Court of Appeals dismissed our motion for clarification, indicating
that the regulations included in Decree No. 2,703/02 were sufficiently clear,
and confirmed the lifting of the injunction that prohibited the Central Bank and
the Ministry of Economy from interfering with our access to foreign exchange
proceeds, as described above. On February 19, 2004, we filed an extraordinary
appeal before the Supreme Court against the dismissal of the motion for
clarification by the Court of Appeals and requested the restatement of the
injunction against the Central Bank and the Ministry of Economy. The Federal
Court of Appeals dismissed the extraordinary appeal. Taking into account the
fact that there is a new special system in place allowing for the free disposal
of up to 70% of the foreign currency proceeds from the exports of crude oil and
its derivatives, it was deemed advisable to abandon the suit as a procedural
strategy. If the Central Bank were to reassert and prevail before the courts in
the argument that the exemption allowing oil and gas companies to keep up to 70%
of export proceeds abroad during the period between the issuance of Decree No.
1,606/01 and the issuance of Decree No. 2,703/02 was not available, we could be
subject to material penalties.
On October
12, 2007, we were notified of the initiation of an administrative summary
proceeding for alleged late repatriation of foreign currency proceeds, and the
failure to repatriate the remaining 70%, in connection with some hydrocarbon
export transactions made in 2002 (during the period between the issuance of
Decree No. 1,606/01 and the issuance of Decree No. 2,703/02). In this
administrative summary proceeding, charges were brought against us in the amount
of U.S.$1.6 million, and it has been advised that the conduct of a bank that
handled other of our export transactions made in 2002 be investigated, which
could give rise to the initiation of further proceedings. Nevertheless, a final
and unchallenged judicial judgment recently issued by a First Instance Court in
Criminal Economic Matters in a similar administrative summary proceeding against
a different company for alleged violation of the criminal exchange law (lack of
repatriation of 70% of foreign currency proceeds) regarding export transactions
made in 2002 resolved the matter in favor of that company based on well-founded
arguments that were not challenged by the prosecutor. In addition, the Argentine
Attorney General recently issued an opinion in similar proceedings against
another oil company stating that there were no criminal law violations in that
case due to the lack of willful misconduct and the existence of laws that
created uncertainty as to the extent of certain obligations.
CNDC investigation. On
November 17, 2003, CNDC requested explanations, within the framework of an
official investigation pursuant to Art. 29 of the Antitrust Act, from a group of
almost 30 natural gas production companies, including us, with respect to the
following items: (i) the inclusion of clauses purportedly restraining trade in
natural gas purchase/sale contracts and (ii) gas imports from Bolivia, in
particular (a) expired contracts signed by YPF, when it was state-owned, and
YPFB (the Bolivian state-owned oil company), under which YPF allegedly sold
Bolivian gas in Argentina at prices below the purchase price; and (b) the
unsuccessful attempts in 2001 by Duke and Distribuidora de Gas del Centro to
import gas into Argentina from Bolivia. On January 12, 2004, we submitted
explanations in accordance with Art. 29 of the Antitrust Act, contending that no
antitrust violations had been committed and that there had been no price
discrimination between natural gas sales in the Argentine market and the export
market. On January 20, 2006, we received a notification of resolution dated
December 2, 2005, whereby the CNDC (i) rejected the “non bis in idem” petition
filed by us, on the grounds that ENARGAS was not empowered to resolve the issue
when ENARGAS Resolution No. 1,289 was enacted; and (ii) ordered that the
preliminary opening of the proceedings be undertaken pursuant to the provisions
of Section 30 of Act 25,156. On January 15, 2007, CNDC charged us and eight
other producers with violations of Act 25,156. We have contested the complaint
on the basis that no violation of the Act took place and that the charges are
barred by the applicable statute of limitations, and have presented evidence in
support of our position. On June
22, 2007, without
acknowledging any conduct in violation of the Antitrust Act, we filed with the
CNDC a commitment according to Article 36 of the Antitrust Act requesting that
the CNDC approve the commitment, suspend the investigation and dismiss the
proceedings. We are still awaiting a formal response.
The CNDC
has commenced proceedings to investigate us for using a clause in bulk LPG
supply contracts that it believes prevents buyers from reselling the product to
third parties and therefore restricts competition in a manner detrimental to the
general economic interest. We have asserted that the contracts do not contain a
prohibition against resale to third parties and have offered evidence in support
of our position. On April 12, 2007, we presented to the CNDC, without
acknowledging any conduct in violation of the Antitrust Act, a commitment
consistent with Article 36 of the Antitrust Act not to include such clauses in
future bulk LPG supply contracts, among other things, and requested that the CNDC terminate
the proceedings. We are still awaiting a formal response.
Noroeste basin reserves
review. The effectiveness after certain specific dates of natural gas
export authorizations (related to production in the Noroeste basin) granted to
us pursuant to Resolution SE Nos. 165/99, 576/99, 629/99 and 168/00, issued by
the Secretariat of Energy, is subject to an analysis by the Secretariat of
Energy to determine whether sufficient additional natural gas reserves have been
discovered or developed by us in the Noroeste basin. The result of this ongoing
review is uncertain and may have an adverse impact upon the execution of the
export gas sales agreements related to such export authorizations, and may imply
significant costs and liabilities for us. We have submitted to the Secretariat
of Energy documentation in order to allow for the continuation of the authorized
exports in accordance with Resolutions SE No. 629/1999, 565/1999, and 576/1999
(the “Export Permits”) from the Noroeste basin. These Export Permits relate to
the long-term natural gas export contracts with Gas Atacama Generación, Edelnor
and Electroandina (collectively, the “Clients”), involving volumes of 900,000
m3/day,
600,000 m3/day and
1,750,000 m3/day,
respectively. We have not yet received a response from the Secretariat of
Energy. However, on March 29, 2007, an internal memorandum of the technical
sector of the Secretariat of Energy addressed this file and concluded, without
resolving the question that we have not included the necessary reserves to
continue with the Export Permits. The file is currently awaiting decision from
the Secretariat of Energy. If the Secretariat of Energy were to determine that
the reserves are not sufficient to continue to comply with our export
commitments and other commitments, it could declare the expiration or suspension
of one or more of the Export Permits, which would have a direct impact on the
export contracts, to the injury of the Clients. In the case in which it were
determined that we did not act as a prudent and diligent operator and/or did not
have sufficient reserves, we could be responsible for the damages that this
situation causes to the Clients.
Alleged defaults under natural gas
contracts – Mega. Mega has claimed compensation from us for failure to
deliver natural gas under the contract between us and Mega. We invoked that
natural gas deliveries to Mega pursuant to the contract were affected by the
Argentine government’s interference. Likewise, we believe that we would not be
liable for such natural gas delivery deficiencies pursuant to the doctrines of
“force majeure” and
“contract impracticability.”
New Jersey claims. On
December 13, 2005, the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and the
New Jersey Spill Compensation Fund filed a claim with a New Jersey court against
Occidental Chemical Corporation, Tierra, Maxus, Repsol YPF, YPF, YPF Holdings
and CLH Holdings. The plaintiffs are claiming for the remediation of
environmental damages, punitive damages and other damages including the costs
and fees associated with this proceeding, based on alleged violations of the
Spill Compensation and Control Act and the Water Pollution Control Act in a
facility allegedly operated by the defendants and located in Newark, New Jersey
that allegedly impacted the Passaic River and Newark Bay. YPF has filed a motion
to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. See “—YPF Holdings.”
Patagonian Association of
Land-Owners claims. On August 21, 2003, the Patagonian Association of
Land-Owners (“ASSUPA”) sued the companies operating production concessions and
exploration permits in the Neuquina basin, including us, claiming for the
remediation of the general environmental damage purportedly caused in the
execution of such activities or the establishment of an environmental
restoration fund, and the implementation of measures to prevent environmental
damages in the future. The total amount claimed against all companies is more
than U.S.$547.6 million. The plaintiff requested that the Argentine government
(Secretariat of Energy), the Federal Environmental Council (Consejo Federal de Medio
Ambiente), the provinces of Buenos Aires, La Pampa, Neuquén, Río Negro
and Mendoza and the National Ombudsman be summoned. It requested, as a
preliminary injunction, that the defendants refrain from carrying out activities
affecting the environment. Both the Ombudsman’s summons as well as the requested
preliminary injunction were rejected by the Supreme Court of Argentina. Once the
complaint was notified, we and the other defendants filed a motion to dismiss
for failure of the plaintiff to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
The court granted the motion, and the plaintiff had to file a supplementary
complaint.
We have requested that the claim be rejected because the defects of the
complaint indicated by the Supreme Court of Argentina have not been corrected.
However, we have also requested its rejection for other reasons, and impleaded
the Argentine government, due to its obligation to indemnify us against any
liability and hold the us harmless for events and claims arising prior to
January 1, 1991, according to Law No. 24,145 and Decree 546/1993. Our request is
currently pending.
Dock Sud and Quilmes claims.
We have been sued in the following environmental lawsuits that have been filed
by residents living near Dock Sud, province of Buenos Aires: (i) “Mendoza,
Beatriz against National State et al.” is a lawsuit pending before the Supreme
Court of Argentina, in which the Argentine government, the province of Buenos
Aires, the City of Buenos Aires, 14 municipalities and 44 companies (including
us) are being sued. The plaintiffs have requested unspecified compensation for
collective environmental damage of Matanza and Riachuelo river basins and for
physical and property damage, which they claim to have suffered. The National
Supreme Court declared itself legally competent to settle only the conflict
related to the collective environmental damages, including prevention of future
pollution, remediation of environmental damages already caused and monetary
compensation for irreparable environmental damages; and has requested that the
defendants submit specific reports. In particular, it has requested that the
Argentine government, the province of Buenos Aires, the City of Buenos Aires and
Cofema submit a plan with environmental objectives. We have answered the
complaint and requested the impleading of the Argentine government, based on its
obligation to indemnify us against any liability and hold us harmless for events
and claims previous to January 1, 1991, according to Law No. 24,145 and Decree
No. 546/1993; (ii) “Félix, Víctor et al. against Shell C.A.P.S.A. et al. for
compensation” is a suit in which the province of Buenos Aires and the
Municipality of Avellaneda are being sued, as are companies domiciled at Dock
Sud, including us. The plaintiffs are requesting environmental remediation of
Dock Sud, which they estimate at Ps.600 million, and physical and property
damages. However, we have been informed that plaintiffs have left without effect
their claim against us; (iii) “Cicero, María Cristina against Antivari S.A.C.I.
et al. for damages” in which the plaintiffs, who are residents of Villa
Inflamable, Dock Sud, also demand the environmental remediation of Dock Sud and
Ps.33 million in compensation for physical and property damages against many
companies that have operations there, including us. We answered the complaint by
requesting its rejection and asked the citation of the Argentine government, due
to its obligation to indemnify us against any liability and hold us harmless for
events and claims previous to January 1, 1991, according to Law No. 24,145 and
Decree No. 546/1993.
In
addition, citizens claiming to be residents living near Quilmes, in the province
of Buenos Aires, have filed a lawsuit in which they have requested the
remediation of environmental damages and the payment of Ps.46 million as
compensation for alleged personal damages. The plaintiffs base their claim
mainly on a fuel leak that occurred in 1988 in a poliduct running from La Plata
to Dock Sud that was operated by Yacimientos Petrolíferos Fiscales S.A. The
leaked fuel became perceptible in November 2002, resulting in remediation that
is now being performed by us in the affected area, supervised by the
environmental authority of the province of Buenos Aires. We have requested an
extension of the time to answer the complaint to allow us time to evaluate
certain documents submitted to the court by the plaintiffs. We have also
notified the Argentine government that we will implead it at the time we answer
the complaint in order to request that it indemnify us against any liability and
hold us harmless in connection with this lawsuit, as provided by Law. No.
24,145. Others have brought non-judicial claims against us based on similar
allegations, amounting to Ps.4 million. In these cases, we believe that the
Argentine government will contest its obligation to indemnify and hold us
harmless by claiming that the alleged damages were not caused by the 1988
leak.
La Plata Refinery environmental
claims. On June 6, 2007, we were served with a new complaint in which
nine residents of the vicinity of the La Plata Refinery request (i) the
cessation of contamination and other harms they claim are attributable to the
refinery and (ii) the cleanup of the adjacent canals, Río Santiago and Río de la
Plata (water, soils and aquifers, including within the refinery), or, if cleanup
is impossible, compensation for environmental and personal damages. The
plaintiffs have also requested physical and property damages of Ps.51.4 million,
or an amount to be determined from evidence produced in discovery. We believe
that most damages that are alleged by the plaintiff, if proven, may be
attributable to events that occurred prior to YPF’ s privatization and would
therefore be the responsibility of the Argentine government in accordance with
the Privatization Law of YPF. Notwithstanding the foresaid, there is the
possibility a judgment could order us to meet the expenses of remedying these
liabilities, in which case we could ask the Argentine government to reimburse
the remediation expenses for
liabilities
existing prior to January 1, 1991 pursuant to Law 24,145. In addition, we
believe that this claim partially overlaps with the request made by a group of
neighbors of the La Plata Refinery on June 29, 1999, mentioned in preceding
paragraphs. Accordingly, we consider that the cases will need to be partially
consolidated to the extent that the claims overlap. We answered the complaint by
requesting its rejection and asked for the citation of the Argentine government,
due to its obligation to indemnify us against any liability and hold us harmless
for events and claims previous to January 1, 1991, according to Law No. 24,145
and Decree No. 546/1993. The contamination that may exist could derive from
countless sources, including from dumping of refuse over many years by other
industrial facilities and by ships.
Additionally,
we are aware of an action in which we have not yet been served, in which the
plaintiff requests the cessation of contamination and the cleanup of the canals
adjacent to the La Plata Refinery, in Río Santiago, and other sectors near the
coast (removal of mud, drainage of wetlands, restoration of biodiversity, among
other things), and, if such sanitation is not practicable, compensation of
Ps.500 million (approximately U.S.$161 million) or an amount to be determined
from evidence produced in discovery. We believe that this claim partially
overlaps with the requests made by a group of neighbors of the La Plata Refinery
on June 29, 1999 and with the complaint served on June 6, 2007, mentioned in
preceding paragraphs. Accordingly, we consider that if we are served in this
proceeding or any other proceeding related to the same subject matters, the
cases will need to be consolidated to the extent that the claims overlap. With
respect to claims that would not be included in the previous proceedings, for
the time being we are unable to estimate the prospects of such claims.
Additionally, we believe that most damages that would be alleged by the
plaintiff, if proven, may be attributable to events that occurred prior to YPF’s
privatization and could therefore be the responsibility of the Argentine
government in accordance with the Privatization Law concerning YPF.
Non-reserved,
remote contingencies
Our
management, in consultation with our external counsel, believes that the
following contingencies, while individually significant, are
remote:
Congressional request for
investigation to CNDC. On November 7, 2003, certain former members of the
Argentine Congress, Arturo Lafalla, Ricardo Falu and others, filed with the CNDC
a complaint against us for abuse of a dominant position in the bulk LPG market
during 2002 and part of 2003. The alleged conduct consisted of selling bulk LPG
in the domestic market at prices higher than the export price, thereby
restricting the availability of bulk LPG in the domestic market. On December 15,
2003, the CNDC decided to forward the complaint to us, and requested
explanations under Art. 29 of the Antitrust Act. On January 21, 2004, we
submitted explanations in accordance with Art. 29 of the Antitrust Act,
contending that no antitrust violations had been committed. At this point, the
CNDC may accept our explanations or begin a criminal investigation. We contend
that we did not restrict LPG supply in the domestic market during the relevant
period, that during this period all domestic demand for LPG could have been
supplied by our competitors and that therefore our market share could not be
deemed a dominant position. As of the date of this registration statement, CNDC
has not taken any further action.
Pursuant
to the provisions of Resolution No. 189/99, referred to above, certain third
parties have claimed compensation for alleged damages suffered by them as a
consequence of our sanctioned conduct. We have denied these claims and presented
our defenses.
Neuquén royalty disputes. On
February 20, 2006, the province of Neuquén published in the Official Gazette
Decrees No. 225/06 and 226/06 (the “Decrees”). The Decrees provide that
royalties for domestic sales of hydrocarbons produced within the province of
Neuquén must be calculated using international market prices as a reference,
thus increasing the amounts of the royalties to be paid by us. The calculation
of hydrocarbon royalties, in accordance with Section 75 (12) of the Argentine
Constitution, is ruled by federal legislation, and the Decrees, in our opinion,
contradict the preemption principle of the Argentine Constitution. We filed a
declaratory judgment action (Acción Declarativa de
Certeza) with the Argentine Supreme Court with the aim of obtaining the
nullification of the Decrees and the issuance of an interim measure banning the
province of Neuquén from filing any royalty claim on the ground of the
provisions contained within the Decrees. On October 31, 2006, the Argentine
Supreme Court issued an injunction ordering the province of Neuquén to refrain
from applying the Decrees to us. On November 29, 2007, the province of Neuquén
issued Decree No. 2200/07, revoking the Decrees, and subsequently
petitioned
the Argentine Supreme Court to withdraw its injunction against the Decrees as
moot. We have filed a written request for the continuation of the injunction as
well as the official revocation of the Decrees. Neuquén has not expressly
withdrawn its request and the matter is currently pending before the Argentine
Supreme Court.
On August
31, 2004, the province of Neuquén filed with the Federal Court of the province
of Neuquén (the “Federal Court”) a claim against Atalaya Energy and 19 oil and
gas companies, including us, claiming compliance with Section 6 Law No. 25,561
for the calculation of royalties regarding hydrocarbons produced within the
province of Neuquén. Section 6 Law No. 25,561 provides that in no event will
export withholdings reduce the wellhead prices for the calculation and payment
of hydrocarbon royalties. According to the province of Neuquén’s reading of
Section 6 Law No. 25,561, the oil and gas companies producing hydrocarbons in
the province of Neuquén should not make any deduction based on export
withholdings for the calculation of royalties corresponding to hydrocarbons sold
in the domestic market. The Federal Court issued an interim measure ordering the
oil and gas companies to calculate and pay royalties on the basis of
international prices. We filed an appeal against such interim measure. On
October 5, 2005, the Federal Court granted our appeal. Additionally, the Federal
Court clarified that Section 6 Law No. 25,561 shall be applied only to the
calculation of royalties regarding exported hydrocarbons. The province of
Neuquén appealed this decision to the National Court of Appeals, which declared
that it lacked jurisdiction and referred the case to the Argentine Supreme
Court. In 2006, the Argentine Supreme Court also declared that it lacked
jurisdiction, and returned the case file to the Federal Court. We also requested
the Argentine Supreme Court to order the Federal Court to restrain from
continuing proceedings. The Argentine Supreme Court denied such request and we
filed a writ requesting the reversal of such decision. On May 14, 2007, the
judge issued an opinion declaring that the Federal Court lacked jurisdiction to
hear our royalties dispute case and the case was transferred to the
administrative courts of the province of Neuquén. On May 17, 2007, we presented
our appeal on the basis that the judge failed to consider recent jurisprudential
records of the Federal Court (the case of the Neuquén Decrees) that acknowledged
that royalties disputes posed a valid federal question. On June 29, 2007, the
judge rejected our motion in limine but subsequently accepted our motion of
appeal. We have filed a request with the Federal Court requesting jurisdiction
over the royalties litigation, in light of the above-mentioned recent
jurisprudence.
Other export tax disputes.
During 2006 and 2007, the Customs General Administrations in Neuquén, Comodoro
Rivadavia and Puerto Deseado informed us that certain summary proceedings had
been brought against us based on alleged formal misstatements on forward oil
deliveries (future commitments of crude oil deliveries) in the loading permits
submitted before these agencies. Although our management, based on the opinion
of legal counsel, believes the claim has no legal basis, the potential fines
imposed could be substantial.
Mendoza royalties dispute.
Following demands by the province of Mendoza that the international market price
be applied to internal market transactions based on an interpretation of Section
6 of Law No. 25,561 (similar to the above-mentioned claim made by Neuquén), we
commenced an administrative proceeding. Our request is currently
pending.
Neuquén concession investment
dispute. On November 22, 2007, we received Note No. 172/07 of the
Secretariat of Energy and Mining of the Province of Neuquén (SEEyM), alleging
material shortfalls in our investments pursuant to the Extension Agreement for
the Loma de la Lata – Sierra Barrosa Concession, executed on December 5, 2000
(the “Extension Agreement”). The Note provided that: (i) “YPF shall immediately
explain the reasons for the detected underinvestment, subject to immediate
forfeiture of the concession extension”; (ii) “this serious incident makes it
necessary to delay any negotiations with this company for the purpose of any
concession extensions”; (iii) the proceedings will be remitted to the Provincial
Legislature so that the legislators may weigh this “incident” at the time of
reviewing any extension to the contracts; and (iv) legal rights were reserved
for the institution of legal actions “to comprehensively redress the damage
caused.”
The
Extension Agreement sets out three phases for investment by us: (i) a first
phase from July 1, 2000 to December 31, 2005, during which the committed
investment amounted to U.S.$3,500 million; (ii) a second period, from January 1,
2006 to December 31, 2011, contemplating a committed investment of U.S.$2,500
million; and (iii) a final period from January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2017,
during which we agreed to invest the amount of U.S.$2,000 million. The aggregate
amount of the committed investment is U.S.$8,000 million, and under the
Extension Agreement any non-substantial difference in a phase can be performed
and made up for in the next phase.
In
addition to the SEEyM’s failure to observe Section 80 of Law No 17,319, which
requires a controlling authority to warn permission holders and concession
operators and to allow them to cure violations, we believe that:
we have
made the investments agreed to under the Extension Agreement for the first of
the three periods (ended on December 31, 2005), which is the subject of Note No
172/07, whether calculated in U.S. dollars or in pesos (though we believe they
should be calculated in pesos);
during
almost two years since the end of the first period, we have made investments in
the province of Neuquén of approximately U.S.$1,830 million (for a cumulative
amount of U.S.$5,350 million since 2000), which greatly exceeds the difference
alleged by the province in Note No. 172/07 and demonstrates the completion of
our performance of the requisite investments for the first period (U.S.$2,500
million related to the years 2006-2011); and
the
investment obligations are convertible into pesos at a one-to-one ratio by
effect of the emergency regulations enacted in 2002 (including Section 1 of
Decree 214/04) and in light of economic reality, as the size and scope of the
investments that could be made at the time the Extension Agreement was entered
into differs drastically from the amount possible after devaluation in 2002. Our
arguments in this regard are considered without prejudice to asserting the
“unforeseen conditions” doctrine under Argentine law due to the significant
change in circumstances, as the right to assert the doctrine was not waived in
the Extension Agreement.
We have
challenged Note No. 172/07 through administrative and judicial proceedings and
believes that the claim made by the province of Neuquén is without merit;
however, if the Province were to prevail, it would have a material adverse
effect on us.
Additional
information
On January
21, 2005, we were notified of a request made by Empresa Nacional de Electricidad
S.A. (“ENDESA”) for arbitration to resolve a dispute relating to an alleged
breach of a contractual clause in an export contract signed in June 2000. The
clause relates to increased natural gas deliveries and ENDESA has requested
payment of a contractual penalty resulting from our alleged failure to deliver
the required amounts. The contract term is 15 years. ENDESA’s claim amounted to
U.S.$353.8 million, while asserting that there had been willful misconduct on
our part. Thereafter, the parties entered into (i) an agreement for the
amendment of the gas supply agreement in order to adapt it to the export
restrictions imposed by the Argentine government (the “Amendment”) and (ii) an
agreement for the termination of the arbitration (the “Termination Agreement”),
both subject to the Secretariat of Energy’s approval. On August 31, 2007, we
were notified of the Secretariat of Energy’s approval. Thereafter, the parties
informed the tribunal of the termination of the arbitration by mutual agreement.
We have paid ENDESA U.S.$8 million pursuant to the Termination Agreement and
ENDESA has foregone all claims based on past conduct. Finally, the
Amendment adjusted the maximum semi-annual compensation that we would have to
pay in connection with deficiencies in natural gas deliveries.
On August
11, 2006, we received Note SE No. 1009 (the “Note”) from the Secretariat of
Energy, which reviewed the progress of reserves in the Ramos Area in the
Noroeste basin, in relation to the export authorization granted by Resolution SE
No. 169/97 (the “Export Authorization”). The Export Authorization concerns the
long-term natural gas export contract between us and GasAtacama Generación, for
a maximum daily volume of 530,000 m3/day. The Note stated that as a result of
the decrease in natural gas reserves supporting the Export Authorization, the
domestic market supply was at risk. The Note preventively provided that the
maximum natural gas daily volumes authorized to be exported under the Export
Authorization were to be reduced by 20%, affecting the export contract. We filed
an answer to the Note on September 15, 2006 stating our allegations and
defenses.
YPF
Holdings
The
following is a brief description of certain environmental and other liabilities
related to YPF Holdings.
In
connection with the sale of Maxus’ former chemical subsidiary, Diamond Shamrock
Chemicals Company (“Chemicals”), to Occidental Petroleum Corporation (together
with its subsidiary Occidental Chemical Corporation, “Occidental”) in 1986,
Maxus agreed to indemnify Chemicals and Occidental from and against certain
liabilities relating to the business or activities of Chemicals, including
certain environmental liabilities. Tierra assumed essentially all of Maxus’
aforesaid indemnity obligations to Occidental in respect of Chemicals. See “Item
4. Information on the Company—YPF Holdings—Operations in the United
States.”
As of
December 31, 2007, YPF Holdings’ reserves for environmental and other
contingencies totaled approximately U.S.$135.4 million. YPF Holdings management
believes it has adequately reserved for all environmental and other
contingencies that are probable and can be reasonably estimated based on
information available as of such time; however, many such contingencies are
subject to significant uncertainties, including the completion of ongoing
studies, the discovery of new facts, or the issuance of orders by regulatory
authorities, which could result in material additions to such reserves in the
future. It is possible that additional claims will be made, and additional
information about new or existing claims (such as results of ongoing
investigations, the issuance of court decisions or the signing of settlement
agreements) is likely to develop over time. YPF Holdings’ reserves for the
environmental and other contingencies described below are based solely on
currently available information and as a result, YPF Holdings, Maxus and Tierra
may have to incur costs that may be material, in addition to the reserves
already taken.
In the
following discussion concerning plant sites and third party sites, references to
YPF Holdings include, as appropriate and solely for ease of reference,
references to Maxus and Tierra. As indicated above, Tierra is also a subsidiary
of YPF Holdings and has assumed certain of Maxus’ obligations.
Newark, New Jersey. A consent
decree, previously agreed upon by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (the
“EPA”), the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (the “DEP”) and
Occidental, as successor to Chemicals, was entered in 1990 by the United States
District Court of New Jersey for Chemicals’ former Newark, New Jersey
agricultural chemicals plant. The approved remedy has been completed and paid
for by Tierra pursuant to the above described indemnification agreement with
Occidental. Operations and maintenance of the constructed remedy are ongoing,
and as of December 31, 2007, YPF Holdings has
reserved approximately U.S.$15.8 million in connection with such
activities.
Passaic River/Newark Bay, New
Jersey. Maxus, acting on behalf of Occidental, negotiated an agreement
with the EPA under which Tierra has conducted further testing and studies to
characterize contaminated sediment and biota in a six-mile portion of the
Passaic River near the Newark, New Jersey plant site described above. While some
work remains, these studies were substantially completed in 2005. In addition,
the EPA and other agencies are addressing the lower 17-mile portion of the
Passaic River (including the six-mile portion already studied) in a joint
federal, state, local and private sector cooperative effort designated as the
Lower Passaic River Restoration Project (PRRP). Tierra, along with certain other
entities, has agreed to participate in and fund a remedial investigation and
feasibility study (RIFS) in connection with the PRRP. The parties are discussing
the possibility of further work with the EPA. The entities that have agreed to
fund the RIFS have negotiated allocations of responsibility among themselves
based on a number of considerations. Tierra,
acting on behalf of Occidental, is also performing and funding a separate RIFS
to characterize sediment contamination and evaluate remedial alternatives in
Newark Bay and portions of the Hackensack River, the Arthur Kill, and the Kill
van Kull pursuant to a 2004 administrative order on consent with
EPA.
In
December 2005, the DEP issued a directive to Tierra, Maxus and Occidental
directing said parties to pay the State of New Jersey’s costs of developing a
Source Control Dredge Plan focused on allegedly dioxin-contaminated sediment in
the lower six-mile portion of the Passaic River described above. The development
of this Plan is estimated by the DEP to cost approximately U.S.$2.3 million. The
DEP has advised the recipients that they are not required to respond to the
directive until otherwise notified. Also in December 2005, the DEP and the New
Jersey Spill Compensation Fund sued YPF Holdings, Tierra, Maxus and several
affiliated entities, in addition to Occidental, in connection with dioxin
contamination allegedly emanating from Chemicals’ former Newark plant and
contaminating the lower 17-mile portion of the Passaic River, Newark Bay, other
nearby waterways and surrounding areas. The defendants have made responsive
pleadings and/or filings. The court recently denied motions to dismiss by
Occidental Chemical Corporation, and by Tierra and Maxus. A motion to dismiss by
YPF on personal jurisdiction grants remains pending.
In June
2007, EPA released a draft Focused Feasibility Study (“FFS”) that outlines
several alternatives for remedial action in the lower eight miles of the Passaic
River. These range from no action (which would result in comparatively little
cost) to extensive dredging and capping (which according to the draft FFS,
EPA estimated
could cost from
U.S.$0.9 billion to U.S.$2.3 billion), and are all described by EPA as
involving proven technologies that could be carried out in the near term,
without extensive research. Tierra, in conjunction with the other parties of the
PRRP group, submitted comments on the draft FFS to EPA, as did a number of other
interested parties. In September 2007, EPA announced its intention to spend
further time considering the comments, to issue a proposed plan for public
comment in the middle of 2008 and to select a clean-up plan in the last quarter
of 2008. Tierra plans to respond to any further EPA proposal as may be
appropriate at that time.
In August
2007, the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (“NOAA”), as one of the
Federal Natural Resources Trustees, sent a letter to the parties of the PRRP
group, including Tierra and Occidental, requesting that the group enter into an
agreement to conduct a cooperative assessment of natural resources damages in
the Passaic River and Newark Bay. The PRRP group has responded through its
common counsel to request that discussions relating to such an agreement be
postponed until 2008, due in part to the pending FFS proposal by EPA. Tierra
plans to continue to participate in the PRRP group with regard to this matter.
In January 2008, the NOAA sent a letter to us, YPF Holdings, CLH Holdings Inc.
and other entities designating each as a potentially responsible party
(“PRP”).
As of
December 31, 2007, YPF Holdings has reserved approximately U.S.$40.6 million in
connection with the foregoing matters related to the Passaic River, the Newark
Bay and the surrounding area comprising the estimated costs for studies, YPF
Holdings’ best estimate of its probable costs in connection with certain
remediation activities proposed by Tierra, and certain other matters related to
the Passaic River and the Newark Bay. However, it is possible that other works,
including interim remedial measures, may be ordered. How these matters are
resolved, including the development of new information, the imposition of
natural resource damages or the selection of remedial actions differing from the
scenarios we have proposed could result in Maxus and Tierra incurring additional
costs to the amount
currently reserved.
Hudson and Essex Counties, New
Jersey. Until the 1970s, Chemicals operated a chromite ore processing
plant at Kearny, New Jersey (the “Kearny Plant”). Tierra, on behalf of
Occidental, is providing financial assurance in the amount of U.S.$20 million
for performance of the work associated with the issues described
below.
In May
2005, the DEP took two actions in connection with the chrome sites in Hudson and
Essex Counties. First, the DEP issued a directive to Maxus, Occidental and two
other chromium manufacturers (the “Respondents”) directing them to arrange for
the cleanup of chromite ore residue at three sites in Jersey City and for the
conduct of a study by paying the DEP a total of U.S.$19.55 million. Second, the
DEP filed a lawsuit against Occidental and two other entities in state court in
Hudson County seeking, among other things, cleanup of various sites where
chromite ore residue is allegedly located, recovery of past costs incurred by
the state at such sites (including in excess of U.S.$2.3 million dollars
allegedly spent for investigations and studies) and, with respect to certain
costs at 18 sites, treble damages. The DEP claims that the defendants are
jointly and severally liable, without regard to fault, for much of the damages
alleged. The parties have engaged in discussions (including mediation) regarding
possible settlement; however, there is no assurance that these discussions will
be successful.
Pursuant
to a request of the DEP, in the second half of 2006, Tierra and certain other
parties tested the sediments in a portion of the Hackensack River near the
former Kearny Plant. A report of those test results has been submitted to the
DEP for its comments. What, if any, additional work will be required is expected
to be determined once the results of this testing have been analyzed by the
DEP.
In
November 2005, several environmental groups sent a notice of intent to sue the
owner of the property adjacent to the former Kearny Plant and five other
parties, including Tierra, under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. The
parties have entered into an agreement that addresses the concerns of the
environmental groups, and these groups have agreed, at least for now, not to
file suit.
As of
December 31, 2007, YPF Holdings has reserved a total of approximately U.S.$19.4
million in connection with the foregoing chrome-related matters. Soil action
levels for chromium in New Jersey have not been finalized,
and the
DEP continues to review the proposed action levels. The cost of addressing these
chrome-related matters could increase significantly depending upon the final
soil action levels, the DEP’s response to Tierra’s reports and other
developments.
Painesville, Ohio. From about
1912 through 1976, Chemicals operated manufacturing facilities in Painesville,
Ohio (the “Painesville Works”). The operations there over the years involved
several discrete but contiguous plant sites over an area of about 1,300 acres.
The primary area of concern historically has been Chemicals’ former chromite ore
processing plant (the “Chrome Plant”). The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
(OEPA) has approved certain work, including the remediation of specific sites
within the former Painesville Works area and work associated with the
development plans (the “Remediation Work”). The Remediation Work has begun. As
the OEPA approves additional projects for the site of the former Painesville
Works, additional amounts may need to be reserved. YPF Holdings has reserved a
total of approximately U.S.$7.3 million as of December 31, 2007 for its
estimated share of the cost to perform the remedial investigation and
feasibility study (“RIFS”), the Remediation Work and other operation and
maintenance activities at this site.
Third Party Sites. Pursuant
to settlement agreements with the Port of Houston Authority (the “Port”) and
other parties, Tierra and Maxus are participating (on behalf of Occidental) in
the remediation of property adjoining Chemicals’ former Greens Bayou facility
where dichloro-diphenyl-trichloroethane (“DDT”) and certain other chemicals were
manufactured. At December 31, 2007, YPF Holdings has reserved approximately
U.S.$19.9 million for its estimated share of future remediation activities
associated with the Greens Bayou facility. Additionally, the parties have
engaged in settlement discussions with Natural Resources Trustees in connection
with claims for natural resources damages. The amount of natural resources
damages and the parties’ obligations in respect thereof are unknown at the
present time.
In June
2005, the EPA designated Maxus as a PRP at the Milwaukee Solvay Coke & Gas
Site in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The basis for this designation is Maxus’ alleged
status as the successor to Pickands Mather & Co. and Milwaukee Solvay Coke
Co., companies that the EPA has asserted are former owners or operators of such
site. Preliminary work in connection with the RIFS in respect of this site
commenced in the second half of 2006. YPF Holdings has reserved approximately
U.S.$0.24 million as of December 31, 2007 for its estimated share of the costs
of the RIFS. Maxus lacks sufficient information to determine additional exposure
or costs, if any, it might have in respect of this site.
Maxus is
responsible for certain liabilities attributable to Occidental, as successor to
Chemicals, in respect of the Malone Service Company Superfund Site in Galveston
County, Texas. This site is a former waste disposal site where Chemicals is
alleged to have sent waste products prior to September 1986.
Chemicals
has also been designated as a PRP by the EPA under the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980, as amended
(“CERCLA”) with respect to a number of third party sites where hazardous
substances from Chemicals’ plant operations allegedly were disposed or have come
to be located. Numerous PRPs have been named at substantially all of these
sites. At several of these, Chemicals has no known exposure. At December 31,
2007, YPF Holdings had reserved approximately U.S.$2.4 million in connection
with its estimated share of the costs related to the sites mentioned in this
paragraph.
“Agent Orange” and VCM
Litigation. In 2002, Occidental sued Maxus and Tierra in state court in
Dallas, Texas seeking a declaration that Maxus and Tierra have the obligation
under the agreement pursuant to which Maxus sold Chemicals to Occidental to
defend and indemnify Occidental from and against certain historical obligations
of Chemicals, including claims related to “Agent Orange” and vinyl chloride
monomer (VCM), notwithstanding the fact that said agreement contains a 12-year
cut-off for defense and indemnity obligations with respect to most litigation.
Tierra was dismissed as a party, and the matter was tried in May 2006. The trial
court decided that the 12-year cut-off period did not apply and entered judgment
against Maxus. This decision was affirmed by the Court of Appeals in February
2008. Maxus has appealed this decision to the Texas Supreme Court. If affirmed,
this decision will require Maxus to accept responsibility for various matters
for which it has refused to indemnify Occidental since 1998, which could result
in the incurrence of material costs in addition to YPF Holdings’ current
reserves for this matter. This decision will also require Maxus to reimburse
Occidental for past costs on these matters. Maxus believes that its current
reserves are adequate for these
past costs
and is currently evaluating the decision of the Court of Appeals. As of December
31, 2007, YPF Holdings had reserved approximately U.S.$14.9 million in respect
of this matter.
Turtle Bayou Litigation. In
March 2005, Maxus agreed to defend Occidental, as successor to Chemicals, in
respect of an action seeking the contribution of costs for the remediation of
the Turtle Bayou waste disposal site in Liberty County, Texas. Judgment was
recently entered in this action, and Maxus filed a motion for reconsideration
which was partially successful. As a result, the court’s decision requires Maxus
to pay, on behalf of Occidental, approximately 16% of those costs incurred by
one of the plaintiffs. Maxus has appealed. As of December 31, 2007, YPF
Holdings has
reserved U.S.$3.8 million in respect of this matter.
YPF
Holdings, including its subsidiaries, is a party to various other lawsuits, the
outcomes of which are not expected to have a material adverse affect on the
Company’s financial condition. YPF Holdings has established reserves for legal
contingencies in situations where a loss is probable and can be reasonably
estimated.
YPF
Holdings has entered into various operating agreements and capital commitments
associated with the exploration and development of its oil and gas properties.
Such contractual, financial and/or performance commitments are not material,
except perhaps those commitments related to the development of the Neptune
Prospect located in the vicinity of the Atwater Valley Area, Blocks 573, 574,
575, 617 and 618. Total commitment for the Neptune Prospect is U.S.$28 million
in 2008.
Dividends
Policy
See “Item
10. Additional Information—Dividends.”
ITEM
9. The Offer and Listing
Shares
and ADSs
New
York Stock Exchange
The ADSs,
each representing one Class D Share, are listed on the NYSE under the trading
symbol “YPF.” The ADSs began trading on the NYSE on June 28, 1993, and were
issued by The Bank of New York as depositary (the “Depositary”).
The
following table sets forth, for the five most recent full financial years and
for the current financial year, the high and low closing prices in U.S. dollars
of our ADSs on the NYSE:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
37.35 |
|
|
|
12.99 |
|
2004
|
|
|
44.00 |
|
|
|
35.95 |
|
2005
|
|
|
69.20 |
|
|
|
43.20 |
|
2006
|
|
|
57.38 |
|
|
|
37.00 |
|
2007
|
|
|
50.10 |
|
|
|
34.37 |
|
2008(1)
|
|
|
44.49 |
|
|
|
37.75 |
|
(1)
|
Through April 11,
2008.
|
The
following table sets forth, for each quarter of the most recent two financial
years and the high and low closing prices in U.S. dollars of our ADSs on the
NYSE.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First
Quarter
|
|
|
57.38 |
|
|
|
51.92 |
|
Second
Quarter
|
|
|
55.00 |
|
|
|
37.00 |
|
Third
Quarter
|
|
|
45.45 |
|
|
|
40.01 |
|
Fourth
Quarter
|
|
|
51.49 |
|
|
|
42.75 |
|
2007:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First
Quarter
|
|
|
50.10 |
|
|
|
41.14 |
|
Second
Quarter
|
|
|
46.41 |
|
|
|
41.42 |
|
Third
Quarter
|
|
|
45.91 |
|
|
|
34.37 |
|
Fourth
Quarter
|
|
|
44.97 |
|
|
|
37.02 |
|
2008:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First
Quarter
|
|
|
43.90 |
|
|
|
37.75 |
|
Second
Quarter(1)
|
|
|
44.49 |
|
|
|
42.75 |
|
(1)
|
Through
April 11, 2008.
|
The
following table sets forth, for each of the most recent six months and for the
current month, the high and low closing prices in U.S. dollars of our ADSs on
the NYSE.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
October
|
|
|
44.97 |
|
|
|
38.70 |
|
November
|
|
|
43.88 |
|
|
|
37.32 |
|
December
|
|
|
43.15 |
|
|
|
37.02 |
|
2008:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
January
|
|
|
43.80 |
|
|
|
37.76 |
|
February
|
|
|
42.25 |
|
|
|
37.75 |
|
March
|
|
|
43.90 |
|
|
|
39.00 |
|
(1)
|
Through April
11, 2008.
|
As of
December 31, 2007 there were approximately 224.7 million ADSs outstanding and
approximately 93 holders of record of ADSs. Such ADSs represented approximately
57.10% of the total number of issued and outstanding Class D shares as of
December 2007. Repsol YPF was the holder of 222.8 million of our ADSs at that
date.
Buenos
Aires Stock Market
The Buenos
Aires Stock Market is the principal Argentine market for trading the ordinary
shares.
The Buenos
Aires Stock Market (Mercado de
Valores de Buenos Aires, or “MERVAL”) is the largest stock market in
Argentina and is affiliated with the BASE. MERVAL is a corporation consisting of
133 shareholders who are the sole individuals or entities authorized to trade,
either as principals or agents, in the securities listed on the BASE. Trading on
the BASE is conducted either through the traditional auction system from 11 a.m.
to 6 p.m. on trading days, or through the Computer-Assisted
Integrated Negotiation System (Sistema Integrado de Negociación
Asistida por Computación, or “SINAC”). SINAC is a computer trading system
that permits trading in both debt and equity securities and is accessed by
brokers directly from workstations located in their offices. Currently, all
transactions relating to listed negotiable obligations and listed government
securities can be effectuated through SINAC. In order to control price
volatility, MERVAL imposes a 15-minute suspension on trading when the price of a
security registers a variation in price between 10% and 15% and between 15% and
20%. Any additional 5% variation in the price of a security will result in an
additional 10-minute successive suspension period.
Investors
in the Argentine securities market are mostly individuals and companies.
Institutional investors, which are responsible for a growing percentage of
trading activity, consist mainly of institutional pension funds created under
the amendments to the social security laws enacted in late 1993.
Certain
information regarding the Argentine stock market is set forth in the table
below.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Market
capitalization (in billions of pesos)(1)
|
|
|
1,773 |
|
|
|
1,229 |
|
|
|
771 |
|
|
|
690 |
|
As
percent of GDP(1)
|
|
|
227.2 |
% |
|
|
183.4 |
% |
|
|
163 |
% |
|
|
152 |
% |
Volume
(in millions of pesos)
|
|
|
209,905 |
|
|
|
131,984 |
|
|
|
145,535 |
|
|
|
82,099 |
|
Average
daily trading volume (in millions of pesos)
|
|
|
849.82 |
|
|
|
532.19 |
|
|
|
577.52 |
|
|
|
376.26 |
|
(1)
|
End-of-period
figures for trading on the BASE.
|
Source:
CNV and Instituto Argentino de Mercado de Capitales.
The
following table sets forth, for the five most recent full financial years and
for the current financial year, the high and low prices in Argentine pesos of
our Class D shares on the Buenos Aires Stock Market:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
110.00 |
|
|
|
43.75 |
|
2004
|
|
|
130.00 |
|
|
|
103.00 |
|
2005
|
|
|
205.00 |
|
|
|
128.00 |
|
2006
|
|
|
177.50 |
|
|
|
115.00 |
|
2007
|
|
|
153.00 |
|
|
|
110.90 |
|
2008(1)
|
|
|
142.00 |
|
|
|
118.00 |
|
(1)
|
Through April 11,
2008.
|
The
following table sets forth, for each quarter of the most recent two financial
years, the high and low prices in Argentine pesos of our Class D shares on the
Buenos Aires Stock Market.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First
Quarter
|
|
|
177.50 |
|
|
|
159.50 |
|
Second
Quarter
|
|
|
168.00 |
|
|
|
115.00 |
|
Third
Quarter
|
|
|
141.00 |
|
|
|
123.50 |
|
Fourth
Quarter
|
|
|
152.95 |
|
|
|
131.00 |
|
2007:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First
Quarter
|
|
|
153.00 |
|
|
|
126.00 |
|
Second
Quarter
|
|
|
143.50 |
|
|
|
127.00 |
|
Third
Quarter
|
|
|
143.50 |
|
|
|
107.80 |
|
Fourth
Quarter
|
|
|
142.00 |
|
|
|
118.00 |
|
2008:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First
Quarter
|
|
|
142.00 |
|
|
|
118.00 |
|
Second
Quarter(1)
|
|
|
141.50 |
|
|
|
136.50 |
|
(1)
|
Through April
11, 2008.
|
The
following table sets forth, for each of the most recent six months and for the
current month, the high and low prices in Argentine pesos of our Class D shares
on the Buenos Aires Stock Market.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
October
|
|
|
145.00 |
|
|
|
122.25 |
|
November
|
|
|
141.25 |
|
|
|
118.50 |
|
December
|
|
|
121.00 |
|
|
|
116.00 |
|
2008:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
January
|
|
|
140.00 |
|
|
|
118.00 |
|
February
|
|
|
137.00 |
|
|
|
121.00 |
|
March
|
|
|
142.00 |
|
|
|
125.50 |
|
April(1)
|
|
|
141.50 |
|
|
|
136.50 |
|
(1)
|
Through
April 11, 2008.
|
As of
December 31, 2007, there were approximately 8,336 holders of Class D
shares.
Stock
Exchange Automated Quotations System International
The ADSs
are also quoted on the Stock Exchange Automated Quotations System
International.
Argentine
Securities Market
The
securities market in Argentina is composed of 10 stock exchanges, which are
located in the City of Buenos Aires, Bahía Blanca, Corrientes, Córdoba, La
Plata, La Rioja, Mendoza, Rosario, Santa Fe, and Tucumán. Five of these
exchanges (the BASE, Rosario, Córdoba, Mendoza, and Santa Fe) have affiliated
stock markets and, accordingly, are authorized to quote publicly offered
securities. Securities listed on these exchanges include corporate equity and
bonds and government securities.
The BASE
is the principal and longest-established exchange in Argentina and is currently
the fourth largest exchange in Latin America in terms of market capitalization.
The BASE began operating in 1854 and accounts for approximately 95% of all
equity trading in Argentina. Bonds listed on the BASE may simultaneously be
listed on the Argentine over-the-counter market (Mercado Abierto Electrónico,
or “MAE”), pursuant to an agreement
between
BASE and MAE that stipulates that equity securities are to be traded exclusively
on the BASE, while debt securities (both public and private) may be traded on
both the MAE and the BASE. In addition, through separate agreements with the
BASE, all of the securities listed on the BASE may be listed and subsequently
traded on the Córdoba, Rosario, Mendoza, La Plata and Santa Fe exchanges, by
virtue of which many transactions originating on these exchanges relate to
BASE-listed companies and are subsequently settled in Buenos Aires. Although
companies may list all of their capital stock on the BASE, controlling
shareholders in Argentina typically retain the majority of a company’s capital
stock, resulting in a relatively small percentage of active trading of the
companies’ stock by the public on the BASE.
Argentina’s
equity markets have historically been composed of individual investors, though
in recent years there has been an increase in the level of investment by banks
and insurance companies in these markets. The participation of Argentine pension
funds represents an increasing percentage of the BASE market; however, Argentine
mutual funds (fondos comunes
de inversión) continue to have very low participation. As of December 31,
2007, 109 companies had equity securities listed on the BASE, of which the 10
most traded companies accounted for approximately 78.1% of the total market
capitalization during 2007.
Regulation
of the Argentine securities market
The
Argentine securities market is regulated and overseen by the CNV, pursuant to
Law No. 17,811, as amended, which, in addition to having created the CNV,
governs the regulation of security exchanges, as well as stockbroker
transactions, market operations, the public offering of securities, corporate
governance matters relating to public companies and the trading of futures and
options. Argentine pension funds and insurance companies are regulated by
separate government agencies, whereas financial institutions are regulated
primarily by the Central Bank.
In
Argentina, debt and equity securities traded on an exchange or the
over-the-counter market must, unless otherwise instructed by their shareholders,
be deposited with Stock Exchange Incorporated (Caja de Valores S.A.), a
corporation owned by the BASE, MERVAL and certain provincial exchanges. Stock
Exchange Incorporated is the central securities depositary of Argentina and
provides central depositary facilities, as well as acting as a clearinghouse for
securities trading and as a transfer and paying agent for securities
transactions. Additionally, it handles the settlement of securities transactions
carried out by the BASE and operates SINAC.
Despite a
change in the legal framework of Argentine securities trading in the early
1990s, which permitted the issuance and trading of new financial products in the
Argentine capital markets, including commercial paper, new types of corporate
bonds and futures and options, there is still a relatively low level of
regulation of the market for Argentine securities and investors’ activities in
such markets and enforcement of them has been extremely limited. Because of the
limited exposure and regulation in these markets, there may be less publicly
available information about Argentine companies than is regularly published by
or about companies in the United States and certain other countries. However,
the CNV has taken significant steps to strengthen disclosure and regulatory
standards for the Argentine securities market, including the issuance of
regulations prohibiting insider trading and requiring insiders to report on
their ownership of securities, with associated penalties for
noncompliance.
In order
to improve Argentine securities market regulation, the Argentine government
issued Decree No. 677/01 on June 1, 2001 (the “Transparency Decree”), which
provided certain guidelines and provisions relating to capital markets
transparency and best practices. The Transparency Decree applies to individuals
and entities that participate in the public offering of securities, as well as
to stock exchanges. Among its key provisions, the decree broadens the definition
of a “security,” governs the treatment of negotiable securities, obligates
publicly listed companies to form audit committees composed of three or more
members of the Board of Directors (the majority of whom must be independent
under CNV regulations), authorizes market stabilization transactions under
certain circumstances, governs insider trading, market manipulation and
securities fraud and regulates going-private transactions and acquisitions of
voting shares, including controlling stakes in public companies.
Before
offering securities to the public in Argentina, an issuer must meet certain
requirements established by the CNV with regard to the issuer’s assets,
operating history and management. Only securities approved for a public offering
by the CNV may be listed on a stock exchange. However, CNV approval does not
imply any kind of
certification
as to the quality of the securities or the solvency of the issuer, even though
issuers of listed securities are required to file unaudited quarterly financial
statements and audited annual financial statements and various other periodic
reports with the CNV and the stock exchange on which their securities are
listed, as well as to report to the CNV and the relevant stock exchange any
event related to the issuer and its shareholders that may affect materially the
value of the securities traded.
Money
laundering regulations
Recent
modifications to Argentine money laundering regulations have resulted in their
application to increasing numbers and types of securities
transactions.
Argentine
Law No. 25,246 (as amended by Law No. 26,087 and Law 26,119) categorizes money
laundering as a crime under the Argentine Criminal Code and created the Unidad de Información
Financiera (“UIF”), an agency of the Ministry of Justice and Human Rights
of Argentina responsible for investigating questionable transactions. The
Argentine Criminal Code defines money laundering as the exchange, transfer,
management, sale or any other use of money or other assets obtained through a
crime, by a person who did not take part in such crime, with the possible result
that such original assets (or new asset resulting from such original asset) have
the appearance of having been obtained through legitimate sources, provided that
the aggregate value of the assets exceeded Ps.50,000, whether such amount
results from one or more connected transactions.
The money
laundering legal framework assigns control and information reporting duties to
certain private sector entities, including banks, broker-dealers, trading
companies and insurance companies, in many cases according to highly general
criteria. According to the rules of the Guide to Unusual or Questionable
Financial and Foreign Exchange Transactions (Guía de Transacciones Inusuales o
Sospechosas en la Órbita del Sistema Financiero y Cambiario) approved by
Resolution No. 2/2002 of the UIF (as amended), such entities have an obligation
to notify the UIF of transactions falling into the following general categories:
(a) investments in securities in amounts significantly exceeding the amounts
normally invested by a particular investor, taking the business of the investor
into account; (b) deposits or back-to-back loans in jurisdictions known as tax
havens; (c) requests for asset management services where the origin of funds is
not certain, is unclear or does not relate to the business of the investor; (d)
unusual transfers of large amounts of securities or interests; (e) unusual and
frequent use of special investment accounts; and (f) frequent purchases and
sales of securities during the same day for the same amount and volume, when
such transactions seem unusual and inadequate considering the business of the
investor.
ITEM
10. Additional Information
Capital
Stock
Our
capital stock consists of Ps.3,933,127,930, divided into 3,764 Class A shares,
7,624 Class B shares, 105,736 Class C shares and 393,195,669 Class D shares,
each fully subscribed and paid, with a par value of ten pesos each and the
right to one vote per share. Our total capital stock has not changed since
December 31, 2004.
In
November 1992, the Privatization Law became effective. Pursuant to the
Privatization Law, in July 1993, we completed a worldwide offering of 160
million Class D shares, representing approximately 45% of our outstanding
capital stock, which had been owned by the Argentine government. Concurrently
with the completion of such offering, the Argentine government transferred
approximately 40 million Class B shares to the Argentine provinces, which
represented approximately 11% of our outstanding capital stock, and made an
offer to holders of pension bonds and certain other claims to exchange such
bonds and other claims for approximately 46.1 million Class B shares,
representing approximately 13% of our outstanding capital stock. As a result of
these transactions, the Argentine government’s ownership percentage of our
capital stock was reduced from 100% to approximately 30%, including shares that
had been set aside to be offered to our employees upon establishment of the
terms and conditions by the Argentine government in accordance with Argentine
law. The shares set aside to be offered to employees represented 10% of our
outstanding capital stock.
In July
1997, the Class C shares set aside for the benefit of our employees in
conjunction with the privatization, excluding approximately 1.5 million Class C
shares set aside as a reserve against potential claims, were sold through a
global public offering, increasing the percentage of our outstanding shares of
capital stock held by the public to 75%. Proceeds from the transactions were
used to cancel debt related to the employee plan, with the remainder distributed
to participants in the plan. Additionally, Resolution 1,023/06 of the Ministry
of Economy and Production, dated December 21, 2006, effected the transfer to the
employees covered by the employee share ownership plan, or PPP, of 1,117,717
Class C shares, corresponding to the Class C shares set aside as a reserve
against potential claims, and reserving 357,987 Class C shares until a decision
was reached in a pending lawsuit. Subsequently, with a final decision having
been reached in the lawsuit, and consistent with the mechanism of conversion of
Class C shares into Class D shares established by Decree 628/1997 and its
accompanying rules, as of December 28, 2007, 1,381,999 Class C shares had been
converted into Class D shares. See “Item 4. Information on The Company—History
of YPF.”
The Class
A shares held by the Argentine government became eligible for sale in April 1995
upon the effectiveness of legislation which permitted the Argentine government
to sell such shares. In January 1999, Repsol YPF acquired 52,914,700 Class A
shares in block (14.99% of our shares) which were converted to Class D shares.
Additionally, on April 30, 1999, Repsol YPF announced a tender offer to purchase
all outstanding Class A, B, C and D shares at a price of U.S.$44.78 per share
(the “Offer”). Pursuant to the Offer, in June, 1999, Repsol YPF acquired an
additional 82.47% of our outstanding capital stock. On November 4, 1999, Repsol
YPF acquired an additional 0.35%. On June 7, 2000, Repsol YPF announced a tender
offer to exchange newly issued Repsol YPF’s shares for 2.16% of our Class B, C
and D shares held by minority shareholders. Pursuant to the tender offer, and
after the merger with Astra, as of December 31, 2007, Repsol YPF owns
389,548,900 Class D shares and therefore controls us through a 99.04% ownership
interest. On
February 21, 2008, Petersen Energía S.A. (“Petersen Energía”) purchased
58,603,606 of our ADSs, representing 14.9% of our capital stock, from Repsol YPF
for U.S.$2,235 million (the “Petersen
Transaction”). In addition,
Repsol YPF also granted certain members of the Eskenazi family, who are
affiliates of Petersen Energía, options to purchase up to an additional 10.1% of
our outstanding capital stock within four years (the “Petersen
Options”).
Memorandum
and Articles of Association
YPF’s
by-laws were approved by National Executive Decree No. 1,106, dated May 31,
1993, and notarized by public deed No. 175, dated June 15, 1993 at the National
Notary Public Office, sheet 801 of the National Registry, and registered at the
Inspection Board of Legal Entities of the Argentine Republic on the same date,
June 15, 1993 under number 5,109 of the book of Corporations number 113, volume
“A.”
At a
Shareholder’s Meeting on April 13, 2007, YPF’s shareholders approved an
amendment to YPF’s by-laws which broadens the scope of YPF’s permissible
activities to include work with non-fossil fuels, biofuels, and their
components, as well as the production, processing, transport, marketing and
storage of grain and its derivatives. The
amendment is currently under the registration process with the Argentine
National Securities Commission (“NSC”).
For a
detailed description of YPF’s object and purpose, see “Item 4. Information on
the Company.” YPF’s object is set forth in Section 4 of its by-laws. Copies of
the by-laws, which have been filed as described in “Exhibit Index” in this
annual report, are also available at the offices of YPF.
Pursuant
to Argentine Corporations Law No. 19,550 (the “Corporations Law”), the Board of
Directors or the Statutory Audit Committee (as defined below) shall call either
annual general or extraordinary shareholders’ meetings in the cases provided by
laws and whenever they consider appropriate. Shareholders representing not less
than five percent of YPF’s capital stock may also request that a shareholders’
meeting be called.
A
shareholders’ meeting shall be called at least twenty days prior to the meeting
date by notice published in the legal publications journal for a period of five
days. The notice shall include the nature, date, time and place of the meeting,
the agenda to be discussed and the specific requirements shareholders must meet
to attend the meeting.
In order
to attend the meeting, shareholders must obtain a deposit certificate from a
broker or from the depository trust company. This certificate will allow each
shareholder to be registered in the attendance book which closes three business
days before the date on which the meeting will be held. YPF will issue to each
shareholder a deposit certificate required for admission into the meeting.
Shares certified and registered in the attendance book shall not be disposed of
before the meeting is held unless the corresponding deposit is
cancelled.
Directors,
members of the Statutory Audit Committee and senior managers are both entitled
and required to attend all shareholders’ meetings. These persons may only
exercise voting power to the extent they have been previously registered as
shareholders, in accordance with the provisions described in the above
paragraph. Nevertheless, these persons are not allowed to vote on any proposal
regarding to the approval of their management duties or their removal for
cause.
Pursuant
to the Argentine Corporations Law, the Board of Directors or the Supervisory
Committee shall call either annual ordinary or extraordinary shareholders’
meetings in the cases provided by laws and whenever they consider appropriate.
Shareholders representing not less than 5% of our capital stock may also request
that a shareholders’ meeting be called.
Shareholders’
meetings may be ordinary meetings or extraordinary meetings. We are required to
convene and hold an ordinary meeting of shareholders within four months of the
close of each fiscal year to consider the matters specified in the first two
paragraphs of Section 234 of the Argentine Corporations Law, such as the
approval of our financial statements, allocation of net income for such fiscal
year, approval of the reports of the Board of Directors and the Audit Committee
and election, performance and remuneration of directors and members of the
Supervisory Committee. In addition, pursuant to the Transparency Decree, at
ordinary shareholders’ meetings, shareholders must consider (i) the disposition
of, or creation of any lien over, assets as long as such decision has not been
performed in the ordinary course of business and (ii) the execution of
administration or management agreements and whether to approve any agreement by
virtue of which the assets or services provided to us are paid partial or
totally with a percentage of our income, results or earnings, if the payment is
material when measured against the volume of the ordinary course of business and
our shareholders’ equity. Other matters which may be considered at an ordinary
shareholders’ meeting convened and held at any time include the responsibility
of directors and members of the Supervisory Committee, capital increases and the
issuance of certain notes. Extraordinary shareholders’ meetings may be called at
any time to consider matters beyond the authority of an ordinary meeting
including, without limitation, the amendment of our bylaws, issuance of
debentures, early dissolution, merger, spin-off, reduction of capital stock and
redemption of shares, transformation from one type of entity to another and
limitation or suspension of shareholders’ preemptive rights.
Shareholders’
meetings may be called by the Board of Directors or the members of the
Supervisory Committee whenever required by law or whenever they deem it
necessary. Also, the Board of Directors or the members of the Supervisory
Committee are required to call shareholders’ meetings upon the request of
shareholders representing an aggregate of at least five percent of our
outstanding share capital, in which case the meeting must take place within 40
days of such shareholders’ request. If the board or the Supervisory Committee
fails to call a meeting following such a request, a meeting may be ordered by
the CNV or by the courts.
Notices
of meetings
Notice of
shareholders’ meetings must be published for five days in the Official Gazette,
in an Argentina newspaper of wide circulation and in the bulletin of the Buenos
Aires Stock Exchange, at least 20 but not more than 45 days prior to the date on
which the meeting is to be held. Such notice must include information regarding
the type of meeting to be held, the date, time and place of such meeting and the
agenda. If a quorum is not available at such meeting, a notice for a meeting on
second call, which must be held within 30 days of the date on which the first
meeting was called, must be published for three days at least eight days before
the date of the meeting on second call. The above-described notices of
shareholders’ meetings may be effected simultaneously for the meeting on second
call to be held on the same day as the first meeting, only in the case of
ordinary meetings. Shareholders’ meetings may be validly held without
notice if all the shares of our outstanding share capital are present and
resolutions are adopted by unanimous vote of shares entitled to
vote.
Quorum
and voting requirements
Except as
described below, the quorum for ordinary meetings of shareholders on first call
is a majority of the shares entitled to vote, and action may be taken by the
affirmative vote of an absolute majority of the shares present that are entitled
to vote on such action. If a quorum is not available at the first meeting, a
meeting on second call may be held at which action may be taken by the holders
of an absolute majority of the shares present, regardless of the number of such
shares. The quorum for an extraordinary shareholders’ meeting on first call is
60% of the shares entitled to vote, and if such quorum is not available, a
meeting or second call may be held, at which action may be taken by the holders
of an absolute majority of the shares present, regardless of the number of such
shares.
Our bylaws
establish that in order to approve (i) the transfer of our domicile outside
Argentina, (ii) a fundamental change of the corporate purpose set forth in our
bylaws, (iii) delisting of our shares in the BASE or NYSE, and (iv) a spin-off
by us, when as a result of such spin-off more than 25% of our assets are
transferred to the resulting corporations, a majority of the shares representing
75% or more of our voting shares is required, both in first and second call. Our
bylaws also establish that in order to approve (i) certain amendments to our
bylaws concerning tender offers of shares (as described below), (ii) the
granting of certain guarantees in favor of our shareholders, (iii) full stop of
refining, commercialization and distribution activities and (iv) rules regarding
appointment, election and number of members of our Board of Directors, a
majority of the shares representing 66% or more of our voting shares is
required, both in first and second call, as is the affirmative vote of the Class
A Shares, granted in a special meeting of the holders of such
shares.
In order
to attend the meeting, shareholders must deposit their shares, or a certificate
representing book-entry shares issued by a bank, clearing house or depository
trust company, with us. This certificate will allow each shareholder to be
registered in the attendance book which closes three business days before the
date on which the meeting will be held. We will issue to each shareholder a
deposit certificate required for admission into the meeting. Shares certified
and registered in the attendance book may not be disposed of before the meeting
is held unless the corresponding deposit is cancelled.
Under the
Corporations Law, foreign companies that own shares in an Argentine corporation
are required to register with the Superintendent of Corporations (Inspección General de
Justicia, or IGJ) in order to exercise certain shareholder rights,
including voting rights. Such registration requires the filing of certain
corporate and accounting documents. Accordingly, if a shareholder owns Class D
shares directly (rather than in the form of ADSs) and is a non-Argentine
company, and such shareholder fails to register with the IGJ, the ability to
exercise its rights as a holder of Class D shares may be limited.
Directors,
members of the Supervisory Committee and senior managers are both entitled and
required to attend all shareholders’ meetings. These persons may only exercise
voting power to the extent they have been previously registered as shareholders,
in accordance with the provisions described in the above paragraph.
Nevertheless, these persons are not allowed to vote on any proposal regarding
the approval of their management duties or their removal for cause.
Shareholders
who have a conflict of interest with us and who do not abstain from voting may
be liable for damages to us, but only if the transaction would not have been
approved without such shareholders’ votes. Furthermore, shareholders who
willfully or negligently vote in favor of a resolution that is subsequently
declared void by a court as contrary to the law or our bylaws may be held
jointly and severally liable for damages to us or to other third parties,
including shareholders.
Directors
Election
of Directors
Our
business and affairs are managed by the Board of Directors in accordance with
our bylaws and the Argentine Corporations Law No. 19,550 (the “Argentine
Corporations Law”). Our bylaws provide for a Board of Directors of 11 to 21
members, and up to an equal number of alternates. Alternates are those elected
by the shareholders to replace directors who are absent from meetings or who are
unable to exercise their duties, when and for whatever period appointed to do so
by the Board of Directors. Alternates have the responsibilities, duties and
powers of directors only if and to the extent they are called upon to attend
board meetings or for such longer period as they may act as
replacements.
Directors
shall hold office from one to three years, as determined by the shareholders’
meetings. Since the shareholders’ general ordinary and extraordinary meeting
held on March 7, 2008, our Board of Directors is composed of 17 directors and 14
alternates.
In
accordance with our bylaws, the Argentine government, sole holder of Class A
shares, is entitled to elect one director and one alternate. The current
director representative of Class A shares was appointed to serve up to a
one-year term.
Under the
Argentine Corporations Law, a majority of our directors must be residents of
Argentina. All directors must establish a legal domicile in Argentina for
service of notices in connection with their duties.
Our bylaws
require the Board of Directors to meet at least once every quarter in person or
by video conference, and a majority of directors is required in order to
constitute a quorum. If a quorum is not met one hour after the start time set
for the meeting, the President or his substitute may invite alternates of the
same class as that of the absent directors to join the meeting, or call a
meeting for another day. Resolutions must be adopted by a majority of the
directors present, and the President or his substitute is entitled to cast the
deciding vote in the event of a tie.
The
composition of certain of our Board committees, as well as the roles of certain
members thereof, will change upon the implementation of the requirements of the
shareholders’ agreement between Repsol YPF and Petersen Energía. See “Item 7.
Major Shareholders and Related Party Transactions—Principal and Selling
Shareholders.”
Duties
and liabilities of Directors
In
accordance with the Argentine Corporations Law, directors have an obligation to
perform their duties with loyalty and with the diligence of a prudent business
person. Directors are jointly and severally liable to us, our shareholders and
to third parties for the improper performance of their duties, for violating the
law or our bylaws or regulations, and for any damage caused by fraud, abuse of
authority or gross negligence. Specific duties may be assigned to a director by
the bylaws, company regulations, or by resolution of the shareholders’ meeting.
In such cases, a director’s liability will be determined by reference to the
performance of such duties.
Only
shareholders, through a shareholders’ meeting may authorize directors to engage
in activities in competition with us. Transactions or contracts between
directors and us in connection with our activities are permitted to the extent
they are performed under fair market conditions. Transactions that do not comply
with the Argentine Corporations Law require prior approval of the Board of
Directors or the Supervisory Committee. In addition, these transactions must be
subsequently approved by the shareholders at a general meeting. If our
shareholders do not approve the relevant transaction, the directors and members
of the Supervisory Committee who approved such transactions are jointly and
severally liable for any damages caused to us.
Any
director whose personal interests are adverse to ours shall notify the Board of
Directors and the Supervisory Committee and abstain from voting on such matters.
Otherwise, such director may be held liable to us.
A director
will not be liable if, notwithstanding his presence at the meeting at which a
resolution was adopted or his knowledge of such resolution, a written record
exists of his opposition to such resolution and he reports his opposition to the
Supervisory Committee before any complaint against him is brought before the
Board of Directors, the Supervisory Committee, the shareholders’ meeting, the
appropriate governmental agency or the courts. Any liability of a director to us
terminates upon approval of the director’s actions by the shareholders at a
general meeting, provided that shareholders representing at least 5% of our
capital stock do not object and provided further that such liability does not
result from a violation of the law, our bylaws or other
regulations.
Foreign
Investment Legislation
Under the
Argentine Foreign Investment Law, as amended, and its implementing regulations
(together, referred to as the “Foreign Investment Legislation”), the purchase of
shares of an Argentine corporation by an individual or legal entity domiciled
abroad or by an Argentine company of “foreign capital” (as defined in the
Foreign Investment Legislation) constitutes foreign investment. Currently,
foreign investment in industries other than broadcasting is not restricted, and
no prior approval is required to make foreign investments. No prior approval is
required in order to purchase Class D Shares or ADSs or to exercise financial or
corporate rights thereunder.
Dividends
Under our
bylaws, all Class A, Class B, Class C and Class D shares rank equally with
respect to the payment of dividends. All shares outstanding as of a particular
record date share equally in the dividend being paid, except that shares issued
during the period to which a dividend relates may be entitled only to a partial
dividend with respect to such period if the shareholders’ meeting that approved
the issuance so resolved. No provision of our bylaws or of the Argentine
Corporations Law gives rise to future special dividends only to certain
shareholders.
The amount
and payment of dividends are determined by majority vote of our shareholders
voting as a single class, generally, but not necessarily, on the recommendation
of the Board of Directors. In addition, under the Argentine Corporations Law,
our Board of Directors has the right to declare dividends subject to further
approval of shareholders at the next shareholders’ meeting.
We have
distributed over 85% of our net income attributable to the years 2001 through
2006 in dividends to our shareholders. We have not adopted a formal dividend
policy. Any dividend policy adopted will be subject to a number of factors,
including our debt service requirements, capital expenditure and investment
plans, other cash requirements and such other factors as may be deemed relevant
at the time. In addition, Repsol YPF and Petersen Energía have agreed in the
shareholders’ agreement entered into by them in connection with the Petersen
Transaction to effect the adoption of a dividend policy under which we would
distribute 90% of our net income as dividends, starting with our net income for
2007. They have also agreed to vote in favor of corporate resolutions requiring
us to distribute a special dividend of U.S.$850 million, of which half will be
paid in 2008 and half will be paid in 2009. See “Item 7. Major Shareholders and
Related Party Transactions—Shareholders’ Agreement.”
The
following table sets forth for the periods and dates indicated, the quarterly
dividend payments made by us, expressed in pesos.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1Q
|
|
|
|
2Q
|
|
|
|
3Q
|
|
|
|
4Q
|
|
|
|
|
2002
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
4.00 |
|
|
|
4.00 |
|
2003
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
5.00 |
|
|
|
2.60 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
7.60 |
|
2004
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
9.00 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
4.50 |
|
|
|
13.50 |
|
2005
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
8.00 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
4.40 |
|
|
|
12.40 |
|
2006
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
6.00 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
6.00 |
|
2007
|
|
|
6.00 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
6.00 |
|
2008
|
|
|
10.76 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
10.76 |
|
On March
6, 2007, the Board of Directors approved a dividend of Ps.6.00 per share or per
ADS, to be paid out of the reserve for future dividends approved by the
shareholders’ meeting of April 28, 2006. The dividends were paid on March 21,
2007 and ratified by the shareholders’ meeting of April 13, 2007. Our
shareholders’ meeting held on April 13, 2007, approved a reserve for future
dividends of Ps.4,234 million.
On
February 6, 2008, our Board of Directors approved a dividend of Ps.10.76 per
share or per ADS, to be paid out of the reserve for future dividends approved by
our shareholders’ meeting held on April 13, 2007. The dividend was paid on
February 29, 2008. Furthermore, our Board of Directors has proposed a reserve
for future dividends, including the agreed additional dividend, of Ps.6,560
million. This reserve must be approved by our shareholders and is scheduled for
consideration by them on April 24, 2008.
Amount
Available for Distribution
Under
Argentine law, dividends may be lawfully paid only out of our retained earnings
reflected in the annual audited financial statements prepared in accordance with
Argentine GAAP and CNV regulations and approved by a shareholders’ meeting. The
Board of Directors of a listed Argentine company may declare interim dividends,
in which case each member of the Board and of the Supervisory Committee is
jointly and severally liable for the repayment of such dividend if retained
earnings at the close of the fiscal year in which the interim dividend was paid
would not have been sufficient to permit the payment of such
dividend.
According
to the Argentine Corporations Law and our by-laws, we are required to maintain a
legal reserve of 20% of our then-outstanding capital stock. The legal reserve is
not available for distribution to shareholders.
Under our
bylaws, our net income is applied as follows:
·
|
first,
an amount equivalent to at least 5% of net income, plus (less) prior year
adjustments, is segregated to build the legal reserve until such reserve
is equal to 20% of our subscribed
capital;
|
·
|
second,
an amount is segregated to pay the accrued fees of the members of the
Board of Directors and of the Supervisory Committee (see “Item 6.
Directors, Senior Management and Employees—Compensation of Directors and
Officers”);
|
·
|
third,
an amount is segregated to pay dividends on preferred stock, if any;
and
|
·
|
fourth,
the remainder of net income may be distributed as dividends to common
shareholders or allocated for voluntary or contingent reserves as
determined by the shareholders’
meeting.
|
Our Board
of Directors submits our financial statements for the preceding fiscal year,
together with reports thereon by the Supervisory Committee and the auditors, at
the annual ordinary shareholders’ meeting for approval. Within four months of
the end of each fiscal year, an ordinary shareholders’ meeting must be held to
approve our yearly financial statements and determine the allocation of our net
income for such year.
Under
applicable CNV regulations, cash dividends must be paid to shareholders within
30 days of the shareholders’ meeting approving such dividends or, in the case in
which the shareholders’ meeting delegates the authority to distribute dividends
to the Board of Directors, within 30 days of the Board of Directors’ meeting
approving such dividends. In the case of stock dividends, shares are required to
be delivered within three months of our receipt of notice of the authorization
of the CNV for the public offering of the shares arising from such dividends. In
accordance with the Argentine Commercial Code, the statute of limitations to the
right of any shareholder to receive dividends declared by the shareholders’
meeting is three years from the date on which it has been made available to the
shareholder.
Owners of
ADSs are entitled to receive any dividends payable with respect to the
underlying Class D shares. Cash dividends are paid to the Depositary in pesos,
directly or through The Bank of New York S.A., although we may choose to pay
cash dividends outside Argentina in a currency other than pesos, including U.S.
dollars. The Deposit Agreement provides that the Depositary shall convert cash
dividends received by the Depositary in pesos to dollars, to the extent that, in
the judgment of the Depositary, such conversion may be made on a reasonable
basis, and, after deduction or upon payment of the fees and expenses of the
Depositary, shall make payment to the holders of ADSs in dollars.
Preemptive
and Accretion Rights
Except as
described below, in the event of a capital increase, a holder of existing shares
of a given class has a preferential right to subscribe a number of shares of the
same class sufficient to maintain the holder’s existing proportionate holdings
of shares of that class. Preemptive rights also apply to issuances of
convertible securities, but do not apply upon conversion of such securities.
Pursuant to the Argentine Corporations Law, in exceptional cases and on a
case-by-case basis when required for our best interest, the shareholders at an
extraordinary meeting with a special majority may decide to limit or suspend
shareholders’ preemptive rights, provided that such limitation or suspension of
the shareholders’ preemptive rights is included in the agenda of the meeting and
the shares to be issued are paid in kind or are issued to cancel preexisting
obligations.
Under our
bylaws, we may only issue securities convertible into Class D shares, and the
issuance of any such convertible securities must be approved by a special
meeting of the holders of Class D shares.
Holders of
ADSs may be restricted in their ability to exercise preemptive rights if a
registration statement under the Securities Act relating thereto has not been
filed or is not effective. Preemptive rights are exercisable during the 30 days
following the last publication of notice informing shareholders of their right
to exercise such preemptive
rights in
the Official Gazette and in an Argentine newspaper of wide circulation. Pursuant
to the Argentine Corporations Law, if authorized by an extraordinary
shareholders’ meeting, companies authorized to make public offering of their
securities, such as us, may shorten the period during which preemptive rights
may be exercised from 30 to ten days following the publication of notice of the
offering to the shareholders to exercise preemptive rights in the Official
Gazette and a newspaper of wide circulation in Argentina. Pursuant to our
bylaws, the terms and conditions on which preemptive rights may be exercised
with respect to Class C shares may be more favorable than those applicable to
Class A, Class B and Class D shares.
Shareholders
who have exercised their preemptive rights have the right to exercise accretion
rights, in proportion to their respective ownership, with respect to any
unpreempted shares, in accordance with the following procedure.
·
|
Any
unpreempted Class A shares will be converted into Class D shares and
offered to holders of Class D shares that exercised preemptive rights and
indicated their intention to exercise additional preemptive rights with
respect to any such Class A shares.
|
·
|
Any
unpreempted Class B shares will be assigned to those provinces that
exercised preemptive rights and indicated their intention to exercise
accretion rights with respect to such shares; any excess will be converted
into Class D shares and offered to holders of Class D shares that
exercised preemptive rights and indicated their intention to exercise
accretion rights with respect to any such Class D
shares.
|
·
|
Any
unpreempted Class C shares will be assigned to any PPP participants who
exercised preemptive rights and indicated their intention to exercise
accretion rights with respect to such shares; any excess will be converted
into Class D shares and offered to holders of Class D shares that
exercised preemptive rights and indicated their intention to exercise
accretion rights with respect to any such Class C
shares.
|
·
|
Any
unpreempted rights will be assigned to holders of Class D shares that
exercised their preemptive rights and indicated their intention to
exercise accretion rights; any remaining Class D shares will be assigned
pro rata to any holder of shares of another class that indicated his or
her intention to exercise accretion
rights.
|
The term
for exercise of additional preemptive rights is the same as that fixed for
exercising preemptive rights.
Voting
of the Underlying Class D Shares
Under the
by-laws, each Class A, Class B, Class C and Class D share entitles the holder
thereof to one vote at any meeting of the shareholders of YPF, except that a
specified number of Directors is elected by majority vote of each class (except
as provided below). See “—Directors—Election of Directors” above for information
regarding the number of directors that holders of each class of shares are
entitled to elect and certain other provisions governing nomination and election
of directors. The Depositary has agreed that, as soon as practicable after
receipt of a notice of any meeting of shareholders of YPF, it will mail a notice
to the holders of ADRs, evidencing ADSs, registered on the books of the
Depositary which will contain the following:
·
|
a
summary in English of the information contained in the notice of such
meeting;
|
·
|
a
statement that the holders of ADRs at the close of business on a specified
record date will be entitled, subject to any applicable provisions of
Argentine law, the by-laws of YPF and the Class D Shares, to instruct the
Depositary to exercise the voting rights, if any, pertaining to the Class
D Shares evidenced by their respective ADSs;
and
|
·
|
a
statement as to the manner in which such instructions may be given to the
Depositary.
|
The
Depositary shall endeavor, to the extent practicable, to vote or cause to be
voted the amount of Class D Shares represented by the ADSs in accordance with
the written instructions of the holders thereof. The Depositary will vote Class
D Shares, as to which no instructions are received, in accordance with the
recommendations of the Board of Directors of YPF. The Depositary will not vote
Class D Shares, as to which no instructions have been received, in accordance
with the recommendations of the Board of Directors, however, unless YPF has
provided to
the
Depositary an opinion of Argentine counsel stating that the action recommended
by the Board of Directors is not illegal under Argentine law or contrary to the
by-laws or Board regulations of YPF. In addition, the Depositary will, if
requested by the Board of Directors and unless prohibited by any applicable
provision of Argentine law, deposit all Class D Shares represented by ADSs for
purposes of establishing a quorum at meetings of shareholders, whether or not
voting instructions with respect to such shares have been received.
Voting
Under our
bylaws, each Class A, Class B, Class C and Class D share entitles the holder
thereof to one vote at any meeting of our shareholders, except that the Class A
shares (i) vote separately with respect to the election of our Board of
Directors and are entitled to appoint one director and one alternate director
and (ii) have certain veto rights, as described below.
Class
A Veto Rights
Under the
bylaws, so long as any Class A shares remain outstanding, the affirmative vote
of such shares is required in order to: (i) decide upon the merger of the
Company; (ii) approve any acquisition of shares by a third party representing
more than 50% of the Company’s capital; (iii) transfer to third parties all the
exploitation rights granted to the Company pursuant to the Hydrocarbons Law,
applicable regulations thereunder or the Privatization Law, if such transfer
would result in the total suspension of the Company’s exploration and production
activities; (iv) voluntarily dissolve the Company and (v) transfer our legal or
fiscal domicile outside Argentina. The actions described in clauses (iii) and
(iv) above also require prior approval of the Argentine Congress through
enactment of a law.
Reporting
Requirements
Pursuant
to our bylaws, any person who, directly or indirectly, through or together with
its affiliates and persons acting in concert with it, acquires Class D shares or
securities convertible into Class D shares, so that such person controls more
than 3% of the Class D shares, is required to notify us of such acquisition
within five days of such acquisition, in addition to complying with any
requirements imposed by any other authority in Argentina or elsewhere where our
Class D shares are traded. Such notice must include the name or names of the
person and persons, if any, acting in concert with it, the date of the
acquisition, the number of shares acquired, the price at which the acquisition
was made, and a statement as to whether it is the purpose of the person or
persons to acquire a greater shareholding in, or control of, us. Each subsequent
acquisition by such person or persons requires a similar
notice.
Certain
Provisions Relating to Acquisitions of Shares
Pursuant
to our bylaws:
·
|
each
acquisition of shares or convertible securities, as a result of which the
acquirer, directly or indirectly through or together with its affiliates
and persons acting in concert with it (collectively, an “Offeror”), would
own or control shares that, combined with such Offeror’s prior holdings,
if any, of shares of such class, would
represent:
|
·
|
15%
or more of the outstanding capital stock,
or
|
·
|
20%
or more of the outstanding Class D shares;
and
|
·
|
each
subsequent acquisition by an Offeror (other than subsequent acquisitions
by an Offeror owning or controlling more than 50% of our capital prior to
such acquisition) (collectively, “Control Acquisitions”), must be carried
out in accordance with the procedure described under “Restrictions on
Control Acquisitions” below.
|
In
addition, any merger, consolidation or other combination with substantially the
same effect involving an Offeror that has previously carried out a Control
Acquisition, or by any other person or persons, if such transaction would have
for such person or persons substantially the same effect as a Control
Acquisition (“Related Party Share Acquisition”), must be carried out in
accordance with the provisions described under “—Restrictions on Related Party
Share Acquisitions.” The voting, dividend and other distribution rights of any
shares acquired in a Control Acquisition or a Related Party Share Acquisition
carried out other than in accordance with such provisions will be suspended, and
such shares will not be counted for purposes of determining the existence of a
quorum at shareholders’ meetings.
Restrictions
on Control Acquisitions
Prior to
consummating any Control Acquisition, an Offeror must obtain the approval of the
Class A shares, if any are outstanding, and make a public tender offer for all
of our outstanding shares and convertible securities. The Offeror will be
required to provide us with notice of, and certain specified information with
respect to, any such tender offer at least fifteen business days prior to the
commencement of the offer, as well as the terms and conditions of any agreement
with any shareholder proposed for the Control Acquisition (a “Prior Agreement”).
We will send each shareholder and holder of convertible securities a copy of
such notice at the Offeror’s expense. The Offeror is also required to publish a
notice containing substantially the same information in a newspaper of general
circulation in Argentina, New York and each other city in which our securities
are traded on an exchange or other securities market, at least once per week,
beginning on the date notice is provided to us, until the offer
expires.
Our Board
of Directors shall call a special meeting of the Class A shares to be held ten
business days following the receipt of such notice for the purpose of
considering the tender offer. If the special meeting is not held, or if the
shareholders do not approve the tender offer at such meeting, neither the tender
offer nor the proposed Control Acquisition may be completed.
The tender
offer must be carried out in accordance with a procedure specified in our bylaws
and in accordance with any additional or stricter requirements of jurisdictions,
exchanges or markets in which the offer is made or in which our securities are
traded. Under the bylaws, the tender offer must provide for the same price for
all shares tendered, which price may not be less than the highest of the
following (the “Minimum Price”):
(i) the
highest price paid by, or on behalf of, the Offeror for Class D shares or
convertible securities during the two years prior to the notice provided to us,
subject to certain antidilution adjustments with respect to Class D
shares;
(ii) the
highest closing price for the Class D shares on the BASE during the thirty-day
period immediately preceding the notice provided to us, subject to certain
antidilution adjustments;
(iii) the
price resulting from clause (ii) above multiplied by a fraction, the numerator
of which shall be the highest price paid by or on behalf of the Offeror for
Class D shares during the two years immediately preceding the date of the notice
provided to us and the denominator of which shall be the closing price for the
Class D shares on the BASE on the date immediately preceding the first day in
such two-year period on which the Offeror acquired any interest in or right to
any Class D shares, in each case subject to certain antidilution adjustments;
and
(iv) the
net earnings per Class D share during the four most recent full fiscal quarters
immediately preceding the date of the notice provided to us, multiplied by the
higher of (A) the price/earnings ratio during such period for Class D shares (if
any) and (B) the highest price/earnings ratio for us in the two-year period
immediately preceding the date of the notice provided to us, in each case
determined in accordance with standard practices in the financial
community.
Any such
offer must remain open for a minimum of 20 days and a maximum of 30 days
following the provision of notice to the shareholders or publication of the
offer, plus an additional period of a minimum of five days and a maximum of ten
days required by CNV regulations, and shareholders must have the right to
withdraw tendered shares at any time up until the close of the offer. Following
the close of such tender offer, the Offeror will be obligated to acquire all
tendered shares or convertible securities, unless the number of shares tendered
is less than the minimum, if any, upon which such tender offer was conditioned,
in which case the Offeror may withdraw the tender offer. Following the close of
the tender offer, the Offeror may consummate any Prior Agreement within thirty
days following the close of the tender offer; provided, however, that if such
tender offer was conditioned on the acquisition of a minimum number of shares,
the Prior Agreement may be consummated only if such minimum was reached. If no
Prior Agreement existed, the Offeror may acquire the number of shares indicated
in the notice provided to us on the terms indicated in such notice, to the
extent such number of shares were not acquired in the tender offer, provided
that any condition relating to a minimum number of shares tendered has been
met.
Restrictions
on Related Party Share Acquisitions
The price
per share to be received by each shareholder in any Related Party Share
Acquisition must be the same as, and must not be less, than the highest of the
following:
(i) the
highest price paid by or on behalf of the party seeking to carry out the Related
Party Share Acquisition (an “Interested Shareholder”) for (A) shares of the
class to be transferred in the Related Party Share Acquisition (the “Class”)
within the two-year period immediately preceding the first public announcement
of the Related Party Share Acquisition or (B) shares of the Class acquired in
any Control Acquisition, in each case as adjusted for any stock split, reverse
stock split, stock dividend or other reclassification affecting the
Class;
(ii) the
highest closing sale price of shares of the Class on the BASE during the thirty
days immediately preceding the announcement of the Related Party Share
Acquisition or the date of any Control Acquisition by the Interested
Shareholder, adjusted as described above;
(iii) the
price resulting from clause (ii) multiplied by a fraction, the numerator of
which shall be the highest price paid by or on behalf of the Interested
Shareholder for any share of the Class during the two years immediately
preceding the announcement of the Related Party Transaction and the denominator
of which shall be the closing sale price for shares of the Class on the date
immediately preceding the first day in the two-year period referred to above on
which the Interested Shareholder acquired any interest or right in shares of the
Class, in each case as adjusted as described above; and
(iv) the
net earnings per share of the shares of the Class during the four most recent
full fiscal quarters preceding the announcement of the Related Party Transaction
multiplied by the higher of the (A) the price/earnings ratio during such period
for the shares of the Class and (B) the highest price/earnings ratio for us in
the two-year period preceding the announcement of the Related Party Transaction,
in each case determined in accordance with standard practices in the financial
community.
In
addition, any transaction that would result in the acquisition by any Offeror of
ownership or control of more than 50% of our capital stock, or that constitutes
a merger or consolidation of us, must be approved in advance by the Class A
shares while any such shares remain outstanding.
Taxation
Argentine
Tax Considerations
The
following discussion is a summary of the material Argentine tax considerations
relating to the purchase, ownership and disposition of our Class D shares or
ADSs.
Dividends
tax
Dividends
paid on our Class D shares or ADSs, whether in cash, property or other equity
securities, are not subject to income tax withholding, except for dividends paid
in excess of our taxable accumulated income for the previous fiscal period,
which are subject to withholding at the rate of 35% in respect of such excess.
This is a final tax and it is not applicable if dividends are paid in shares
(acciones liberadas)
rather than in cash.
Capital
gains tax
Due to the
amendments made to the Argentine Income Tax Law (the “AITL”) by Law 25,414 and
Decree 493/2001, and the abrogation of Law 25,414 by Law 25,556, it is not clear
whether certain amendments concerning capital gains taxes are in effect or not.
Although opinion No. 351 of the National Treasury General Attorney Office solved
the most important matters related to capital gains taxes, other issues remain
unclear.
Resident
individuals
Under what
we believe to be a reasonable interpretation of existing applicable tax laws and
regulations: (i) income derived from the sale, exchange or other disposition of
our Class D shares or ADSs by resident individuals who do not sell or dispose of
Argentine shares on a regular basis would not be subject to Argentine income
tax, and (ii) although there still exists uncertainty regarding this issue,
income derived from the sale, exchange or other disposition of our Class D
shares or ADSs by resident individuals who sell or dispose of Argentine shares
on a regular basis should be exempt from Argentine income tax to the extent our
Class D shares or ADSs are listed on stock exchanges or securities
markets.
Foreign
beneficiaries
Capital
gains obtained by non resident individuals or entities from the sale, exchange
or other disposition of our Class D shares or ADSs are exempt from income tax.
Pursuant to a reasonable construction of the AITL, and although the matter is
not completely free from doubt, such treatment should apply to those foreign
beneficiaries that qualify as “offshore entities” for purposes of the AITL if
the shares are not listed in Argentina or any other jurisdiction. For this
purpose, an “offshore entity” is any foreign legal entity if pursuant to its
bylaws or to the applicable regulatory framework (i) its principal activity is
to invest outside the jurisdiction of its incorporation and/or (ii) it cannot
perform in such jurisdiction certain transactions. On the contrary, there is no
doubt that such exemption is not available if the shares are publicly traded on
a stock exchange.
Local
entities
Capital
gains obtained by Argentine entities (in general, entities organized or
incorporated under Argentine law, certain traders and intermediaries, local
branches of non-Argentine entities, sole proprietorships and individuals
carrying
on certain commercial activities in Argentina) derived from the sale, exchange
or other disposition of our Class D shares or ADSs are subject to income tax at
the rate of 35%. Losses arising from the sale of our Class D shares or ADSs can
be applied only to offset capital gains arising from sales of shares or
ADSs.
Personal
assets tax
Argentine
entities, such as us, have to pay the personal assets tax corresponding to (i)
individuals and undivided estates; (ii) foreign individuals and undivided
estates; and (iii) foreign entities, for the holding of our shares or ADSs at
December 31 of each year. The applicable tax rate is 0.5% and is levied on the
equity value (valor
patrimonial proporcional), or the book value, of the shares arising from
the latest financial statements at December 31 of each year. Pursuant to the
Personal Assets Tax Law, we are entitled to seek reimbursement of such paid tax
from the applicable shareholders, including by withholding, foreclosing on the
shares, or by withholding dividends.
Tax
on debits and credits in bank accounts
Tax on
debits and credits in bank accounts is levied, with certain exceptions, for
debits and credits on checking accounts maintained at financial institutions
located in Argentina and other transactions that are used as a substitute for
the use of checking accounts. The general tax rate is 0.6% for each debit and
credit, although in certain cases an increased rate of 1.2% or a decreased rate
may apply. The account holder may use up to 34% of the tax paid when the 0.6%
rate is applicable, and up to 17% of the tax when the 1.2% rate is applicable,
as a credit against other federal taxes.
Value
added tax
The sale,
exchange or other disposition of our Class D shares or ADSs and the distribution
of dividends are exempt from the value added tax.
Transfer
taxes
The sale,
exchange or other disposition of our Class D shares or ADSs is not subject to
transfer taxes.
Stamp
taxes
Stamp
taxes may apply in certain Argentine provinces in case transfer of our Class D
shares or ADSs is performed or executed in such jurisdictions by means of
written agreements. Transfer of our Class D shares or ADSs is exempt from stamp
tax in the City of Buenos Aires.
Other
taxes
There are
no Argentine inheritance or succession taxes applicable to the ownership,
transfer or disposition of our Class D shares or ADSs. In addition, neither the
minimum presumed income tax nor any local gross turnover tax is applicable to
the ownership, transfer or disposition of our Class D shares or
ADSs.
In the
case of litigation regarding the Class D shares or ADSs before a court of the
City of Buenos Aires, a 3% court fee would be charged, calculated on the basis
of the claim. A 3% surcharge calculated on the amount of the court tax would
also be imposed by the City of Buenos Aires Attorneys Social Security
Association.
Tax
treaties
Argentina
has tax treaties for the avoidance of double taxation currently in force with
Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Denmark, Finland,
France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and
the United Kingdom. There is currently no tax treaty or convention in effect
between Argentina and the United States. It is not clear when, if ever, a treaty
will be ratified or entered into effect. As a result, the Argentine tax
consequences described in this section will apply, without modification, to a
holder of our Class D shares or ADSs that is a U.S. resident. Foreign
shareholders located in certain jurisdictions with a tax
treaty in
force with Argentina may be (i) exempted from the payment of the personal assets
tax and (ii) entitled to apply for reduced withholding tax rates on payments to
be made by Argentine parties.
United
States Federal Income Tax Considerations
The
following are the material U.S. federal income tax consequences of purchasing,
owning and disposing of our Class D shares or ADSs. This discussion does not
purport to be a comprehensive description of all of the tax considerations that
may be relevant to a particular person’s decision to acquire such
securities.
This
discussion applies only if you are a U.S. Holder (as defined below) and you hold
our Class D shares or ADSs, as capital assets for tax purposes and it does not
describe all of the tax consequences that may be relevant to holders subject to
special rules, such as:
·
|
certain
financial institutions;
|
·
|
dealers
and traders in securities or foreign
currencies;
|
·
|
persons
holding Class D shares or ADSs, as part of a hedge, “straddle,” integrated
transaction or similar transaction;
|
·
|
persons
whose functional currency for U.S. federal income tax purposes is not the
U.S. dollar;
|
·
|
partnerships
or other entities classified as partnerships for U.S. federal income tax
purposes;
|
·
|
persons
liable for the alternative minimum
tax;
|
·
|
tax-exempt
organizations; or
|
·
|
persons
holding Class D shares or ADSs, that own or are deemed to own ten percent
or more of our voting stock.
|
If an
entity that is classified as a partnership for U.S. federal income tax purposes
holds Class D shares or ADSs, the U.S. federal income tax treatment of a partner
will generally depend on the status of the partner and upon the activities of
the partnership. Partnerships holding Class D shares or ADSs and partners in
such partnerships should consult their tax advisers as to the particular U.S.
federal income tax consequences of holding and disposing of the Class D shares
or ADSs.
This
discussion is based on the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the
“Code”), administrative pronouncements, judicial decisions and final, temporary
and proposed Treasury regulations, all as of the date hereof. These laws are
subject to change, possibly on a retroactive basis. It is also based in part on
representations by the Depositary and assumes that each obligation under the
Deposit Agreement and any related agreement will be performed in accordance with
its terms.
You are a
“U.S. Holder” if you are a beneficial owner of Class D shares or ADSs and are,
for U.S. federal tax purposes:
·
|
a
citizen or individual resident of the United
States;
|
·
|
a
corporation, or other entity taxable as a corporation, created or
organized in or under the laws of the United States or any political
subdivision thereof; or
|
·
|
an
estate or trust the income of which is subject to U.S. federal income
taxation regardless of its source.
|
In
general, if you hold ADSs, you will be treated as the holder of the underlying
shares represented by those ADSs for U.S. federal income tax purposes.
Accordingly, no gain or loss will be recognized if you exchange ADSs for the
underlying shares represented by those ADSs.
The U.S.
Treasury has expressed concerns that parties to whom ADSs are pre-released, or
intermediaries in the chain of ownership between U.S. Holders and the issuer of
the security underlying the ADSs, may be taking actions that are inconsistent
with the claiming of foreign tax credits by U.S. Holders of ADSs. Such actions
would also be inconsistent with the claiming of the reduced rate of tax,
described below, applicable to dividends received by certain non-corporate
holders. Accordingly, the analysis of the creditability of Argentine taxes, and
the availability of the reduced tax rate for dividends received by certain
non-corporate holders, each described below, could be affected by actions taken
by such parties or intermediaries.
Please
consult your own tax advisers concerning the U.S. federal, state, local and
foreign tax consequences of purchasing, owning and disposing of Class D shares
or ADSs in your particular circumstances.
This
discussion assumes that the Company is not, and will not become, a passive
foreign investment company, as described below.
Taxation
of distributions
Distributions
paid on Class D shares or ADSs, other than certain pro rata distributions of
ordinary shares, will be treated as a dividend to the extent paid out of current
or accumulated earnings and profits (as determined under U.S. federal income tax
principles). Because the Company does not maintain calculations of earnings and
profits under U.S. federal income tax principles, it is expected that
distributions will generally be reported to U.S. Holders as dividends. Subject
to applicable limitations (including a minimum holding period requirement) and
the discussion above regarding concerns expressed by the U.S. Treasury, certain
dividends paid by qualified foreign corporations to certain non-corporate U.S.
Holders in taxable years beginning before January 1, 2011, are taxable at a
maximum rate of 15%. A foreign corporation is treated as a qualified foreign
corporation with respect to dividends paid on stock that is readily tradable on
an established securities market in the United States, such as the New York
Stock Exchange where our ADSs are traded. You should consult your own tax
advisers to determine whether the favorable rate may apply to dividends you
receive and whether you are subject to any special rules that limit your ability
to be taxed at this favorable rate. The amount of a dividend will include any
amounts withheld by us in respect of Argentine taxes. The amount of the dividend
will be treated as foreign-source dividend income to you and will not be
eligible for the dividends-received deduction generally allowed to U.S.
corporations under the Code.
Dividends
paid in Argentine pesos will be included in your income in a U.S. dollar amount
calculated by reference to the exchange rate in effect on the date of your or in
the case of ADSs, the Depositary’s receipt of the dividend, regardless of
whether the payment is in fact converted into U.S. dollars. If the dividend is
converted into U.S. dollars on the date of receipt, you generally should not be
required to recognize foreign currency gain or loss in respect of the dividend
income. You may have foreign currency gain or loss if you do not convert the
amount of such dividend into U.S. dollars on the date of its
receipt.
Subject to
applicable limitations (including a minimum holding period requirement) that may
vary depending upon your circumstances and subject to the discussion above
regarding concerns expressed by the U.S. Treasury, Argentine income taxes
withheld from dividends on Class D shares or ADSs will be creditable against
your U.S. federal income tax liability. The rules governing the foreign tax
credit are complex. You are urged to consult your tax advisers regarding the
availability of the foreign tax credit under your particular
circumstances.
Sale
and other disposition of Class D shares or ADSs
For U.S.
federal income tax purposes, gain or loss you realize on the sale or other
disposition of Class D shares or ADSs will be capital gain or loss, and will be
long-term capital gain or loss if you held the Class D shares or ADSs for more
than one year. The amount of your gain or loss will equal the difference between
the amount realized on the disposition and your tax basis in the Class D shares
or ADSs disposed of. Such gain or loss will generally be U.S.-source gain or
loss for foreign tax credit purposes. The deductibility of capital losses is
subject to limitations.
Passive
foreign investment company rules
The
Company believes that it will not be considered a “passive foreign investment
company” (“PFIC”) for U.S. federal income tax purposes for the taxable year of
2008, and does not expect to be considered one in the foreseeable future.
However, since PFIC status depends upon the composition of a company’s income
and assets and the market value of its assets (including, among other things,
less than 25 percent owned equity investments) from time to time, there can be
no assurance that the Company will not be considered a PFIC for any taxable
year. If the Company were treated as a PFIC for any taxable year during which
you held a Class D share or ADS, certain adverse consequences could apply to
you.
If the
Company is treated as a PFIC for any taxable year during which you held a Class
D share or ADS, any gain you recognize on a sale or other disposition of the
Class D share or ADS would be allocated ratably over your holding period for the
Class D share or ADS. The amounts allocated to the taxable year of the
disposition and to any year before the Company became a PFIC would be taxed as
ordinary income. The amount allocated to each other taxable year would be
subject to tax at the highest rate in effect for individuals or corporations, as
appropriate, and an interest charge would be imposed on the amount allocated to
such taxable year. Further, any distribution in respect of ADSs or ordinary
shares in excess of 125 percent of the average of the annual distributions on
ADSs or ordinary shares received by you during the preceding three years or your
holding period, whichever is shorter, would be subject to taxation in the manner
just described for gains. Certain elections may be available to you (including a
mark to market election) that may mitigate the adverse consequences resulting
from PFIC status.
In
addition, if the Company were to be treated as a PFIC in a taxable year in which
it pays dividends or the prior taxable year, the 15% dividend rate discussed
above with respect to dividends paid to non-corporate holders would not
apply.
Information
reporting and backup withholding
Payments
of dividends and sales proceeds that are made within the United States or
through certain U.S.-related financial intermediaries generally are subject to
information reporting and to backup withholding unless (i) you are a corporation
or other exempt recipient or (ii) in the case of backup withholding, you provide
a correct taxpayer identification number and certify that you are not subject to
backup withholding.
The amount
of any backup withholding from a payment to you will be allowed as a credit
against your U.S. federal income tax liability and may entitle you to a refund,
provided that the required information is timely furnished to the Internal
Revenue Service.
Available
Information
YPF is
subject to the information requirements of the Exchange Act, except that as a
foreign issuer, YPF is not subject to the proxy rules or the short-swing profit
disclosure rules of the Exchange Act. In accordance with these statutory
requirements, YPF files or furnishes reports and other information with the SEC.
Reports and other information filed or furnished by YPF with the SEC may be
inspected and copied at the public reference facilities maintained by the SEC at
Room 1024, 450 Fifth Street, N. W., Washington, D.C. 20549, and at the SEC’s
Regional Offices at Northwestern Atrium Center, 500 West Madison Street, Suit
1400, Chicago, Illinois 60611-2511. Copies of such material may be obtained by
mail from the Public Reference Section of the SEC, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, D.C. 20549, at prescribed rates. You may obtain information on the
operation of the Public Reference Section by calling the SEC at 1-800-732-0330.
The SEC maintains a World Wide Web site on the Internet at http://www.sec.gov
that contains reports and information statements and other information regarding
us. Such reports and other information may also be inspected at the offices of
the New York Stock Exchange, 11 Wall Street, New York, New York 10005, on which
YPF’s American Depositary Shares are listed.
ITEM
11. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk
The
following quantitative and qualitative information is provided about financial
instruments to which we are a party as of December 31, 2007, and from which we
may incur future gains or losses from changes in market, interest rates, foreign
exchange rates or commodity prices. We do not enter into derivative or other
financial instruments for trading purposes.
This
discussion contains forward-looking statements that are subject to risks and
uncertainties. Actual results could vary materially as a result of a number of
factors including those set forth in “Item 3. Key Information—Risk
Factors.”
Foreign
currency exposure
We
generally follow a policy of not hedging our debt obligations in U.S. dollars
due to the fact that, in 1991, the Argentine government instituted a set of
economic reforms known as the “Convertibility Plan,” the centerpiece of which
was a fixed one-to-one rate of exchange between the Argentine peso and the U.S.
dollar. Although in view of the Argentine economic crisis the Argentine
authorities implemented a number of monetary and exchange control measures,
including the abolishment of the Convertibility Law, we have still not hedged
our U.S. dollar debt obligations to date. In addition, our costs
and receipts denominated in currencies other than the Argentine peso, including
the U.S. dollar, often do not match. As a result, we are currently exposed to
risks associated with changes in foreign currency exchange rates. See “Item 3.
Key Information—Risk Factors—Risks Relating to Argentina—We may be exposed to
fluctuations in foreign exchange rates.”
The table
below provides information about our assets and liabilities denominated in
currency other than pesos (principally U.S. dollars) that may be sensitive to
changes in foreign exchange rates, as of December 31, 2007.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
More
than 5 years and undetermined
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in
millions of U.S. dollars)
|
|
Assets
|
|
|
1,834 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
1,894 |
|
Accounts
payable
|
|
|
730 |
|
|
|
225 |
|
|
|
180 |
|
|
|
337 |
|
|
|
1,472 |
|
Debt
|
|
|
140 |
|
|
|
101 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
306 |
|
Other
Liabilities
|
|
|
87 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
412 |
(1) |
|
|
513 |
|
(1)
|
Includes
U.S.$318 million corresponding to reserves with undetermined
maturity.
|
Crude
oil price exposure
We entered
into price swap agreement in June 1998 on future oil delivery commitment,
covering approximately 23.9 million barrels of crude oil, for a term of ten
years. This swap agreement was entered into in connection with advanced payments
received by us for future crude-oil deliveries
under forward crude oil sale agreement covering these same volumes of crude oil
subject to the swap agreement. Under the price swap agreements, we will pay a
fixed average price of U.S.$18.24 per barrel from 2007 to 2008 and will receive
variable selling prices that will depend upon market prices. The estimated price
effect presented in the table below represents the difference between the prices
we will pay and the forecasted prices we will receive under the contracts. See
“Item 4. Information on the Company—Liquidity and Capital Resources—Transactions
with unconsolidated variable interest entities.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contract
volumes (mmbbl)
|
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
|
|
Average
Price of Contract (U.S.$/bbl)(1)
|
|
|
18.24 |
|
|
|
18.24 |
|
|
|
|
Contract
amount (millions of U.S.$)
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
76 |
|
Estimated
price effect (millions of U.S.$)(1)
|
|
|
(78 |
) |
|
|
(78 |
) |
|
|
(73 |
) |
(1) The
expected cash flows were calculated based on a WTI oil price of U.S.$81.66 for
all periods, which was the spot price as of December 31, 2007. The estimated
price effect disclosed in the table was calculated as the difference between
this price and the contractually agreed settlement price per
barrel.
Interest
rate exposure
Our
objective in borrowing under fixed rate debt is to satisfy capital requirements
that minimize our exposure to interest rate fluctuations. To realize our
objectives, we have borrowed under fixed rate debt instruments, based on the
availability of capital and prevailing market conditions.
The table
below provides information about our assets and liabilities as of December 31,
2007 that may be sensitive to changes in interest rates.
|
|
Expected
Maturity Date
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in
millions of pesos)
|
|
Assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Variable
rate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
Receivables (Related parties)
|
|
|
2,570
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
2,570 |
|
|
|
2,570 |
|
Interest
rate
|
|
Libor
+
0.2
- 1.5%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed
rate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
Receivables (Related parties)
|
|
|
51
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
Interest
rate
|
|
|
5.23%
- 7.28%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed
rate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
YPF’s
Negotiable Obligations
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
318 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
205 |
|
|
|
523 |
|
|
|
573 |
|
Interest
rate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9.13 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
Short-term debt
|
|
|
457
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
457 |
|
|
|
457 |
|
Interest
rate
|
|
|
1.25%
- 11.5%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ITEM
12. Description of Securities Other than Equity Securities
Not
applicable.
PART
II
ITEM
13. Defaults, Dividend Arrearages and Delinquencies
None.
ITEM
14. Material Modifications to the Rights of Security Holders and Use of
Proceeds
None.
ITEM
15. Controls and Procedures
Conclusion
Regarding the Effectiveness of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
As of
December 31, 2007, YPF, under the supervision and with the participation of
YPF’s management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer, performed an evaluation of the effectiveness of the design and
operation of our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rule
13a-15(f) under the Securities Exchange Act). There are, as described below,
inherent limitations to the effectiveness of any control system, including
disclosure controls and procedures. Accordingly, even effective disclosure
controls and procedures can provide only reasonable assurance of achieving their
control objectives.
Based on
such evaluation, YPF’s Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
concluded that YPF’s disclosure controls and procedures are
effective in ensuring that information relating to YPF, required
to be disclosed in reports it files under the Exchange Act is (1) recorded,
processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the
SEC’s rules and forms, and (2) accumulated and communicated to our
management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer,
as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required
disclosure.
Management’s Report
on internal control over financial reporting
Management
of YPF is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control
over financial reporting (as defined in Rule 13a-15(f) under the Securities
Exchange Act). YPF’s internal control over financial reporting is a process
designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial
reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in
accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in Argentina including
the reconciliation to U.S. GAAP and includes those policies and procedures
that:
·
|
Pertain
to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and
fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of
YPF;
|
·
|
Provide
reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit
preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles, and that our receipts and expenditures are being
made only in accordance with authorizations of YPF’s management and
directors; and
|
·
|
Provide
reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of
unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of our assets that could have
a material effect on the financial
statements.
|
Because of
its inherent limitations, any system of internal control over financial
reporting, no matter how well designed, may not prevent or detect misstatements,
due to the possibility that a control can be circumvented or overridden or that
misstatements due to error or fraud may occur that are not detected. Also,
projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to
the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions,
or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may
deteriorate.
Under the
supervision and with the participation of YPF’s management, including the Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, we conducted an evaluation of the
effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting based on the
criteria established in Internal Control-Integrated
Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the
Treadway Commission (“COSO”). Based on this assessment, our management
concluded
that, as of December 31, 2007, our internal control over financial reporting was
effective based on those criteria.
Our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31,
2007 has been audited by Deloitte & Co. S. R. L., as independent registered
public accounting firm, as stated in their report in cluded in the
F-pages.
Changes
in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
There has
been no change in YPF’s internal control over financial reporting (as defined in
Rule 13a-15(f) under the Securities Exchange Act) that occurred during the
period covered by this Annual Report on Form 20-F that has materially affected,
or is reasonably likely to materially affect, internal control over financial
reporting.
ITEM
16.
ITEM
16A. Audit Committee Financial Expert
The Board
of Directors has designated Mario Vázquez as YPF’s Audit Committee
Financial Expert at the meeting held on March 7, 2008.
YPF
believes that Mr. Vázquez, a member of YPF’s Audit Committee,
possesses the attributes of an Audit Committee Financial Expert set forth in the
instructions to Item 16A of Form 20-F. Mr. Vázquez is an independent
director.
ITEM
16B. Code of Ethics
YPF has
adopted a Code of Ethics applicable to all employees of YPF and the Board of
Directors. Since its effective date on August 15, 2003, we have not waived
compliance with, nor made any amendment to, the Code of Ethics. A copy of our
Code of Ethics is filed as an Exhibit to this Annual Report. YPF undertakes to
provide to any person without charge, upon request, a copy of such Code of
Ethics. A copy of the Code of Ethics can be requested in writing by telephone or
facsimile from us at either of the following addresses:
Repsol
YPF
U.S.
Investors Relations Offices
410 Park
Avenue Floor 4 – Suite
440
New York,
NY 10022
U.S.A.
Tel. (212)
588-1087
Fax (212)
355-0910
YPF
S.A.
Office of
Shareholders Relations
Avenida
Pte. R. Sáenz
Peña
777
C1035AAC
Buenos Aires, Argentina
Tel.
(54-11) 4323-1498
Fax
(54-11) 4329-2113
ITEM
16C. Principal Accountant Fees and Services
The
following table provides information on the aggregate fees billed by our
principal accountants, Deloitte & Co. S.R.L. by type of service rendered for
the periods indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(thousands
of Ps.)
|
|
Audit
Fees
|
|
|
6,281 |
|
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
5,220 |
|
|
|
84 |
|
Audit-Related
Fees (1)
|
|
|
284 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
423 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Tax
Fees (2)
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
255 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(thousands
of Ps.)
|
|
All
Other Fees
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
6,565 |
|
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
5,898 |
|
|
|
85 |
|
______________
(1)
|
Includes
the fees for the issuance of agreed upon procedures reports and fees
related to employee benefit plan audits. It also includes fees billed
for assistance services rendered in relation to YPF’s readiness
plan to comply with Sarbanes-Oxley’s Section
404 requirements in
2006.
|
(2)
|
Includes
the fees for the assistance and general consulting services provided in
connection with an IRS dispute of one of YPF subsidiaries, which do not
imply management functions, legal services or advocacy
role.
|
The annual
shareholders’
meeting of YPF appoints the external auditor of YPF, along with the Audit
Committee’s
non-binding opinion, which is submitted for consideration to the annual
shareholders’
meeting.
The Audit
and Control Committee has a pre-approval policy regarding the contracting of
Repsol YPF’s
external auditor, or any affiliate of the external auditor, for professional
services. The professional services covered by such policy include audit and
non-audit services provided to Repsol YPF or any of its subsidiaries reflected
in agreements dated on or after May 6, 2003.
The
pre-approval policy is as follows:
1. The
Audit and Control Committee must pre-approve all audit and non-audit services to
be provided to Repsol YPF or any of its subsidiaries by the external auditor (or
any of its affiliates) of Repsol YPF.
2. The
Chairman of the Audit and Control Committee has been delegated the authority to
approve the hiring of Repsol YPF’s external auditor
(or any of its affiliates) without first obtaining the approval of the Audit and
Control Committee for any of the services which require pre-approval as
described in (1) above.
Services
approved by the Chairman of the Audit and Control Committee as set forth above
must be ratified at the next plenary meeting of the Audit and Control
Committee.
All of the
services described in the table above were approved by the Audit and
Control Committee.
Additionally,
all services to be provided to YPF by its external auditors must be approved by
the Board of Directors of YPF.
ITEM
16D. Exemptions from the Listing Standards for Audit Committees
Not
applicable.
ITEM
16E. Purchases of Equity Securities by the Issuer and Affiliated
Purchasers
In 2007,
neither YPF nor any of its affiliates purchased any of YPF’s equity
securities.
PART
III
ITEM
17. Financial Statements
The
registrant has responded to Item 18 in lieu of responding to this
Item.
ITEM
18. Financial Statements
The
following financial statements are filed as part of this Annual
Report:
Report
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
|
F-2
|
Consolidated
Statements of Income of YPF S.A. for the Years Ended December 31, 2007,
2006 and 2005
|
F-3
|
Consolidated
Balance Sheets of YPF S.A. as of December 31, 2007, 2006 and
2005
|
F-4
|
Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows of YPF S.A. for the Years Ended December 31,
2007, 2006 and 2005
|
F-5
|
Consolidated
Statements of Change in Shareholders’ equity of YPF S.A. for the Years
Ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005
|
F-6
|
Notes
to the Consolidated Financial Statements of YPF S.A. for the Years Ended
December 31, 2007, 2006 and
2005
|
F-7
|
ITEM
19. Exhibits
|
1.1
|
By-laws
(Estatutos) of YPF S.A. as amended (Spanish Version)
|
|
1.2
|
By-laws
(Estatutos) of YPF S.A. as amended (English Version)
|
|
11.1
|
Code
of Ethics*
|
|
12.1
|
Section
302 Certification by the Chief Executive Officer
|
|
12.2
|
Section
302 Certification by the Chief Financial Officer
|
|
13.1
|
Section
906 Certification by the Chief Executive Officer
|
|
13.2
|
Section
906 Certification by the Chief Financial Officer
|
|
23.1 |
Consent
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm |
|
23.2 |
Consent
of Independent Registered Public Accounting
Firm |
* Incorporated
by reference to YPF’s 2004 Annual Report on Form 20-F filed on June 30,
2005.
SIGNATURES
The
registrant hereby certifies that it meets all of the requirements for filing on
Form 20-F and that it has duly caused and authorized the undersigned to sign
this annual report on its behalf.
YPF
SOCIEDAD ANÓNIMA
|
|
By:
|
/s/
Walter Cristian Forwood
|
|
|
Name:
|
Walter
Cristian Forwood
|
|
|
Title:
|
Chief
Financial Officer
|
|
Dated:
April 14, 2008
YPF
SOCIEDAD ANONIMA AND CONTROLLED AND JOINTLY CONTROLLED COMPANIES
INDEX
|
Page
|
|
|
Reports
of independent registered public accounting firm
|
F-2
|
|
|
Consolidated
statements of income for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and
2005
|
F-4
|
|
|
Consolidated
balance sheets as of December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005
|
F-5
|
|
|
Consolidated
statements of cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and
2005
|
F-6
|
|
|
Consolidated
statements of changes in shareholders' equity for the years ended December
31, 2007, 2006 and 2005
|
F-7
|
|
|
Notes
to consolidated financial statements for the years ended December 31,
2007, 2006 and 2005
|
F-8
|
|
|
Supplemental
information on oil and gas producing activities
(unaudited)
|
F-57
|
Report
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
To the
Board of Directors and Shareholders of YPF SOCIEDAD ANONIMA:
We have
audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of YPF SOCIEDAD ANONIMA (an
Argentine Corporation) and its controlled and jointly controlled companies (the
“Company”) as of December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, and the related consolidated
statements of income, cash flows and changes in shareholders' equity for each of
the three years in the period ended December 31, 2007. These consolidated
financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s Management. Our
responsibility is to express an opinion on these consolidated financial
statements based on our audits.
We
conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan
and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial
statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a
test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial
statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and
significant estimates made by Management, as well as evaluating the overall
financial statements presentation. We believe that our audits provide a
reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our
opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly,
in all material respects, the financial position of YPF SOCIEDAD ANONIMA and its
controlled and jointly controlled companies as of December 31, 2007, 2006, and
2005, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the
three years in the period ended December 31, 2007, in conformity with generally
accepted accounting principles applicable to consolidated financial statements
in Argentina.
Accounting
principles generally accepted in Argentina vary in certain significant respects
from accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America
(“U.S. GAAP”). Information relating to the nature and effect of such differences
is presented in Notes 13, 14 and 15 to the consolidated financial
statements.
We have
also audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (United States), the Company’s internal control over financial
reporting as of December 31, 2007, based on the criteria established in Internal Control - Integrated
Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the
Treadway Commission and our report dated April 10, 2008 expressed an unqualified
opinion on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.
Buenos
Aires City, Argentina
April 10,
2008
Deloitte
& Co. S.R.L.
Ricardo C.
Ruiz
Partner
Report
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
To the
Board of Directors and Shareholders of YPF SOCIEDAD ANONIMA:
We have
audited the internal control over financial reporting of YPF SOCIEDAD ANONIMA
(an Argentine Corporation) and its controlled and jointly controlled companies
(the “Company”) as of December 31, 2007, based on the criteria established in
Internal Control - Integrated
Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the
Treadway Commission. The Company's management is responsible for
maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its
assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting
included in the accompanying Management’s Report on Internal
Control over Financial Reporting (Item 15). Our responsibility is to
express an opinion on the Company's internal control over financial reporting
based on our audit.
We
conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that
we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether
effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all
material respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of
internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material
weakness exists, testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness
of internal control based on the assessed risk, and performing such other
procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe
that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
A
company's internal control over financial reporting is a process designed by, or
under the supervision of, the company's principal executive and principal
financial officers, or persons performing similar functions, and effected by the
company's board of directors, management, and other personnel to provide
reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the
preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles. A company's internal control
over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain
to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly
reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2)
provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to
permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are
being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of
the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely
detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company's
assets that could have a material effect on the financial
statements.
Because of
the inherent limitations of internal control over financial reporting, including
the possibility of collusion or improper management override of controls,
material misstatements due to error or fraud may not be prevented or detected on
a timely basis. Also, projections of any evaluation of the effectiveness
of the internal control over financial reporting to future periods are subject
to the risk that the controls may become inadequate because of changes in
conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may
deteriorate.
In our
opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal
control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2007, based on the criteria
established in Internal
Control - Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring
Organizations of the Treadway Commission.
We have
also audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated financial statements of YPF
SOCIEDAD ANONIMA and its controlled and jointly controlled companies as of and
for the year ended December 31, 2007 and our report dated April 10, 2008
expressed an unqualified opinion on those consolidated financial statements and
included an explanatory paragraph stating that the accounting principles
generally accepted in Argentina vary in certain significant respects from
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“U.S.
GAAP”) and that the information related to the nature and effect of such
differences is presented in Notes 13, 14, and 15 to the consolidated financial
statements of the Company.
Buenos
Aires City, Argentina
April 10,
2008
Deloitte
& Co. S.R.L.
Ricardo C.
Ruiz
Partner
YPF
SOCIEDAD ANONIMA AND CONTROLLED AND JOINTLY CONTROLLED COMPANIES
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF INCOME
FOR
THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2007, 2006 AND 2005
(Amounts
expressed in millions of Argentine pesos, except for per share amounts in
Argentine pesos – Note 1)
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
sales (Note 3.l)
|
|
|
29,104 |
|
|
|
25,635 |
|
|
|
22,901 |
|
Cost
of sales (Note 16.d)
|
|
|
(19,000 |
) |
|
|
(15,821 |
) |
|
|
(11,258 |
) |
Gross
profit
|
|
|
10,104 |
|
|
|
9,814 |
|
|
|
11,643 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Administrative
expenses (Note 16.f)
|
|
|
(805 |
) |
|
|
(674 |
) |
|
|
(552 |
) |
Selling
expenses (Note 16.f)
|
|
|
(2,120 |
) |
|
|
(1,797 |
) |
|
|
(1,650 |
) |
Exploration
expenses (Note 16.f)
|
|
|
(522 |
) |
|
|
(460 |
) |
|
|
(280 |
) |
Operating
income
|
|
|
6,657 |
|
|
|
6,883 |
|
|
|
9,161 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
on long-term investments
|
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
183 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
Other
expenses, net (Note 3.j)
|
|
|
(439 |
) |
|
|
(204 |
) |
|
|
(545 |
) |
Financial
income (expense), net and holding gains:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gains
on assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interests
|
|
|
278 |
|
|
|
338 |
|
|
|
221 |
|
Exchange
differences
|
|
|
142 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
129 |
|
Holding
gains on inventories
|
|
|
451 |
|
|
|
394 |
|
|
|
244 |
|
Losses
on liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interests
|
|
|
(292 |
) |
|
|
(213 |
) |
|
|
(459 |
) |
Exchange
differences
|
|
|
(61 |
) |
|
|
(70 |
) |
|
|
(33 |
) |
Income
from sale of long-term investments
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
Reversal
(impairment) of other current assets (Note 2.c)
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
(69 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Net
income before income tax
|
|
|
6,844 |
|
|
|
7,258 |
|
|
|
8,772 |
|
Income
tax (Note 3.k)
|
|
|
(2,758 |
) |
|
|
(2,801 |
) |
|
|
(3,410 |
) |
Net
income
|
|
|
4,086 |
|
|
|
4,457 |
|
|
|
5,362 |
|
Earnings per share (Note
1)
|
|
|
10.39 |
|
|
|
11.33 |
|
|
|
13.63 |
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
YPF
SOCIEDAD ANONIMA AND CONTROLLED AND JOINTLY CONTROLLED COMPANIES
CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS
AS
OF DECEMBER 31, 2007, 2006 AND 2005
(Amounts
expressed in millions of Argentine pesos – Note 1)
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
Current
Assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
|
|
|
196 |
|
|
|
118 |
|
|
|
122 |
|
Investments
(Note 3.a)
|
|
|
655 |
|
|
|
971 |
|
|
|
408 |
|
Trade
receivables (Note 3.b)
|
|
|
3,235 |
|
|
|
2,242 |
|
|
|
2,212 |
|
Other
receivables (Note 3.c)
|
|
|
4,361 |
|
|
|
5,033 |
|
|
|
4,433 |
|
Inventories
(Note 3.d)
|
|
|
2,573 |
|
|
|
1,697 |
|
|
|
1,315 |
|
Other
assets (Note 2.c)
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,128 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Total
current assets
|
|
|
11,020 |
|
|
|
11,189 |
|
|
|
8,490 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noncurrent
Assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trade
receivables (Note 3.b)
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
Other
receivables (Note 3.c)
|
|
|
809 |
|
|
|
852 |
|
|
|
1,223 |
|
Investments
(Note 3.a)
|
|
|
799 |
|
|
|
788 |
|
|
|
495 |
|
Fixed
assets (Note 3.e)
|
|
|
25,434 |
|
|
|
22,513 |
|
|
|
21,958 |
|
Intangible
assets
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Total
noncurrent assets
|
|
|
27,082 |
|
|
|
24,205 |
|
|
|
23,734 |
|
Total
assets
|
|
|
38,102 |
|
|
|
35,394 |
|
|
|
32,224 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
Liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts
payable (Note 3.f)
|
|
|
4,339 |
|
|
|
3,495 |
|
|
|
2,932 |
|
Loans
(Note 3.g)
|
|
|
471 |
|
|
|
915 |
|
|
|
346 |
|
Salaries
and social security
|
|
|
213 |
|
|
|
207 |
|
|
|
153 |
|
Taxes
payable
|
|
|
1,441 |
|
|
|
1,298 |
|
|
|
1,831 |
|
Net
advances from crude oil purchasers (Note 3.h)
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
96 |
|
|
|
95 |
|
Reserves
(Note 16.c)
|
|
|
466 |
|
|
|
273 |
|
|
|
230 |
|
Total
current liabilities
|
|
|
6,939 |
|
|
|
6,284 |
|
|
|
5,587 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noncurrent
Liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts
payable (Note 3.f)
|
|
|
2,542 |
|
|
|
2,448 |
|
|
|
1,915 |
|
Loans
(Note 3.g)
|
|
|
523 |
|
|
|
510 |
|
|
|
1,107 |
|
Salaries
and social security (Note 3.i)
|
|
|
164 |
|
|
|
202 |
|
|
|
241 |
|
Taxes
payable
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
Net
advances from crude oil purchasers (Note 3.h)
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
101 |
|
Reserves
(Note 16.c)
|
|
|
1,853 |
|
|
|
1,578 |
|
|
|
1,007 |
|
Total
noncurrent liabilities
|
|
|
5,103 |
|
|
|
4,765 |
|
|
|
4,388 |
|
Total
liabilities
|
|
|
12,042 |
|
|
|
11,049 |
|
|
|
9,975 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholders’
Equity (per corresponding statements)
|
|
|
26,060 |
|
|
|
24,345 |
|
|
|
22,249 |
|
Total
liabilities and shareholders’ equity
|
|
|
38,102 |
|
|
|
35,394 |
|
|
|
32,224 |
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
YPF
SOCIEDAD ANONIMA AND CONTROLLED AND JOINTLY CONTROLLED COMPANIES
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
FOR
THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2007, 2006 AND 2005
(Amounts
expressed in millions of Argentine pesos – Note 1)
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
Cash
Flows from Operating Activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income
|
|
|
4,086 |
|
|
|
4,457 |
|
|
|
5,362 |
|
Adjustments
to reconcile net income to net cash flows provided by operating
activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
on long-term investments
|
|
|
(34 |
) |
|
|
(183 |
) |
|
|
(39 |
) |
Dividends
from long-term investments
|
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
(Reversal)
impairment of other current assets
|
|
|
(69 |
) |
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Income
from sale of long-term investments
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
(15 |
) |
Depreciation
of fixed assets
|
|
|
4,139 |
|
|
|
3,718 |
|
|
|
2,707 |
|
Consumption
of materials and fixed assets retired, net of allowances
|
|
|
247 |
|
|
|
272 |
|
|
|
276 |
|
Increase
in allowances for fixed assets
|
|
|
116 |
|
|
|
192 |
|
|
|
74 |
|
Income
tax
|
|
|
2,758 |
|
|
|
2,801 |
|
|
|
3,410 |
|
Income
tax payments
|
|
|
(2,281 |
) |
|
|
(2,855 |
) |
|
|
(3,242 |
) |
Increase
in reserves
|
|
|
1,005 |
|
|
|
882 |
|
|
|
326 |
|
Changes
in assets and liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trade
receivables
|
|
|
(981 |
) |
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
(144 |
) |
Other
receivables
|
|
|
849 |
|
|
|
(255 |
) |
|
|
(312 |
) |
Inventories
|
|
|
(876 |
) |
|
|
(382 |
) |
|
|
(181 |
) |
Accounts
payable
|
|
|
670 |
|
|
|
(99 |
) |
|
|
1,003 |
|
Salaries
and social security
|
|
|
(25 |
) |
|
|
189 |
|
|
|
(14 |
) |
Taxes
payable
|
|
|
(340 |
) |
|
|
(425 |
) |
|
|
(372 |
) |
Net
advances from crude oil purchasers
|
|
|
(93 |
) |
|
|
(90 |
) |
|
|
(705 |
) |
Decrease
in reserves
|
|
|
(537 |
) |
|
|
(268 |
) |
|
|
(117 |
) |
Interests,
exchange differences and others
|
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
|
218 |
|
Net
cash flows provided by operating activities
|
|
|
8,756 |
(1) |
|
|
8,019 |
(1) |
|
|
8,251 |
(1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
Flows from Investing Activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acquisitions
of fixed assets
|
|
|
(6,163 |
) |
|
|
(5,002 |
) |
|
|
(3,722 |
) |
Capital
distributions from long-term investments
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
8 |
|
Acquisition
of long-term investments
|
|
|
(16 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Proceeds
from sale of long-term investments
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
454 |
|
Investments
(non cash and equivalents)
|
|
|
(14 |
) |
|
|
(139 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
Net
cash flows used in investing activities
|
|
|
(6,187 |
) |
|
|
(5,109 |
) |
|
|
(3,262 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
Flows from Financing Activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payment
of loans
|
|
|
(1,860 |
) |
|
|
(666 |
) |
|
|
(736 |
) |
Proceeds
from loans
|
|
|
1,411 |
|
|
|
688 |
|
|
|
253 |
|
Dividends
paid
|
|
|
(2,360 |
) |
|
|
(2,360 |
) |
|
|
(4,878 |
) |
Net
cash flows used in financing activities
|
|
|
(2,809 |
) |
|
|
(2,338 |
) |
|
|
(5,361 |
) |
(Decrease)
increase in Cash and Equivalents
|
|
|
(240 |
) |
|
|
572 |
|
|
|
(372 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
and equivalents at the beginning of year
|
|
|
1,087 |
|
|
|
515 |
|
|
|
887 |
|
Cash
and equivalents at the end of year
|
|
|
847 |
|
|
|
1,087 |
|
|
|
515 |
|
(Decrease)
increase in Cash and Equivalents
|
|
|
(240 |
) |
|
|
572 |
|
|
|
(372 |
) |
For
supplemental information on cash and equivalents, see Note 3.a.
(1) Includes
(114), (103) and (262) corresponding to interest cash payments for the years
ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these
statements.
YPF
SOCIEDAD ANONIMA AND CONTROLLED AND JOINTLY CONTROLLED COMPANIES
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY
FOR
THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2007, 2006 AND 2005
(Amounts
expressed in millions of Argentine pesos – Note 1, except for per share amount
in pesos)
|
Shareholder’s
contributions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subscribed
capital
|
|
|
Adjustment
to contributions
|
|
|
Issuance
premiums
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Legal
reserve
|
|
|
Deferred
earnings
|
|
|
Reserve
for future dividends
|
|
|
Unappropriated
retained earnings
|
|
|
Total
shareholders’ equity
|
|
Balance
as of December 31, 2004
|
|
3,933 |
|
|
|
7,281 |
|
|
|
640 |
|
|
|
11,854 |
|
|
|
1,286 |
|
|
|
(119 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
8,748 |
|
|
|
21,769 |
|
As
decided by the Ordinary and Extraordinary Shareholders' meeting
of April 19, 2005:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- Cash
dividends (Ps. 8 per share)
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(3,147 |
) |
|
|
(3,147 |
) |
- Appropriation
to Legal reserve
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
244 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(244 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
- Appropriation
to Reserve for future dividends
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,731 |
|
|
|
(1,731 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
As
decided by the Board of Directors' meeting of November 10,
2005:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- Cash
dividends (Ps. 4.4 per share)
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(1,731 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(1,731 |
) |
Net
decrease in deferred earnings (Note 2.k)
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
Net
income
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
5,362 |
|
|
|
5,362 |
|
Balance
as of December 31, 2005
|
|
3,933 |
|
|
|
7,281 |
|
|
|
640 |
|
|
|
11,854 |
|
|
|
1,530 |
|
|
|
(123 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
8,988 |
|
|
|
22,249 |
|
As
decided by the Ordinary Shareholders' meeting of April 28,
2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- Cash
dividends (Ps. 6 per share)
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(2,360 |
) |
|
|
(2,360 |
) |
- Appropriation
to Legal reserve
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
267 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(267 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
- Appropriation
to Reserve for future dividends
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
2,710 |
|
|
|
(2,710 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Net
decrease in deferred earnings (Note 2.k)
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
Net
income
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
4,457 |
|
|
|
4,457 |
|
Balance
as of December 31, 2006
|
|
3,933 |
|
|
|
7,281 |
|
|
|
640 |
|
|
|
11,854 |
|
|
|
1,797 |
|
|
|
(124 |
) |
|
|
2,710 |
|
|
|
8,108 |
|
|
|
24,345 |
|
As
decided by the Board of Directors’ meeting of March 6,
2007:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- Cash
dividends (Ps. 6 per share)
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(2,360 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(2,360 |
) |
As
decided by the Ordinary Shareholders’ meeting of April 13,
2007:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- Appropriation
to Legal reserve
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
223 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(223 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
- Appropriation
to Reserve for future dividends
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
4,234 |
|
|
|
(4,234 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Net
decrease in deferred earnings (Note 2.k)
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(11 |
) |
Net
income
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
4,086 |
|
|
|
4,086 |
|
Balance
as of December 31, 2007
|
|
3,933 |
|
|
|
7,281 |
|
|
|
640 |
|
|
|
11,854 |
|
|
|
2,020 |
|
|
|
(135 |
) |
|
|
4,584 |
|
|
|
7,737 |
|
|
|
26,060 |
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
YPF
SOCIEDAD ANONIMA AND CONTROLLED AND JOINTLY CONTROLLED COMPANIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
FOR
THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2007, 2006 AND 2005
(Amounts
expressed in millions of Argentine pesos, except where otherwise indicated –
Note 1)
1.
|
SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
|
The
financial statements of YPF Sociedad Anónima (“YPF”) and its controlled and
jointly controlled companies (the “Company”) have been prepared in accordance
with generally accepted accounting principles applicable to consolidated
financial statements in Argentina (“Argentine GAAP”), and taking into
consideration the regulations of the National Securities Commission
(“CNV”).
In
accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and current Argentine
legislation, the presentation of individual financial statements is mandatory.
Consolidated financial statements are to be included as supplementary
information to the individual financial statements. For the purpose of this
filing, individual financial statements have been omitted since they are not
required for the United States Securiries and Exchange Comission (“SEC”)
reporting purposes.
Certain
disclosures related to formal legal requirements for reporting in Argentina have
been omitted for purposes of these consolidated financial statements, since they
are not required for SEC reporting purposes.
Presentation
of financial statements in constant Argentine pesos
The
financial statements reflect the effect of changes in the purchasing power of
money by the application of the method for inflation adjustment into constant
Argentine pesos set forth in Technical Resolution No. 6 of the Argentine
Federation of Professional Councils in Economic Sciences (“F.A.C.P.C.E”) and
taking into consideration General Resolution No. 441 of the CNV, which
established the discontinuation of the inflation adjustment of financial
statements into constant Argentine pesos as from March 1, 2003.
Basis
of consolidation
Following
the methodology established by Technical Resolution No. 21 of the
F.A.C.P.C.E., the Company has consolidated its balance sheets and the related
statements of income and cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006
and 2005, as follows:
·
|
Investments
and income (loss) related to controlled companies in which YPF has the
number of votes necessary to control corporate decisions are substituted
for such companies’ assets, liabilities, net revenues, cost and expenses,
which are aggregated to YPF’s balances after the elimination of
intercompany profits, transactions, balances and other consolidation
adjustments.
|
·
|
Investments
and income (loss) related to companies in which YPF holds joint control
are consolidated line by line on the basis of the YPF’s proportionate
share in their assets, liabilities, net revenues, cost and expenses,
considering intercompany profits, transactions, balances and other
consolidation adjustments. The effect of this proportional consolidation
for the year ended December 31, 2007 and comparative information, is
disclosed in Note 13.b.
|
Foreign
subsidiaries in which YPF participates have been defined as non-integrated
companies as they collect cash and other monetary items, incur expenses and
generate income. Corresponding assets and liabilities have been translated into
Argentine pesos at the exchange rate prevailing as of the end of each year.
Income statements have been translated using the relevant exchange rate at the
date of each transaction. Exchange differences arising from the translation
process have been included as a component of shareholders’ equity in the account
“Deferred earnings”, which will be maintained until the sale or complete or
partial reimbursement of equity of the related investment occur.
The
consolidated financial statements are based upon the last available financial
statements of those companies in which YPF holds control or joint control,
taking into consideration, if applicable, significant subsequent events and
transactions, available management information and transactions between YPF and
the related company, which could have produced changes on the latter’s
shareholders’ equity.
The
valuation methods employed by the controlled and jointly controlled companies
are consistent with those followed by YPF. If necessary, adjustments have been
made to conform the accounting principles used by these companies to those of
YPF. The principal adjustments relate to the application of general accepted
accounting principles in Argentina to foreign related companies’ financial
statements.
Cash
and equivalents
In the
statements of cash flows, the Company considers cash and all highly liquid
investments with an original maturity of less than three months to be cash and
equivalents.
Revenue
recognition criteria
Revenue is
recognized on sales of crude oil, refined products and natural gas, in each
case, when title and risks are transferred to the customer.
Joint
ventures and other agreements
The
Company’s interests in oil and gas related joint ventures and other agreements
involved in oil and gas exploration and production, have been consolidated line
by line on the basis of the Company’s proportional share in their assets,
liabilities, revenues, costs and expenses (Note 6).
Production
concessions and exploration permits
According
to Argentine Law No. 24,145 issued in November 1992, YPF’s areas were
converted into production concessions and exploration permits under Law
No. 17,319, which has been currently amended by Law No. 26,197.
Pursuant to these laws, the hydrocarbon reservoirs located in Argentine onshore
territories and offshore continental shelf belong to national or provincial
governments, depending on the location. Exploration permits may have a term of
up to 17 years and production concessions have a term of 25 years, which may be
extended for an additional ten-year term.
Fair
value of financial instruments and concentration of credit risk
The
carrying value of cash, current investments and trade receivables approximates
its fair value due to the short maturity of these instruments. Furthermore, the
fair value of loans receivable, which has been estimated based on current
interest rates offered to the Company at the end of each year, for investments
with the same remaining maturity, approximates its carrying value. As of
December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005 the fair value of loans payable estimated based
on market prices or current interest rates at the end of each year amounted to
1,049, 1,494 and 1,546, respectively.
Financial
instruments that potentially expose the Company to concentration of credit risk
consist primarily of cash, current investments, accounts receivable and other
receivables. The Company invests cash excess primarily in high liquid
investments in financial institutions, both in Argentina and abroad, with strong
credit rating and providing credit to foreign related parties. In the normal
course of business, the Company provides credit based on ongoing credit
evaluations to its customers and certain related parties. Additionally, the
Company accounts for credit losses based on specific information of its clients.
Credit risk on trade receivables is limited, as a result of the Company's large
customer base.
Since
counterparties to the Company's derivative transactions are major financial
institutions with strong credit rating, exposure to credit losses in the event
of nonperformance by such counterparties is minimal.
Use
of estimates
The
preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted
accounting principles requires Management to make estimates and assumptions that
affect reported assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses and disclosure of
contingencies. Future results could differ from the estimations made by
Management.
Earnings
per share
Earnings
per share have been calculated based on the 393,312,793 shares outstanding
during the years ended as of December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005.
The
principal valuation criteria used in the preparation of the financial statements
are as follows:
|
a)
|
Cash,
current investments, trade and other receivables and
payables:
|
-
|
Amounts
in Argentine pesos have been stated at face value, which includes accrued
interest through the end of each year, if applicable. Mutual funds have
been valued at fair value as of the end of each year. When required by
generally accepted accounting principles, discounted value does not differ
significantly from their face value as of the end of each
year.
|
-
|
Amounts
in foreign currency have been valued at face value at the relevant
exchange rates in effect as of the end of each year, including accrued
interest, if applicable. Exchange differences have been credited (charged)
to current income. Mutual funds have been valued at fair value at the
relevant exchange rate in effect as of the end of each year. Investments
in government securities have been valued at their fair value as of the
end of each year. Additional information on assets and liabilities
denominated in foreign currency is disclosed in Note
16.e.
|
If
applicable, allowances have been made to reduce receivables to their estimated
realizable value.
-
|
Refined
products, products in process, crude oil and natural gas have been valued
at replacement cost as of the end of each
year.
|
-
|
Raw
materials and packaging materials have been valued at cost, which does not
differ significantly from its replacement cost as of the end of each
year.
|
Valuation
of inventories does not exceed their estimated realizable value.
Includes
oil and gas exploration and producing fields held for sale as of December 31,
2006, which had been valued at the lower of their carrying amount and fair value
less cost to sell. In April, 2007, the Company decided to suspend the selling
process of those assets, transferred their book value as fixed assets held for
use and reversed the impairment charge during the year ended December 31,
2006.
|
d)
|
Noncurrent
investments:
|
These
include the Company’s investments in companies under significant influence and
holdings in other companies. These investments are detailed in Note 16.b and
have been valued using the equity method, except for holdings in other
companies, which have been valued at its acquisition cost remeasured as detailed
in Note 1.
Investments
in Gasoducto del Pacífico (Argentina) S.A., Gasoducto del Pacífico
(Cayman) Ltd., Gasoducto Oriental S.A. and Oleoducto Trasandino (Chile)
S.A., where less than 20% direct or indirect interest is held, are accounted by
the equity method since the Company exercises significant influence over these
companies in making operation and financial decisions based on its
representation on the Boards of Directors and/or the significant transactions
between YPF and such companies.
If
applicable, allowances have been made to reduce investments to their estimated
recoverable value. The main factors for the recognized impairment were the
devaluation of the Argentine peso, certain events of debt default and the
de-dollarization and freezing of utility rates.
Holdings
in preferred shares have been valued as defined in the respective
bylaws.
If
necessary, adjustments have been made to conform the accounting principles used
by companies under significant influence to those of the Company.
The
investments in companies under significant influence have been valued based upon
the last available financial statements of these companies as of the end of each
year, taking into consideration, if applicable, significant subsequent events
and transactions, available management information and transactions between the
Company and the related company which have produced changes to the latter’s
shareholders’ equity.
As from
the effective date of Law No. 25,063, dividends, either in cash or in kind, that
YPF receives from investments and which are in excess of the accumulated taxable
income that the companies carry upon distribution shall be subject to a 35%
income tax withholding as a sole and final payment. YPF has not recorded any
charge for this tax since it has estimated that dividends from earnings of
investees accounted under equity method will be remitted in a tax free
liquidation.
Fixed
assets have been valued at acquisition cost remeasured as detailed in
Note 1, less related accumulated depreciation. Depreciation rates,
representative of the useful life assigned, applicable to each class of asset,
are disclosed in Note 16.a. For those assets whose construction requires an
extended period of time, financial costs corresponding to third parties’
financing have been capitalized during the assets’ construction
period.
Oil
and gas producing activities
-
|
The
Company follows the “successful effort” method of accounting for its oil
and gas exploration and production operations. Accordingly, exploratory
costs, excluding the costs of exploratory wells, have been charged to
expense as incurred. Costs of drilling exploratory wells, including
stratigraphic test wells, have been capitalized pending determination as
to whether the wells have found proved reserves that justify commercial
development. If such reserves were not found, the mentioned costs are
charged to expense. Occasionally, an exploratory well may be determined to
have found oil and gas reserves, but classification of those reserves as
proved cannot be made when drilling is completed. In those cases, the cost
of drilling the exploratory well shall continue to be capitalized if the
well has found a sufficient quantity of reserves to justify its completion
as a producing well and the enterprise is making sufficient progress
assessing the reserves and the economic and operating viability of the
project. If any of the mentioned conditions is not met, cost of drilling
exploratory wells is charged to expense. As of December 31, 2007, the
Company has only one exploratory well capitalized for more than one year
after the completion of the drilling. As of the date of the issuance of
these financial statements, the Company has contracted external advisors
in order to assess the feasibility of the project and the economic
viability of the well. The capitalized cost of the project amounts to
approximately 43. The Company expects to have the result of the above
mentioned assessment in the first half of 2008. As of December 31, 2006
and 2005, the Company had 34 and 65, respectively, of exploratory drilling
costs that had been capitalized for a period greater than one
year.
|
-
|
Intangible
drilling costs applicable to productive wells and to developmental dry
holes, as well as tangible equipment costs related to the development of
oil and gas reserves, have been
capitalized.
|
-
|
The
capitalized costs related to producing activities have been depreciated by
field on the unit-of-production basis by applying the ratio of produced
oil and gas to estimate recoverable proved and developed oil and gas
reserves.
|
-
|
The
capitalized costs related to acquisitions of properties with proved
reserves have been depreciated by field on the unit-of-production basis by
applying the ratio of produced oil and gas to proved oil and gas
reserves.
|
-
|
Revisions
of crude oil and natural gas proved reserves are considered prospectively
in the calculation of depreciation. Revisions in estimates of reserves are
performed at least once a year. Additionally, estimates of reserves are
audited by independent petroleum engineers on a three year rotation
plan.
|
-
|
Costs
related to hydrocarbon wells abandonment obligations are capitalized along
with the related assets, and are depreciated using the unit-of-production
method. As compensation, a liability is recognized for this concept at the
estimated value of the discounted payable amounts. Revisions of the
payable amounts are performed at the end of each fiscal year upon
consideration of the current costs incurred in abandonment obligations on
a field-by-field basis or other external available information if
abandonment obligations were not performed. Due to the number of wells in
operation and/or not abandoned and likewise the complexity with respect to
different geographic areas where the wells are located, the current costs
incurred in plugging are used for estimating the plugging cost of the
wells pending abandonment. Current costs incurred are the best source of
information at the end of each fiscal year in order to make the best
estimate of asset retirement
obligations.
|
-
|
Properties
on foreign unproved reserves have been valued at cost and translated into
pesos as detailed in Note 1. Capitalized costs related to unproved
properties are reviewed periodically by Management to ensure the carrying
value does not exceed their estimated recoverable
value.
|
Other
fixed assets
-
|
The
Company's other fixed assets are depreciated using the straight-line
method, with depreciation rates based on the estimated useful life of each
class of property.
|
Fixed
assets’ maintenance and repairs have been charged to expense as
incurred.
Major
inspections of refineries, necessary to continue to operate the related assets,
are capitalized and depreciated using the straight-line method over the period
of operation to next major inspection.
Renewals
and betterments that materially extend the useful life and/or increase the
productive capacity of properties are capitalized. As fixed assets are retired,
the related cost and accumulated depreciation are eliminated from the balance
sheet.
The
Company capitalizes the costs incurred in limiting, neutralizing or preventing
environmental pollution only in those cases in which at least one of the
following conditions is met: (a) the expenditure improves the safety or
efficiency of an operating plant (or other productive asset); (b) the
expenditure prevents or limits environmental pollution at operating facilities;
or (c) the expenditures are incurred to prepare assets for sale and do not raise
the assets' carrying value above their estimated recoverable value.
The
carrying value of the fixed asset of each business segment, as defined in Note
8, does not exceed their estimated recoverable value.
|
f)
|
Salaries
and Social Security – Pensions Plans and other Postretirement and
Postemployment Benefits
|
YPF Holdings Inc.,
which has operations in the United States of America, has a number of trustee
defined-benefit pension plans and postretirement and postemployment
benefits.
The
funding policy related to pension plans is to contribute amounts to the plans
sufficient to meet the minimum funding requirements under governmental
regulations, plus such additional amounts as Management may determine to be
appropriate. The benefits related to the plans were valued at net present value
and accrued based on the years of active service of employees. The net liability
for defined-benefits plans is disclosed as non-current liabilities in the
“Salaries and social security” account and is the amount resulting from the sum
of: the present value of the obligations, net of the fair value of the plan
assets and net of the unrecognized actuarial losses generated since December 31,
2003. These unrecognized actuarial losses and gains are recognized in the
statement of income during the expected average remaining working lives of the
employees participating in the plans and the life expectancy of retired
employees. The Company updates the actuarial assumptions at the end of each
year.
YPF
Holdings Inc. also has a noncontributory supplemental retirement plan for
executive officers and other selected key employees.
YPF
Holding Inc. provides certain health care and life insurance benefits for
eligible retired employees, and also certain insurance, and other postemployment
benefits for eligible individuals in the case employment is terminated by YPF
Holdings Inc. before their normal retirement. YPF Holdings Inc. accrues the
estimated cost of retiree benefit payments, other than pensions, during
employees’ active service periods. Employees become eligible for these benefits
if they meet minimum age and years of service requirements. YPF Holdings Inc.
accounts for benefits provided when the minimum service period is met, payment
of the benefit is probable and the amount of the benefit can be reasonably
estimated.
Other
postretirement and postemployment benefits are recorded as claims are
incurred.
g)
|
Taxes,
withholdings and royalties:
|
Income
tax and tax on minimum presumed income
The
Company recognizes the income tax applying the liability method, which considers
the effect of the temporary differences between the financial and tax basis of
assets and liabilities and the tax loss carryforwards and other tax credits,
which may be used to offset future taxable income, at the current statutory rate
of 35%.
In
deferred income tax computations, the difference between the book value of fixed
assets remeasured into constant Argentine pesos and their corresponding
historical cost used for tax purposes is a temporary difference to be considered
in deferred income tax computations. However, generally accepted accounting
principles in Argentina give the option to only disclose the mentioned effect in
a note to the financial statements. The Company adopted this latter criterion
(Note 3.k).
Additionally,
the Company calculates tax on minimum presumed income applying the current 1%
tax rate to taxable assets as of the end of each year. This tax complements
income tax. The Company's tax liability will coincide with the higher between
the determination of tax on minimum presumed income and the Company's tax
liability related to income tax, calculated applying the current 35% income tax
rate to taxable income for the year. However, if the tax on minimum presumed
income exceeds income tax during one tax year, such excess may be computed as
prepayment of any income tax excess over the tax on minimum presumed income that
may be generated in the next ten years.
For the
years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, the amounts determined as current
income tax were higher than tax on minimum presumed income and they were
included in the “Income tax” account of the income statements of each
year.
Royalties
and withholding systems for hydrocarbon exports
A 12%
royalty is payable on the estimated value at the wellhead of crude oil
production and the natural gas volumes commercialized. The estimated value is
calculated based upon the approximate sale price of the crude oil and gas
produced, less the costs of transportation and storage. Notwithstanding, in
January 2008, the Secretariat of Energy issued the Disposition No.1, providing
certain guidelines to calculate the royalties of crude oil. The Company is
currently analyzing the Disposition No.1, therefore it is not possible to assert
whether such regulation is in conflict with the provisions of Law No.17,319 as
amended.
Royalty
expense is accounted for as a production cost.
Law No.
25,561 on Public Emergency and Exchange System Reform, issued in January 2002,
established duty taxes for hydrocarbon exports for a five year-period. In
January 2007, Law No. 26,217 extended this export withholding system for an
additional five-year period and also established specifically that this regime
is also applicable to exports from Tierra del Fuego province, which were
previously exempted from such regime. As of December 31, 2006, outstanding
withholding rates were 20% for liquefied petroleum gas, 5% for gasoline, diesel
and other refined products and between 25% and 45% for crude oil based on West
Texas Intermediate Price (“WTI”). On July 25, 2006, Resolution No. 534/2006
of the Ministry of Economy and Production entered in force, raising the natural
gas withholding rate from 20% to 45% and establishing the natural gas import
price from Bolivia as the basis for its determination. In March 2008, Resolution
No. 127/2008 of the Ministry of Economy and Production amended Resolution No.
534/2006, establishing the natural gas export withholding rate as 100% of the
highest price from any natural gas import contract to Argentina. YPF is
negotiating with its export clients the effect of the above mentioned increase
and the transfer of a significant part of these incremental costs to them.
Additionally, on November 16, 2007, the Ministry of Economy and Production
published Resolution No. 394/2007, modifying the withholding regime on
exports of crude oil and other crude oil derivative products. The new regime
provides the reference prices and floor prices which in conjunction with the
West Texas Intermediate price (“WTI”), determine the export withholding rate for
each product. In case of crude oil, when the WTI exceeds the reference price,
which is fixed at US$ 60.9 per barrel, the producer is allowed to collect a
floor price of US$ 42 per barrel, depending on the quality of the crude oil
sold, with the remainder being withheld by the Argentine Government. If the WTI
is under the reference price but over US$ 45 per barrel, a 45% withholding rate
will apply. If such price is under US$ 45 per barrel, the Government will have
to determine the export rate within a term of 90 business days. The withholding
rate determined as indicated above for crude oil, also currently applies to
diesel, gasoline products and other crude oil derivative products, and as from
the issuance of Resolution No. 127/2008 in March 2008, to liquified petroleum
gas. In addition, this calculation procedure also applies to other petroleum
products and lubricants, considering different reference and floor prices as
disclosed in Resolution No. 394/2007.
Hydrocarbon
export withholdings are charged to the “Net sales” account of the statement of
income.
h)
|
Allowances
and reserves:
|
-
|
Allowances:
amounts have been provided in order to reduce the valuation of trade
receivables, other receivables, noncurrent investments and fixed assets
based on analysis of doubtful accounts and on the estimated recoverable
value of these assets.
|
-
|
Reserves
for losses: amounts have been provided for various contingencies which are
probable and can be reasonably estimated, based on Management's
expectations and in consultation with legal counsels. Reserves for losses
are required to be accounted for at the discounted value as of the end of
each year, however, as their face value does not differ significantly from
discounted values, they are recorded at face
value.
|
The
activity in the allowances and reserves accounts is set forth in Note
16.c.
i)
|
Environmental
liabilities:
|
Environmental
liabilities are recorded when environmental assessments and/or remediation are
probable and can be reasonably estimated. Such estimates are based on either
detailed feasibility studies of remediation approach and cost for individual
sites or on Company’s estimate of costs to be incurred based on historical
experience and available information based on the stage of assessment and/or
remediation of each site. As additional information becomes available regarding
each site or as environmental standards change, the Company revises its estimate
of costs to be incurred in environmental assessment and/or remediation
matters.
j)
|
Derivative
instruments:
|
Although
the Company does not use derivative instruments to hedge the effects of
fluctuations in market prices, as of December 31, 2007, YPF maintains a price
swap agreement that hedges the fair value of crude oil future committed
deliveries under the forward crude oil sale agreement mentioned in
Note 10.c (“hedged item”). Under this price swap agreement YPF will receive
variable selling prices, which will depend upon market prices and will pay fixed
prices. As of December 31, 2007, approximately 1 million of barrels of crude oil
are hedged under this agreement.
This fair
value hedge is carried at fair value and is disclosed in the “Net advances from
crude oil purchasers” account in the balance sheet. Changes in fair value are
recognized in earnings together with the offsetting loss or gain from changes in
the fair value of the hedged item caused by the risk being hedged. As hedge
relationship is effective, changes in the fair value of this derivative
instrument and of the hedged item do not have effect on net income.
k)
|
Shareholders’
equity accounts:
|
These
accounts have been stated in Argentine pesos as detailed in Note 1.a,
except for “Subscribed Capital” account, which is stated at its historical
value. The adjustment required to remeasure this account in constant Argentine
pesos is disclosed in the “Adjustment to Contributions” account.
The
account “Deferred earnings” includes the effect of the exchange differences
generated by the foreign companies’ translation for the years ended December 31,
2007, 2006 and 2005.
l)
|
Statements
of income accounts:
|
The
amounts included in the income statement accounts have been recorded by applying
the following criteria:
|
-
|
Accounts
which accumulate monetary transactions at their face
value.
|
|
-
|
Cost
of sales has been calculated by computing units sold in each month at the
replacement cost of that month.
|
|
-
|
Depreciation
and amortization of nonmonetary assets, valued at acquisition cost, have
been recorded based on the remeasured cost of such assets as detailed in
Note 1.
|
|
-
|
Holding
gains (losses) on inventories valued at replacement cost have been
included in the “Holding gains on inventories”
account.
|
|
-
|
Income
(Loss) on long-term investments in which significant influence is held,
has been calculated on the basis of the income (loss) of those companies
and was included in the “Income on long-term investments”
account.
|
3.
|
ANALYSIS OF THE MAIN ACCOUNTS OF THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS
|
Details
regarding the significant accounts included in the accompanying consolidated
financial statements are as follows:
a)
Investments:
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Noncurrent
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Noncurrent
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Noncurrent
|
|
Short-term
investments and government securities
|
|
|
655 |
(1) |
|
|
168 |
(2) |
|
|
971 |
(1) |
|
|
156 |
(2) |
|
|
408 |
(1) |
|
|
4 |
|
Long-term
investments (Note 16.b)
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
837 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
843 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
802 |
|
Allowance
for reduction in value of holdings in long-term investments (Note
16.c)
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(206 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(211 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(311 |
) |
|
|
|
655 |
|
|
|
799 |
|
|
|
971 |
|
|
|
788 |
|
|
|
408 |
|
|
|
495 |
|
(1)
|
Includes
651, 969 and 393 as of December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively,
with an original maturity of less than three
months.
|
(2)
|
Restricted
cash as of December 31, 2007 and 2006 which represents bank deposits used
to pay workers compensation claims and security deposits for letters of
credits used as security with governmental
agencies.
|
b)
Trade
receivables:
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Noncurrent
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Noncurrent
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Noncurrent
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts
receivable
|
|
|
3,142 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
2,280 |
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
2,240 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
Related
parties (Note 7)
|
|
|
533 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
391 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
352 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
3,675 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
2,671 |
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
2,592 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
Allowance
for doubtful trade receivables (Note 16.c)
|
|
|
(440 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(429 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(380 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
3,235 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
2,242 |
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
2,212 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
c)
Other
receivables
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Noncurrent
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Noncurrent
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Noncurrent
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred
income tax (Note 3.k)
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
517 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
510 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
452 |
|
Tax
credits and export rebates
|
|
|
931 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
692 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
529 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
Trade
|
|
|
97 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
71 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Prepaid
expenses
|
|
|
111 |
|
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
130 |
|
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
66 |
|
|
|
95 |
|
Concessions
charges
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
79 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
96 |
|
Related
parties (Note 7)
|
|
|
2,681 |
(1) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
3,883 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
3,139 |
|
|
|
371 |
|
Loans
to clients
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
90 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
90 |
|
Advances
to suppliers
|
|
|
132 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
- |
|
From
joint ventures and other agreements
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Advances
under Decree No. 1,882/04
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
273 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Miscellaneous
|
|
|
438 |
|
|
|
98 |
|
|
|
254 |
|
|
|
146 |
|
|
|
444 |
|
|
|
155 |
|
|
|
|
4,483 |
|
|
|
859 |
|
|
|
5,170 |
|
|
|
904 |
|
|
|
4,554 |
|
|
|
1,277 |
|
Allowance
for other doubtful accounts (Note 16.c)
|
|
|
(122 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(137 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(121 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Allowance
for valuation of other receivables to their estimated realizable value
(Note 16.c)
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(50 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(52 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(54 |
) |
|
|
|
4,361 |
|
|
|
809 |
|
|
|
5,033 |
|
|
|
852 |
|
|
|
4,433 |
|
|
|
1,223 |
|
(1)
|
Includes
76 which accrue fixed interest at an annual rates between 5.23% and 7.28%
and 2,529 which accrue interest at LIBOR plus a maximum spread of
1.5%.
|
d)
Inventories:
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refined
products
|
|
|
1,612 |
|
|
|
1,047 |
|
|
|
747 |
|
Crude
oil and natural gas
|
|
|
646 |
|
|
|
441 |
|
|
|
409 |
|
Products
in process
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
Raw
materials, packaging materials and others
|
|
|
269 |
|
|
|
162 |
|
|
|
140 |
|
|
|
|
2,573 |
|
|
|
1,697 |
|
|
|
1,315 |
|
e)
Fixed
assets:
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
book value of fixed assets (Note 16.a)
|
|
|
25,481 |
|
|
|
22,562 |
|
|
|
22,009 |
|
Allowance
for unproductive exploratory drilling (Note 16.c)
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
Allowance
for obsolescence of materials and equipment (Note 16.c)
|
|
|
(44 |
) |
|
|
(46 |
) |
|
|
(48 |
) |
|
|
|
25,434 |
|
|
|
22,513 |
|
|
|
21,958 |
|
f)
Accounts
payable:
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Noncurrent
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Noncurrent
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Noncurrent
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trade
|
|
|
3,131 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
2,617 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
2,071 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
Hydrocarbon
wells abandonment obligations
|
|
|
395 |
|
|
|
2,316 |
|
|
|
233 |
|
|
|
2,210 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,419 |
|
Related
parties (Note 7)
|
|
|
140 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
238 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
279 |
|
|
|
- |
|
From
joint ventures and other agreements
|
|
|
373 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
256 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
200 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Environmental
liabilities
|
|
|
137 |
|
|
|
166 |
|
|
|
93 |
|
|
|
164 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
200 |
|
Miscellaneous
|
|
|
163 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
334 |
|
|
|
266 |
|
|
|
|
4,339 |
|
|
|
2,542 |
|
|
|
3,495 |
|
|
|
2,448 |
|
|
|
2,932 |
|
|
|
1,915 |
|
g) Loans:
|
|
Interest
|
|
|
Principal
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
rates
(1)
|
|
|
maturity
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Noncurrent
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Noncurrent
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Noncurrent
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Negotiable
Obligations - YPF
|
|
|
9.13
– 10.00 |
% |
|
|
2009
- 2028 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
523 |
|
|
|
559 |
|
|
|
509 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
1,031 |
|
Other
bank loans and other creditors
|
|
|
1.25
– 14.00 |
% |
|
2008
|
|
|
|
457 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
356 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
319 |
|
|
|
76 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
471 |
|
|
|
523 |
|
|
|
915 |
|
|
|
510 |
|
|
|
346 |
|
|
|
1,107 |
|
(1)
|
Annual
fixed interest rates as of December 31,
2007.
|
The
maturities of the Company’s noncurrent loans, as of December 31, 2007, are as
follows:
|
From
1
to 2
years
|
|
Over
5
years
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noncurrent
loans
|
318
|
|
205
|
|
523
|
Details
regarding the Negotiable Obligations of the Company are as follows:
M.T.N.
Program
|
|
Issuance
|
|
Fixed
Interest Rates
|
|
Principal
Maturity
|
|
Book
Value
|
(in
millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
2006
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Year
|
|
Principal
Value
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
|
|
Noncurrent
|
|
Current
|
|
Noncurrent
|
|
Current
|
|
Noncurrent
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
US$1,000
|
|
1997
|
|
US$300
|
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
546
|
|
-
|
|
14
|
|
527
|
|
US$1,000
|
|
1998
|
|
US$100
|
|
10.00%
|
|
2028
|
|
4
|
|
205
|
|
3
|
|
199
|
|
3
|
|
197
|
|
US$1,000
|
|
1999
|
|
US$225
|
|
9.13%
|
|
2009
|
|
10
|
|
318
|
|
10
|
|
310
|
|
10
|
|
307
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14
|
|
523
|
|
559
|
|
509
|
|
27
|
|
1,031
|
|
In
connection with the issuance of the Negotiable Obligations, YPF has agreed for
itself and its controlled companies to certain covenants, including among
others, to pay all liabilities at their maturity and not to create other
encumbrances that exceed 15% of total consolidated assets. If the Company does
not comply with any covenant, the trustee or the holders of not less than 25% in
aggregate principal amount of each outstanding Negotiable Obligations may
declare the principal and accrued interest immediately due and
payable.
Financial
debt contains customary covenants for contracts of this nature, including
negative pledge, material adverse change and cross-default clauses. Almost all
of YPF's total outstanding debt is subject to cross-default provisions, which
may be triggered if an event of default occurs with respect to the payment of
principal or interest on indebtedness equal to or exceeding US$ 20
million.
The
Shareholders’ Meeting held on January 8, 2008, approved a Notes Program for an
amount up to US$ 1,000 million. The proceeds of any offerings under this program
must be used exclusively to invest in fixed assets and working capital in
Argentina.
h)
Net
advances from crude oil purchasers:
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Noncurrent
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Noncurrent
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advances
from crude oil purchasers
|
|
|
238 |
|
|
|
412 |
|
|
|
152 |
|
|
|
398 |
|
|
|
527 |
|
Derivative
instruments - Crude oil price swaps
|
|
|
(229 |
) |
|
|
(316 |
) |
|
|
(145 |
) |
|
|
(303 |
) |
|
|
(426 |
) |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
96 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
95 |
|
|
|
101 |
|
i)
Noncurrent
salaries and social security:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Defined
– benefit obligations and other benefits
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
present value of obligations
|
|
|
472 |
|
|
|
480 |
|
|
|
501 |
|
Fair
value of assets
|
|
|
(247 |
) |
|
|
(226 |
) |
|
|
(199 |
) |
Deferred
actuarial losses
|
|
|
(61 |
) |
|
|
(52 |
) |
|
|
(61 |
) |
Recognized
net liabilities
|
|
|
164 |
|
|
|
202 |
|
|
|
241 |
|
Changes
in the fair value of the defined-benefit obligations
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities
at the beginning of the year
|
|
|
480 |
|
|
|
501 |
|
|
|
479 |
|
Translation
differences
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Service
cost
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Interest
cost
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
Actuarial
losses
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
42 |
|
Benefits
paid and terminations
|
|
|
(77 |
) |
|
|
(63 |
) |
|
|
(54 |
) |
Liabilities
at the end of the year
|
|
|
472 |
|
|
|
480 |
|
|
|
501 |
|
Changes
in the fair value of the plan assets
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair
value of assets at the beginning of the year
|
|
|
226 |
|
|
|
199 |
|
|
|
188 |
|
Translation
differences
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Expected
return on assets
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
Actuarials
(losses) gains
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
Employer
and employees contributions
|
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
Benefits
paid and terminations
|
|
|
(62 |
) |
|
|
(48 |
) |
|
|
(56 |
) |
Fair
value of assets at the end of the year
|
|
|
247 |
|
|
|
226 |
|
|
|
199 |
|
|
|
Income
(Expense)
|
|
Amounts
recognized in the Income Statements
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Service
cost
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Interest
cost
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
Expected
return on assets
|
|
|
(17 |
) |
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
|
(15 |
) |
Actuarial
losses recognized in the year
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Losses
on terminations
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Total
recognized as other expenses, net (Note 3.j)
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
Actuarial
assumptions used to determine benefit cost
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discount
rate
|
|
|
6.5 |
% |
|
|
6 |
% |
|
|
5.75 |
% |
Expected
return on assets
|
|
|
7 |
% |
|
|
7 |
% |
|
|
8.50 |
% |
Expected
increase on salaries
|
|
|
N/A |
(1) |
|
|
5.5 |
% |
|
|
4.5
- 5.5 |
% |
(1)
|
Increase
on salaries is not expected as there are no more active
employees.
|
The
expected long-term rate of return on pension fund assets was determined based on
input from our investment consultants and the projected long-term returns of
broad equity and bond indices. The Company anticipates that on the average, the
investment managers for each of the plans will generate long-term rates of
return of at least 7%. The long-term rate of return is based on an asset
allocation assumption of about 70% equity securities and 30% fixed income
securities. The Company regularly reviews its actual asset allocation and
rebalances its investments when it is considered appropriate. The Company will
continue to evaluate its long-term rate of return assumptions at least annually
and will adjust them as necessary.
The
pension plan asset allocations as of December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, are as
follows:
Asset
Category
|
|
Target
|
|
|
Percentage
of Plan Assets
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity
securities
|
|
|
70 |
% |
|
|
70 |
% |
|
|
70 |
% |
|
|
70 |
% |
Debt
securities
|
|
|
30 |
% |
|
|
29 |
% |
|
|
28 |
% |
|
|
30 |
% |
Other
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1 |
% |
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
% |
During
March 2008, YPF Holdings, Inc. purchased a group annuity contract from an
insurance company to settle the liability associated with the benefits under
certain Maxus’ defined benefit pension plans, for a premium amount of
US$115
million. The insurance company assumed the liabilities under these pension plans
effective March 20, 2008, date in which the premium was paid by YPF Holdings,
Inc.
Considering
the annuity contracts above mentioned, expected employer contributions and
estimated future benefit payments for the remaining plans are:
|
|
|
|
|
Other
Benefits
|
|
|
|
Pension
Benefits
|
|
|
Gross
Benefits Payments
|
|
|
Implied
Medicare Subsidy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expected
employer contributions for next year
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Estimated
future benefit payments are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
2009
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
2010
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
2011
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
2012
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
2013-2016
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
j)
Other
expenses, net:
|
|
Income
(Expense)
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reserve
for pending lawsuits and other claims
|
|
|
(194 |
) |
|
|
(173 |
) |
|
|
(180 |
) |
Environmental
remediation – YPF Holdings Inc.
|
|
|
(206 |
) |
|
|
(136 |
) |
|
|
(54 |
) |
Defined
benefit pension plans and other postretirement benefits (Note
3.i)
|
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
(22 |
) |
|
|
(16 |
) |
Miscellaneous
|
|
|
(18 |
) |
|
|
127 |
|
|
|
(295 |
) |
|
|
|
(439 |
) |
|
|
(204 |
) |
|
|
(545 |
) |
k)
Income
tax:
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
income tax
|
|
|
(2,765 |
) |
|
|
(2,859 |
) |
|
|
(3,440 |
) |
Deferred
income tax
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
|
(2,758 |
)
(1) |
|
|
(2,801 |
)(1) |
|
|
(3,410 |
)(1) |
(1)
|
Corresponds
to income tax incurred in Argentina as of December 31, 2007, 2006 and
2005, respectively.
|
The reconciliation of pre-tax income at
the statutory tax rate, to the income tax as disclosed in the income statements
for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006, and 2005, is as follows:
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income before income tax
|
|
|
6,844 |
|
|
|
7,258 |
|
|
|
8,772 |
|
Statutory
tax rate
|
|
|
35 |
% |
|
|
35 |
% |
|
|
35 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Statutory
tax rate applied to net income before income tax
|
|
|
(2,395 |
) |
|
|
(2,540 |
) |
|
|
(3,070 |
) |
Permanent
differences:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect
of the inflation adjustment into constant Argentine pesos
|
|
|
(276 |
) |
|
|
(399 |
) |
|
|
(367 |
) |
Income
on long-term investments(2)
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
64 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
Not
taxable foreign source income
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
Tax
free income – Law N° 19,640 (Tierra del Fuego)
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
81 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
Miscellaneous
|
|
|
(45 |
) |
|
|
68 |
|
|
|
(29 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase
of valuation allowance for temporary differences and tax loss and credit
carryforwards(1)
|
|
|
(112 |
) |
|
|
(100 |
) |
|
|
(18 |
) |
|
|
|
(2,758 |
) |
|
|
(2,801 |
) |
|
|
(3,410 |
) |
|
(1)
|
Relates
to changes in circumstances and prospects that affect the future use of
the temporary differences, tax loss and credit
carryforwards.
|
|
(2)
|
The
Company does not provide for income taxes on the unremitted earnings of
equity method investees because they will be remitted in a tax free
liquidation.
|
The
breakdown of the net deferred tax asset as of December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005,
is as follows:
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
Deferred
tax assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax
loss and credit carryforwards
|
|
|
812 |
(1) |
|
|
645 |
|
|
|
522 |
|
Non
deductible allowances and reserves and other liabilities
|
|
|
930 |
|
|
|
917 |
|
|
|
820 |
|
Miscellaneous
|
|
|
290 |
|
|
|
159 |
|
|
|
352 |
|
Total
deferred tax assets
|
|
|
2,032 |
|
|
|
1,721 |
|
|
|
1,694 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred
tax liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed
assets
|
|
|
(449 |
) |
|
|
(286 |
) |
|
|
(424 |
) |
Miscellaneous
|
|
|
(76 |
) |
|
|
(72 |
) |
|
|
(65 |
) |
Total
deferred tax liabilities
|
|
|
(525 |
) |
|
|
(358 |
) |
|
|
(489 |
) |
Valuation
allowances
|
|
|
(990 |
) |
|
|
(853 |
) |
|
|
(753 |
) |
Net
deferred tax asset
|
|
|
517 |
|
|
|
510 |
|
|
|
452 |
|
(1)
|
Tax loss and credit carryforwards
will expire as follows: 671 after five years and 141 that carry forward
indefinitely.
|
As
explained in Note 2.g, the difference between the book value of fixed assets in
Argentina remeasured into constant Argentine pesos and their corresponding cost
used for the tax basis, is a deferred tax liability of 1,525, 1,801 and 2,200 as
of December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively. The mentioned difference will
continue to be reduced as the corresponding fixed assets are depreciated or
retired.
l)
Net
sales:
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales
|
|
|
30,535 |
|
|
|
26,996 |
|
|
|
24,051 |
|
Turnover
tax
|
|
|
(567 |
) |
|
|
(460 |
) |
|
|
(372 |
) |
Hydrocarbon
export withholdings
|
|
|
(864 |
) |
|
|
(901 |
) |
|
|
(778 |
) |
|
|
|
29,104 |
|
|
|
25,635 |
|
|
|
22,901 |
|
YPF’s
subscribed capital, as of December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, was 3,933 and was
represented by 393,312,793 shares of common stock and divided into four classes
of shares (A, B, C and D), with a par value of Argentine pesos 10 and one vote
per share. These shares are fully subscribed, paid-in and authorized for stock
exchange listing.
As of
December 31, 2007, Repsol YPF S.A. (“Repsol YPF”) controlled the Company,
directly and indirectly, through a 99.04% shareholding. Repsol YPF’s legal
address is Paseo de la Castellana 278, 28046 Madrid, Spain. On February 21,
2008, Repsol YPF entered into a shares sale and purchase agreement with Petersen
Energía S.A. (“PESA”) pursuant to which Repsol YPF sold to PESA shares of YPF
representing 14.9% of YPF’s capital stock for US$ 2,235 million (the
“Transaction”). The Transaction is subject to the approval of certain Argentine
regulatory agencies. Simultaneously with the execution of such shares sale and
purchase agreement, Repsol YPF granted certain affiliates of PESA an option to
purchase from Repsol YPF up to an additional 10.1% of YPF’s outstanding capital
stock within four years after consummation of the Transaction. Additionally,
Repsol YPF and PESA have signed a shareholders’ agreement, in connection with
the Transaction, establishing, among other things, the adoption of a dividend
policy under which YPF will distribute 90% of the annual net income as
dividends. They have also agreed to vote for the payment of a special dividend
of US$ 850 million, of which half shall be paid in 2008 and half shall be paid
in 2009.
Additionally,
on February 29, 2008, Repsol YPF has started an offering process for the sale of
shares representing 20% of the capital stock of YPF (the “Offering”). The
effective date of the Offering will be subject, among other conditions, to the
authorization of the SEC and the CNV, considering current requirements and
regulations.
Repsol
YPF's principal business is the exploration, development and production of crude
oil and natural gas, transportation of petroleum products, liquefied petroleum
gas and natural gas, petroleum refining, production of a wide range of
petrochemicals and marketing of petroleum products, petroleum derivatives,
petrochemicals, liquefied petroleum gas and natural gas.
As of
December 31, 2007, there are 3,764 Class A shares outstanding. So long as any
Class A share remains outstanding, the affirmative vote of the Argentine
Government is required for: 1) mergers, 2) acquisitions of more than 50% of
YPF’s shares in an agreed or hostile bid, 3) transfers of all the YPF’s
production and exploration rights, 4) the voluntary dissolution of YPF or 5)
change of corporate and/or tax address outside the Argentine Republic. Items 3)
and 4) will also require prior approval by the Argentine Congress.
5.
|
RESTRICTED ASSETS AND GUARANTEES
GIVEN
|
As of
December 31, 2007, YPF has signed guarantees in relation to the financing
activities of Pluspetrol Energy S.A., Central Dock Sud S.A. and Inversora
Dock Sud S.A. in an amount of approximately US$ 24 million (US$ 21 million
as of April 10, 2008), US$ 81 million (US$ 23 million as of April 10, 2008)
and 5, respectively. The corresponding loans have final maturity in 2011, 2013
and 2009, respectively.
Additionally,
YPF has committed to contribute capital up to a maximum amount that will enable
to satisfy certain environmental liabilities assumed by Maxus Energy Corporation
(“Maxus) and Tierra Solutions Inc. (“Tierra”), together “the Parties”,
subsidiaries of YPF Holdings Inc. and to meet its operating expenses (see Note
10.a). On October 8, 2007, YPF and the Parties have signed an agreement which,
after making the corresponding contributions and under the fulfillment of
certain conditions establishes, among other things, the end of YPF’s obligations
under the Contribution Agreement. The conditions established in the agreement
were fulfilled on March 31, 2008.
6.
|
PARTICIPATION IN JOINT VENTURES AND OTHER
AGREEMENTS
|
As of
December 31, 2007, the main exploration and production joint ventures and other
agreements in which the YPF participates are the following:
Name
and Location
|
|
Ownership
Interest
|
|
Operator
|
|
Acambuco
Salta
|
|
22.50%
|
|
Pan
American Energy LLC
|
|
Aguada
Pichana
Neuquén
|
|
27.27%
|
|
Total
Austral S.A.
|
|
Aguaragüe
Salta
|
|
30.00%
|
|
Tecpetrol
S.A.
|
|
CAM-2/A
SUR
Tierra
del Fuego
|
|
50.00%
|
|
Sipetrol
S.A.
|
|
Campamento
Central
/Cañadón
Perdido
Chubut
|
|
50.00%
|
|
YPF
S.A.
|
|
Consorcio
CNQ 7/A
La
Pampa and Mendoza
|
|
50.00%
|
|
Petro
Andina Resources Ltd. Sucursal Argentina
|
|
El
Tordillo
Chubut
|
|
12.20%
|
|
Tecpetrol
S.A.
|
|
La
Tapera y Puesto Quiroga
Chubut
|
|
12.20%
|
|
Tecpetrol
S.A.
|
|
Llancanello
Mendoza
|
|
51.00%
|
|
YPF
S.A.
|
|
Magallanes
Santa
Cruz, Tierra del Fuego and National Continental Shelf
|
|
50.00%
|
|
Sipetrol
S.A.
|
|
Palmar
Largo
Formosa
ans Salta
|
|
30.00%
|
|
Pluspetrol
S.A.
|
|
Puesto
Hernández
Neuquén
and Mendoza
|
|
61.55%
|
|
Petrobras
Energía S.A.
|
|
Ramos
Salta
|
|
15.00%(1)
|
|
Pluspetrol
Energy S.A.
|
|
San
Roque
Neuquén
|
|
34.11%
|
|
Total
Austral S.A.
|
|
Tierra
del Fuego
Tierra
del Fuego
|
|
30.00%
|
|
Petrolera
L.F. Company S.R.L.
|
|
Yacimiento
La Ventana - Río Tunuyan
Mendoza
|
|
60.00%
|
|
YPF
S.A.
|
|
Zampal
Oeste
Mendoza
|
|
70.00%
|
|
YPF
S.A.
|
|
(1)
|
Additionally,
YPF has a 27% indirect ownership interest through Pluspetrol Energy
S.A.
|
As of
December 31, 2007, YPF has been awarded the bids on its own or with other
partners and received exploration permits for acreage in several
areas.
Additionally,
certain YPF subsidiaries participate in exploration and production agreements in
Guyana and in the Gulf of Mexico.
The assets
and liabilities as of December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005 and production costs of
the joint ventures and other agreements for the years then ended are as
follows:
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
assets
|
|
|
187 |
|
|
|
538 |
|
|
|
75 |
|
Noncurrent
assets
|
|
|
3,606 |
|
|
|
2,463 |
|
|
|
2,110 |
|
Total
assets
|
|
|
3,793 |
|
|
|
3,001 |
|
|
|
2,185 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
liabilities
|
|
|
474 |
|
|
|
405 |
|
|
|
280 |
|
Noncurrent
liabilities
|
|
|
373 |
|
|
|
343 |
|
|
|
186 |
|
Total
liabilities
|
|
|
847 |
|
|
|
748 |
|
|
|
466 |
|
Production
costs
|
|
|
1,423 |
|
|
|
1,098 |
|
|
|
894 |
|
Participation
in joint ventures and other agreements have been calculated based upon the last
available financial statements as of the end of each year, taking into account
significant subsequent events and transactions as well as available management
information.
YPF
Holdings Inc. has entered into various operating agreements and capital
commitments associated with the exploration and development of its oil and gas
properties which are not material except those for the Neptune Prospect. Total
commitments related to the development of the Neptune Prospect located in the
vicinity of the Atwater Valley Area, Blocks 573, 574, 575, 617 and 618 are
US$ 28 million for 2008.
7.
|
BALANCES AND TRANSACTIONS WITH RELATED
PARTIES
|
The
principal outstanding balances as of December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005 from
transactions with jointly controlled companies, companies under significant
influence, the parent company and other related parties under common control are
as follows:
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
Trade
receivables
|
|
|
Other
receivables
|
|
|
Accounts
payable
|
|
|
Trade
receivables
|
|
|
Other
receivables
|
|
|
Accounts
payable
|
|
|
Trade
receivables
|
|
|
Other
receivables
|
|
|
Accounts
payable
|
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Noncurrent
|
|
|
Current
|
|
Jointly
controlled companies:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Profertil
S.A.
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Compañía
Mega S.A. (“Mega”)
|
|
|
167 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
110 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Refinería
del Norte S.A. (“Refinor”)
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
|
206 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
155 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
153 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
12 |
|
Companies
under significant influence:
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
143 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
46 |
|
Parent
company and other related parties under common control:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repsol
YPF
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
979 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,404 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
83 |
|
Repsol
YPF Transporte y Trading S.A.
|
|
|
199 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
110 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
30 |
|
Repsol
YPF Gas S.A.
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Repsol
YPF Brasil S.A.
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
1,102 |
(1) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
1,305 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
267 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
Repsol
International Finance B.V.
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,427 |
(1) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,520 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,571 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Repsol
Netherlands Finance B.V.
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
116 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Gaviota
Re S.A.
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
104 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Repsol
YPF E&P Bolivia S.A.
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
69 |
|
Others
|
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
66 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
|
302 |
|
|
|
2,654 |
|
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
200 |
|
|
|
3,874 |
|
|
|
89 |
|
|
|
161 |
|
|
|
3,135 |
|
|
|
371 |
|
|
|
221 |
|
|
|
|
533 |
|
|
|
2,681 |
|
|
|
140 |
|
|
|
391 |
|
|
|
3,883 |
|
|
|
238 |
|
|
|
352 |
|
|
|
3,139 |
|
|
|
371 |
|
|
|
279 |
|
(1)
|
As
of the date of the issuance of these financial statements, these
receivables were fully collected.
|
The
Company maintains purchase, sale and financing transactions with related
parties. The principal purchase, sale and financing transactions with these
companies for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, include the
following:
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
Sales
|
|
|
Purchases
and services
|
|
|
Loans
(granted)
collected
|
|
|
Interest
gains
(losses)
|
|
|
Sales
|
|
|
Purchases
and services
|
|
|
Loans
(granted)
collected
|
|
|
Interest
gains
(losses)
|
|
|
Sales
|
|
|
Purchases
and services
|
|
|
Loans
(granted)
collected
|
|
|
Interest
gains
(losses)
|
|
Jointly
controlled companies:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Profertil
S.A.
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
86 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Mega
|
|
|
669 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
629 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
514 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Refinor
|
|
|
199 |
|
|
|
66 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
200 |
|
|
|
79 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
156 |
|
|
|
87 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Petroken
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
87 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
900 |
|
|
|
152 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
858 |
|
|
|
132 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
789 |
|
|
|
125 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Companies
under significant influence:
|
|
|
90 |
|
|
|
151 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
152 |
|
|
|
231 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
245 |
|
|
|
262 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Parent
company and other related parties under common control:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repsol
YPF
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
926 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
350 |
|
|
|
67 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
56 |
|
Repsol
YPF Transporte y Trading S.A.
|
|
|
1,276 |
|
|
|
827 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
923 |
|
|
|
654 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
546 |
|
|
|
508 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Repsol
YPF Brasil S.A.
|
|
|
116 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
225 |
|
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
97 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(1,011 |
) |
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
72 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
11 |
|
Repsol
YPF Gas S.A.
|
|
|
227 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
210 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
192 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Repsol
International Finance B.V.
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
143 |
|
|
|
91 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
191 |
|
|
|
62 |
|
Repsol
Netherlands Finance B.V.
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
68 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(112 |
) |
|
|
1 |
|
Repsol
YPF E&P Bolivia S.A.
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
446 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
323 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Repsol
YPF Chile Ltda.
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
306 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
Gaviota
Re S.A.
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
104 |
|
Others
|
|
|
160 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
157 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
205 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
1,779 |
|
|
|
861 |
|
|
|
1,292 |
|
|
|
201 |
|
|
|
1,388 |
|
|
|
1,123 |
|
|
|
(530 |
) |
|
|
209 |
|
|
|
1,017 |
|
|
|
852 |
|
|
|
438 |
|
|
|
259 |
|
|
|
|
2,769 |
|
|
|
1,164 |
|
|
|
1,317 |
|
|
|
201 |
|
|
|
2,398 |
|
|
|
1,486 |
|
|
|
(530 |
) |
|
|
209 |
|
|
|
2,051 |
|
|
|
1,239 |
|
|
|
438 |
|
|
|
259 |
|
8.
|
CONSOLIDATED BUSINESS SEGMENT
INFORMATION
|
The
Company organizes its business into four segments which comprise: the
exploration and production, including contractual purchases of natural gas and
crude oil purchases arising from service contracts and concession obligations,
as well as, crude oil intersegment sales, natural gas and its derivatives sales
and electric power generation (“Exploration and Production”); the refining,
transport and marketing of crude oil to unrelated parties and refined products
(“Refining and Marketing”); the petrochemical operations (“Chemical”); and other
activities, not falling into these categories, are classified under “Corporate
and Other”, which principally includes corporate administration costs and
assets, construction activities and environmental remediation activities related
to YPF Holdings Inc. preceding operations (Note 10.a).
Operating
income (loss) and assets for each segment have been determined after
intersegment adjustments. Sales between business segments are made at internal
transfer prices established by the Company.
|
|
Exploration
and Production
|
|
|
Refining
and
Marketing
|
|
|
Chemical
|
|
|
Corporate
and
Other
|
|
|
Consolidation
Adjustments
|
|
|
Total
|
|
Year
ended December 31, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
sales to unrelated parties
|
|
|
3,288 |
|
|
|
20,375 |
|
|
|
2,563 |
|
|
|
109 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
26,335 |
|
Net
sales to related parties
|
|
|
724 |
|
|
|
2,045 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
2,769 |
|
Net
intersegment sales
|
|
|
14,056 |
|
|
|
1,858 |
|
|
|
892 |
|
|
|
440 |
|
|
|
(17,246 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Net
sales
|
|
|
18,068 |
|
|
|
24,278 |
|
|
|
3,455 |
|
|
|
549 |
|
|
|
(17,246 |
) |
|
|
29,104 |
|
Operating
income (loss)
|
|
|
5,679 |
|
|
|
1,234 |
|
|
|
500 |
|
|
|
(620 |
) |
|
|
(136 |
) |
|
|
6,657 |
|
Income
on long-term investments
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
34 |
|
Depreciation
|
|
|
3,616 |
|
|
|
377 |
|
|
|
92 |
|
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
4,139 |
|
Acquisitions
of fixed assets
|
|
|
4,861 |
|
|
|
898 |
|
|
|
143 |
|
|
|
314 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
6,216 |
|
Assets
|
|
|
19,893 |
|
|
|
11,199 |
|
|
|
2,220 |
|
|
|
5,421 |
|
|
|
(631 |
) |
|
|
38,102 |
|
Year
ended December 31, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
sales to unrelated parties
|
|
|
3,076 |
|
|
|
17,651 |
|
|
|
2,401 |
|
|
|
109 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
23,237 |
|
Net
sales to related parties
|
|
|
774 |
|
|
|
1,624 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
2,398 |
|
Net
intersegment sales
|
|
|
14,033 |
|
|
|
1,526 |
|
|
|
647 |
|
|
|
282 |
|
|
|
(16,488 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Net
sales
|
|
|
17,883 |
|
|
|
20,801 |
|
|
|
3,048 |
|
|
|
391 |
|
|
|
(16,488 |
) |
|
|
25,635 |
|
Operating
income (loss)
|
|
|
6,564 |
|
|
|
258 |
|
|
|
572 |
|
|
|
(540 |
) |
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
6,883 |
|
Income
on long-term investments
|
|
|
167 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
183 |
|
Depreciation
|
|
|
3,263 |
|
|
|
329 |
|
|
|
85 |
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
3,718 |
|
Acquisitions
of fixed assets
|
|
|
4,886 |
|
|
|
733 |
|
|
|
137 |
|
|
|
176 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
5,932 |
|
Assets
|
|
|
18,987 |
|
|
|
9,349 |
|
|
|
1,876 |
|
|
|
6,049 |
|
|
|
(867 |
) |
|
|
35,394 |
|
Year
ended December 31, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
sales to unrelated parties
|
|
|
2,910 |
|
|
|
15,791 |
|
|
|
2,062 |
|
|
|
87 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
20,850 |
|
Net
sales to related parties
|
|
|
626 |
|
|
|
1,425 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
2,051 |
|
Net
intersegment sales
|
|
|
11,659 |
|
|
|
962 |
|
|
|
207 |
|
|
|
243 |
|
|
|
(13,071 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Net
sales
|
|
|
15,195 |
|
|
|
18,178 |
|
|
|
2,269 |
|
|
|
330 |
|
|
|
(13,071 |
) |
|
|
22,901 |
|
Operating
income (loss)
|
|
|
7,140 |
|
|
|
1,900 |
|
|
|
542 |
|
|
|
(451 |
) |
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
9,161 |
|
Income
(loss) on long-term investments
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
39 |
|
Depreciation
|
|
|
2,230 |
|
|
|
367 |
|
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
2,707 |
|
Acquisitions
of fixed assets
|
|
|
3,706 |
|
|
|
541 |
|
|
|
104 |
|
|
|
108 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
4,459 |
|
Assets
|
|
|
17,911 |
|
|
|
8,807 |
|
|
|
1,658 |
|
|
|
4,818 |
|
|
|
(970 |
) |
|
|
32,224 |
|
Export
sales for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005 were 8,400, 8,649 and
8,644, respectively. Export sales were mainly to the United States of America,
Brazil and Chile.
9.
|
SOCIAL AND OTHER EMPLOYEE BENEFITS
|
a)
Performance
Bonus Programs:
These
programs cover certain YPF and its controlled companies' personnel. These
bonuses are based on compliance with business unit objectives and performance.
They are calculated considering the annual compensation of each employee,
certain key factors related to the fulfillment of these objectives and will be
paid in cash.
The amount
charged to expense related to the Performance Bonus Programs was 61, 44 and 38
for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
Effective
March 1, 1995, YPF established a defined contribution retirement plan that
provides benefits for each employee who elects to join the plan. Each plan
member will pay an amount between 2% and 9% of his monthly compensation and YPF
will pay an amount equal to that contributed by each member.
The plan
members will receive YPF’s contributed funds before retirement only in the case
of voluntary termination under certain circumstances or dismissal without cause
and additionally in the case of death or incapacity. YPF has the right to
discontinue this plan at any time, without incurring termination
costs.
The total
charges recognized under the Retirement Plan amounted to approximately 11, 9 and
9 for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005,
respectively.
10.
|
COMMITMENTS
AND CONTINGENCIES
|
a)
Pending
lawsuits and contingencies:
As of
December 31, 2007, the Company has recorded the pending lawsuits, claims and
contingencies which are probable and can be reasonably estimated. The most
significant pending lawsuits and contingencies reserved are described in the
following paragraphs.
|
-
|
Pending lawsuits: In
the normal course of its business, the Company has been sued in numerous
labor, civil and commercial actions and lawsuits. Management, in
consultation with the external counsels, has reserved an allowance
considering its best estimation, based on the information available as of
the date of the issuance of these financial statements, including counsel
fees and judicial expenses.
|
|
-
|
Liquefied petroleum gas
market: On March 22, 1999, YPF was notified of Resolution
No. 189/1999 from the former Department of Industry, Commerce and
Mining of Argentina, which imposed a fine on YPF of 109, stated in
Argentine pesos as of that date, based on the interpretation that YPF had
purportly abused of its dominant position in the bulk liquefied petroleum
gas (“LPG”) market due to the existence of different prices between the
exports of LPG and the sales to the domestic market from 1993 through
1997. In July 2002, the Argentine Supreme Court confirmed the fine and YPF
carried out the claimed payment.
|
Additionally,
Resolution No. 189/1999 provided the beginning of an investigation in order to
prove whether the penalized behavior continued from October 1997 to March 1999.
On December 19, 2003, the National Antitrust Protection Board (the “Antitrust
Board”) imputed the behavior of abuse of dominant position during the previously
mentioned period to the Company. On January 20, 2004, YPF answered the
notification: (i) opposing the preliminary defense claiming the application
of the statutes of limitation and alleging the existence of defects in the
imputation procedure (absence of majority in the resolution that decided the
imputation and pre-judgment by its signers); (ii) arguing the absence of
abuse of dominant position; and (iii) offering the corresponding
evidence.
The
request of invalidity by defects in the imputation procedure mentioned above was
rejected by the Antitrust Board. This resolution of the Antitrust Board was
confirmed by the Economic Penal Appellate Court, and it was confirmed, on
September 27, 2005, pursuant to the Argentine Supreme Court's rejection of the
complaint made by YPF due to the extraordinary appeal denial.
Additionally,
on August 31, 2004, YPF filed an appeal with the Antitrust Board in relation to
the resolution that denied the claim of statutes of limitation. The Antitrust
Board conceded the appeal and remitted proceedings for its resolution by the
Appeals Court. However, in March 2006, YPF was notified that the proceedings
were opened for the production of evidence. During August and September 2007,
testimonial hearings were held for by YPF’s witnesses.
Despite
the solid arguments expressed by YPF, the mentioned circumstances make evident
that, preliminarily, the Antitrust Board preliminarily denied the defenses filed
by YPF and appears reluctant to modify the doctrine provided by the Resolution
No. 189/1999 and, furthermore, the Appeals Court’s decisions tend to
confirm the decisions made by the Antitrust Board.
|
-
|
Tax claims: On January
31, 2003, YPF received a claim from the Federal Administration of Public
Revenue (“AFIP”), stating that the sales corresponding to forward oil sale
agreements entered into by YPF, should have been subject to an income tax
withholding. On March 8, 2004, the AFIP formally notified YPF of a claim
for approximately 45 plus interests and fines. Additionally, on June 24,
2004, YPF received a new formal claim from the AFIP, considering that the
services related to these contracts should have been taxed with the value
added tax. Consequently, during 2004, YPF presented its defense to the
AFIP rejecting the claims and arguing its position. However, on December
28, 2004, YPF was formally notified of a resolution from the AFIP
confirming its original position in both claims for the period 1997 to
2001. The Company has appealed such resolution in the National Fiscal
Court. In 2006, YPF conditionally paid the amounts corresponding to
periods that followed those included in the claim by the AFIP and filed
reimbursement summary proceedings so as to avoid facing interest payment
or a fine. On March 18, 2008 the AFIP notified us of the rejection of the
reimbursement previously mentioned. The Company will appeal that decision
to the National Fiscal Court.
|
In
addition, the Company has received several claims from the AFIP and from the
provincial and municipal fiscal authorities, which are not individually
significant.
|
-
|
Liabilities and contingencies
assumed by the Argentine Government: The YPF Privatization
Law provided for the assumption by the Argentine Government of certain
liabilities of the predecessors as of December 31, 1990. In certain
lawsuits related to events or acts that took place before December 31,
1990, YPF has been required to advance the payment established in certain
judicial decisions. YPF has the right to be reimbursed for these payments
by the Argentine Government pursuant to the above-mentioned
indemnity.
|
Export sales: Pursuant to
Resolution No. 265/2004 of the Secretariat of Energy, the Argentine Government
created a program of “useful” curtailment of natural gas exports and their
associated transportation service. Such Program was initially implemented by
means of Regulation No. 27/2004 of the Under-Secretariat of Fuels, which was
subsequently substituted by the Program of Rationalization of Gas Exports and
Use of Transportation Capacity (the “Program”) approved by Resolution No.
659/2004 of the Secretariat of Energy. Additionally, Resolution
No. 752/2005 of the Secretariat of Energy provided that industrial users
and thermal generators (which according to this resolution will have to request
volumes of gas directly from the producers) could also acquire the natural gas
from the cutbacks on natural gas export through the Permanent Additional
Injections mechanism created by this resolution. By means of the Program and/or
the Permanent Additional Injection, the Argentine Government, requires natural
gas exporting producers to deliver additional volumes to the domestic market in
order to satisfy natural gas demand of certain domestic consumers of the
Argentine market (“Additional Injection Requirements”). Such additional volumes
are not contractually committed by YPF, who is thus forced to affect natural gas
exports, the execution has been conditioned. The mechanisms that affect the
exports established by the resolutions No. 659/2004 and 752/2005 have been
adapted by SE Resolution No. 599/2007 depending on whether the producers have
signed or not the Proposed Agreement, ratified by such resolution, between the
Secretariat of Energy and the Producers. Additionally, the Argentine Government,
through other instructions made using different procedures, has limited natural
gas exports (in conjunction with the Program and the Additional Injection
Requirements, named the “Restrictions”).
As a
result of the Restrictions, in several occasions during the years 2004, 2005,
2006 and 2007, YPF has been forced to suspend, either totally or partially, its
natural gas deliveries to some of its export clients, with whom YPF has
undertaken long-term firm commitments to deliver natural gas.
YPF has
challenged the Program, the Permanent Additional Injection and the Additional
Injection Requirements, as arbitrary and illegitimate, and has invoked vis-à-vis
the relevant clients that such measures of the Argentine Government constitute a
force majeure event (act of authority) that releases YPF from any liability
and/or penalty for the failure to deliver the contractual volumes. A large
number of clients have rejected the force majeure argument invoked by YPF,
demanding the payment of indemnifications and/or penalties for the failure to
comply with firm supply commitments, and/or reserving their rights to future
claims in such respect (the “claims”).
Electroandina
S.A. and Empresa Eléctrica del Norte Grande S.A. (“Edelnor”) have rejected the
force majeure argument invoked by YPF and have invoiced the penalty stipulated
under the “deliver or pay” clause of the contract in September, 2007, for a
total amount of US$ 93 million. The invoices have been rejected by YPF.
Furthermore the above-mentioned companies have notified the formal start-up
period of negotiations previous to any arbitration demand. Although such period
is overdue, YPF has not been notified of the initiation of the arbitration
demands. In
addition, YPF has been notified of an arbitration demand from Innergy Soluciones
Energéticas (“Innergy”). YPF has answered the arbitration complaint, and has
filed a counterclaim based on the hardship provisions (“teoría de la
imprevisión”) of the Argentine Civil Code. The parties have exchanged
documentation requirements and have presented its appellate brief with the
documental evidence and witnesses’ declaration. The damages claimed by Innergy
amount to US$ 88 million plus interests, according to the invoice presented
in the Innergy’s appellate brief, on September 17, 2007. Such amount might be
increased if Innergy incorporates to the demand the invoices for penalties
received for the subsequent periods to August 2007. As of the issuance date of
these financial statements, the parties have suspended the arbitration in order
to start negotiations.
Claim from Empresa Nacional de
Electricidad S.A. (“ENDESA”): In January, 2005, YPF was notified of a
request made by ENDESA for an arbitration to resolve a dispute relating to an
alleged breach of a contractual clause in an export contract signed in June,
2000. The clause was related to the increase of natural gas deliveries and
ENDESA has requested payment for damages. The parties reached an agreement which
amends the export contract (“the Amendment”) which was approved on August 31,
2007 by the Secretariat of Energy. As a result of the Amendment, the parties
settled the arbitration and that decision was communicated to the Arbitral
Court. YPF paid US$ 8 million to ENDESA for the termination of the arbitration
and ENDESA resigned to any claim related to past periods. Finally, the Amendment
adjusted the maximum half-yearly compensations that YPF would eventually have to
pay in connection with deficiencies in the natural gas deliveries.
Domestic sales: Central
Puerto S.A. has sued YPF for cutbacks in natural gas supply pursuant to their
respective contracts. The Company has formally denied such breach, based on the
view that, pending the restructuring of such contracts, it is not obliged to
confirm nominations of natural gas to those clients during certain periods of
the year. On March 15, 2007, Central Puerto S.A. notified YPF of the beginning
of pre-arbitral negotiations in relation to the agreements for the supply of its
plants located in Buenos Aires and Loma La Lata, Province of Neuquén. On May 29,
2007, the parties reached a settlement agreement in order to solve their
disputes related to the Loma La Lata natural gas supply contract. Additionally,
on June 6, 2007, Central Puerto S.A. notified its decision to submit to
arbitration under the rules of the International Chamber of Commerce the
controversy related to natural gas supply to its combined-cycle plant located in
the city of Buenos Aires. Central Puerto S.A. nominated its arbiter and notified
YPF the commencement of an arbitration proceeding in that Chamber. On June 21,
2007, YPF nominated its arbiter and notified its decision to submit the
controversy related to certain amounts claimed to Central Puerto S.A., also
related to the natural gas supply to its combined-cycle located in the city of
Buenos Aires to an arbitration proceeding. On July 23, 2007, YPF received the
arbitration demand which was answered on September 24, 2007, denying the claims
of Central Puerto. Besides, the Company has filed a counterclaim requesting,
among other things, the termination of the contract or, in absence of this, the
revision based on the hardship provision and the “both-parties-effort”. On
December 3, 2007, Central Puerto S.A. submitted a presentation requesting (i)
the rejection of all subsidiary claims presented by YPF S.A., including the
request that the Chamber ratifies the effectiveness of the contract and the
rejection of the fair reconvention of the contract; (ii) the rejection of the
settlement and payment claim related to amounts due by Central Puerto S.A.
pursuant to the “take or pay” clause; (iii) the rejection of the settlement and
payment claim related to the adjustment by the application of the “Coeficiente
de Estabilización de Referencia” (“CER”), and in subsidy opposing the
prescription exception; (iv) the inappropriateness of the claim in relation with
the price differential payment.
On
February 11, 2008, an audience was held with the arbitral trial members and the
“Acta de Misión” was subscribed. In that document, Central Puerto S.A. argued
that it could not determine the claimed amount until the performance of the
corresponding work of experts. However, it accepted to fix the payment provision
on its charge based on the maximum value determined by CCI Rules (Apendix III).
YPF estimated in, approximately, US$ 11 million, plus interest and CER, the
amount that must be claimed as payable to its favor, under the reconvention
process. All of these amounts are subject to expert review. On March 12, 2008,
the Company and Central Puerto suspended the arbitration for 30 days to allow
for settlement discussions.
As of
December 31, 2007, the Company has reserved costs for penalties associated with
the failure to deliver the contractual volumes of natural gas in the export and
domestic markets which are probable and can be reasonably
estimated.
|
-
|
Environmental claims in La
Plata: There are certain claims that require a compensation for
individual damages purportedly caused by the operation of the La Plata
Refinery and the environmental remediation of the channels adjacent to the
mentioned refinery. During 2006, YPF submitted a presentation before the
Environmental Ministry of the Province of Buenos Aires which puts forward
for consideration the performance of a study for the characterization of
environmental associated risks. As mentioned previously, YPF has the right
of indemnity for events and claims previous to January 1, 1991, according
to Law No. 22,145 and Decree No. 546/1993. Besides, there are
certain claims that could result in the requirement to make additional
investments connected with the operations of La Plata Refinery and claims
for the compensation to the neighbours of La Plata
Refinery.
|
|
-
|
Environmental
contingencies and other claims and commitments of YPF Holdings Inc. – a
wholly owned subsidiary of YPF.
|
Laws and
regulations relating to health and environmental quality in the United States of
America affect nearly all of the operations of YPF Holdings Inc. These laws and
regulations set various standards regulating certain aspects of health and
environmental quality, provide for penalties and other liabilities for the
violation of such standards and establish in certain circumstances remedial
obligations.
YPF
Holdings Inc. believes that its policies and procedures in the area of pollution
control, product safety and occupational health are adequate to prevent
unreasonable risk of environmental and other damage, and of resulting financial
liability, in connection with its business. Some risk of environmental and other
damage is, however, inherent in particular operations of YPF Holdings Inc. and,
as discussed below, Maxus and Tierra (both controlled by YPF Holdings Inc.)
could have certain potential liabilities associated with operations of Maxus’
former chemical subsidiary.
YPF
Holdings Inc. cannot predict what environmental legislation or regulations will
be enacted in the future or how existing or future laws or regulations will be
administered or enforced. Compliance with more stringent laws or regulations, as
well as more vigorous enforcement policies of the regulatory agencies, could in
the future require material expenditures by YPF Holdings Inc. for the
installation and operation of systems and equipment for remedial measures,
possible dredging requirements and in certain other respects. Also, certain laws
allow for recovery of natural resource damages from responsible parties and
ordering the implementation of interim remedies to abate an imminent and
substantial endangerment to the environment. Potential expenditures for any such
actions cannot be reasonably estimated.
In
connection with the sale of Maxus’ former chemical subsidiary, Diamond Shamrock
Chemicals Company ("Chemicals") to Occidental Petroleum Corporation
(“Occidental”) in 1986, Maxus agreed to indemnify Chemicals and Occidental from
and against certain liabilities relating to the business or activities of
Chemicals, including environmental liabilities relating to chemical plants and
waste disposal sites used by Chemicals prior to the selling date. Tierra has
agreed to assume essentially all of Maxus’ aforesaid indemnity obligations to
Occidental in respect of Chemicals.
As of
December 31, 2007, reserves for the environmental contingencies and other claims
totaled approximately 421. YPF Holdings Inc.’s Management believes it has
adequately reserved for all environmental contingencies, which are probable and
can be reasonably estimated as of such time; however, changes in circumstances,
including new information or new requirements of governmental entities, could
result in changes, including additions, to such reserves in the future. The most
significant contingencies are described in the following
paragraphs:
In the
following discussion concerning plant sites and third party sites, references to
YPF Holdings Inc. include, as appropriate and solely for ease of reference,
references to Maxus and Tierra. As indicated above, Tierra is also a subsidiary
of YPF Holdings Inc. and has assumed certain of Maxus’ obligations.
Newark, New Jersey. A consent
decree, previously agreed upon by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
("EPA"), the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and Energy
("DEP") and Occidental, as successor to Chemicals, was entered in 1990 by the
United States District Court of New Jersey and requires implementation of a
remedial action plan at Chemicals' former Newark, New Jersey agricultural
chemicals plant. The approved remedy has been completed and paid for by Tierra.
This project is in the operation and maintenance phase. YPF Holdings Inc. has
reserved approximately 49 as of December 31, 2007, in connection with such
activities.
Passaic River, New Jersey.
Studies have indicated that sediments of the Newark Bay watershed, including the
Passaic River adjacent to the former Newark plant, are contaminated with
hazardous chemicals from many sources. Maxus, forced to act on behalf of
Occidental, negotiated an agreement with the EPA under which Tierra has
conducted further testing and studies near the plant site. While some work
remains, these studies were substantially completed in 2005. In
addition:
-
|
The
EPA and other agencies are addressing the lower Passaic River in a joint
federal, state, local and private sector
cooperative effort designated as the Lower Passaic River Restoration
Project (“PRRP”). Tierra, along with other
entities, participated in an initial remedial investigation and
feasibility study (“RIFS”) in connection with the PRRP. The parties are
discussing the possibility of further work with the EPA. The entities that
have agreed to fund the RIFS have negotiated allocations of responsibility
among themselves based on a number of considerations.
|
-
|
In
2003, the DEP issued Directive No. 1 to approximately 66 entities,
including Occidental and Maxus and certain of their respective related
entities. Directive No. 1 seeks to address natural resource damages
allegedly resulting from almost 200 years of historic industrial and
commercial development of the lower 17 miles of the Passaic River and a
part of its watershed. Directive No. 1 asserts that the named entities are
jointly and severally liable for the alleged natural resource damages
without regard to fault. The DEP has asserted jurisdiction in this matter
even though all or part of the lower Passaic River has been designated as
a Superfund site and is a subject of the PRRP. Directive No. 1 calls for
the following actions: interim compensatory restoration, injury
identification, injury quantification and value determination. Maxus and
Tierra responded to Directive No. 1 setting forth good faith defenses.
Settlement discussions between the DEP and the named entities have been
held; however, no agreement has been reached or is
assured.
|
-
|
In
2004, the EPA and Occidental entered into an administrative order on
consent (the “AOC”) pursuant to which Tierra (on behalf of Occidental) has
agreed to conduct testing and studies to characterize contaminated
sediment and biota in the Newark Bay. The initial field work on this
study, which includes testing in the Newark Bay, has been substantially
completed. Discussions with the EPA regarding additional work that might
be required are underway.
|
-
|
In
December 2005, the DEP issued a directive to Tierra, Maxus and Occidental
directing said parties to pay the State of New Jersey’s costs of
developing a Source Control Dredge Plan focused on allegedly
dioxin-contaminated sediment in the lower six-mile portion of the Passaic
River. The development of this plan is estimated by the DEP to cost
approximately US$ 2 million. This directive was issued even though
this portion of the lower Passaic River is a subject of the PRRP. The DEP
has advised the recipients that (a) it is engaged in discussions with the
EPA regarding the subject matter of the directive, and (b) they are not
required to respond to the directive until otherwise
notified.
|
-
|
In
December 2005, the DEP sued YPF Holdings Inc., Tierra, Maxus and several
affiliated entities, in addition to Occidental, in
connection with dioxin contamination allegedly emanating from
Chemicals’ former Newark plant and contaminating the lower portion of the
Passaic River, Newark Bay, other nearby waterways and surrounding areas.
The DEP seeks unspecified and punitive damages and other matters. The
defendants have made responsive pleadings and
filings.
|
-
|
In
June 2007, EPA released a draft Focused Feasibility Study (the “FFS”) that
outlines several alternatives for remedial action in the lower eight miles
of the Passaic River. These alternatives range from no action, which would
result in comparatively little cost, to extensive dredging and
capping, which according to the draft FFS, EPA estimated could cost from
US$ 0.9 billion to US$ 2.3 billion and are all described by EPA as
involving proven technologies that could be carried out in the near term,
without extensive research. Tierra, in conjunction with the other parties
of the PRRP group, submitted comments on the draft FFS to EPA, as did
other interested parties. In September 2007, EPA announced its intention
to spend further time considering these comments, to issue a proposed plan
for public comment by the middle of 2008 and to select a clean-up plan in
the last quarter of 2008. Tierra will respond to any further EPA proposal
as may be appropriate at the time.
|
-
|
Tierra,
acting on behalf of Occidental, is also performing and funding a separate
RIFS to characterize sediment contamination and evaluate remedial
alternatives in Newark Bay and portions of the Hackensack River, the
Arthur Kill, and the Kill van Kull pursuant to a 2004 consent decree with
EPA.
|
-
|
In
August 2007, the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (“NOAA”) sent
a letter to the parties of the PRRP group, including Tierra and
Occidental, requesting that the group enters into an agreement to conduct
a cooperative assessment of natural resources damages in the Passaic River
and Newark Bay. The PRRP group has responded through its common counsel
requesting that discussions relating to such agreement be postponed until
2008, due in part to the pending FFS proposal by EPA. Tierra will continue
to participate in the PRRP group with regard to this matter. In January
2008, the NOAA sent a letter to YPF S.A., YPF Holdings Inc., CLH Holdings
Inc. and other entities, designating them as potentially responsible party
(“PRP”).
|
As of
December 31, 2007, there is a total of approximately 126 reserved in connection
with the foregoing matters related to the Passaic River and surrounding area,
comprising the estimated costs for studies, YPF Holdings Inc.’s best estimate of
the cash flows it could incur in connection with remediation activities
considering the studies performed by Tierra, and in addition certain other
matters related to Passaic River and the Newark Bay. However, it is possible
that other works, including interim remedial measures, may be ordered. In
addition, the development of new information or the imposition of natural
resource damages or remedial actions differing from the scenarios we have
evaluated could result in Maxus and Tierra incurring additional costs to the
amount currently reserved.
Hudson County, New Jersey.
Until 1972, Chemicals operated a chromite ore processing plant at Kearny, New
Jersey (“Kearny Plant”). According to the DEP, wastes from these ore processing
operations were used as fill material at a number of sites in and near Hudson
County. The DEP and Occidental, as successor to Chemicals, signed an
administrative consent order with the DEP in 1990 for investigation and
remediation work at certain chromite ore residue sites in Kearny and Secaucus,
New Jersey.
Tierra, on
behalf of Occidental, is presently performing the work and funding Occidental's
share of the cost of investigation and remediation of these sites and is
providing financial assurance in the amount of US$ 20 million for
performance of the work. The ultimate cost of remediation is uncertain. Tierra
submitted its remedial investigation reports to the DEP in 2001, and the DEP
continues to review the report.
Additionally,
in May 2005, the DEP took two actions in connection with the chrome sites in
Hudson and Essex Counties. First, the DEP issued a directive to Maxus,
Occidental and two other chromium manufacturers directing them to arrange for
the cleanup of chromite ore residue at three sites in Jersey City and the
conduct of a study by paying the DEP a total of US$ 20 million. While YPF
Holdings Inc. believes that Maxus is improperly named and there is little or no
evidence that Chemicals’ chromite ore residue was sent to any of these sites,
the DEP claims these companies are jointly and severally liable without regard
to fault. Second, the State of New Jersey filed a lawsuit against Occidental and
two other entities in state court in Hudson County seeking, among other things,
cleanup of various sites where chromite ore residue is allegedly located,
recovery of past costs incurred by the state at such sites (including in excess
of US$ 2 million allegedly spent for investigations and studies) and,
with respect to certain costs at 18 sites, treble damages. The DEP claims that
the defendants are jointly and severally liable, without regard to fault, for
much of the damages alleged. During mediation, the parties have engaged in
discussion regarding possible settlement; however, there is no assurance that
these discussions will be successful.
In
November 2005, several environmental groups sent a notice of intent to sue the
owners of the properties adjacent to the former Kearny Plant (the “Adjacent
Property”), including among others Tierra, under the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act. The stated purpose of the lawsuit, if filed, would be to require
the noticed parties to carry out measures to abate alleged endangerments to
health and the environment emanating from the Adjacent Property. The parties
have entered into an agreement that addresses the concerns of the environmental
groups, and these groups have agreed, at least for now, not to file
suit.
Pursuant
to a request of the DEP, in the second half of 2006, Tierra and other parties
tested the sediments in a portion of the Hackensack River near the former Kearny
Plant. Whether additional work will be required, is expected to be determined
once the results of this testing have been analyzed.
As of
December 31, 2007, there is a total of approximately 60 reserved in connection
with the foregoing chrome-related matters. The study of the levels of chromium
in New Jersey has not been finalized, and the DEP is still reviewing the
proposed action levels. The cost of addressing these chrome-related matters
could increase depending upon the final soil action levels, the DEP’s response
to Tierra’s reports and other developments.
Painesville, Ohio. In
connection with the operation until 1976 of one chromite ore processing plant
("Chrome Plant"), from Chemicals, the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
(“OEPA”) ordered to conduct a Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study
(“RIFS”) at the former Painesville's Plant area. Tierra has agreed to
participate in the RIFS as required by the OEPA. Tierra submitted the remedial
investigation report to the OEPA, which report was finalized in 2003. Tierra is
submitting required feasibility reports separately. In addition, the OEPA has
approved certain work, including the remediation of specific sites within the
former Painesville Works area and work associated with the development plans
discussed below (the “Remediation Work”). The Remediation Work has begun. As the
OEPA approves additional projects for the site of the former Painesville Works,
additional amounts may need to be reserved.
Over ten
years ago, the former Painesville Works site was proposed for listing on the
national Priority List under the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation and Liability Act of 1980, as amended (“CERCLA”): however, the EPA
has stated that the site will not be listed so long as it is satisfactorily
addressed pursuant to the Director’s Order and OEPA’s programs. As of the date
of issuance of these financial statements, the site has not been listed. YPF
Holdings Inc. has reserved a total of 23 as of December 31, 2007 for its
estimated share of the cost to perform the RIFS, the remediation work and other
operation and maintenance activities at this site. The scope and nature of any
further investigation or remediation that may be required cannot be determined
at this time; however, as the RIFS progresses, YPF Holdings Inc. will
continuously assess the condition of the Painesville's plants works site and
make any changes, including additions, to its reserve as may be
required.
Third Party Sites. Pursuant
to settlement agreements with the Port of Houston Authority and other parties,
Tierra and Maxus are participating (on behalf of Chemicals) in the remediation
of property adjoining Chemicals’ former Greens Bayou facility where DDT and
certain other chemicals were manufactured. As of December 31, 2007, YPF Holdings
Inc. has reserved 62 for its estimated share of future remediation activities
associated with the Greens Bayou facility. Additionally, efforts have been
initiated in connection with claims for natural resources damages. The amount of
natural resources damages and the party’s obligations in respect thereof are
unknown at the present time.
In June
2005, the EPA designated Maxus as a PRP at the Milwaukee Solvay Coke & Gas
site in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The basis for this designation is Maxus alleged
status as the successor to Pickands Mather & Co. and Milwaukee Solvay Coke
Co., companies that the EPA has asserted are former owners or operators of such
site. Preliminarily work in connection with the RIFS of this site commenced in
the second half of 2006. Maxus has reserved 1 as of December 31, 2007 for its
estimated share of the costs of the RIFS. Maxus lacks sufficient information to
determine additional exposure or costs, if any, it might have in respect of this
site.
Maxus has
agreed to defend Occidental, as successor to Chemicals, in respect of the Malone
Services Company Superfund site in Galveston County, Texas. This site is a
former waste disposal site where Chemicals is alleged to have sent waste
products prior to September 1986. It is the subject of enforcement activities by
the EPA. Although Occidental is one of many PRPs that have been identified and
have agreed to an Administrative Order on Consent, Tierra (which is handling
this matter on behalf of Maxus) presently believes the degree of Occidental’s
alleged involvement as successor to Chemicals is relatively small.
Chemicals
has also been designated as a PRP with respect to a number of third party sites
where hazardous substances from Chemicals' plant operations allegedly were
disposed or have come to be located. At several of these, Chemicals has no known
exposure. Although PRPs are typically jointly and severally liable for the cost
of investigations, cleanups and other response costs, each has the right of
contribution from other PRPs and, as a practical matter, cost sharing by PRPs is
usually effected by agreement among them. At a number of these sites, the
ultimate response cost and Chemicals’ share of such costs cannot be estimated at
this time. As of December 31, 2007, YPF Holdings Inc. has reserved 7 in
connection with its estimated share of costs related to these
sites.
Black Lung Benefits Act
Liabilities. The Black Lung Benefits Act provides monetary and medical
benefits to miners disabled with black lung disease, and also provides benefits
to the dependents of deceased miners if black lung disease caused or contributed
to the miner’s death. As a result of the operations of its coal-mining
subsidiaries, YPF Holdings Inc. is required to provide insurance of this benefit
to former employees and their dependents. As of December 31, 2007, YPF Holdings
Inc. has reserved 29 in connection with its estimate of these
obligations.
Legal Proceedings. In 1998, a
subsidiary of Occidental filed a lawsuit in state court in Ohio seeking a
declaration of the parties’ rights with respect to obligations for certain costs
allegedly related to Chemicals’ Ashtabula, Ohio facility, as well as certain
other costs. A settlement of this matter was reached in March 2007, with those
activities required by the settlement document completed in the second quarter
of 2007.
In 2001,
the Texas State Controller assessed Maxus approximately US$ 1 million in
Texas state sales taxes for the period of September 1, 1995 through December 31,
1998, plus penalty and interest. In August 2004, the administrative law judge
issued a decision affirming approximately US$ 1 million of such assessment,
plus penalty and interest. YPF Holdings Inc. believes the decision is erroneous,
has paid the revised tax assessment, penalty and interest (a total of
approximately US$ 2 million under protest). Maxus filed suit in Texas state
court in December 2004 challenging the administrative decision. The matter will
be reviewed by a trial de novo in the court action.
In 2002,
Occidental sued Maxus and Tierra in state court in Dallas, Texas seeking a
declaration that Maxus and Tierra have the obligation under the agreement
pursuant to which Maxus sold Chemicals to Occidental to defend and indemnify
Occidental from and against certain historical obligations of Chemicals,
including claims related to “Agent Orange” and vinyl chloride monomer (VCM),
notwithstanding the fact that said agreement contains a 12-year cut-off for
defense and indemnity obligations with respect to most litigation. Tierra was
dismissed as a party, and the matter was tried in May 2006. The trial court
decided that the 12-year cut-off period did not apply and entered judgment
against Maxus. This decision was affirmed by the Court of Appeals in February
2008. This decision will require Maxus to accept responsibility of various
matters which it has refused indemnification since 1998 which could result in
the incurrence of material costs in addition to YPF Holdings Inc.’s current
reserves for this matter. This decision will also require Maxus to reimburse
Occidental for past costs on these matters. Maxus believes that its current
reserves are adequate for these past costs. Maxus is currently evaluating the
decision of the Court of Appeals. As of December 31, 2007, YPF Holdings Inc. has
reserved 46 in respect to this matter.
In March
2005, Maxus agreed to defend Occidental, as successor to Chemicals, in respect
of an action seeking the contribution of costs incurred in connection with the
remediation of the Turtle Bayou waste disposal site in Liberty County, Texas.
The plaintiffs alleged that certain wastes attributable to Chemicals found their
way to the Turtle Bayou site. Trial for this matter was bifurcated, and in the
liability phase Occidental and other parties were found severally, and not
jointly, liable for waste products disposed of at this site. Trial in the
allocation phase of this matter was completed in the second quarter of 2007, and
the court has entered a decision setting Occidental’s liability at 18.73% of
those costs incurred by one of the plaintiffs. Occidental’s motion for
reconsideration of a portion of this decision has been filed with the court, and
the parties are awaiting the court’s decision on this and other post-judgment
motions. As of December 31, 2007, YPF Holdings Inc. has reserved 12 in respect
of this matter.
In 2005,
Skidmore Energy Company and others (“Skidmore”) have sued Maxus (U.S.)
Exploration Company (“Maxus US”), a subsidiary of YPF Holdings Inc., in state
court in Texas. Skidmore claims it was entitled to an assignment of
approximately five oil and gas leases in the US Gulf of Mexico. Maxus US denies
Skidmore’s claims. Maxus US and Skidmore have entered into an agreement to
submit this matter to binding arbitration; the arbitration hearing was held from
October 29, 2007, to November 1, 2007, with briefs submitted to the arbitration
panel on November 6, 2007. The decision of the arbitration panel, holding that
Skidmore should take nothing, was rendered on November 29, 2007.
YPF
Holdings Inc., including its subsidiaries, is a party to various other lawsuits,
the outcomes of which are not expected to have a material adverse effect on the
Company’s financial condition.
|
-
|
EDF International S.A.
(“EDF”): EDF had initiated an international arbitration proceeding
under the Arbitration Regulations of the International Chamber of Commerce
against Endesa Internacional S.A. and YPF. EDF claimed from YPF the
payment of US$ 69 million, which were subsequently increased to US$ 103
million plus interests without existing real arguments, in connection with
the sale of Electricidad Argentina S.A., parent company of Edenor S.A. EDF
claimed an adjustment in the purchase price it paid arguing that under the
stock purchase agreement, the price it paid would be reviewed if changes
in the exchange rate of Argentine peso occurred prior to December 31,
2001. EDF considered that this had happened. On October 22, 2007, the
Arbitral Court issued an arbitral final award in which EDF’s claim and the
defendants’ counterclaim are partially accepted. Consequently, the
arbitral final award imposed on YPF the payment of US$ 28.9 million plus
interests. The Company and EDF are both currently challenging the arbitral
decision.
|
Additionally,
the Company’s Management, in consultation with its external counsels, believes
that the following contingencies and claims, individually significant, have a
reasonably possible outcome:
|
-
|
Availability of foreign
currency deriving from exports: Decree No. 1,589/1989 of the
Federal Executive provides that, producers enjoying free availability of
crude oil, natural gas and/or liquefied gas under Law No. 17,319 and
its supplemented Decrees and producers that may agree so in the future
will have free availability of the percentage of foreign currency coming
from the exports of crude oil, petroleum derivatives, natural gas and/or
liquefied gas of free availability established in biddings and/or
renegotiations, or agreed-upon in the respective contracts. In no cases
will the maximum freely available percentage be allowed to exceed 70% of
each transaction.
|
During
year 2002, several government organizations considered that free availability of
foreign currency provided by Decree No. 1,589/1989 was implicitly abolished
by Decree No. 1,606/2001.
On
December 31, 2002, Decree No. 2,703/2002 was enforced, ratifying such date
the 70% limit as the maximum freely available percentage of foreign currency
deriving from the exports of crude oil and petroleum derivatives, without
providing a conclusion in regards to the exports performed during the year 2002,
after the issuance of Decree No. 1,606/2001.
The
Central Bank has indicted YPF on charges allegedly related to certain exports
performed during 2002, once the executive order 1,606/2001 was no longer in
force and before the executive order 2,703/2002 came into effect. Therefore, YPF
will file an answer to the charges and will offer evidence in this regard. In
case YPF is indicted on charges involving other exports during the said period,
YPF has the right to challenge the decision as well as to request the issuance
of precautionary measures.
There is a
recently confirmed sentence, connected with proceeding to another hydrocarbon
exporter, where the claim was the same and the company and its directors were
acquitted of all charges because it was considered that the company was exempt
from the liquidation and negotiation of the 70% of the foreign currency deriving
from the hydrocarbon exports.
|
-
|
Asociación Superficiarios de
la Patagonia (“ASSUPA”): In August 2003, ASSUPA sued 18 companies
operating exploitation concessions and exploration permits in the Neuquén
Basin, YPF being one of them, claiming the remediation of the general
environmental damage purportedly caused in the execution of such
activities, and subsidiary constitution of an environmental restoration
fund and the implementation of measures to prevent environmental damages
in the future. The plaintiff requested that the National Government, the
Federal Environmental Council (“Consejo Federal de Medio Ambiente”), the
provinces of Buenos Aires, La Pampa, Neuquén, Río Negro and Mendoza and
the Ombudsman of the Nation be summoned. It requested, as a preliminary
injunction, that the defendants refrain from carrying out activities
affecting the environment. Both the Ombudsman’s summon as well as the
requested preliminary injunction were rejected by the Supreme Court of
Justice of Argentina. YPF has answered the demand and has required the
summon of the National Government, due to it’s obligation to indemnify YPF
for events and claims previous to January 1, 1991, according to Law No.
22,145 and Decree No. 546/1993.
|
-
|
Environmental
claims in Dock Sud and Quilmes:
|
Dock sud: A group of
neighbours of Dock Sud, Province of Buenos Aires, have sued 44 companies, among
which YPF is included, the National Government, the Province of Buenos Aires,
the City of Buenos Aires and 14 municipalities, before the Supreme Court of
Justice of Argentina, seeking the remediation and the indemnification of the
environmental collective damage produced in the basin of the Matanza and
Riachuelo rivers. Additionally, another group of neighbours of the Dock Sud
area, have filed two other environmental lawsuits, one of them has not been
notified to YPF, claiming several companies located in that area, among which
YPF is included, the Province of Buenos Aires and several municipalities, for
the remediation and the indemnification of the environmental collective damage
of the Dock Sud area and for the individual damage they claim to have suffered.
YPF has the right of indemnity by the Argentine Government for events and claims
previous to January 1, 1991, according to Law No. 22,145 and Decree
No. 546/1993.
Quilmes: Citizens which
allege that are residents living near Quilmes, province of Buenos Aires, have
filed a lawsuit in which they have requested remediation of environmental
damages and also the payment of 46 as a compensation for supposedly personal
damages. They base their claim mainly on a fuel leak in a poliduct running from
La Plata to Dock Sud, currently operated by YPF, which occurred in 1988 as a
result of an illicit detected at that time, being at that moment YPF a
state-owned company. Fuel would have emerged and become perceptible in November
2002, which resulted in remediation which is being performed by YPF in the
affected area, supervised by the environmental authority of the province of
Buenos Aires. YPF has requested suspension of the term to respond to the
lawsuit, until the document filed by the plaintiffs is obtained. YPF has also
notified the Argentine Government that it will receive a citation, due to its
obligation to indemnify the Company against any liability according to Law No.
24,145, prior to requesting its citation before the Court upon YPF’s response to
the complaint. In addition, a group of neighbors brought out-of-court claims
against us and some others filed similar claims amounting Ps. 4
million.
|
-
|
National Antitrust Protection
Board: On November 17, 2003, Antitrust Board requested
explanations, within the framework of an official investigation pursuant
to Art. 29 of the Antitrust Act, from a group of almost thirty natural gas
production companies, among them YPF, with respect to the following items:
(i) the inclusion of clauses purportedly restraining trade in natural gas
purchase/sale contracts and (ii) gas imports from Bolivia, in particular
(a) old expired contracts signed by YPF, when it was state-owned, and YPFB
(the Bolivian state-owned oil company), under which YPF allegedly sold
Bolivian gas in Argentina at prices below the purchase price; and (b) the
unsuccessful attempts in 2001 by Duke and Distribuidora de Gas del Centro
to import gas into Argentina from Bolivia. On January 12, 2004, YPF
submitted explanations in accordance with Art. 29 of the Antitrust Act,
contending that no antitrust violations had been committed and that there
had been no price discrimination between natural gas sales in the
Argentine market and the export market. On January 20, 2006, YPF received
a notification of resolution dated December 2, 2005, whereby the
AntitrustBoard (i) rejected the “non bis in idem” petition filed by YPF,
on the grounds that ENARGAS was not empowered to resolve the issue when
ENARGAS Resolution No. 1,289 was enacted; and (ii) ordered that the
preliminary opening of the proceedings be undertaken pursuant to the
provisions of Section 30 of Act 25,156. On January 15, 2007, Antitrust
Board charged YPF and eight other producers with violations of Act 25,156.
YPF has contested the complaint on the basis that no violation of the Act
took place and that the charges are barred by the applicable statute of
limitations, and has presented evidence in support of its position. On
June 22, 2007, YPF presented to the Antitrust Board, without acknowledging
any conduct in violation of the Antitrust Act, a commitment consistent
with Article 36 of the Antitrust Act, requiring to the Antitrust Board to
approve the commitment, to suspend the investigation and to file the
proceedings.
|
The
Antitrust Board has started proceedings to investigate YPF for including a
clause in bulk LPG (Liquid Petroleum Gas) supply contracts that it believes
prevents the buyer from reselling the product to a third party and therefore
restricts competition in a manner detrimental to the general economic interest.
YPF has asserted that the contracts do not contain a prohibition against resale
to third parties and has offered evidence in support of its position. On April
12, 2007, YPF presented to the Antitrust Board, without acknowledging any
conduct in violation of the Antitrust Act, a commitment consistent with Article
36 of the Antitrust Act, in which it commits, among other things, to refrain
from including a clause with the destiny of the product in future bulk LPG
supply contracts.
|
-
|
Other environmental claims in
La Plata: On June 6, 2007, YPF was served with a new complaint in
which 9 residents of the vicinity of Refineria La Plata request i) the
cease of contamination and other harms they claim are attributable to the
refinery; ii) the clean-up of the adjacent channels, Río Santiago and Río
de la Plata (soil, water and acquiferous) or, if clean-up is impossible,
indemnification for environmental and personal damages. The plaintiff has
quantified damages as 51, or an amount to be determined from evidence
produced during the proceeding. YPF believes that most damages that are
alleged by the plaintiff, might be attributable to events that occurred
prior to YPF's privatization and would therefore be covered to that extent
by the indemnity granted by the Argentine Government in accordance with
the Privatization Law of YPF. Notwithstanding the foresaid, the
possibility of YPF being asked to afford these liabilities is not
discarded, in which case the Argentine State must be asked to reimburse
the remediation expenses for liabilities existing prior to January 1,
1991. In addition, the claim partially overlaps with the request made by a
group of neighbours of the La Plata Refinery on June 29, 1999, mentioned
in “La Plata environmental claims”. Accordingly, YPF considers that the
cases should be partially consolidated to the extent that the claims
overlap. Regarding claims not consolidated, for the time being information
and documents in order to answer the claim are being collected, and it is
not possible to reasonably estimate the outcome, as long as, if
applicable, estimate the corresponding legal fees and expenses that might
result. The contamination that may exist could derive from countless
sources, including from disposal of waste over many years by other
industrial facilities and ships.
|
Additionally,
YPF is aware of an action in which it has not yet been served, in which the
plaintiff requests the clean-up of the channels adjacent to the La Plata
Refinery, Río Santiago, and other sectors near the coast line, and, if such
remediation is not possible, an indemnification of 500 (approximately US$ 161
million) or an amount to be determined from evidence produced in discovery. The
claim partially overlaps with the requests made by a group of neighbours of the
La Plata Refinery on June 29, 1999, previously mentioned in “La Plata
environmental claims”, and with the complaint served on June 6, 2007, mentioned
in the previous paragraph. Accordingly, YPF considers that if it is served in
this proceeding or any other proceeding related to the same subject matters, the
cases should be consolidated to the extent that the claims overlap. With respect
to claims not consolidated, for the time being, it is not possible to reasonably
estimate the monetary outcome, as long as, if applicable, estimate the
corresponding legal fees and expenses that might result. Additionally, YPF
believes that most damages that would be alleged by the plaintiff, if proven,
may be attributable to events that occurred prior to YPF's privatization and
would therefore be the responsibility of the Argentine Government in accordance
with the Privatization Law concerning YPF.
|
-
|
Other claims related to the
domestic natural gas market: Mega has claimed YPF for cutbacks in
natural gas supply pursuant to their respective sales contract. YPF
affirmed that the deliveries of natural gas to Mega were affected by the
interference of the Government. Besides, YPF wouldn’t have any
responsibility based on the events of force majeure, fortuitous case and
frustration of the contractual purpose. Despite YPF has material arguments
of defense, taking into account the characteristics of the claims, these
have been considered as possible
contingences.
|
|
-
|
Additionally,
the Company has received other labor, civil and commercial claims and
several claims from the AFIP and from several provincial and municipal
fiscal authorities, which have not been reserved since Management, based
on the evidence available to date and upon the opinion of its external
counsels, has considered them to be reasonably possible
contingencies.
|
b)
Environmental
liabilities:
The
Company is subject to various laws and regulations relating to the protection of
the environment. These laws and regulations may, among other things, impose
liability on companies for the cost of pollution clean-up and environmental
damages resulting from operations. Management believes that the Company's
operations are in substantial compliance with the laws and regulations currently
in force relating to the protection of the environment, as such laws have
historically been interpreted and enforced.
However,
the Company is periodically conducting new studies to increase its knowledge
concerning the environmental situation in certain geographic areas where the
Company operates in order to establish their status, causes and solutions.
Furthermore, based on the aging of the environmental issue, the Company analyzes
the possible responsibility of Argentine Government, in accordance with the
contingencies assumed by the Argentine Government for liabilities existing prior
December 31, 1990. Until these studies are completed and evaluated, the Company
cannot estimate what additional costs, if any, will be required. However, it is
possible that other works, including provisional remedial measures, may be
required.
In
addition to the hydrocarbon wells abandonment legal obligations for 2,711 as of
December 31, 2007, the Company has reserved 303 corresponding to environmental
remediations, which evaluations and/or remediation works are probable,
significant and can also be reasonably estimated, based on the Company's
existing remediation program. Future legislative and technological changes may
cause a re-evaluation of the estimates. The Company cannot predict what
environmental legislation or regulation will be enacted in the future or how
future laws or regulations will be administered. In the long-term, this
potential changes and ongoing studies, could materially affect future results of
operations.
|
-
|
Contractual
commitments: In June 1998, YPF
has received an advanced payment for a crude oil future delivery
commitment for approximately US$ 315 million. Under the terms of this
agreement, the Company has agreed to sell and deliver approximately 23.9
million crude oil barrels during the term of ten years. To satisfy the
contract deliveries, YPF may deliver crude oil from different sources,
including its own produced crude oil and crude oil acquired from third
parties. This payment has been classified as “Net advances from crude oil
purchasers” on the balance sheet and is being reduced as crude oil is
delivered to the purchaser under the term of the contract. As of December
31, 2007, approximately 1 million crude oil barrels are pending of
delivery.
|
Additionally,
the Company has signed other contracts by means of which it has committed to buy
certain products and services, and to sell natural gas, liquefied petroleum gas
and other products. Some of the mentioned contracts include penalty clauses that
stipulate compensations for a breach of the obligation to receive, deliver or
transport the product object of the contract. In particular, YPF has
renegotiated certain natural gas export contracts, and has agreed certain
limited compensations in case of any delivery interruption or suspension, for
any reason, except for physical force majeure event.
On June
14, 2007, Resolution No. 599/2007 of the Secretariat of Energy was published
(the “Resolution”). This Resolution approved an agreement with natural gas
producers regarding the natural gas supply to the domestic market during the
period 2007 through 2011 (the “Agreement 2007-2011”), giving such producers a
five business-day term to enter into the Agreement 2007-2011. The purpose of
this Agreement 2007-2011 is to guarantee the normal supply of the natural gas
domestic market during the period 2007 through 2011, considering the domestic
market demand registered during 2006 plus the growth of residential and small
commercial customers consumption (the “Priority Demand”). According to the
Resolution, the producers that have signed the Agreement 2007-2011 commit to
supply a part of the Priority Demand according to certain percentage determined
for each producer based upon its share of production for the 36 months period
prior to April 2004. In case of shortage to supply Priority Demand, natural gas
exports of producers that did not sign the Agreement 2007-2011 will be the first
to be called upon in order to satisfy such mentioned shortage. The Agreement
2007-2011 also establishes terms of effectiveness and pricing provisions for the
Priority Demand consumption. Considering that the Resolution anticipates the
continuity of the regulatory mechanisms that affect the exports, YPF has
appealed the Resolution and has expressly stated that the execution of the
Agreement 2007-2011 does not mean any recognition by YPF of the validity of that
Resolution. On June 22, 2007, the National Direction of Hydrocarbons notified
that the Agreement 2007-2011 reached the sufficient level of subscription and
that it is currently in an implementation stage.
|
-
|
Regulatory requirements:
the Company is subject to certain regulations that require to
satisfy the hydrocarbon market domestic demand. In October 11, 2006,
Domestic Trade Secretary issued Resolution No. 25/2006 which requires
refiners and/or wholesale and/or retail sellers to meet domestic market
diesel demand. The resolution requires, at least, to supply volumes
equivalent to those of previous year corresponding month, plus the
positive correlation between the rise in diesel demand and the rise of the
Gross Domestic Product, accrued from the reference month. The mentioned
commercialization should be performed with no distortion nor damage to the
diesel market normal operation.
|
In
connection with certain natural gas export contracts from the Noroeste basin in
Argentina, YPF presented to the Secretariat of Energy the accreditation of the
existence of natural gas reserves of that basin in adherence to export permits.
If The Secretariat of Energy considers that the natural gas reserves are
insufficient, it could resolve the partial or total suspension of one or several
export permits. Through SE Note No. 1,009/2006, the Secretariat of Energy
limited the exportable volumes of natural gas authorized by the SE Resolution
No. 167/1997 in a 20% (thus, 80% of the authorized exportable volumes remain
outstanding) by the SE Note N° 1,009/2006. All of this is connected with the
export authorization gave by the SE Resolution N° 167/1997.
During
2005, the Secretariat of Energy by means of Resolution No. 785/2005,
created the National Program of Hydrocarbons Warehousing Aerial Tank Loss
Control, measure aimed at reducing and correcting environmental pollution caused
by hydrocarbons warehousing-aerial tanks. The Company has begun to develop and
implement a technical and environmental audit plan as required by the
resolution.
|
-
|
Operating leases: As of
December 31, 2007, the main lease contracts correspond to the rental of
oil and gas production equipment, natural gas compression equipment and
real estate for service stations. Charges recognized under these contracts
for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, amounted to 396, 323
and 272, respectively.
|
As of
December 31, 2007, estimated future payments related to these contracts are as
follows:
|
Within
1 year
|
|
From
1 to 2 years
|
|
From
2 to 3 years
|
|
From
3 to 4 years
|
|
From
4 to 5 years
|
|
More
than 5 years
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated
future payments
|
228
|
|
211
|
|
186
|
|
156
|
|
115
|
|
177
|
|
-
|
Agreement with the Federal
Government and the Province of Neuquén: On December 28, 2000,
through Decree No. 1,252/2000, the Argentine Federal Executive Branch (the
“Federal Executive”) extended for an additional term of 10 years, until
November 2027, the concession for the exploitation of Loma La Lata -
Sierra Barrosa area granted to YPF. The extension was granted under the
terms and conditions of the Extension Agreement executed between the
Federal Government, the Province of Neuquén and YPF on December 5, 2000.
Under this agreement, YPF paid US$ 300 million to the Federal
Government for the extension of the concession mentioned above, which were
recorded in fixed assets and committed among other things to define an
investment program of US$ 8,000 million in the Province of Neuquén from
2000 to 2017 and to pay to the Province of Neuquén 5% of the net cash
flows arising out of the concession during each year of the extension
term. The previously mentioned commitments have been affected by the
changes in economic rules established by Public Emergency and Exchange
System Reform Law No. 25,561.
|
d)
Changes
in Argentine economic rules:
During
year 2002, a deep change was implemented in the economic model of the country to
overcome the economic crisis in the medium-term. Therefore, the Argentine
Federal Government abandoned the parity between the Argentine peso and the US
dollar, in place since March 1991, and adopted a set of economic, monetary,
financial, fiscal and exchange measures. These financial statements include the
effects derived from the economic policies known to the release date thereof.
The effects of any additional measures to be implemented by the Argentine
Federal Government will be recognized in the financial statements once
Management becomes aware of their existence.
11.
|
RESTRICTIONS
ON UNAPPROPRIATED RETAINED EARNINGS
|
In
accordance with the provisions of Law No. 19,550, 5% of net income for each
fiscal year is to be appropriated to the legal reserve until such reserve
reaches 20% of the Company's capital (subscribed capital plus adjustment to
contributions). Accordingly, the unappropriated retained earnings as of December
31, 2007, are restricted in 204.
On
February 6, 2008, the Board of Directors approved a dividend of 10.76 Argentine
pesos per share, paid on February 29, 2008, from the Reserve for Future
Dividends approved by the Ordinary Shareholders’ Metting of April 13,
2007.
Under Law
No. 25,063, dividends distributed, either in cash or in kind, in excess of
accumulated taxable income as of the end of the year immediately preceding the
dividend payment or distribution date, shall be subject to a 35% income tax
withholding as a sole and final payment, except for those distributed to
shareholders resident in countries benefited from conventions for the avoidance
of double taxation, which will be subject to a minor tax rate.
12. MAIN
CHANGES IN COMPANIES COMPRISING THE YPF GROUP
During
the year ended December 31, 2007:
·
|
YPF
acquired an additional 18% interest in Oleoducto Trasandino (Argentina)
S.A., a 18% interest in Oleoducto Trasandino (Chile) S.A. and a 18%
interest in A&C Pipeline Holding Company, for an amount of US$ 5.3
million.
|
·
|
YPF
sold its interest in Petróleos Trasandinos S.A., for an amount of US$ 2
million, recording a gain of 5.
|
During
the year ended December 31, 2006:
·
|
YPF
International S.A., controlled by YPF, sold for an amount of US$ 10.6
million (approximately 31), its interest in Greenstone Assurance Ltd.,
recording a gain of 11.
|
During
the year ended December 31, 2005:
·
|
YPF
sold, for an amount of US$ 97.5 million, its interest in
PBBPolisur S.A., recording a net gain of
75.
|
·
|
YPF
sold its interest in Petroken, for an amount of US$ 58 million
(equivalent to its carrying
amount).
|
·
|
YPF
transfered its interest in Gas Argentino S.A. to YPF Inversora Energética
S.A., company wholly controlled by
YPF.
|
|
13.
|
SUMMARY
OF SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES BETWEEN ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLES FOLLOWED BY THE
COMPANY AND UNITED STATES GENERALLY ACCEPTED ACCOUNTING
PRINCIPLES
|
The
consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with
Argentine GAAP, which differs in certain respects from generally accepted
accounting principles in the United States of America (“U.S.
GAAP”).
The
differences between Argentine GAAP and U.S. GAAP are reflected in the amounts
provided in Notes 14 and 15 and principally relate to the items discussed in the
following paragraphs:
a.
|
Functional
and reporting currency
|
Under
Argentine GAAP, financial statements are presented in constant Argentine pesos
(“reporting currency”), as mentioned in Note 1. Foreign currency transactions
are recorded in Argentine pesos by applying to the foreign currency amount the
exchange rate between the reporting and the foreign currency at the date of the
transaction. Exchange rate differences arising on monetary items in foreign
currency are recognized in the income statement of each year.
Under U.S.
GAAP, a definition of the functional currency is required, which may differ from
the reporting currency. Management has determined for YPF and certain of its
subsidiaries and investees the U.S. dollar as its functional currency in
accordance with the Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 52,
“Foreign Currency translation”
(“SFAS No. 52”). Therefore, the Company has remeasured into U.S. dollars
its financial statements and the financial statements of the mentioned
subsidiaries and investees as of December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, prepared in
accordance with Argentine GAAP by applying the procedures specified in SFAS No.
52. The objective of the remeasurement process is to produce the same results
that would have been reported if the accounting records had been kept in the
functional currency. Accordingly, monetary assets and liabilities are remeasured
at the balance sheet date (current) exchange rate. Amounts carried at prices in
past transactions are remeasured at the exchange rates in effect when the
transactions occurred. Revenues and expenses are remeasured on a monthly basis
at the average rates of exchange in effect during the period, except for
consumption of nonmonetary assets, which are remeasured at the rates of exchange
in effect when the respective assets were acquired. Translation gains and losses
on monetary assets and liabilities arising from the remeasurement are included
in the determination of net income (loss) in the period such gains and losses
arise. For certain YPF’s subsidiary and investees, Management has determined the
Argentine peso as its functional currency. Translation adjustments resulting
from the process of translating the financial statements of the mentioned
subsidiary and investees into U.S. dollars are not included in determining net
income and are reported in other comprehensive income (“OCI”) as a component of
shareholders’ equity.
The
amounts obtained from the process referred to above are translated into
Argentine pesos following the provisions of SFAS No. 52. Assets and liabilities
were translated at the current selling exchange rate of Argentine pesos 3.15,
3.06 and 3.03 to US$ 1, as of December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
Revenues, expenses, gains and losses reported in the income statement are
translated at the exchange rate existing at the time of each transaction or, if
appropriate, at the weighted average of the exchange rates during the period.
Translation effects of exchange rate changes are included in OCI as a component
of shareholders’ equity.
b.
|
Proportional
consolidation
|
As
discussed in Note 1, YPF has proportionally consolidated, net of intercompany
transactions, assets, liabilities, net sales, cost and expenses of investees in
which joint control is held. Under U.S. GAAP these investees are accounted for
by the equity method. The mentioned proportional consolidation generated under
Argentine GAAP an increase of 486, 446 and 381 in total assets and total
liabilities as of December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively, and an
increase of 1,350, 1,451 and 1,216 in net sales and 690, 774 and 681 in
operating income for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005,
respectively.
c.
|
Valuation
of inventories
|
As
described in Note 2.b, the Company values its inventories of refined products
for sale, products in process of refining and separation, crude oil and natural
gas at replacement cost. Under U.S. GAAP, these inventories should be valued at
the lower of cost or market, which is defined as replacement cost, provided that
it does not exceed net realizable value or is not less than net realizable value
reduced by a normal profit margin. As the turnover ratio of inventories is high,
there have been no significant differences between inventories valued at
replacement cost and at historical cost using first in first out (“FIFO”) method
for the years presented.
d.
|
Impairment
of long-lived assets
|
Under
Argentine GAAP, in order to perform the recoverability test, long-lived assets
are grouped with other assets at business segment level. With respect to
long-lived assets that were held as pending for sale or disposal, the Company’s
policy is to record these assets at amounts that did not exceed net realizable
value.
Under U.S.
GAAP, for proved oil and gas properties, the Company performs the impairment
test on an individual field basis. Other long-lived assets are aggregated so
that the discrete cash flows produced by each group of assets may be separately
analyzed. Each asset is tested following the guidelines of SFAS No. 144,
“Accounting for the Impairment
of Long-Lived Assets”, by comparing the net book value of such an asset
with the expected undiscounted cash flows. Impairment losses are measured as the
amount by which the carrying amount of the assets exceeds the fair value of the
assets. When market values are not available, the Company estimates them using
the expected future cash flows discounted at a rate commensurate with the risks
associated with the recovery of the assets.
Impairment
charges under U.S. GAAP amounted to 111, 80 and 2 for the years ended
December
31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively, and were included as operating income
from continuing operations. The impairment recorded in years ended December 31,
2007, 2006 and 2005 was mainly the result of a decrease in oil and gas reserves
affecting certain long-lived assets of the YPF’s Exploration and Production
Business Segment.
The
reversal and impairment charge of 69 and (69) under Argentine GAAP
for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively, as discussed in
Note 2.c, were eliminated for U.S. GAAP purposes.
The
adjusted basis after impairment results in lower depreciation under U.S. GAAP of
132, 137 and 170 for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005,
respectively.
e.
|
Start-up
and organization costs
|
Under
Argentine GAAP, start-up and organization costs can be capitalized subject to
recoverability through future revenues. These costs were fully amortized during
2006 based on a five-year estimated useful life.
Under U.S.
GAAP, start-up costs were expensed as incurred.
f.
|
Reorganization
of entities under common control
|
Under
Argentine GAAP, results on sales of noncurrent assets and the corresponding
accounts receivable are recognized in the statement of income and the balance
sheet, respectively. Under U.S. GAAP, results related with reorganization of
entities under common control are eliminated and the corresponding accounts
receivable are considered as a capital (dividend) transaction.
During the
year ended December 31, 2007, the Company collected the account receivables
related with the reorganization of entities under common control. Accordingly,
no shareholders’ equity adjustment is required as of December 31, 2007. Net
income reconciliation for the year ended December 31, 2007, includes the
elimination of interests accrued under Argentine GAAP in relation with the
mentioned account receivables, which should not be recognized under U.S.
GAAP.
As
displayed in Note 2.f, YPF Holdings Inc. has non-contributory defined-benefit
pension plans and postretirement and postemployment benefits.
Under
Argentine GAAP, the net liability for defined-benefits plans is the amount
resulting from the sum of the present value of the obligations, net of the fair
value of the plan assets and net of the unrecognized actuarial losses. These
unrecognized actuarial losses are recorded in the statement of income during the
expected average remaining working lives of the employees participating in the
plans and the life expectancy of retired employees.
Under U.S.
GAAP the Company adopted SFAS No. 158 “Employers’ Accounting for Defined
Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans-an amendment of FASB Statements
No. 87, 88, 106, and 132 (R)” (“SFAS No. 158”). Under provisions of SFAS
No. 158 the Company fully recognized the underfunded status of defined-benefit
pension and postretirement plans as a liability in the financial statements
reducing the Company’s shareholders’ equity through Accumulated OCI account.
Unrecognized actuarial losses and gains are recognized in the statement of
income during the expected average remaining working lives of the employees
participating in the plans and the life expectancy of retired employees.
Considering the settlement agreement mentioned in Note 3.i, the estimated
amounts that will be amortized from accumulated other comprehensive income for
2008 are 171.
h.
|
Accounting
for asset retirement obligations
|
SFAS
No. 143, “Accounting for
Asset Retirement Obligations” (“SFAS No. 143”), addresses financial
accounting and reporting for obligations associated with the retirement of
tangible long-lived assets and the associated asset retirement cost. The
standard applies to legal obligations associated with the retirement of
long-lived assets that result from the acquisition, construction, development
and normal use of the asset. SFAS No. 143 requires that the fair value of a
liability for an asset retirement obligation be recognized in the period in
which it is incurred, if a reasonable estimate of fair value can be made. The
asset retirement obligations liability is built up in cash flow layers, with
each layer being discounted using the discount rate as of the date that the
layer was created. Remeasurement of the entire obligation using current discount
rates is not permitted. Each cash flow layer is added to the carrying amount of
the associated asset. This additional carrying amount is then depreciated over
the life of the asset. The liability is increased due to the passage of time
based on the time value of money (“accretion expense”) until the obligation is
settled. The activity with respect to retirement obligations under US GAAP is
detailed in Note 15.c.
Argentine
GAAP is similar to SFAS No. 143, except for a change in the discount rate is
treated as a change in estimates, so the entire liability must be recalculated
using the current discount rate, being the change added or reduced from the
related asset.
i.
|
Consolidation
of variable interest entities - Interpretation of ARB No.
51
|
Under
Argentine GAAP consolidation is based on having the votes necessary to control
corporate decisions (Note 1). FIN No. 46R, “Consolidation of Variable Interest
Entities”, (“FIN 46R”), clarifies the application of Accounting
Research Bulletin No. 51, Consolidated Financial Statements, to certain
entities in which equity investors do not have the characteristics of a
controlling financial interest or do not have sufficient equity at risk for the
entity to finance its activities without additional subordinated financial
support from other parties. The interpretations explain how to identify variable
interest entities and how an enterprise assesses its interests in a variable
interest entity to decide whether to consolidate that entity. They require
existing unconsolidated variable interest entities to be consolidated by their
primary beneficiaries if the entities do not effectively disperse risks among
parties involved.
As of
December 31, 2007, YPF has operations with one variable interest entity (“VIE”)
which has been created in order to structure YPF’s future deliveries of oil
(“FOS transaction”).
YPF
entered into a forward oil sale agreement that calls for the future delivery of
oil for the life of the contract. YPF was paid in advance for the future
delivery of oil. The price of the oil to be delivered was calculated using
various factors, including the expected future price and quality of the crude
oil being delivered. The counterparty or assignee to the oil supply agreement is
a VIE incorporated in the Cayman Islands, which finance itself through the
issuance of notes. The oil to be delivered under the supply agreement is
subsequently sold in the open market.
YPF is
exposed to any change in the price of the crude oil it will deliver in the
future under the outstanding FOS transaction. YPF’s exposure derives from crude
oil swap agreements under which YPF pays a fixed price with respect to the
nominal amount of the crude oil sold, and receives the variable market price of
such crude oil (Note 2.j).
The effect
before taxes of such consolidation was an increase in the “Loans” account of 68,
186 and 297, an increase of current assets of 24, 19, and 18, the elimination of
“Net advances from crude oil purchasers” of 9, 103 and 196 and a decrease in
shareholders’ equity of 35, 65 and 83 as of December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005,
respectively.
j.
|
Capitalization
of financial expenses
|
Under
Argentine GAAP, for those assets that necessarily take a substantial period of
time to get ready for its intended use, borrowing costs (including interest and
exchange differences) should be capitalized. Accordingly, borrowing costs for
those assets whose construction period exceeds one year have been capitalized,
provided that such capitalization does not exceed the amount of financial
expense recorded in that year.
Under US
GAAP, only interest expense on qualifying assets must be capitalized, regardless
of the asset’s construction period.
The effect
on net income and shareholders’ equity as of December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005 is
included in “Capitalization of financial expenses” in the reconciliation in Note
14.
k.
|
Accounting
treatment for retrospective
premiums
|
Up to the
sale of its indirect subsidiary, Greenstone Assurance Limited, YPF was a member
of Oil Insurance Limited (“OIL”). OIL is owned by and operated for its
shareholders, all of whom are engaged in energy operations.
Pursuant
to OIL’s Rating and Premium Plan, there is a withdrawal premium (the “Avoided
Premium Surcharge” or “APS”) to which insured members are liable under certain
circumstances which include cancellation and non-renewal of the policy. The APS
is calculated by OIL at its sole discretion, it is final and the amount shall
not exceed the applicable future premiums that the insured would have paid
absent such cancellation or non-renewal, in respect of losses incurred before
the date on which the cancellation or non-renewal takes place. Such obligation,
in substance, is similar to a retrospective premium to recover past losses which
is paid in any case, either through future premium payments (if the member
remains in the company) or as a one-time payment if the member withdraws from
OIL.
The effect
on net income under US GAAP as of December 31, 2004 was recorded in the
subsequent year for Argentine GAAP purposes.
l.
|
SFAS
Interpretation No. 48, “Accounting for uncertainty in
income taxes – an interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109” (“FIN
48”)
|
FIN 48
defines the criteria an individual tax position must meet for any part of the
benefit of such position to be recognized in the financial statements. FIN 48
establishes “a more-likely-than-not” recognition threshold that must be met
before a tax benefit can be recognized in the financial statements. FIN 48 also
provides guidance, among other things, on the measurement of the income tax
benefit associated with uncertain tax positions, de-recognition, classification,
interest and penalties and financial statement disclosures.
The
Company implemented FIN 48 in January, 2007. As it is defined in this
interpretation, the Company has reassessed whether the “more-likely-than-not”
recognition threshold has been met before a tax benefit can be recognized and
how much of a tax benefits to recognize in the financial statements. The
adoption of FIN 48 did not have an impact on YPF’s financial position. There
were no unrecognized tax benefits as of the date of adoption and as of December
31, 2007.
Under
Argentine tax regime, as of December 31, 2007, fiscal years 2001 through 2006
remain subject to examination by the Federal Administration of Public Revenues
(“AFIP”).
m.
|
SFAS
No. 157, Fair Value Measurements
|
In
September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements”
(“SFAS No. 157”), which clarifies the definition of fair value, establishes
guidelines for measuring fair value, and expands disclosures regarding fair
value measurements. SFAS No. 157 does not require any new fair value
measurements and eliminates inconsistencies in guidance found in various prior
accounting pronouncements. SFAS No. 157 will be effective for the Company
on January 1, 2008. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of adopting
SFAS No. 157 but does not believe the adoption of SFAS 157 will have a material
impact on its financial position results of operations and cash
flows.
n.
|
FSP
FAS 157-1, “Application of FASB Statement No. 157 to FASB Statement
No. 13 and Other Accounting Pronouncements That Address Fair Value
Measurements for Purposes of Lease Classification or Measurement under
Statement 13”
|
This FASB
Staff Position (“FSP”) was issued in February 2008, is effective upon
the initial adoption of Statement 157 and amends SFAS No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements”, to
exclude SFAS No. 13, “Accounting for Leases”, and
other accounting pronouncements that address fair value measurements for
purposes of lease classification or measurement under Statement 13. However,
this scope exception does not apply to assets acquired and liabilities assumed
in a business combination that are required to be measured at fair value under
SFAS No. 141, “Business
Combinations”, regardless of whether those assets and liabilities are
related to leases. The Company does not anticipate that the adoption of this new
statement at the required effective date will have a significant effect in its
results of operations, financial position or cash flows.
o.
|
FSP
No. FAS 157-2 “Effective Date of SFAS
No. 157”
|
In
December 2007, the FASB released a proposed FSP (FSP SFAS 157-2 – Effective Date of SFAS
No. 157) which, if adopted, would delay the effective date of SFAS
No. 157 until fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2008, and
interim periods within those fiscal years, for all non-financial assets and
nonfinancial liabilities, except those that are recognized or disclosed at fair
value in the financial statements on a recurring basis (at least annually). The
Company does not anticipate that the adoption of this new statement at the
required effective date will have a significant effect in its results of
operations, financial position or cash flows.
p.
|
SFAS
No. 159, The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial
Liabilities
|
In
February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 159, “The Fair Value Option for Financial
Assets and Financial Liabilities—Including an amendment of FASB Statement
No. 115” (“SFAS No. 159”). SFAS No. 159 permits entities to
choose to measure many financial instruments and certain other items at fair
value. Unrealized gains and losses on items for which the fair value option has
been elected will be recognized in earnings at each subsequent reporting date.
SFAS No. 159 is effective for the Company on January 1, 2008. The
Company is evaluating the impact that the adoption of SFAS No. 159 will
have on the financial statements, but does not believe the adoption of SFAS No.
159 will have a material impact on its financial position results of operations
and cash flows.
q.
|
SFAS
No.141(R), “Business Combinations” and SFAS No. 160, “Noncontrolling
Interests in Consolidated Financial Statements — an amendment of ARB No.
51”
|
In
December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 141 (Revised 2007), “Business Combinations”
(“SFAS No. 141(R)”) which requires the recognition of assets acquired,
liabilities assumed, and any noncontrolling interest in an acquiree at the
acquisition date fair value with limited exceptions. SFAS No. 141(R) will
change the accounting treatment for certain specific items and includes a
substantial number of new disclosure requirements. SFAS No. 141(R) applies
prospectively to business combinations for which the acquisition date is on or
after the beginning of the first annual reporting period beginning on or after
December 15, 2008.
In
December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 160, “Noncontrolling Interests in
Consolidated Financial Statements — an Amendment of ARB No. 51”
(“SFAS No. 160”), which establishes new accounting and reporting standards for
noncontrolling interest (minority interest) and for the deconsolidation of a
subsidiary. SFAS No. 160 also includes expanded disclosure requirements
regarding the interests of the parent and its noncontrolling interest. SFAS
No. 160 is effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those
fiscal years, beginning on or after December 15, 2008.
r.
|
SFAS
No. 161, Disclosures about Derivative Instruments and Hedging
Activities
|
In March
2008 the FASB issued SFAS No. 161, “Disclosures about Derivative
Instruments and Hedging Activities”. The new standard is intended to
improve financial reporting about derivative instruments and hedging activities
by requiring enhanced disclosures to enable investors to better understand their
effects on an entity’s financial position, financial performance, and cash
flows. The new standard also improves transparency about the location and
amounts of derivative instruments in an entity’s financial statements; how
derivative instruments and related hedged items are accounted for under
SFAS 133; and how derivative instruments and related hedged items affect
its financial position, financial performance, and cash flows. This
Statement is effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years and
interim periods beginning after November 15, 2008, with early application
encouraged. The Company does not anticipate that the adoption of this new
statement at the required effective date will have a significant effect in its
results of operations, financial position or cash flows.
|
14.
|
RECONCILIATION
OF NET INCOME AND SHAREHOLDERS' EQUITY TO UNITED STATES GENERALLY ACCEPTED
ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLES
|
The
following is a summary of the significant adjustments to net income for each of
the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, and to shareholders’ equity as
of December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, which would have been required if U.S. GAAP
had been applied instead of Argentine GAAP in the consolidated financial
statements. Amounts are expressed in millions of Argentine pesos.
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income according to Argentine GAAP
|
|
|
4,086 |
|
|
|
4,457 |
|
|
|
5,362 |
|
Increase
(decrease) due to:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Elimination
of the inflation adjustment into Argentine constant pesos
(Note
1 and 13.a)
|
|
|
805 |
|
|
|
1,144 |
|
|
|
1,048 |
|
Remeasurement
into functional currency and translation into reporting currency (Note
13.a)
|
|
|
(1,513 |
) |
|
|
(2,065 |
) |
|
|
(1,479 |
) |
Impairment
of long-lived assets (Note 13.d)
|
|
|
(48 |
) |
|
|
126 |
|
|
|
168 |
|
Start-up
and organization costs amortization (Note 13.e)
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
Reorganization
of entities under common control - Interest from accounts receivable (Note
13.f)
|
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
|
(65 |
) |
|
|
(123 |
) |
Pension
Plans (Note 13.g)
|
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
(19 |
) |
|
|
(25 |
) |
Asset
Retirement Obligations (Note 13.h)
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(33 |
) |
Consolidation
of VIEs (Note 13.i)
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
Capitalization
of financial expenses (Note 13.j)
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
104 |
|
|
|
102 |
|
Retrospective
premiums (Note 13.k)
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
122 |
|
Deferred
income tax (1)
|
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
|
(47 |
) |
|
|
(36 |
) |
Net
income in accordance with U.S. GAAP
|
|
|
3,325 |
|
|
|
3,667 |
|
|
|
5,142 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholders'
equity according to Argentine GAAP
|
|
|
26,060 |
|
|
|
24,345 |
|
|
|
22,249 |
|
Increase
(decrease) due to:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Elimination
of the inflation adjustment into Argentine constant pesos
(Note
1 and 13.a)
|
|
|
(4,203 |
) |
|
|
(5,008 |
) |
|
|
(6,152 |
) |
Remeasurement
into functional currency and translation into
reporting
currency (Note 13.a)
|
|
|
7,723 |
|
|
|
8,333 |
|
|
|
10,184 |
|
Impairment
of long-lived assets (Note 13.d)
|
|
|
(554 |
) |
|
|
(491 |
) |
|
|
(611 |
) |
Start-up
and organization costs (Note 13.e)
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(13 |
) |
Reorganization
of entities under common control - Accounts receivable (Note
13.f)
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(954 |
) |
|
|
(1,417 |
) |
Pension
plans (Note 13.g)
|
|
|
(65 |
) |
|
|
(56 |
) |
|
|
16 |
|
Asset
Retirement Obligations (Note 13.h)
|
|
|
(17 |
) |
|
|
(35 |
) |
|
|
(34 |
) |
Consolidation
of VIEs (Note 13.i)
|
|
|
(35 |
) |
|
|
(65 |
) |
|
|
(83 |
) |
Capitalization
of financial expenses (Note 13.j)
|
|
|
220 |
|
|
|
211 |
|
|
|
106 |
|
Deferred
income tax (1)
|
|
|
(62 |
) |
|
|
(39 |
) |
|
|
9 |
|
Shareholders'
equity in accordance with U.S. GAAP
|
|
|
29,067 |
|
|
|
26,241 |
|
|
|
24,254 |
|
(1)
|
Corresponds
to the effect of Deferred Income Tax, if applicable, to U.S. GAAP
adjustments.
|
The
summarized balance sheets as of December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, and statements
of income and cash flows for the years then ended, remeasured into U.S. dollar
and translated into Argentine pesos under U.S. GAAP, after giving effect to the
adjustments detailed above and the elimination of the proportional consolidation
performed under Argentine GAAP, are presented only for the convenience of the
readers and would be as follows:
Summarized
balance sheets
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
assets
|
|
|
10,695 |
|
|
|
10,325 |
|
|
|
7,338 |
|
Fixed
assets
|
|
|
27,372 |
|
|
|
24,193 |
|
|
|
23,952 |
|
Other
noncurrent assets
|
|
|
2,679 |
|
|
|
2,528 |
|
|
|
3,458 |
|
Total
assets
|
|
|
40,746 |
|
|
|
37,046 |
|
|
|
34,748 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
liabilities
|
|
|
5,719 |
|
|
|
5,962 |
|
|
|
5,496 |
|
Noncurrent
liabilities
|
|
|
5,960 |
|
|
|
4,843 |
|
|
|
4,998 |
|
Shareholders'
equity
|
|
|
29,067 |
|
|
|
26,241 |
|
|
|
24,254 |
|
Total
liabilities and shareholders' equity
|
|
|
40,746 |
|
|
|
37,046 |
|
|
|
34,748 |
|
Summarized
statements of income
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
sales (1)
|
|
|
27,746 |
|
|
|
24,204 |
|
|
|
21,698 |
|
Operating
income (Note 15.a)
|
|
|
5,176 |
|
|
|
5,626 |
|
|
|
8,065 |
|
Net
income
|
|
|
3,325 |
|
|
|
3,667 |
|
|
|
5,142 |
|
Earnings
per share, basic and diluted
|
|
|
8.45 |
|
|
|
9.32 |
|
|
|
13.07 |
|
|
(1)
|
Sales
are disclosed net of fuel transfer tax, turnover tax and hydrocarbon
export withholdings.
|
Summarized
statements of cash flows
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
cash flow provided by operating activities
|
|
|
7,926 |
|
|
|
7,466 |
|
|
|
8,594 |
|
Net
cash flow used in investing activities
|
|
|
(6,112 |
) |
|
|
(5,063 |
) |
|
|
(3,221 |
) |
Net
cash flow used in financing activities
|
|
|
(2,035 |
) |
|
|
(1,955 |
) |
|
|
(5,539 |
) |
(Decrease)
increase in cash and equivalents
|
|
|
(221 |
) |
|
|
448 |
|
|
|
(166 |
) |
Cash
and equivalents at the beginning of years
|
|
|
821 |
|
|
|
371 |
|
|
|
534 |
|
Exchange
differences from cash and equivalents
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Cash
and equivalents at the end of years
|
|
|
610 |
|
|
|
821 |
|
|
|
371 |
|
Cash and
equivalents at the end of years are comprised as follows:
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
|
|
|
193 |
|
|
|
111 |
|
|
|
80 |
|
Cash
equivalents(1)
|
|
|
417 |
|
|
|
710 |
|
|
|
291 |
|
Cash
and equivalents at the end of years(2)
|
|
|
610 |
|
|
|
821 |
|
|
|
371 |
|
|
(1)
|
Included
in short-term investments in the consolidated balance
sheets.
|
|
(2)
|
Cash
and equivalents from jointly controlled companies which are proportionally
consolidated for Argentine GAAP purposes are not
included.
|
The
principal transactions not affecting cash consisted in increases in assets
related to revisions in hydrocarbon well abandonment costs for the years ended
December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005.
15. ADDITIONAL
U.S. GAAP DISCLOSURES
a)
Consolidated operating income
Under U.S.
GAAP, costs charged to income for environmental remediation, holding gains on
inventories, impairment of long-lived assets, the elimination of operating
results of jointly controlled companies proportionally consolidated, pending
lawsuits and other claims costs and other items which are not individually
significant, would have been deducted from or added to operating
income.
b)
Comprehensive income
Net income
under U.S. GAAP as determined in Note 14 is approximately the same as
comprehensive income as defined by SFAS No. 130, “Reporting Comprehensive
Income” (“SFAS 130”) for all periods presented, except for the effect in
the years 2007, 2006 and 2005 of the following items, that should be included in
comprehensive income for U.S. GAAP purposes but are excluded from net income for
U.S. GAAP purposes:
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect
arising from the translation into reporting currency (1)
|
|
|
15,485 |
|
|
|
14,582 |
|
|
|
14,368 |
|
Pension
plans (2)
|
|
|
(208 |
) |
|
|
(217 |
) |
|
|
(167 |
) |
Comprehensive
income at the end of years
|
|
|
15,277 |
|
|
|
14,365 |
|
|
|
14,201 |
|
(1)
Has no tax effect.
(2)
Valuation allowance has been recorded to offset the recognized income tax
effect.
c)
Assets retirement obligation
Under
Argentine regulations, the Company has the obligation to incur costs related to
the abandonment of hydrocarbon wells. The Company does not have assets legally
restricted for purposes of settling the obligation.
The
reconciliation of the beginning and ending aggregate carrying amount of assets
retirement obligation, translated into Argentine pesos at the outstanding
selling exchange rate at the end of each year and under US GAAP, is as
follows:
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aggregate
assets retirement obligation, beginning of year
|
|
|
2,441 |
|
|
|
1,457 |
|
|
|
648 |
|
Translation
effect
|
|
|
83 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
43 |
|
Revision
in estimated cash flows
|
|
|
314 |
|
|
|
840 |
|
|
|
693 |
|
Obligations
incurred
|
|
|
67 |
|
|
|
55 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
Accretion
expense
|
|
|
197 |
|
|
|
117 |
|
|
|
49 |
|
Obligations
settled
|
|
|
(66 |
) |
|
|
(40 |
) |
|
|
(22 |
) |
Aggregate
assets retirement obligation, end of year
|
|
|
3,036 |
|
|
|
2,441 |
|
|
|
1,457 |
|
d)
Contractual relationships with service stations
Included
below is a summarized discussion of the activities and the corresponding
accounting treatment provided to the service stations based on the existing
differences in ownership or levels of control. No differences have been
identified in this respect between the accounting treatment provided under
Argentine GAAP and U.S. GAAP.
Controlled stations: Includes
service stations directly managed by YPF or its subsidiaries (company-owned,
company-operated-“COCO” and dealer-owned, company-operated-“DOCO”). In this
case, YPF, as the manager of the point of sale, is charged with the marketing of
the oil products, the non-oil products (sold in the shops) and any ancillary
services provided at the point of sale (car wash, cleaning, etc.). Accordingly,
product sales are accounted for when the risks and rewards of the property are
transferred to the end-consumer.
Branded stations: Includes
dealer-owned, dealer-operated (“DODO”) service stations. These stations are
owned by third parties with which YPF has signed a contract that entitles it (i)
to become the exclusive supplier and (ii) to brand the service station with its
corporate image. The average contract term is 8 years.
Typically,
the owner of the service station markets the product by account of YPF on
consignment basis (i.e. earning a fee). Accordingly, the Company records the
revenue arising from the sale of the product less the corresponding marketing
fee for the product sold when the risks and rewards of the product are
transferred to the end-consumer.
The
Company signs exclusive distribution agreements with service stations to market
YPF’s oil products for a specified period of time under its brand name. Upon
signing of the contracts, the service stations agree to exclusively sell YPF’s
gasoline and other products. YPF, provides a guaranteed loan to the service
station’s owner to refurbishing and improvement of such service stations. The
contracts are established for a defined period of time, and may be renewed
beyond the initial term. Under Argentine and U.S. GAAP, YPF capitalizes such
costs as Other receivables – Loans to clients.
|
16.
|
OTHER
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENT
INFORMATION
|
The following tables present additional
consolidated financial statement disclosures required under Argentine GAAP.
Certain information disclosed in these tables is not required as part of the basic financial statements
under U.S. GAAP.
a)
|
Fixed assets
evolution.
|
b)
|
Investments in shares and holdings
in companies under significant influence and other
companies.
|
c)
|
Allowances and
reserves.
|
e)
|
Foreign currency assets and
liabilities.
|
a) Fixed assets
evolution
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
Cost
|
|
Main
account
|
|
Amounts
at beginning of year
|
|
|
Translation
net effect (5)
|
|
|
Increases
|
|
|
Net
decreases, transfers and reclassifications
|
|
|
Amounts
at end of year
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Land
and buildings
|
|
|
2,326 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
2,391 |
|
Mineral
property, wells and related equipment
|
|
|
42,534 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
82 |
|
|
|
8,970 |
|
|
|
51,595 |
|
Refinery
equipment and petrochemical plants
|
|
|
8,650 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
108 |
|
|
|
469 |
|
|
|
9,227 |
|
Transportation
equipment
|
|
|
1,850 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
1,887 |
|
Materials
and equipment in warehouse
|
|
|
611 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,028 |
|
|
|
(848 |
) |
|
|
791 |
|
Drilling
and work in progress
|
|
|
3,569 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
4,815 |
|
|
|
(3,764 |
) |
|
|
4,617 |
|
Exploratory
drilling in progress
|
|
|
135 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
145 |
|
|
|
(136 |
) |
|
|
147 |
|
Furniture,
fixtures and installations
|
|
|
556 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
622 |
|
Selling
equipment
|
|
|
1,341 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
1,406 |
|
Other
property
|
|
|
367 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
(23 |
) |
|
|
377 |
|
Total
2007
|
|
|
61,939 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
6,216 |
(2) |
|
|
4,895 |
(1)(6) |
|
|
73,060 |
|
Total
2006
|
|
|
61,812 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
5,932 |
(2) |
|
|
(5,807 |
)
(1)(6) |
|
|
61,939 |
|
Total
2005
|
|
|
57,752 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
4,459 |
(2) |
|
|
(401 |
)
(1) |
|
|
61,812 |
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
Depreciation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Main
account
|
|
Accumulated
at beginning of year
|
|
|
Net
decreases, transfers and reclassifications
|
|
|
Depreciation
rate
|
|
|
Increases
|
|
|
Accumulated
at end of year
|
|
|
Net
book value
|
|
|
Net
book value
|
|
|
Net
book
value
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Land
and buildings
|
|
|
1,053 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
2 |
%(4) |
|
|
57 |
|
|
|
1,108 |
|
|
|
1,283 |
|
|
|
1,273 |
|
|
|
1,265 |
|
Mineral
property, wells and related equipment
|
|
|
29,496 |
|
|
|
4,071 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,564 |
|
|
|
37,131 |
|
|
|
14,464 |
(3) |
|
|
13,038 |
(3) |
|
|
13,553 |
(3) |
Refinery
equipment and petrochemical plants
|
|
|
5,793 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
4 -
10 |
% |
|
|
347 |
|
|
|
6,139 |
|
|
|
3,088 |
|
|
|
2,857 |
|
|
|
2,998 |
|
Transportation
equipment
|
|
|
1,273 |
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
4 -
5 |
% |
|
|
55 |
|
|
|
1,324 |
|
|
|
563 |
|
|
|
577 |
|
|
|
582 |
|
Materials
and equipment in warehouse
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
791 |
|
|
|
611 |
|
|
|
420 |
|
Drilling
and work in progress
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
4,617 |
|
|
|
3,569 |
|
|
|
2,571 |
|
Exploratory
drilling in progress
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
147 |
|
|
|
135 |
|
|
|
188 |
|
Furniture,
fixtures and installations
|
|
|
479 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
10 |
% |
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
523 |
|
|
|
99 |
|
|
|
77 |
|
|
|
49 |
|
Selling
equipment
|
|
|
1,001 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
10 |
% |
|
|
57 |
|
|
|
1,056 |
|
|
|
350 |
|
|
|
340 |
|
|
|
314 |
|
Other
property
|
|
|
282 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
10 |
% |
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
298 |
|
|
|
79 |
|
|
|
85 |
|
|
|
69 |
|
Total
2007
|
|
|
39,377 |
|
|
|
4,063 |
(1)(6) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,139 |
|
|
|
47,579 |
|
|
|
25,481 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
2006
|
|
|
39,803 |
|
|
|
(4,144 |
)
(1)(6) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,718 |
|
|
|
39,377 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22,562 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total
2005
|
|
|
37,135 |
|
|
|
(39 |
)
(1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,707 |
|
|
|
39,803 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22,009 |
|
(1)
|
Includes
118, 194 and 86 of net book value charged to fixed assets allowances for
the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005,
respectively.
|
(2)
|
Includes
53, 930 and 737 corresponding to the future cost of hydrocarbon wells
abandonment obligations for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and
2005, respectively.
|
(3)
|
Includes
851, 1,052 and 1,255 of mineral property as of December 31, 2007, 2006 and
2005, respectively.
|
(4)
|
Depreciation
has been calculated according to the unit of production
method.
|
(5)
|
Includes
the net effect of the exchange differences arising from the translation of
net book values at beginning of the year of fixed assets in foreign
companies.
|
(6)
|
Includes
5,291 of acquisition cost and 4,094 of accumulated depreciation
corresponding to oil and gas exploration and producing areas to
be disposed by sale as of December 31, 2006 (Note
2.c).
|
b) Investments in shares and holdings in
companies under significant influence and other companies
|
|
2007
|
|
2006
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Information
of the Issuer
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Description
of the Securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Last
Financial Statements Issued
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name
and Issuer
|
|
Class
|
|
Face
Value
|
|
Amount
|
|
Book
Value
|
|
Cost
(5)
|
|
Main
Business
|
|
Registered
Address
|
|
Date
|
|
Capital
Stock
|
|
Income
(Loss)
|
|
Equity
|
|
Holding
in Capital Stock
|
|
Book
Value
|
|
Book
Value
|
|
Companies
under significant influence:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oleoductos
del Valle S.A.
|
|
Common
|
|
$
|
10
|
|
4,072,749
|
|
95
|
(1)
|
-
|
|
Oil
transportation by pipeline
|
|
Florida
1, P. 10°, Buenos Aires, Argentina
|
|
09/30/07
|
|
110
|
|
8
|
|
311
|
|
37.00%
|
|
101
|
(1)
|
104
|
(1)
|
Terminales
Marítimas Patagónicas S.A.
|
|
Common
|
|
$
|
10
|
|
476,034
|
|
44
|
|
-
|
|
Oil
storage and shipment
|
|
Av.
Leandro N. Alem 1180, P.11°, Buenos Aires, Argentina
|
|
09/30/07
|
|
14
|
|
15
|
|
133
|
|
33.15%
|
|
44
|
|
44
|
|
Oiltanking
Ebytem S.A.
|
|
Common
|
|
$
|
10
|
|
351,167
|
|
44
|
(2)
|
3
|
|
Hydrocarbon
transportation and storage
|
|
Terminal
Marítima Puerto Rosales – Provincia de Buenos Aires,
Argentina
|
|
09/30/07
|
|
12
|
|
10
|
|
96
|
|
30.00%
|
|
43
|
(2)
|
38
|
(2)
|
Gasoducto
del Pacífico (Argentina) S.A.
|
|
Preferred
|
|
$
|
1
|
|
15,579,578
|
|
19
|
|
1
|
|
Gas
transportation by pipeline
|
|
Av.
Leandro N. Alem 928, P. 7º, Buenos Aires, Argentina
|
|
09/30/07
|
|
156
|
|
30
|
|
191
|
|
10.00%
|
|
19
|
|
18
|
|
Central
Dock Sud S.A.
|
|
Common
|
|
$
|
0.01
|
|
3,719,290,957
|
|
7
|
(2)
|
46
|
|
Electric
power generation and bulk marketing
|
|
Reconquista
360, P. 6°, Buenos Aires, Argentina
|
|
09/30/07
|
|
468
|
|
(55)
|
|
179
|
|
9.98%
|
(5)
|
11
|
(2)
|
17
|
(2)
|
Gas
Argentino S.A.
|
|
Common
|
|
$
|
1
|
|
308,855,955
|
|
181
|
|
338
|
|
Investment
in Metrogas S.A.
|
|
Gregorio
Araoz de Lamadrid 1360, Buenos Aires, Argentina
|
|
09/30/07
|
|
280
|
|
(6)
|
|
398
|
|
45.33%
|
(6)
|
186
|
|
126
|
|
Inversora
Dock Sud S.A.
|
|
Common
|
|
$
|
1
|
|
103,497,738
|
|
114
|
(2)
|
193
|
|
Investment
and finance
|
|
Reconquista
360, P. 6°, Buenos Aires, Argentina
|
|
09/30/07
|
|
241
|
|
(42)
|
|
179
|
|
42.86%
|
|
129
|
(2)
|
142
|
(2)
|
Pluspetrol
Energy S.A.
|
|
Common
|
|
$
|
1
|
|
30,006,540
|
|
290
|
|
71
|
|
Exploration
and exploitation of hydrocarbons and electric power generation, production
and marketing
|
|
Lima
339, Buenos Aires, Argentina
|
|
09/30/07
|
|
67
|
|
62
|
|
643
|
|
45.00%
|
|
281
|
|
281
|
|
Oleoducto
Trasandino (Argentina) S.A.
|
|
Preferred
|
|
$
|
1
|
|
16,198,560
|
|
16
|
|
3
|
|
Oil
transportation by pipeline
|
|
Esmeralda
255, P. 5°, Buenos Aires, Argentina
|
|
09/30/07
|
|
45
|
|
1
|
|
77
|
|
36.00%
|
|
14
|
|
17
|
|
Other
companies:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Others
(3)
|
|
-
|
|
-
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
27
|
|
27
|
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
15
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
837
|
|
682
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
843
|
|
802
|
|
(1)
|
Holding
in shareholder’s equity, net of intercompany
profits.
|
(2)
|
Holding
in shareholder’s equity plus adjustments to conform to YPF S.A. accounting
methods.
|
(3)
|
Includes
A-Evangelists Constrçoes e Serviçios Ltda., Gasoducto del Pacífico
(Cayman) Ltd. A&C Pipeline Holding Company. Poligás Luján S.A.C.I.,
Oleoducto Transandinos (Chile) S.A., Gasoducto Oriental S.A. and Mercobank
S.A.
|
(4)
|
Additionally,
the Company has a 29,93% indirect holding in capital stock through
Inversora Dock Sud S.A.
|
(5)
|
Cost
net of cash dividends and capital distributions from long-term investments
inflation adjusted in accordance with Note
1.
|
(6)
|
As
of December 31, 2007, rhe shareholders and creditors of Gasoducto
Argentino S.A. have signed a debt restructuring agreement, whose approval
is pending by the National Antitrust Protection
Board.
|
c) Allowances and
reserves
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
Account
|
|
Amount
at Beginning of Year
|
|
|
Increases
|
|
|
Decreases
|
|
|
Amount
at End of Year
|
|
|
Amount
at End of Year
|
|
|
Amount
at End of Year
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deducted
from current assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For
doubtful trade receivables
|
|
|
429 |
|
|
|
93 |
|
|
|
82 |
|
|
|
440 |
|
|
|
429 |
|
|
|
380 |
|
For
other doubtful accounts
|
|
|
137 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
122 |
|
|
|
137 |
|
|
|
121 |
|
|
|
|
566 |
|
|
|
94 |
|
|
|
98 |
|
|
|
562 |
|
|
|
566 |
|
|
|
501 |
|
Deducted
from noncurrent assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For
valuation of other receivables to their estimated realizable
value
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
54 |
|
For
reduction in value of holdings in long-term investments
|
|
|
211 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
206 |
|
|
|
211 |
|
|
|
311 |
|
For
unproductive exploratory drilling
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
116 |
|
|
|
116 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
For
obsolescence of materials and equipment
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
|
312 |
|
|
|
127 |
|
|
|
136 |
|
|
|
303 |
|
|
|
312 |
|
|
|
416 |
|
Total
deducted from assets, 2007
|
|
|
878 |
|
|
|
221 |
|
|
|
234 |
|
|
|
865 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
deducted from assets, 2006
|
|
|
917 |
|
|
|
396 |
|
|
|
435 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
878 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total
deducted from assets, 2005
|
|
|
947 |
|
|
|
157 |
|
|
|
187 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
917 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reserves
for losses - current:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For
various specific contingencies
|
|
|
273 |
|
|
|
337 |
|
|
|
144 |
|
|
|
466 |
|
|
|
273 |
|
|
|
230 |
|
|
|
|
273 |
|
|
|
337 |
|
|
|
144 |
|
|
|
466 |
|
|
|
273 |
|
|
|
230 |
|
Reserves
for losses - noncurrent:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For
pending lawsuits, environmental contingencies and various specific
contingencies
|
|
|
1,578 |
|
|
|
668 |
|
|
|
393 |
|
|
|
1,853 |
(1) |
|
|
1,578 |
|
|
|
1,007 |
|
|
|
|
1,578 |
|
|
|
668 |
|
|
|
393 |
|
|
|
1,853 |
|
|
|
1,578 |
|
|
|
1,007 |
|
Total
included in liabilities, 2007
|
|
|
1,851 |
|
|
|
1,005 |
|
|
|
537 |
|
|
|
2,319 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
included in liabilities, 2006
|
|
|
1,237 |
|
|
|
882 |
|
|
|
268 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,851 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total
included in liabilities, 2005
|
|
|
1,028 |
|
|
|
326 |
|
|
|
117 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,237 |
|
(1)
|
Includes 1,548 for YPF’s lawsuits
and contingencies and 285 for YPF Holdings’ contingencies, 15 for
A-Evangelista S.A’s legal contingencies and 5 for Refinor’s legal
contingencies as of December 31,
2007.
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inventories
at beginning of year
|
|
|
1,697 |
|
|
|
1,315 |
|
|
|
1,134 |
|
Purchases
for the year
|
|
|
6,637 |
|
|
|
4,351 |
|
|
|
2,755 |
|
Production
costs (Note 16.f)
|
|
|
12,788 |
|
|
|
11,458 |
|
|
|
8,440 |
|
Holding
gains on inventories
|
|
|
451 |
|
|
|
394 |
|
|
|
244 |
|
Inventories
at end of year
|
|
|
(2,573 |
) |
|
|
(1,697 |
) |
|
|
(1,315 |
) |
Cost
of sales
|
|
|
19,000 |
|
|
|
15,821 |
|
|
|
11,258 |
|
e)
Foreign currency assets and
liabilities
Account
|
|
Foreign
currency and amount
|
|
|
Exchange
rate in pesos as of 12-31-07
|
|
|
|
Book
value as of 12-31-07
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
Assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
|
|
US$ |
11 |
|
|
US$ |
2 |
|
|
US$ |
17 |
|
|
|
3.11 |
(1) |
|
|
|
52 |
|
Investments
|
|
US$ |
91 |
|
|
US$ |
139 |
|
|
US$ |
117 |
|
|
|
3.11 |
(1) |
|
|
|
364 |
|
Trade
receivables
|
|
US$ |
528 |
|
|
US$ |
567 |
|
|
US$ |
588 |
|
|
|
3.11 |
(1) |
|
|
|
1,828 |
|
|
|
€ |
4 |
|
|
€ |
15 |
|
|
€ |
10 |
|
|
|
4.57 |
(1) |
|
|
|
46 |
|
Other
receivables
|
|
US$ |
1,030 |
|
|
US$ |
1,262 |
|
|
US$ |
1,092 |
|
|
|
3.11 |
(1) |
|
|
|
3,395 |
|
|
|
$CH |
113,994 |
|
|
$CH |
34,743 |
|
|
- |
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
- |
|
|
€ |
5 |
|
|
€ |
4 |
|
|
|
4.57 |
(1) |
|
|
|
18 |
|
Total
current assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,703 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noncurrent
Assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investments
|
|
US$ |
1 |
|
|
US$ |
51 |
|
|
US$ |
54 |
|
|
|
3.11 |
(1) |
|
|
|
168 |
|
Other
receivables
|
|
US$ |
128 |
|
|
US$ |
7 |
|
|
US$ |
6 |
|
|
|
3.11 |
(1) |
|
|
|
19 |
|
Total
noncurrent assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
187 |
|
Total
assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,890 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
Liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts
payable
|
|
US$ |
454 |
|
|
US$ |
523 |
|
|
US$ |
708 |
|
|
|
3.15 |
(2) |
|
|
|
2,229 |
|
|
|
€ |
11 |
|
|
€ |
12 |
|
|
€ |
15 |
|
|
|
4.63 |
(2) |
|
|
|
69 |
|
Loans
|
|
US$ |
48 |
|
|
US$ |
287 |
|
|
US$ |
140 |
|
|
|
3.15 |
(2) |
|
|
|
441 |
|
Salaries
and social security
|
|
US$ |
6 |
|
|
US$ |
7 |
|
|
US$ |
5 |
|
|
|
3.15 |
(2) |
|
|
|
16 |
|
Net
advances from crude oil purchasers
|
|
US$ |
31 |
|
|
US$ |
31 |
|
|
US$ |
3 |
|
|
|
3.15 |
(2) |
|
|
|
9 |
|
Reserves
|
|
- |
- |
|
|
US$ |
21 |
|
|
US$ |
79 |
|
|
|
3.15 |
(2) |
|
|
|
248 |
|
Total
current liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,012 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noncurrent
Liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts
payable
|
|
US$ |
571 |
|
|
US$ |
736 |
|
|
US$ |
742 |
|
|
|
3.15 |
(2) |
|
|
|
2,337 |
|
Loans
|
|
US$ |
365 |
|
|
US$ |
166 |
|
|
US$ |
166 |
|
|
|
3.15 |
(2) |
|
|
|
523 |
|
Salaries
and social security
|
|
US$ |
19 |
|
|
US$ |
66 |
|
|
US$ |
52 |
|
|
|
3.15 |
(2) |
|
|
|
164 |
|
Net
advances from crude oil purchasers
|
|
US$ |
33 |
|
|
US$ |
2 |
|
|
- |
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
- |
|
Reserves
|
|
- |
- |
|
|
US$ |
300 |
|
|
US$ |
374 |
|
|
|
3.15 |
(2) |
|
|
|
1,178 |
|
Total
noncurrent liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,202 |
|
Total
liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,214 |
|
(1) Buying exchange
rate.
(2) Selling exchange
rate.
f) Expenses incurred
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
Production
costs
|
|
|
Administrative
expenses
|
|
|
Selling
expenses
|
|
|
Exploration
expenses
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salaries
and social security taxes
|
|
|
824 |
|
|
|
186 |
|
|
|
170 |
|
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
1,225 |
|
|
|
971 |
|
|
|
758 |
|
Fees
and compensation for services
|
|
|
174 |
|
|
|
295 |
|
|
|
42 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
517 |
|
|
|
399 |
|
|
|
270 |
|
Other
personnel expenses
|
|
|
283 |
|
|
|
84 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
415 |
|
|
|
334 |
|
|
|
254 |
|
Taxes,
charges and contributions
|
|
|
226 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
301 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
551 |
|
|
|
446 |
|
|
|
367 |
|
Royalties
and easements
|
|
|
1,989 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
2,006 |
|
|
|
2,101 |
|
|
|
1,753 |
|
Insurance
|
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
126 |
|
|
|
122 |
|
|
|
86 |
|
Rental
of real estate and equipment
|
|
|
331 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
396 |
|
|
|
323 |
|
|
|
272 |
|
Survey
expenses
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
218 |
|
|
|
218 |
|
|
|
124 |
|
|
|
108 |
|
Depreciation
of fixed assets
|
|
|
3,989 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
102 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
4,139 |
|
|
|
3,718 |
|
|
|
2,707 |
|
Industrial
inputs, consumable materials and supplies
|
|
|
535 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
42 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
593 |
|
|
|
532 |
|
|
|
613 |
|
Operation
services and other service contracts
|
|
|
535 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
82 |
|
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
677 |
|
|
|
664 |
|
|
|
396 |
|
Preservation,
repair and maintenance
|
|
|
1,674 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
57 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
1,757 |
|
|
|
1,400 |
|
|
|
997 |
|
Contractual
commitments
|
|
|
596 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
596 |
|
|
|
519 |
|
|
|
131 |
|
Unproductive
exploratory drillings
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
144 |
|
|
|
144 |
|
|
|
199 |
|
|
|
70 |
|
Transportation,
products and charges
|
|
|
790 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,023 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,813 |
|
|
|
1,488 |
|
|
|
1,376 |
|
Allowance
for doubtful trade receivables
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
76 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
Publicity
and advertising expenses
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
142 |
|
|
|
140 |
|
|
|
120 |
|
Fuel,
gas, energy and miscellaneous
|
|
|
736 |
|
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
875 |
|
|
|
833 |
|
|
|
613 |
|
Total
2007
|
|
|
12,788 |
|
|
|
805 |
|
|
|
2,120 |
|
|
|
522 |
|
|
|
16,235 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
2006
|
|
|
11,458 |
|
|
|
674 |
|
|
|
1,797 |
|
|
|
460 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,389 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total
2005
|
|
|
8,440 |
|
|
|
552 |
|
|
|
1,650 |
|
|
|
280 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,922 |
|
SUPPLEMENTAL
INFORMATION ON OIL AND GAS PRODUCING ACTIVITIES (UNAUDITED)
The
following information is presented in accordance with SFAS No. 69, "Disclosures about Oil and Gas
Producing Activities" (amounts expressed in millions of Argentine Pesos,
except where otherwise indicated).
Capitalized
costs
The
following tables set forth capitalized costs, along with the related accumulated
depreciation and allowances as of December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005:
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
Argentina
|
|
|
Other
foreign
|
|
|
Worldwide
|
|
|
Argentina
|
|
|
Other
foreign
|
|
|
Worldwide
|
|
|
Argentina
|
|
|
Other
foreign
|
|
|
Worldwide
|
|
Proved
oil and gas properties
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mineral
property, wells and related equipment
|
|
|
50,871 |
|
|
|
545 |
|
|
|
51,416 |
|
|
|
47,398 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
47,434 |
|
|
|
43,785 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
43,808 |
|
Support
equipment and facilities
|
|
|
1,358 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,358 |
|
|
|
1,183 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,183 |
|
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,000 |
|
Drilling
and work in progress
|
|
|
2,656 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
2,656 |
|
|
|
2,049 |
|
|
|
293 |
|
|
|
2,342 |
|
|
|
1,561 |
|
|
|
101 |
|
|
|
1,662 |
|
Unproved
oil and gas properties
|
|
|
147 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
197 |
|
|
|
109 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
140 |
|
|
|
136 |
|
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
192 |
|
Total
capitalized costs
|
|
|
55,032 |
|
|
|
595 |
|
|
|
55,627 |
|
|
|
50,739 |
|
|
|
360 |
|
|
|
51,099 |
|
|
|
46,482 |
|
|
|
180 |
|
|
|
46,662 |
|
Accumulated
depreciation and valuation allowances
|
|
|
(37,613 |
) |
|
|
(18 |
) |
|
|
(37,631 |
) |
|
|
(34,111 |
) |
|
|
(22 |
) |
|
|
(34,133 |
) |
|
|
(30,859 |
) |
|
|
(19 |
) |
|
|
(30,878 |
) |
Net
capitalized costs
|
|
|
17,419 |
|
|
|
577 |
|
|
|
17,996 |
|
|
|
16,628 |
(1) |
|
|
338 |
|
|
|
16,966 |
|
|
|
15,623 |
|
|
|
161 |
|
|
|
15,784 |
|
Company’s
share in equity method investees’ net capitalized
costs
|
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
108 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
108 |
|
(1)
|
Includes
1,127 of net capitalized cost related to other assets disposed by
sale.
|
Costs
incurred
The
following tables set forth the costs incurred for oil and gas producing
activities during the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005:
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
Argentina
|
|
|
Other
foreign
|
|
|
Worldwide
|
|
|
Argentina
|
|
|
Other
foreign
|
|
|
Worldwide
|
|
|
Argentina
|
|
|
Other
foreign
|
|
|
Worldwide
|
|
Acquisition
of unproved properties
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
Exploration
costs
|
|
|
545 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
576 |
|
|
|
427 |
|
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
502 |
|
|
|
371 |
|
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
425 |
|
Development
costs
|
|
|
4,225 |
|
|
|
265 |
|
|
|
4,490 |
|
|
|
4,243 |
|
|
|
174 |
|
|
|
4,417 |
|
|
|
3,236 |
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
3,273 |
|
Total
costs incurred
|
|
|
4,770 |
|
|
|
296 |
|
|
|
5,066 |
|
|
|
4,670 |
|
|
|
249 |
|
|
|
4,919 |
|
|
|
3,607 |
|
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
3,713 |
|
Company’s
share in equity method investees’ total costs incurred
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
12 |
|
Results
of operations from oil and gas producing activities
The
following tables include only the revenues and expenses directly associated with
oil and gas producing activities. It does not include any allocation of the
interest costs or corporate overhead and, therefore, is not necessarily
indicative of the contribution to net earnings of the oil and gas
operations.
Differences
between these tables and the amounts shown in Note 8, "Consolidated Business
Segment Information", for the exploration and production business unit, relate
to additional operations that do not arise from those properties held by the
Company.
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
Argentina
|
|
|
Other
foreign
|
|
|
Worldwide
|
|
|
Argentina
|
|
|
Other
foreign
|
|
|
Worldwide
|
|
|
Argentina
|
|
|
Other
foreign
|
|
|
Worldwide
|
|
Net
sales to unaffiliated parties
|
|
|
2,737 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
2,749 |
|
|
|
2,539 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
2,552 |
|
|
|
2,366 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
2,380 |
|
Net
intersegment sales
|
|
|
13,989 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
13,989 |
|
|
|
13,960 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
13,960 |
|
|
|
11,467 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
11,467 |
|
Total
net revenues
|
|
|
16,726 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
16,738 |
|
|
|
16,499 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
16,512 |
|
|
|
13,833 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
13,847 |
|
Production
costs
|
|
|
(6,989 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(6,996 |
) |
|
|
(6,168 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(6,175 |
) |
|
|
(4,247 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(4,253 |
) |
Exploration
expenses
|
|
|
(465 |
) |
|
|
(57 |
) |
|
|
(522 |
) |
|
|
(392 |
) |
|
|
(68 |
) |
|
|
(460 |
) |
|
|
(231 |
) |
|
|
(49 |
) |
|
|
(280 |
) |
Depreciation
and expense for valuation allowances
|
|
|
(3,572 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
(3,576 |
) |
|
|
(3,226 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
(3,230 |
) |
|
|
(2,190 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(2,197 |
) |
Other
|
|
|
(190 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(190 |
) |
|
|
(117 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(117 |
) |
|
|
(44 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(44 |
) |
Pre-tax
income (loss) from producing activities
|
|
|
5,510 |
|
|
|
(56 |
) |
|
|
5,454 |
|
|
|
6,596 |
|
|
|
(66 |
) |
|
|
6,530 |
|
|
|
7,121 |
|
|
|
(48 |
) |
|
|
7,073 |
|
Income
tax expense
|
|
|
(2,314 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(2,314 |
) |
|
|
(2,589 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(2,589 |
) |
|
|
(2,740 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(2,742 |
) |
Results
of oil and gas producing activities
|
|
|
3,196 |
|
|
|
(56 |
) |
|
|
3,140 |
|
|
|
4,007 |
|
|
|
(66 |
) |
|
|
3,941 |
|
|
|
4,381 |
|
|
|
(50 |
) |
|
|
4,331 |
|
Company’s
share in equity method investees’results of operations
|
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
51 |
|
Oil
and gas reserves
Proved oil
and gas reserves are the estimated quantities of crude oil, natural gas, and
natural gas liquids which geological and engineering available data demonstrate
with reasonable certainty to be recoverable in future years from known
reservoirs under existing economic and operating conditions, i.e., prices and
costs as of the date the estimate is made. Prices include consideration of
changes in existing prices provided by contractual arrangements, but not on
increases based upon future conditions. Proved developed oil and gas reserves
are reserves that can reasonably be expected to be recovered through existing
wells with existing equipment and operating methods.
Estimates
of reserves were prepared using standard geological and engineering methods
generally accepted by the petroleum industry and in accordance with the rules
and regulations of the SEC. The choice of method or combination of methods
employed in the analysis of each reservoir was determined by experience in the
area, stage of development, quality and completeness of basic data, and
production history. There are numerous uncertainties inherent in estimating
quantities of proved reserves and in projecting future rates of production and
timing of development expenditures, including many factors beyond the control of
the producer. Reserve engineering is a subjective process of estimating
underground accumulations of crude oil and natural gas that cannot be measured
in an exact manner and the accuracy of any reserve estimate is a function of the
quality of available data and of engineering and geological interpretation and
judgment. In addition, results of drilling, testing and production subsequent to
the date of an estimate may justify revision of such estimate. Accordingly,
reserve estimates are often different from the quantities of crude oil and
natural gas that are ultimately recovered. The meaningfulness of such estimates
is highly dependent upon the accuracy of the assumption upon which they were
based. The reserve estimates were subjected to economic tests to determine
economic limits. The reserves in Argentina are stated prior to the payment of
any royalties to the provinces in which the reserves are located. Consequently,
royalties are given effect in such economic tests as operating costs in
Argentina. The estimates may change as a result of numerous factors including,
but not limited to, additional development activity, evolving production
history, and continued reassessment of the viability of production under varying
economic conditions.
The
following tables reflect the estimated reserves of crude oil, condensate,
natural gas liquids and natural gas as of December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005 and
the changes therein.
|
|
Crude
oil, condensate and natural gas liquids (Millions of
barrels)
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
Argentina
|
|
|
Other
foreign
|
|
|
Worldwide
|
|
|
Argentina
|
|
|
Other
foreign
|
|
|
Worldwide
|
|
|
Argentina
|
|
|
Other
foreign
|
|
|
Worldwide
|
|
Proved
developed and undeveloped reserves
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beginning
of year
|
|
|
674 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
680 |
|
|
|
771 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
777 |
|
|
|
1,058 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
1,064 |
|
Revisions
of previous estimates
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
(175 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(175 |
) |
Extensions,
discoveries and improved recovery
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
22 |
|
Production
for the year
|
|
|
(120 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(120 |
) |
|
|
(126 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(126 |
) |
|
|
(134 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(134 |
) |
End
of year
|
|
|
617 |
(1) |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
623 |
|
|
|
674 |
(1) |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
680 |
|
|
|
771 |
(1) |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
777 |
|
Proved
developed reserves
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beginning
of year
|
|
|
521 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
521 |
|
|
|
604 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
604 |
|
|
|
863 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
863 |
|
End
of year
|
|
|
460 |
(2) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
460 |
|
|
|
521 |
(2) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
521 |
|
|
|
604 |
(2) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
604 |
|
Company’s
share in equity method investees’proved developed and undeveloped
reserves
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
3 |
|
(1)
|
Includes
natural gas liquids of 114, 123 and 150 as of December 31, 2007, 2006 and
2005, respectively.
|
(2)
|
Includes
natural gas liquids of 76, 83 and 108 as of December 31, 2007, 2006 and
2005, respectively.
|
|
|
Natural
gas (Billions of standard cubic feet)
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
Argentina
|
|
|
Other
foreign
|
|
|
Worldwide
|
|
|
Argentina
|
|
|
Other
foreign
|
|
|
Worldwide
|
|
|
Argentina
|
|
|
Other
foreign
|
|
|
Worldwide
|
|
Proved
developed and undeveloped reserves
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beginning
of year
|
|
|
4,008 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
4,015 |
|
|
|
4,675 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
4,683 |
|
|
|
5,668 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
5,676 |
|
Revisions
of previous estimates
|
|
|
319 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
319 |
|
|
|
(63 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(63 |
) |
|
|
(356 |
) |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(355 |
) |
Extensions
and discoveries
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
30 |
|
Production
for the year (1)
|
|
|
(634 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(635 |
) |
|
|
(650 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(651 |
) |
|
|
(667 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(668 |
) |
End
of year
|
|
|
3,702 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
3,708 |
|
|
|
4,008 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
4,015 |
|
|
|
4,675 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
4,683 |
|
Proved
developed reserves
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beginning
of year
|
|
|
2,568 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
2,571 |
|
|
|
3,197 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
3,201 |
|
|
|
4,041 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
4,045 |
|
End
of year
|
|
|
2,438 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
2,441 |
|
|
|
2,568 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
2,571 |
|
|
|
3,197 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
3,201 |
|
Company’s
share in equity method investees’proved developed and undeveloped
reserves
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
97 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
97 |
|
(1)
|
Excludes
quantities which have been flared or
vented.
|
Standardized
measure of discounted future net cash flows
The
standardized measure is calculated as the excess of future cash inflows from
proved reserves less future costs of producing and developing the reserves,
future income taxes and a discount factor. Future cash inflows represent the
revenues that would be received from production of year-end proved reserve
quantities assuming the future production would be sold at year-end prices.
Additionally, year-end prices were adjusted in those instances where future
sales are covered by contracts at specified prices.
Future
production costs include the estimated expenditures related to production of the
proved reserves plus any production taxes without consideration of future
inflation. Future development costs include the estimated costs of drilling
development wells and installation of production facilities, plus the net costs
associated with dismantling and abandonment of wells, assuming year-end costs
continue without consideration of future inflation. Future income taxes were
determined by applying statutory rates to future cash inflows less future
production costs and less tax depreciation of the properties involved. The
present value was determined by applying a discount rate of 10% per year to the
annual future net cash flows.
The future
cash inflows and outflows in foreign currency have been remeasured at the
selling exchange rate of Argentine pesos 3.15, 3.06 and 3.03 to US$ 1, as of
December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
The
standardized measure does not purport to be an estimate of the fair market value
of the Company's proved reserves. An estimate of fair value would also take into
account, among other things, the expected recovery of reserves in excess of
proved reserves, anticipated changes in future prices and costs and a discount
factor representative of the time value of money and the risks inherent in
producing oil and gas.
The
following information has been determined on a basis which presumes the year-end
economic and operating conditions will continue over the years during which
proved reserves would be produced. Neither the effects of future pricing nor
expected future changes in technology and operating practices have been
considered.
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
Argentina
|
|
|
Other
foreign
|
|
|
Worldwide
|
|
|
Argentina
|
|
|
Other
foreign
|
|
|
Worldwide
|
|
|
Argentina
|
|
|
Other
foreign
|
|
|
Worldwide
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Future
cash inflows (1)
|
|
|
120,976 |
|
|
|
1,871 |
|
|
|
122,847 |
|
|
|
102,269 |
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
102,321 |
|
|
|
123,963 |
|
|
|
109 |
|
|
|
124,072 |
|
Future
production costs
|
|
|
(34,829 |
) |
|
|
(498 |
) |
|
|
(35,327 |
) |
|
|
(29,590 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(29,596 |
) |
|
|
(28,701 |
) |
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
(28,713 |
) |
Future
development costs
|
|
|
(9,164 |
) |
|
|
(145 |
) |
|
|
(9,309 |
) |
|
|
(9,878 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(9,878 |
) |
|
|
(9,054 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(9,054 |
) |
Future
net cash flows, before income taxes
|
|
|
76,983 |
|
|
|
1,228 |
|
|
|
78,211 |
|
|
|
62,801 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
62,847 |
|
|
|
86,208 |
|
|
|
97 |
|
|
|
86,305 |
|
Discount
for estimated timing of future cash flows
|
|
|
(26,019 |
) |
|
|
(336 |
) |
|
|
(26,355 |
) |
|
|
(21,057 |
) |
|
|
(20 |
) |
|
|
(21,077 |
) |
|
|
(28,082 |
) |
|
|
(42 |
) |
|
|
(28,124 |
) |
Future
income taxes, discounted at 10%
(2)
|
|
|
(14,917 |
) |
|
|
(312 |
) |
|
|
(15,229 |
) |
|
|
(11,811 |
) |
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
(11,820 |
) |
|
|
(18,757 |
) |
|
|
(19 |
) |
|
|
(18,776 |
) |
Standardized
measure of discounted future net cash flows
|
|
|
36,047 |
|
|
|
580 |
|
|
|
36,627 |
|
|
|
29,933 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
29,950 |
|
|
|
39,369 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
39,405 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Company’s
share in equity method investees’standardized measure of discounted future
net cash flows
|
|
|
184 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
184 |
|
|
|
194 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
194 |
|
|
|
215 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
215 |
|
(1)
|
Future
cash inflows are stated net of the impact of withholdings on exports until
2011, according to the provisions of Law No.
26,217.
|
(2)
|
Undiscounted
future income taxes are 22,820, (22,390 for Argentina and 430 for Other
foreign), 17,398 (17,382 for Argentina and 16 for Other foreign) and
27,280 (27,245 for Argentina and 35 for Other foreign) as of December 31,
2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
|
Changes
in the standardized measure of discounted future net cash flows
The
following table reflects the changes in standardized measure of discounted
future net cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and
2005:
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beginning
of year
|
|
|
29,950 |
|
|
|
39,405 |
|
|
|
34,482 |
|
Sales
and transfers, net of production costs
|
|
|
(8,304 |
) |
|
|
(11,187 |
) |
|
|
(10,753 |
) |
Net
change in sales and transfer prices, net of future production
costs
|
|
|
7,056 |
|
|
|
(13,716 |
) |
|
|
20,505 |
|
Changes
in reserves and production rates (timing)
|
|
|
5,391 |
|
|
|
2,107 |
|
|
|
(10,223 |
) |
Net
changes for extensions, discoveries and improved recovery
|
|
|
793 |
|
|
|
471 |
|
|
|
1,776 |
|
Changes
in estimated future development and abandonment costs
|
|
|
(949 |
) |
|
|
(1,545 |
) |
|
|
(2,269 |
) |
Development
costs incurred during the year that reduced future development
costs
|
|
|
1,762 |
|
|
|
1,933 |
|
|
|
1,485 |
|
Accretion
of discount
|
|
|
2,198 |
|
|
|
3,388 |
|
|
|
3,105 |
|
Net
change in income taxes
|
|
|
(2,123 |
) |
|
|
8,705 |
|
|
|
678 |
|
Others
|
|
|
853 |
|
|
|
389 |
|
|
|
619 |
|
End
of year
|
|
|
36,627 |
|
|
|
29,950 |
|
|
|
39,405 |
|