矿业权价款评估成本法中取价(费)标准相关问题研究  

Study on pricing standards of cost evaluation on mining property rights

作　　者：陈凯[1] 刘丹[2] 张新元[3] 

机构地区：[1]国土资源实物地质资料中心,河北三河065201 [2]中国地质博物馆,北京100034 [3]中国地质调查局发展研究中心,北京100037

出　　处：《中国矿业》2016年第2期31-35,共5页China Mining Magazine

基　　金：项目"国土资源实物地质资料中心国家级岩心标准采集及数字化"资助

摘　　要：本文在探讨2007年颁布的《国土资源调查预算标准(地质调查部分)》(简称《预算标准》),作为我国当前矿业权价款评估成本途径法计算勘查成本现值的取价(费)标准的背景的基础上,重点分析《预算标准》在执行过程中存在的问题,具体包括三个方面:1分析《预算标准》定额的价格水平是否合理;2对比分析《预算标准》与地质行业内其他标准作为取价(费)标准计算勘查成本现值的公允性;3从编制基础的适用性和定额的科学性角度,分析《预算标准》的局限性。得出《预算标准》作为取价(费)标准不能满足矿业权价款评估需要。建议:1应细化成本法取价(费)标准的相关内容;2使用《预算标准》时,定额应适度调整;3建立取价(费)标准动态调整机制。Based on the analysis of the background of whether ＂Budget Standards for Land Resources Survey（Geological Survey Section）＂（the ＂ budget standards＂）issued in 2007 in China as the pricing standard of calculating the cash values of geological exploration costs could still satisfy present mining right pricing evaluation,the paper mainly discussed the problems and limitations in the implementation process of the ＂budget standard＂,including three aspects：①analyze whether the quota of budget standard price level is reasonable;②comparise and analyze the fairness of the budget standard and other standard of geological industry as the price（fee）standard for calculating the present value of the exploration cost;③analyze the limitations of the budget standard from the applicability of the foundation and the scientific of quota.Finally the paper concluded that the budget standard as price（cost）standard can＇t meet the needs of the mining right evaluation price.Suggestions：①refine the relevant content of cost price of admission（fee）standards;②the quota should be moderately adjusted,while using the＂budget standard＂;③to establish a dynamic adjustment mechanism of price（cost）standard.

关 键 词：矿业权价款 矿业权评估 探矿权 成本途径评估法 取价(费)标准 

分 类 号：F407.1[经济管理—产业经济]