Jump to content
FreeGoldFanatic

Governmental Issues To Consider In New Start-Up Company

Recommended Posts

If I had my choice, which I believe I do, which State in the Union would be best to establish a new corporation?

 

Which State offers the best tax advantages?

 

What other things are there to consider?

 

I will be prospecting in several states.  What it the best state to set up a Home Office in?

 

Have any of you had to consider these questions?

 

What is your experience or knowledge?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FreeGoldFanatic,

 

Excellent topic! :)

 

Unfortunately, for many, they are not at liberty to choose. "Family lives here so, I live here". Kids are in school, kids have friends here, so, I live here. Also, I have friends here, we attend church here and etc. etc.

 

With the liberty to locate anywhere, a decision could be made based on many different selection criterion.

 

Let's assume a few things first of all. You're starting a mining and exploration company. You have no mining property. You have ambition to obtain valuable mining property, explore and mine that property with minimum intervention or interference from local, state, and federal government...

 

I published my experience a few months ago in the ICMJ Magazine. Anyone can read the story.

 

The part that WASN'T published is/are the reasons for the decisions that were made that led ultimately to the discovery of gold in Alaska!

 

It was not an accident.

 

Aside from the governmental issues, the question of "probability" of success must be based on geologic setting, and control of the domain within which the appropriate geologic setting is contained i.e. "if there is a high probability that there is gold, can I obtain control of the gold?"

 

California? no.

 

Oregon? Not likely.

 

Nevada? Not likely.

 

Washington? Not likely.

 

Arizona? Not likely.

 

Colorado? Possible, but not probable.

 

Idaho? Possible, but not probable.

 

Montana? Possible, but probability is leaning toward doubtful.

 

New Mexico? Possible, but not probable.

 

Utah? Possible. requires more research.

 

Wyoming? Been there. Most gold bearing localities are controlled.

 

Alaska? Yes.

 

Looking at opening of new mines in all of the above states outside of recreational provides the "initial" basis for decision making.

 

- Geowizard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many corporations choose Nevada.

 

Very few filing requirements, very few taxes, easy and cheap to get an agent and address. Mining friendly.

 

I'm sure there are other choices for other reasons. Not legal or accounting advice just years of experience with both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Used to be the only reason to go to Nevada was bordellos and gambling. :)

 

They closed the bordellos and you can gamble just about anywhere.

 

The only beach in Nevada is around Lake Tahoe!

 

The geologic setting is favorable. It's pretty well all picked over at this point in history. With the growth of PVC forests in the 1980's the best business was probably selling PVC pipe.

 

(tongue-in cheek emoticon goes here)

 

Actually, Nevada would be my second pick.

 

- Geowizard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What other things are there to consider?

 

Well there is the little thing called the Federal Government !  Laws, rules, regulations and stipulations are not

getting any easier to deal with.

 

 I'll bet Nevada doesn't have many "wetlands".

 

 Alaska, on the other hand, seems to be composed of mostly wetlands ( according to the COE ).

 The recently proposed new Corp of Engineers GP for placer mining in Alaska is horrendous !

 

 Better look at the BIG picture before deciding on any State to do mining business in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps I misunderstood the original question?

 

I thought the original poster was looking for opinions on "which State in the Union would be best to establish a new corporation"? Not which State to start mining in?

 

If  FreeGoldFanatic really is looking for the best State for corporate tax advantages I'm thinking the wetlands, beach and geology issues aren't going to have much influence on his final decision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems intuitively obvious... :)

 

A member named FreeGoldFanatic (self-descriptive) joined the ICMJ forum (a mining related forum) has asked about the difference between lode and placer and stated his interest in locating a LARGE gold deposit and wants to do it properly. Now has asked for information related to "where" to locate.

 

Probably not into hydroponics, not a weight loss fanatic, hot rod fanatic, hunting fanatic. Not a roller skating fanatic.

 

- Geowizard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, the question cannot be answered in a nut shell.

 

Every state has unique needs and rules that pertain to mining. Federal rules and regulations are supposed to cover the federal domain. The federal domain is diverse and unique in every mining district where federal domain is found. By virtue of different managers having responsibility for managing each region and district of each of the national forests, the rules are applied differently. The Bureau of Land Management has different priorities for managing their portion of the Federal Domain depending on the "resources" that could be impacted by mining.

 

The single greatest controlling factor is the local and national activism against mining. Environmental activism retains a voice that works against every plan of operations. The government agencies that are responsible for approval of mining plans are held to very strict standards of environmental compliance. In many cases litigation is applied against the approvals that causes indefinite holds on approval for mining. The costs involved for many mining companies simply is too great. So, the political process has allowed mechanisms to be put in place that require approval of local and national environmental activists.

 

Some of the states are becoming proactive in reversing legislation that inhibits mining.

 

- Geowizard 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reference for examples of current mining plans on the National Forest domain is available through each National Forest District Website. Each plan is listed under the Status of Plan Applications (SOPA).

 

Most plans having significance are required to provide an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). You can usually find a link to the proposed plan of operations at the respective mining company's website. An EIS can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars - even millions. Usually, a mining company is required to hire companies that do the business of "environmental study" in each of the environmental disciplines. i.e. water or hydrology, plant life, animal life, even microbial studies of microbes that thrive in the dirt. Studies are done on and surveys made of prior mining disturbance and potential hazardous waste including mine water discharge. Plans and engineering designs are established to mitigate air pollution, water pollution, sound pollution and visual impacts. My list is not all inclusive. There's more.

 

- Geowizard 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, here's the answer... :)

 

Alaska is the preferred location for mining. Further preference should be given to State of Alaska Domain. Permitting for mining and/or exploration is straight forward with minimal governmental intervention. Don't get me wrong. There are rules.

 

The Geology is appropriate for exploration and the potential is great for mining. Alaska is remote. But, with a home office in AZ, I can be boots on the ground at the mine within 24 hours.

 

- Geowizard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a total outsider, this seems to have strayed off topic. When I last registered a corporation in the US, the state of incorporation had nothing to do with where I was trading, operating the business, or living. On legal advice, the best place at that time to incorporate was the State of Maryland. I forget the reasons now, but i believe it had a bit to do with control of shares (in case of expansion). I suggest that you make an appointment with qualified legal and accounting professionals before moving on.

 

Hope it works for you.

 

cheers,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×