The fact that mines have to be established at the place where they are located without having a chance to choose a location brings out area usage conflicts with areas that need to be protected. In fact, forestlands are most common in these overlapping areas in Turkey. In order to perform mining activities in this overlapping forestlands, mining enterprises in Turkey receive forest land permit fees (FLPF), reforestation fees, rehabilitation fees + security deposit of conformity to the environment (SDCE), and other fees. In order to determine the share of these costs in mining investments and operating costs (OC) and to bring a solution proposal so that these costs do not pose a risk of loss of the investment in the mining enterprises, questions have been asked to mining enterprises within Turkey using the “Survey Monkey” program. The averages of all forest fees determined from the answers are proportioned to the mining investment amounts (MIA) and the annual average OC of each mining company responding to the Survey.
Thus, the distribution criteria of different forest fees that are required to be paid by the mining enterprises in order to carry out mining operations in the forestlands in Turkey and their distribution on the basis of mineral groups were analyzed. In this calculation, it was suggested that all the fees in Turkey should be reduced to a more reasonable degree by suggesting solutions regarding the calculation method envisaged by the FLPF, which has a very high share. Otherwise, the result of these rates shows that the costs of forest land-use for mining stipulated by the legislation in Turkey are quite high compared to other countries, and that the current mining investments can have difficulty in maintaining their economic operability in the presence of these required costs.
The demand for REE was the background to include them to those consisting of the property of the State Treasury in Poland, enumerated in the Geological and Mining Law (Article 10). The PLN 500/kg REE payment for exploitation of REE (exploitation tax) was introduced. Both proposals will restrain the REE recovery from exploited domestic mineral commodities. The term REE is imprecise. Their deposits are rare and may be classified as “REE ore deposits”. The REE are often the accompanying constituents in varied mineral commodities and are recoverable during their processing, outside the mine. The application of an exploitation tax in such a case is inapplicable. The established value of the exploitation tax is incomparably high in respect to the value of the REE contained in mined mineral commodities. The analysis of introduced changes of mining and geological law allow to suggest the reevaluation of ownership based subdivision of mineral commodities: name the mineral commodities belonging to the land property owners and leave the list of mineral commodities consisting property of the State Treasury open. The more careful approach is also necessary in the formulation of Geological and Mining Law. It should be preliminary formulated by persons competent in geology and mining and subsequently adjusted to juridical exigencies.