The article discusses problems related to rules and regulations determining compensations for the mining usufruct of mineral deposits covered by the so called “state mining ownership”. Specific acts of law framing agreements on mining usufruct between government and mining enterprises were analyzed. Rules and algorithms applied to calculate an appropriate compensation are evaluated leading to several conclusions, including the one about lack of a direct legal grounding for them. Such a situation creates disputes and may be risky for all involved. It was also indicated that, in parallel, the State lets another class of mineral deposits, namely the ones owned as a result of real estate ownership and the related Civil Code regulations confirmed by the mining law. In such cases, a mining entrepreneur gets usufruct of a real estate, but only the one with mineral rights. Subsequently a comparison of the rules and algorithms established for determining compensation for mining usufruct and for usufruct of real-estates comprising rights for mineral assets was performed. Arguments for a far going harmonization between these two were put forward. This implies that a starting point for determining any compensation has to be a valuation of a relevant mineral deposit market value as opposed to any universal, however complicated, prescribed algebraic formula. Such a process is complicated and demands competences in geology, mining and finance. Consequently, regulations set in the Polish Mineral Asset Valuation Code shall be applied to both a running a valuation process and indicating competent persons. As a result, recommendations leading to correlate rules applied in both cases are put forward including the adoption of mineral asset valuation as a fundament to determine the level of compensation for the mining usufruct. The closing section contains recommendations regarding necessary changes in the legal framework.

The presented article contains an analysis resulting from 10 years’ experience in the implementation of the POLVAL Code to mineral assets valuations carried out by Competent Valuators. It had been based on data of more than 100 performed valuations. First and foremost, challenges resulting from preferences given by various relevant regulations to the application of a market-based approach were identified. It was underlined that they prompt Valuators to compromise the quality of the database containing reference transactions. In the case of an income based approach, issues resulting from the adoption of estimates and subjective assumptions were discussed. It was indicated that this fact alone cannot create a valid argument to reject the results of such a valuation providing that they have been implemented in a coherent manner and uncertainty was reflected in the value of the applied discount rate. Separately recommended changes to the present version of the POLVAL Code were presented. In conclusion, a significant, positive role of the introduction of the POLVAL Code for the structuring processes of mineral asset valuation was indicated.

The article discusses possibilities and usefulness of application of the cost approach for mineral deposits valuation. Author focuses on the ones related to exploration for and documentation of hypothetical deposits, looking in their case for possible areas of application of the approach in consideration. Analyses covers the three most commonly used valuation methods: Appraised Value Method (AVM), Multiple of Exploration Expenditure Method and Killburn's Method, indicating their strengths, deficiencies and dangers of potential misuse. In conclusion author indicates areas of potential application of the cost approach where it's proper application may deliver credible and useful results.