Book an appointment with us, or search the directory to find the right lawyer for you directly through the app.
Find out more
Deal by Design
Welcome to this edition of Law Update, focusing on the evolving M&A landscape across the MENA region. With deal activity and value continuing to grow, the region is seeing increased investor interest alongside a changing regulatory environment.
This edition explores key legal and market developments affecting M&A transactions, including regulatory reforms, foreign investment, governance, due diligence and deal structuring across the region.
Egypt has overhauled its mining legal framework, replacing the legacy gold cost recovery concession model with a streamlined, permit-based regime designed to provide clarity, predictability, and alignment. The reforms introduce stabilised fiscal terms; modern land access and operational rights; explicit foreign exchange (FX) and export protections; and strengthened environmental, social, and governance (ESG) and community obligations.
This article provides a practical, side-by-side explanation of how the Old Gold Mining Concession Model (Old Model) operated; how the New Gold Mining Concession Model (New Model) functions today; and the core commercial, fiscal, and regulatory differences that matter to companies, investors, the Mineral Resources and Mining Industries Authority (the MRMIA, or the Authority), and local stakeholders.
Under the Old Model, a 50/50 joint‑venture operating company with the MRMIA (which replaced the previous Egyptian Mineral Resources Authority by virtue of Law no.87 of 2025) was formed upon commercial discovery. That joint-venture operating company managed exploitation operations, with a board split between the parties approving annual production schedules, work programmes, and budgets. Rights to the minerals as defined in the issued Gold Concession Agreement and the concession remained with the Authority while the contractor granted the concession; the joint-venture operating company was the operating vehicle.
The New Model dispenses with the joint venture construct. Exploitation rights are granted directly to the company granted the concession via an exploitation permit governed by a dedicated special law framework. The permit terms prevail over conflicting general laws where bespoke rules apply. Operational control sits with the company, while the Authority’s role is focused on authorisations, inspections, reporting, and enforcement.
The Old Model featured tiered exploration periods, mandatory relinquishments, “retain” arrangements, and exploitation leases typically for 20 years, extendable by up to 10 years. If regular commercial shipments were not established within four years of lease issuance, the lease was relinquished unless otherwise agreed. Conversion to exploitation required ministerial approval.
The New Model modernises lifecycle controls. The company receives exclusivity over the exploitation area, and the Authority uses best endeavours to secure land and access rights both inside and, where needed, outside the area, including (where lawful) compulsory acquisition or similar powers on non‑discriminatory terms. There is no maximum cap on the size of an exploitation area if it is identified in the feasibility study submitted with the application. Annual rent applies and is adjusted each year by the Egyptian Consumer Price Index – Urban, replacing prior indexation mechanisms. The company may locate infrastructure inside or, subject to conditions, outside the exploitation area, and cannot be compelled to modify or move it under general regulations that would otherwise apply.
This is where the shift is most pronounced.
Under the Old Model
Under the New Model
Withholding tax on dividends is habitually capped at 5% or the applicable concession agreement rate if lower; withholding on foreign services is habitually capped at 10% or the applicable concession agreement rate if lower. Interest on foreign loans can be exempt from withholding if minimum term and leverage thresholds are met.
Under the Old Model, the export of gold and associated minerals was permitted free of export taxes and licences, with Authority purchase options at market prices and established documentation procedures.
The New Model digitises and accelerates export. Shipment documents are submitted electronically; if the Authority does not respond within a certain timeframe (habitually two days), consent is deemed (provided the full document set was submitted). Companies may use non‑Egyptian refineries; the only consequence is bearing incremental transport costs to the selected refinery, with no other penalty.
Foreign‑exchange protections are explicit. The company may obtain, hold, and disburse funds in foreign currency; maintain accounts inside or outside Egypt; remit proceeds and repatriate capital; and is habitually not required to convert foreign currency into EGP, subject to the stabilised tax and customs framework.
The Old Model provided extensive joint‑venture reporting and audit rights and split dispute forums. Disputes with the government went to local courts, while disputes between the Authority and the company went to arbitration, with the concession agreement terms prevailing over conflicting laws in arbitration.
The New Model preserves robust inspection and reporting rights for the Authority, with reasonable notice, confidentiality, and the ability to take electronic copies of records. A dedicated dispute‑resolution mechanism applies, including an accelerated track for specified disputes. The concession agreement is governed by Egyptian law, contains a clear hierarchy clause under which its terms and the stabilised tax and customs regime prevail over conflicting applicable local law where necessary, and includes express Authority assurances (including non‑discrimination and expropriation protections consistent with local law).
Under the Old Model, assignment required government consent; the Authority had a right of first acquisition; an assignment bonus of habitually 10% applied; and cash bonuses were payable on exploitation lease approval and extension.
The New Model introduces a granular, fee‑free transfer and change‑of‑control framework. Authority consent is required; there is a right of first offer to the Authority for direct changes of control, and deemed consent applies if the Authority does not decide within defined periods. Assignment to affiliates is permitted with appropriate guarantees. Set‑off rights allow mutual amounts due between the company and the Authority to be netted. Termination triggers include sustained non‑payment of undisputed portions of royalties/NPI after cure periods, with interest on late payments.
The recently implemented New Model shifts the fiscal model to a simpler royalties-plus-tax system, removes production-sharing complexities, strengthens ESG and closure obligations, and streamlines export and customs processes. Companies gain clearer, stabilised terms with direct permits, reduced cashflow volatility, explicit FX rights, and defined tax boundaries, while communities benefit from ringfenced development funds and more robust environmental and closure commitments.
In sum, the Old Model — anchored in a 50/50 joint-venture operating company, cost‑recovery tranches, and production sharing — appears in practice and by the initiative of the Minister of Petroleum and Natural Minerals to have been replaced by a modern, stabilised permit regime with a habitually 5% NSR royalty, a 15% NPI on net taxable income, corporate income tax at 22.5%, streamlined export and FX rights, and strengthened ESG and community commitments. The result is simpler administration, greater predictability, and clearer alignment with international mining practice, while maintaining the Authority’s economic participation.
For communities and stakeholders, the New Model regime codifies meaningful environmental and social standards, grievance and reporting mechanisms, and a ringfenced community fund with shared governance.