Compania Sud Americana de Vapores SA

SGO:VAPORES

Q3-2025 Earnings Call

[Operator]

[Audio Gap] of the third quarter.

[Oscar Eduardo Hasbún Martínez, executive]

For the English-speaking people, we have online translation that you can actually click on this sort of planet you have there, and you will find the English version.

For everyone, if you want to ask any questions, the chat is available open, and I recommend that only you have any questions that you have already looked at the material, you can start writing them down immediately so that you're not in a hurry trying to type them at the last minute when it's harder. So we'll try to always answer them when we finish the presentation.

So having said that, we can now begin with our presentation of results. As you can see there in the picture what we have is our last vessel from the Series of 23,660 TEUs, is an amazing ship. So we'll move forward with the presentation.

So the highlights of the quarter, and I'm going to begin with Hapag. We have a volume growth, which is very important, good news, 9% more than twice what we have seen for the market with our tariffs falling 5% our freight rates compared to previous months. Of course, it has a very relevant impact on results. So that makes it so that our utility 9 months has gone down for 976 million this year. I'll go into further detail later on why this happened.

Here we have a combination of lower freight rates and increases of costs above the volume, which is explained basically in 2 reasons. First season, on implementation costs of Gemini are incorporated in the results of the first 9 months. And, of course, this has had a negative effect on our cost structure, and this is cost that will start getting out of the cost structure for the next quarters.

And the second cost or reason is that through the creation of Gemini, our total allocation has increased in a very considerable manner. And this 9% growth does not fill this allocation gap. So we are bearing a cost for this growth that will help us in the upcoming years. So all this additional volume that we have does not require increases of structure. So this is a very discrete leap regarding our size. But of course, this has impact on costs, but it allows us to grow to achieve growth objectives or size objectives that we want to maintain our relevant operational scale.

In the terminal business, we have $110 million for the first 9 months compared to $110 million last year. The second good news is how good our operations have worked with Maersk in Gemini. We're going to talk about that as well. We have an outlook for results. It's a bit smaller due to this third quarter. We'll also look into this, but so far, another piece of relevant news as an industry is that the Red Sea is still not a path that we can use, right, considering that tensions have shrunk a bit, but so far, we still go under Cape Hope.

In the case of CSAV, we have utility of $135 million compared to $194 million last year, but independent of the results of Hapag being much more relevant than this when we see how big effect of results this year. We have $173 million from the $540 million of last year. It's almost half, but we have 2 positive effects on the result that kind of offset this. We have lower taxes, and this is stemming from the real dividends that were distributed in Chile and that triggered dividends in Chile are much lower this year compared to last year.

And this generates taxes that are higher this year, $180 million better or lower, if you will. So we have a relevant impact there. And this does have a special impact on our cash flow is that the refund of the $400 million from Germany, the tax refund regarding the exchange rate generated profits of $170 million with exchange rate with euros. So that's a positive effect of $181 million and $170 million, which is very similar to what CSAV showed for last year regardless of the fact that the results from Hapag are half.

Already explained the taxes, so we'll move forward. Here, we're looking at the industry. We're looking at the first 9 months of the year with a growth of 4.1% of the demand, which is pretty healthy considering everything that has happened regarding freight rates. But, of course, this demand has been volatile in different ports around the world, considering tariffs, and this has generated increased costs, difficulties in trying to predict supply and demand for containers or empty containers.

And of course, this also produces an increase in the cost structure, but this has been stabilizing. And so, there are also costs that we expect that will exit this structure. So we'll also talk about our savings plan. And now, when we have idle fleet, the earnings are 0 -- 1%. And when we include all the fleet that's in the shipbuilders, it's 8%. So it's very low. So the entire worldwide fleet is operational, so volumes are relatively reasonable.

When we look at freight rates, we see a very different situation from last year. On average, last year, we have $2,500 from the freight rate of the Shanghai Index. Today, it's $1,590 as an average, $1,300 at the tip. So the freight rates have gone down significantly from last year. And this explains that the accrued result is considerably worse. There's quite a bit of volatility here, but we have to see how the year closes, right, because this will be a very good indication for signing contracts into 2026. And as you all know, this is a considerable part of our yearly income, basically the same, right?

So when we have this point of view, what we're looking at is the accumulation of overcapacity in a sense because we had 2024 where volume grew 6% and capacity grew 10% notwithstanding the fact that we're also using the Red Sea capacities. So in 2024, the Red Sea was an important part of this capacity as well. But for 2025, what we see is the generation of overcapacity as well. It grew 7%, demand grew 3%. I mean, this is a projection. So we're doing a bit better now. So next year, handing over of new ships is quite low. It's 4%. It's the lowest of the last 4 or 5 years, and we'll see how demand grows.

The projection so far is 2%, but this will depend a lot of what happens in the U.S. So what we're seeing now is that there's a reduction of inventories in the U.S. And we don't see the same from consumption. So at some point, we will have some reactivation of this traffic, which would increase these volumes, and that will change the direction of this demand going into 2026.

When we see the vessel deliveries, the creation of new vessels, it's gone down, but we're around the levels of 30% for the last 4 years. Five years after the pandemic, when we look down, and this is what we have to consider, as of 2030, we will have 4.2 million TEUs of total capacity from around 32 million, 33 million TEUs out of all actual traffic, meaning 14% to 15% of vessels will have more than 20 -- will be more than 25 years old.

So what we expect is that starting in 2028, the scrapping levels will increase, meaning that these ships will be replaced. And why 2028, and not before? Because after the pandemic, all ship contracts were extended for 3 years. And now, with the Suez Canal crisis, also generated fleet scarcity. So these contracts are generally extended for 3 or more years. So the maturity of these contracts is 2028.

What you will start seeing here is that part of the order book that will be delivered for 2028 or 2029 will replace these ships -- these older ships that are rented at high prices, and they are not as efficient regarding their fuel. So we'll have an adjustment mechanism of any overcapacity that was generated during this period.

Well, also, Gemini, just like I said at the beginning, it's been extraordinarily successful. We basically have a schedule reliability above 90% every single month. Of course, this is very important for our clients. As you can see here, the NPS, the Net Promoter Score, of Hapag is 69%, which is very high for those of you that know this index. So this has allowed us for the first 9 months to grow twice the market rate because we have many clients that want to cooperate with us, and that is why we also think that next year, it's very probable that we will also grow over the market, right?

And, of course, this allows us to start looking into commodities that want to pay you more for timely delivery. But the demand margin, we need to have a very nice scheduled reliability. It's also important regarding costs because as you comply with deadlines that lowers cost and frees up capabilities, more transport capabilities with the same vessels. So these 2 positive effects will start to become noticeable in our port structure, probably towards the end of this year and next year as well.

Perfect. So this will explain what I was just saying. We made the decision of investing in 22 new ships, smaller vessel classes, below 5,000 TEUs capacity. They have different sizes; 5,000, 3,500 and 2,000. This is just to bring -- these are feeders to bring the load into bigger ships. So out of this, we have a very small important percentage that will be lease agreements, long-term lease agreements, but we also have our own ships. This will be to help Hapag-Lloyd in this segment. So we operate with around 100 vessels in this segment. And this segment is vessels that are old. They have quite a high average age. So this will probably replace this fleet.

These are ships that even in those lease agreements, there will be lower -- considering what we're paying now, less efficient, whatever it's a series of benefits that we'll be capturing through this investment so that we continue. And just to show you a quick snapshot of our fleet, we already received 284,000 TEU of capacity or tonnage after the delivery of our 12 vessels of 36,000 TEUs. They are dual fuel vessels that work with green hydrogen and oil.

The delivery will begin from '27 to '29. We have 12 ships of 6,000 TEUs, another 12 ships for 9,000 TEUs. This was an order for $16 million, the biggest order in the history of the company. These are ships that will generate important efficiencies regarding fuel consumption, scale economies, et cetera. So these are ships that we expect, when they are delivered, they will entail very big improvements for operation.

We have 5 ships that we're switching to methanol. That, so far, I would consider them tests to see how they operate. But to this, we add the vessels that we're negotiating now, these 22, out of which I mentioned a big part of them are leased and another part of them would be our own. So we have a very healthy order book to replace and grow regarding what the market dictates. You can go ahead now.

[Roberto Saenz, executive]

Thank you very much. Well, I will now continue with Hapag-Lloyd numbers, and then, we will see the numbers from CSAV. So when we look at the first 9 months from Hapag, we see just like Oscar was saying, volumes growing quite a bit above market levels, 9% growth around these last 9 months, but revenue only grew by 5%, and this comes out of lower freight rates. And then, we see at the EBITDA levels fell to 2%. This dip is the cost increase that we just explained that we will look -- that we will delve deeper later.

And with that, as a group profit, it's almost half of the last year's 9 months. But the cash flow is still positive. For the last 9 months, we have generated $1.4 million, and the net debt, although it is positive, I guess, closing as of 2024, where we have more cash flow than debt, it's at a level of 0.7, a very solid balance at a Hapag-Lloyd level.

Here, we can compare the numbers for the third quarter of 2024, numbers from previous quarter and the figures for this third quarter of 2025, and also, the accumulated as of 9 months of 2024 and the same for 2025. Putting out a very quick analysis of this. The numbers from 2024 are lower. Freight rates have gone down regardless of the increase of volume and the cost pressure this year is even more important.

So regarding last year's quarter, this quarter as of 2025, third quarter, the results are better. For the second quarter regarding the EBIT is better. For the second quarter, it was $189 million. This quarter, it's $228 million. But when we look at utility, it went down from $300 million to $172 million. This is explained mainly through the tax expenses related more to an exchange rate issue, more so than expenses carried out, right?

When we look at the previous 9 months, the results are of an EBIT of $900 million, so kind of hold on to the numbers. So then, we look at the forecast for the end of the year, $905 million, I mean, in profit of the last 9 months of $146 million. As we saw, it was kind of half of last year. And also, the return on investment went down from 13% to 5.5%. The trend of the freight rates is going down for many months now, not only the spot trade that we showed that fell around 40% throughout the year, the average freight rate in Hapag is also going down.

This is explained partly due to the volatility of the market for this year due to tariff issues, geopolitical issues, and also, newer fleet being used. It's a fleet that is still not being compensated through scrapping because, as we mentioned, there are many contracts with the ships that are potentially up for scrapping that will go into maturity for the upcoming years. But, regardless of this, the tariff for the third quarter grew from the freight fee of last year's third quarter.

And regarding cost levels, when we analyze line by line, all costs, fuel has shown a dip, which is good. But part of this is offset by credits that the company must now purchase because of emissions that were generated from vessels that operate in European traffic, which is a new regulation that started last year, and that has to be offset. Last year, we offset by 40% of these emissions. This year, we're already offsetting 70%. And next year, it will be 100%, so this compensation is offset, and the compensation costs will keep going up.

The good thing is that fuel has gone down. Almost all lines -- well, basically all lines of costs have been going up. Nonetheless, the most common ones are related to handling and haulage. And this is mainly related to -- first of all, we've had many disruptions and congestions in ports, especially in Northern Europe and Asia. And this generates higher costs for hauling and storage and on land because it's that congestion.

Also, another part that explained is that this is positive in the sense that we're offering better services for clients, and this participation of client sales -- door-to-door sales, meaning from production of goods until it's delivered in the warehouse of the clients on the other port covering the entire service and offering the entire freight of the container to the client, this percentage of door-to-door sales has increased. So that also increases costs, but it also generates higher prices for these products.

And also, the effect of the addition of Gemini, which is -- this is a long-term cooperation, but its starting point generates costs for restructuring of vessels and implementation that have affected costs for this year. And we expect a tendency towards regularization in the upcoming months. Also, costs have been attacked by external factors like exchange rate, regulatory issues, a lot of regulatory compliance on a global level for new regulations.

And also, there's this relevant thing that at a global level, imbalance between geographical regions has increased, and this makes it so we need to reposition empty containers at a higher rate compared to last year, and this generates higher costs as well. So the projection for the year's end has been shortened at an EBIT level. And so a few months, we expected the EBITDA result, so average would be between $1.25 billion and $0.05 billion, and this was shortened to $0.6 billion and $1.1 billion. As I mentioned, we have a regulation of around $900 million as of the 9 months from the beginning of the year. So we are already inside of the expected range.

And now, when we look at CSAV results, this graph is a lot clearer for the comparison of the 9 months of 2024 and 2025. Regarding profits, the profits went down around $19 million, and we closed these last 9 months with a result of $136 million. The main effect of this is the plummeting effect on the contribution of Hapag-Lloyd for CSAV's results.

Also, we have a lower effect of higher management costs. We have an effect of $9 million in the financial results. This is mainly due to having a lower cash flow level that when we look at the end of quarter levels, there were high levels for cash flow because we received retentions, but they were withheld in the cash flow. But when we look at the average cash flow for CSAV for the whole year, it's quite lower than last year. And these negative effects were compensated by an exchange rate effect of $77 million positive.

Also, a great part of this exchange rate difference is already made, and it was related to geographical tensions. We need to get the refund of withheld euros in Germany. And when it was received, they need to be converted back into dollars. So this exchange rate was already done. So this is a real effect in our cash flow.

And we also have a positive effect regarding taxes that we're registering so far, where we have a lower tax expense since we had a lower dividend from Germany to Chile. With this, we can now close the last 9 months with $175 million.

Just to mention a few things. As I mentioned, we recovered all retentions from Germany. For the second retention corresponds to $406 million, and we recovered this in September. Part of this flow also we proposed dividends, was approved in an extraordinary shareholders' meeting. They were handed over in October. But just so you can know in your heads, you can keep an eye on for one of these important numbers. So after recovering these withholdings, the company still has $52 million of tax credits paid abroad that could be used against the payment of taxes in Chile.

And second is that we still need to recover one retention, which is EUR 114 million that in dollars is around $132 million more or less that we see here for taxes yet to recover, taxes to recover. And with this, after all the recoveries that we've mentioned, we only have this only retention here. From first part retentions, retentions generated from the dividends that Hapag-Lloyd paid to CSAV and that have been recovered throughout the last 3 years for a period closer to the first quarter of next year, meaning first quarter -- first semester of 2026.

Here, we only want to show you an example of what it meant, the recovery of these withholdings from Germany and the effect that they had on a balance sheet level. So when we look at the first column, we see the balance as of the end of June of this year and how it changed regarding the -- as of the end of September. And so the main part here and the most evident is that cash and cash equivalents increased by the total amount of withholdings recovered, around $480 million, because we have EUR 406 million.

So cash flow increases against lowering retentions, which is what we have in red here. Some of them were in current assets, and there were noncurrent assets as well. That was the first effect. And the second effect is that they decreased liabilities with deferred taxes, meaning CSAV. When CSAV Germany distributes dividends towards CSAV Chile, we have a part of this flow that goes directly into Chile and another part is retained -- is withheld.

So as a balance sheet, when we send this dividend in Chile, we register that we already have a tax obligation that will be executed once this money arrives. So we register the fact that we'll have to pay taxes in Chile. So we'll leave this in deferred tax liabilities for the long term, which is this $129 million that you can see there at the bottom of the chart in the light blue square.

Once we have received these withholdings, it triggers this new tax payment in Chile. So we discount this deferred tax liability against -- basically, CSAV does not pay this from their cash flow in Chile, but the use of their bonds from credits abroad. So this discount of deferred tax liabilities is charged against the credit assets from abroad.

So on the third effect that I also want to mention, which is equity, equity has increased, thanks to the results from the year. But on a financial statement results, on a balance sheet results, it didn't really have a big effect. The only effect that they have is in the exchange rate mainly when it comes to converting these redemptions that are received in euros, so they are transformed into euros -- they're transformed into dollars.

These dollars are compared to the dollar-euro as of the end of June. And this was the main effect really because it was quite similar to the last 2 periods. I just want to tell you also a few things that we have done with communities and the work that we're carrying out in the port cities during these quarters. We're working together through the Universidad de Chile in a talent development program where we have quite a few children from schools in San Antonio. They went through a selection process.

And all throughout this year, we have been working together with the talent school preparing these children for university. And this is a follow-through that we're doing all throughout the last 2 years of high school with a selection that we have of 8 students in San Antonio. So this has carried out to many visits. They come to Santiago once a month, and they also have online classes every single week with the team of our talent school, which is a program that we have installed all throughout Chile and led by [ Fay ].

We're also carrying out training for forklifts for operation students from a school in San Antonio, and this is also a program that we have for the entire second semester of this year, and they will have a Type D license that will allow them to operate these forklifts, which are the main forklifts that we use in all sort centers.

We've also continued with motivational talks in San Antonio. We had a special guest called [indiscernible] who has a very impactful history of recovery. It was quite an emotional day in San Antonio. And also many of you were able to attend -- you were all invited, and we had a new seminar where we were raising challenges, geopolitical challenges. And now, we had many speakers in the global trade seminar that was held in October -- last October. We had a lot of attending. We closed many gaps there.

And with that, we can now open the floor to any questions. Remember, you can also write down your questions in the chat or if you want to ask directly you can do it. You can raise your hand, and we will give you the floor.

[Oscar Eduardo Hasbún Martínez, executive]

We are reading the questions, give me just 30 seconds here. I'm going to answer a few of them that I can answer. There are some about dividends and year-end results. And we don't do these projections, and we can't also talk about dividends, which is something that the Board of Directors has to propose. So I'll begin with the first question that basically -- you moved it out of the way.

There were go. The cost impact -- I'm not going to look at the data that we have there, but effectively this year, given the cost structure of Hapag-Lloyd, it's a relevant amount of the costs that are coming out of the implementation of Gemini. And this -- as I mentioned, these are 2 things. First of all, we have the Gemini implementation costs that once this is already running, this cost will start to exit the system.

And the second thing is that we took a very discrete leap in allocation in tonnage, and this year, we will not be able to fill out this entire tonnage. And next year, we expect that whatever growth we have we'll have a low marginal cost considering that we have this tonnage already hired. So these 2 effects will generate -- when we look at the unit cost next year, if everything else is constant, it will generate a very important impact in unit costs.

You have to know that results are not only costs, they are also freight rates. So whatever happens with freight rates will be just as or even more determining compared to costs from the year-end results. But we have quite a bit of conviction that if you isolate oil costs, the rest of the structure, the cost structure will tend to go down.

You have to know that from 2024 to date, we have plenty of costs that have gone up structurally for the industry. Just to mention a few regulatory costs, carbon bonds that we have to buy; second, the negotiation of the salaries in the U.S., it's also hit us quite roughly. The increase of lease contracts, which is very structural, it also has been impacting us strongly in the entire industry. So there are many costs that went up, and it will take a long time to come down if they do come down.

So our balance of rates is not what we had 4 years ago, it needs to be higher. But when I'm talking about costs, they will start exiting the system, which is what has to do with implementation costs plus higher allocation costs, which is something that we can use with higher volumes. So the unit cost will be noticeable.

Then, we have a question regarding why we changed cash flow policies. I want to clear up that we -- there are no changes here, right? What the company has done consistently is giving out 100% of the free cash flow, and the decision that the directory had of kind of anticipating part of this. Normally, this is what has been designed in ordinary shareholder meetings, and what the directory did this time is of sharing a dividend considering that we received anticipated cash flow. We will see what the directory will propose for ordinary shareholders' meeting. But so far, I'd say that there is no argument established that there has been any changes in policies.

What it says here, talking about dividend dates, amount for dividends. I can't say more about this, more than I have already said.

Then, I will talk about paying for compensations regarding fuel reductions, right, fuel cost reductions. What applies here is that all emissions generated when vessels move inside of Europe from one country in Europe to the other, all of these emissions are calculated, right, CO2 emissions. They're calculated at 100%. So if we are issued 1 million tons, then you add 1 million.

So if the trip connects Europe to another continent, you calculate half of these emissions. This gives you a total number of emissions. And from that total number, this year, we have to pay or buy 70% in ETS from our carbon bonds, and this is independent of the cost of carbon bonds. I think it's around $90. And next year, you won't have to buy 70%, you have to buy 100% of emissions, but with this formula that I just mentioned before, meaning 100% of emissions in Europe, 50% of emissions between Europe and the rest of the world.

They're asking me specifically about the cost savings that we expect. It's not something that we do here in Hapag-Lloyd, so I can't really anticipate anything, but they are considerable cost levels.

Tom questions about business cost for the directory. No, I have explained there are no policy changes. This is still a driver for investment to continue with the participation that we have so far in Hapag-Lloyd. So we have no intention nor any discussions around going into other businesses. So none of that has changed in an important manner.

Another question about withholdings. I think María Elena answered this at the beginning. What we have from retention is basically the first retention -- the first withholding regarding dividends that we're paying in May. It's the only withholding that we have. You can see here in the documents that we published with the exact number.

Regarding taxes that you mentioned for the second quarter going to be used, yes, our expectation here is that over time, we'll be able to use all these bonds, right? How fast we use them will depend on speed with which Hapag-Lloyd produces profit, but they're considered as an asset. And to consider them an asset, you need to have a conviction that you can use them. If not, you can't consider them an asset. So our conviction is that we will use them. Also, know that these credits mature -- they don't mature, right? They are maintained over time. They have no expiration date. So we could do this now, in 2, 5 years. So yes, we will use them. That's our conviction.

Any competitive advantages regarding the entire industry? I think this is a very important -- interesting question. This year, if you look at our relative performance this year, it was not good. It has not been good. And it has not been good for these 2 reasons that we already explained. First of all, we came into an agreement, a partnership that has implementation costs. In our case, implementation costs are much more relevant than for Maersk. That's our partnership because Maersk has already operated with this concept. So this area for us a certain friction that translated into costs that need to leave the cost structure behind the assets that license the operation. That's one, reason one.

Reason two is that when you negotiate a partnership, right, an alliance that will last a long time, it's very important regarding the allocation of this partnership from minute 1. We want to make sure that this number was 40% of the alliance. So Maersk has 60%, we have 40%. But to fill this 40% of the tons that we have in this alliance, it will take some time. And this, of course, generated also increased costs in 2025 due to this higher amount of structure, which means that our relative performance seems worse.

I think the relative performance next year will look much better than this year, considering that these 2 effects will start to give way the initial costs from Gemini to go away. And second, the growth volume of the next year will come from an allocation that we have already paid, and it's not growing. So it has a higher marginal value. Of course, the final result will depend on freight rates.

Freight rates are a factor that we don't really handle, and they can impact the entire cost. But as a cost structure, this is what we expect. Here, we have a question from potential opening the Suez Canal. This a risk from next year. But for us, for the long term, it's much better to have it operational than nonoperational. For us, what works in the long term is that the supply chain of the plant works without any difficulties. But, of course, this can generate liberation of ships that are used today to do a trip that's 25% longer. So this would free up a percentage of the fleet that could generate some sort of unbalance between the supply and demand.

But having said this, what I cannot see is 2 things. First of all, the speed of the ships is going down again. And this related to a better use with emission loss, fuel consumption. And so reduction of speed will help and has helped to absorb this, shipping companies, notwithstanding the fact that vessels fully stop when you have any issues, you have blank sailings. You stop the ship because it has not enough load, and this kind of stabilizes the supply and demand.

So we have many different mechanisms, structural mechanisms, which are scrapping. We truly believe it will be hard for this to offer a considerable increase around '26-'27. If we increase this to start around 2028, when we have the delivery of medium-sized ships, we expect an effect there.

We have a question around the impact for Hapag-Lloyd, these measures between China and the U.S. regarding taxing ships that are built in any of these countries. For us, we happily don't have this issue. We're able to reorganize our network in a way so that the impact is close to 0, both for China and the U.S. So, so far, any of these measures that have been announced will not really affect our cost structure. Some others have it worse. But in our case, happily, we -- it doesn't really impact us.

There's a question that I don't really understand regarding taxes, but doesn't matter. I don't know. If any of you wants to ask a question out loud, any of them that were written down, I have a little fuel in my brain, it seems because I didn't understand a few of these questions. But if you want, you can raise your hand, and we'll let you talk.

[ Francisco ], go ahead.

[Unknown Analyst]

The question that I had here is that for last meeting, you mentioned that internal unit services allowed you to use bonds paid abroad that were not provisioned. You said that you didn't have any clear amounts. And I wanted to know if you have been able to move forward with that and if these amounts correspond to 35% of taxes paid abroad that are not in the balance sheet?

[Oscar Eduardo Hasbún Martínez, executive]

No, let me clear that up. Effectively, we had a favorable tax return from service in the sense that taxes paid by Hapag-Lloyd and their subsidiaries, they need to comply with certain requisites. First, having a double taxation agreement between countries where the agreement was signed in Chile, the requirement number two, having taxes actually being paid 12 months before they were used, all of that was positive. But these are not taxes paid by us, but by Hapag. So that sadly services are short when trying to detail their procedure. So we do not know just yet, and we're working on this.

They're working on clearing this up, where they need to explain how they will take these taxes paid by Hapag and their subsidiaries, meaning we'll have to use first those that were paid first? Or is it a whole bulk? It's important regarding the allocation of these taxes, how much we'll be able to use them, in how much time.

The second, which is not clear and something that we're working on, will already progress quite a bit. When it comes to determining how many credits do we have instead of Hapag-Lloyd that we could eventually use and apply for this equation that the IRS defines that must be applied for the calculation of the amount of credits. And this is something that we're working on. You need to understand that Hapag-Lloyd, the European company does not really have an integrated system just like in Chile. So what Hapag-Lloyd pays in Peru doesn't work at all for Hapag-Lloyd in Germany.

So they don't do what we do in Chile regarding every subsidiary that pays taxes, making sure they have documents signed and everything. So we're doing this work. We came to an agreement with Hapag-Lloyd. We hired an external consultant that from now on every single year they will help us generate this information. But in order to estimate the amount, we need to have an answer from the IRS to make sure what's the equation that will be applied for these taxes, and this is still not in place, Francisco, and this response reply -- response speed does not depend on us. We're doing all we can trying to have something for this year for next taxable year, but we still have no clear picture on when we'll have the clear explanation of the service.

[Unknown Analyst]

Right. Good. And regarding these new emissions that we mentioned, the cost of emissions is charged on the banked amount or like fuel? Or is it in a different line?

[Oscar Eduardo Hasbún Martínez, executive]

Correct. Fuel.

[Unknown Analyst]

And do you have any notion around this is for all shipping companies as a whole or it depends on the age of the ships?

[Oscar Eduardo Hasbún Martínez, executive]

No emissions depend on how much of oil -- how much fuel every ship burns. So emissions are specific to their ships, but it affects those that have more operations in Europe and less for those that have more operations in the U.S. We have quite a bit of operations in Europe, but these are numbers that is we estimate around $150 million in total. I'm not saying it's not that much money, but as a whole, regarding global numbers next year, they could be $200 million and something, but we'll have to see how much the carbon bond is worth because this is a market price, right? It's not a fixed amount. So if we start seeing many buyers from these bonds, it could go up.

I don't know if there are any more questions. It doesn't seem to be the way. So we can go down.

It seems we don't have any more questions. So I thank you all for your attention, and I will see you after the results are published for the yearly report. I'll give you a piece of news. I don't know if you know. One piece of news that we have here, we have Rolf Habben Jansen here visiting Chile. So we'll be coordinating a call, a meeting, a little breakfast with the shareholders, and you're all invited probably 21st morning, the 20th -- I mean, January 20 in the morning. So it would be very interesting to see his vision directly a bit of what the year was and how we see next year shaping up. So you're all invited. We hope to have you there. So you can ask any more questions to Rolf there.

Thank you very much. Have a nice day.

[Statements in English on this transcript were spoken by an interpreter present on the live call.]