Liaison office of Grand Ayatullah Sayyid Ali Al Sistani (L.M.H.L) in London, Europe, North and South America.
1807. Gold, silver, lead, copper, iron, oil, steamcoal, Feerozah,
Aqeeq, alum, salt or any other mineral are from Anfaal, which means that they
belong to Imam (A.S.). But if anyone extracts them without any religious
impediments, he can own them. And when they are of prescribed quantity, Khums
must be paid on them.
1808. The taxable limit of a mineral is 15 common mithqals of coined
gold i.e. if the value of a thing which is extracted from a mine reaches 15
mithqals of coined gold, the person concerned should pay Khums on it, after
deducting from it the expenses which he has incurred.
1809. If a person has derived profit from a mine, but the value of the
thing which he has extracted does not reach 15 mithqals of coined gold, payment
of Khums on it will be necessary when that profit alone or combined with other
profits of his trade exceed his expenses for one year.
1810. Chalk, lime, fuller's-earth and red clay are, as an obligatory
precaution, minerals, and one who extracts them, is required to pay Khums if the
value of that mineral reached the prescribed taxable limit. This will become
obligatory without deducting annual expenses
1811. If a person acquires something from a mine, he should pay Khums
on it whether the mine is over the ground, or under, and whether it is located
in an owned land, or at a place which has no owner.
1812. If a person does not know whether or not the value of the thing
extracted by him from a mine reaches 15 mithqals of coined gold, as an
obligatory precaution, he should ascertain the value, as far as possible, by
getting it weighed or by any other means.
1813. If a few persons jointly extract something, and if its total
value reaches 15 mithqals of coined gold, they should pay Khums on it, as a
recommended precaution, even if the value of the share of each one of them may
not be liable for Khums.
1814. If a person extracts mineral by digging a land belonging to
another person without his consent, the Fuqaha have said that it belongs to the
owner of the land. But this is a matter of Ishkal, and a better alternative is
that they come to some understanding between them, and if that fails, reference
should be made to the Mujtahid for his decision.