Ruling 1815. Mined products such as gold, silver, lead, copper, iron, oil, coal, turquoise (fīrūzah), agate (ʿaqīq), alum, salt, and others, are considered to be anfāl, i.e. they belong to the Imam (ʿA). However, if someone extracts them and there is no legal obstacle, he can own them; and in the event that the mined product’s value reaches the taxable limit (niṣāb), he must pay khums on it.

Ruling 1816. The niṣāb for mined products is fifteen common (ṣayrafī) mithqāls[1] of coined gold, i.e. if the value of something that is extracted from a mine reaches fifteen common mithqāls of coined gold after deducting the costs for extracting it, then the subsequent expenses – such as the costs for purifying it – are subtracted and khums must be paid on the remainder.

Ruling 1817. When the value of something that has been extracted from a mine does not reach fifteen common mithqāls of coined gold, khums on it becomes necessary only when it – either on its own or in combination with one’s other profits – exceeds his living expenses for the year.

Ruling 1818. Based on obligatory precaution, the rules (aḥkām) of mined products also apply to chalk and lime. Therefore, if their value reaches the niṣāb, one must pay khums on them without deducting his living expenses for the year from their value.

Ruling 1819. A person who acquires something from a mine must pay khums on it, whether the mine is over the ground or under it, located on land owned by him or in a place that does not have an owner.

Ruling 1820. If a person does not know whether or not the value of the thing he has extracted from a mine reaches fifteen common mithqāls of coined gold, the obligatory precaution is that if it is possible, he must ascertain its value by weighing it or by some other way; and if this is not possible, then khums is not obligatory for him.

Ruling 1821. If a few persons extract something from a mine, in the event that its total value reaches fifteen common mithqāls of coined gold but the share of each person does not reach that value, it is not liable for khums.

Ruling 1822. If by digging, a person extracts a mined product from under some land that belongs to someone whose consent he did not get, the opinion held by most jurists (mashhūr) is that whatever is acquired from that belongs to the owner of the land. However, this is problematic and the obligatory precaution is that they must arrive at a settlement. In the event that they are not willing to arrive at a settlement, they must refer to a fully qualified jurist (al‑ḥākim al‑sharʿī) to settle the dispute.