RE:Sherritt Investor Relations You seem to be confusing "value" with replacement value and other accounting concepts like original cost and book value, maybe a sprinkle of tax accounting. The "value" is irrelevant for tax purposes. The tax deduction each year is based on the original capital cost and the remaining cost, for tax purposes, that has not already been claimed as capital cost allowance. Actual Cost = Cost for tax purposes? No. Some items in the cost are 100% deductible for tax purposes in year one, for example. I could go on, but I'm putting myself to sleep talking about depreciation vs CCA. Final word. "Value" is irrelevant for tax purposes.
As for valuations of things like the fort, NO, companies do not provide or report such things. They report book value. What they paid to build it, plus any improvements, plus any capital rebuilds, minus all the accumulated depreciation since it was built. Only financial assets or assets held for sale are "marked to market". The operations at the Fort are NOT. Nor is the "value" of voisey bay reported anywhere by that company. Nor Trail by Teck. Financial analysis can provide a range of "values" for fort Sask depending on a myriad of assumptions made by each analyst. Most analysis focuses on the NPV of future cash flows. It's easy to pop into your HP calculator. Better analysis considers other factors like scarcity and replacement cost. As always, do your own due dilly. Maybe it's $10B, maybe it's zero.