EX-99.3

The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared by and are the responsibility of the Board of Directors and Management of the Company.

The consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board and reflect Management’s best estimates and judgments based on currently available information. The Company has developed and maintains a system of internal controls in order to ensure, on a reasonable and cost effective basis, the reliability of its financial information.

The consolidated financial statements have been audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, Chartered Accountants. Their report outlines the scope of their examination and opinion on the consolidated financial statements.

Barrick’s management is responsible for establishing and maintaining internal control over financial reporting.

Barrick’s management assessed the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as at December 31, 2015. Barrick’s Management used the Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013) as issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations (COSO) of the Treadway Commission to evaluate the effectiveness of Barrick’s internal control over financial reporting. Based on management’s assessment, Barrick’s internal control over financial reporting is effective as at December 31, 2015.

The effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as at December 31, 2015 has been audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, Chartered Accountants, as stated in their report which is located on pages 88 - 90 of Barrick’s 2015 Annual Financial Statements.

We have completed integrated audits of Barrick Gold Corporation’s (the company) 2015 and 2014 consolidated financial statements and its internal control over financial reporting as at December 31, 2015. Our opinions, based on our audits, are presented below.

We have audited the accompanying consolidated financial statements of Barrick Gold Corporation, which comprise the consolidated balance sheets as at December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014 and the consolidated statements of income, comprehensive income, cash flow and changes in equity for the years then ended, and the related notes, which comprise a summary of significant accounting policies and other explanatory information.

Management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of these consolidated financial statements in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) and for such internal control as management determines is necessary to enable the preparation of consolidated financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error.

Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these consolidated financial statements based on our audits. We conducted our audits in accordance with Canadian generally accepted auditing standards and the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the consolidated financial statements are free from material misstatement. Canadian generally accepted auditing standards also require that we comply with ethical requirements.

An audit involves performing procedures to obtain audit evidence, on a test basis, about the amounts and disclosures in the consolidated financial statements. The procedures selected depend on the auditor’s judgement, including the assessment of the risks of material misstatement of the consolidated financial statements, whether due to fraud or error. In making those risk assessments, the auditor considers internal control relevant to the company’s preparation and fair presentation of the consolidated financial statements in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances. An audit also includes evaluating the appropriateness of accounting principles and policies used and the reasonableness of accounting estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the consolidated financial statements.

“PwC” refers to PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an Ontario limited liability partnership.

We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained in our audits is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our audit opinion on the consolidated financial statements.

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Barrick Gold Corporation as at December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014 and its financial performance and its cash flows for the years then ended in accordance with IFRS as issued by the IASB.

As discussed in Note 2 to the consolidated financial statements, on January 1, 2015, Barrick Gold Corporation adopted International Financial Reporting Standard 9, Financial Instruments. Our opinion is not modified with respect to this matter.

We have also audited Barrick Gold Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting as at December 31, 2015, based on criteria established in Internal Control – Integrated Framework (2013), issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO).

Management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting included in the accompanying Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting.

Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our audit. We conducted our audit of internal control over financial reporting in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects.

An audit of internal control over financial reporting includes obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control, based on the assessed risk, and performing such other procedures as we consider necessary in the circumstances.

We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our audit opinion on the company’s internal control over financial reporting.

A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that: (i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

In our opinion, Barrick Gold Corporation maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as at December 31, 2015, based on criteria established in Internal Control – Integrated Framework (2013) issued by COSO.

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

Barrick Gold Corporation. Tabular dollar amounts in millions of United States dollars, unless otherwise shown. References to A$, ARS, C$, CLP, DOP, EUR, GBP, PGK, SAR, TZS, ZAR, and ZMW are to Australian dollars, Argentinean pesos, Canadian dollars, Chilean pesos, Dominican pesos, Euros, British pound sterling, Papua New Guinea kina, Saudi riyal, Tanzanian shillings, South African rand, and Zambian kwacha, respectively.

1 > CORPORATE INFORMATION

Barrick Gold Corporation (“Barrick” or the “Company”) is a corporation governed by the Business Corporations Act (Ontario). The Company’s head and registered office is located at Brookfield Place, TD Canada Trust Tower, 161 Bay Street, Suite 3700, Toronto, Ontario, M5J 2S1. We are principally engaged in the production and sale of gold and copper, as well as related activities such as exploration and mine development. Our producing gold mines are located in Canada, the United States, Peru, Argentina, Australia, and the Dominican Republic. We hold a 50% equity interest in Barrick Niugini Limited (“BNL”), which owns a 95% interest in Porgera, a gold mine located in Papua New Guinea. We also hold a 63.9% equity interest in Acacia Mining plc (“Acacia”), formerly African Barrick Gold plc, a company listed on the London Stock Exchange that owns gold mines and exploration properties in Africa. We have a copper mine that is located in Zambia, a 50% interest in a copper mine in Saudi Arabia, and a 50% interest in Zaldívar, located in Chile. We also have various gold projects located in South America and North America. We sell our gold and copper production into the world market.

2 > SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

A)	Statement of Compliance

These consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”) as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board (“IASB”) under the historical cost convention, as modified by revaluation of derivative contracts and certain financial assets. Accounting policies are consistently applied to all years presented, unless otherwise stated. Certain items within the statement of income have been reclassified in the current year. The prior periods have been restated to reflect the change in presentation. These consolidated financial statements were approved for issuance by the Board of Directors on February 17, 2016.

B)	Basis of Preparation

Subsidiaries

These consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Barrick and its subsidiaries. All intercompany balances, transactions, income and expenses, and profits or losses have been eliminated on consolidation. We consolidate subsidiaries where we have the ability to exercise control. Control of an investee is defined to exist when we are exposed to variable returns from our involvement with the investee and have the ability to affect those returns through our power over the investee. Specifically, we control an investee if, and only if, we have all of the following: power over the investee (i.e., existing rights that give us the current ability to direct the relevant activities of the investee); exposure, or rights, to variable returns from our involvement with the investee; and the ability to use our power over the investee to affect its returns. For non wholly-owned, controlled subsidiaries, the net assets attributable to outside equity shareholders are presented as “non-controlling interests” in the equity section of the consolidated balance sheet. Profit or loss for the period that is attributable to non-controlling interests is calculated based on the ownership of the minority shareholders in the subsidiary.

Joint Arrangements

A joint arrangement is defined as one over which two or more parties have joint control, which is the contractually agreed sharing of control over an arrangement. This exists only when the decisions about the relevant activities (being those that significantly affect the returns of the arrangement) require the unanimous consent of the parties sharing control. There are two types of joint arrangements, joint operations (“JO”) and joint ventures (“JV”).

A JO is a joint arrangement whereby the parties that have joint control of the arrangement have rights to the assets and obligations for the liabilities, relating to the arrangement. In relation to our interests in joint operations, we recognize our share of any assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses of the JO.

A JV is a joint arrangement whereby the parties that have joint control of the arrangement have rights to the net assets of the joint venture. Our investments in JVs are accounted for using the equity method.

Outlined below is information related to our joint arrangements and entities other than 100% owned Barrick subsidiaries at December 31, 2015:

D)	Non-current Assets and Disposal Groups Held-for-Sale and Discontinued Operations

Non-current assets and disposal groups are classified as assets held for sale (“HFS”) if it is highly probable that the value of these assets will be recovered primarily through sale rather than through continuing use. They are recorded at the lower of carrying amount and fair value less cost of disposal. Impairment losses on initial classification as HFS and subsequent gains and losses on remeasurement are recognized in the income statement. Once classified as held-for-sale, property, plant and equipment are no longer amortized. The assets and liabilities are presented as held for sale in the consolidated balance sheet when the sale is highly probable, the asset or disposal group is available for immediate sale in its present condition and management is committed to the sale, which should be expected to be completed within one year from the date of classification.

A discontinued operation is a component of the Company that can be clearly distinguished from the rest of the Company and represents a major line of business or geographic area, and the value of this component is expected to be recovered primarily through sale rather than continuing use.

Results of operations and any gain or loss from disposal are excluded from income before finance items and income taxes and are reported separately as income/loss from discontinued operations.

E)	Foreign Currency Translation

The functional currency of the Company, for each subsidiary of the Company, and for joint arrangements and associates, is the currency of the primary economic environment in which it operates. The functional currency of all of our operations is the US dollar. We translate non-US dollar balances for these operations into US dollars as follows:

●

Property, plant and equipment (“PP&E”), intangible assets and equity method investments using the rates at the time of acquisition;

●

Fair value through other comprehensive income (“FVOCI”) equity investments using the closing exchange rate as at the balance sheet date with translation gains and losses permanently recorded in Other Comprehensive Income (“OCI”);

●

Deferred tax assets and liabilities using the closing exchange rate as at the balance sheet date with translation gains and losses recorded in income tax expense;

●

Other assets and liabilities using the closing exchange rate as at the balance sheet date with translation gains and losses recorded in other income/expense; and

●

Income and expenses using the average exchange rate for the period, except for expenses that relate to non-monetary assets and liabilities measured at historical rates, which are translated using the same historical rate as the associated non-monetary assets and liabilities.

F)	Revenue Recognition

We record revenue when evidence exists that all of the following criteria are met:

●

The significant risks and rewards of ownership of the product have been transferred to the buyer;

●

Neither continuing managerial involvement to the degree usually associated with ownership, nor effective control over the goods sold, has been retained;

●

The amount of revenue can be reliably measured;

●

It is probable that the economic benefits associated with the sale will flow to us; and

●

The costs incurred or to be incurred in respect of the sale can be reliably measured.

These conditions are generally satisfied when title passes to the customer.

Gold Bullion Sales

Gold bullion is sold primarily in the London spot market. The sales price is fixed at the delivery date based on the gold spot price. Generally, we record revenue from gold bullion sales at the time of physical delivery, which is also the date that title to the gold passes.

Concentrate Sales

Under the terms of concentrate sales contracts with independent smelting companies, gold and copper sales prices are provisionally set on a specified future date after shipment based on market prices. We record revenues under these contracts at the time of shipment, which is also when the risk and rewards of ownership pass to the smelting companies, using forward market gold and copper prices on the expected date that final sales prices will be determined. Variations between the price recorded at the shipment date and the actual final price set under the smelting contracts are caused by changes in market gold and copper prices, which result in the existence of an embedded derivative in accounts receivable. The embedded derivative is recorded at fair value each period until final settlement occurs, with changes in fair value classified as provisional price adjustments and included in revenue in the consolidated statement of income.

Copper Cathode Sales

Under the terms of copper cathode sales contracts, copper sales prices are provisionally set on a specified future date based upon market commodity prices plus certain price adjustments. Revenue is recognized at the time of shipment, which is also when the risks and rewards of ownership pass to the customer. Revenue is provisionally measured using forward market prices on the expected date that final selling prices will be determined. Variations occur between the price recorded on the date of revenue recognition and the actual final price under the terms of the contracts due to changes in market copper prices, which result in the existence of an embedded derivative in accounts receivable. This embedded derivative is recorded at fair value each period until final settlement occurs, with changes in fair value classified as provisional price adjustments and included in revenue in the consolidated statement of income.

G)	Exploration and Evaluation (“E&E”)

Exploration expenditures are the costs incurred in the initial search for mineral deposits with economic potential or in the process of obtaining more information about existing mineral deposits. Exploration expenditures typically include costs associated with prospecting, sampling, mapping, diamond drilling and other work involved in searching for ore.

Evaluation expenditures are the costs incurred to establish the technical and commercial viability of developing mineral deposits identified through exploration activities or by acquisition. Evaluation expenditures include the cost of (i) establishing the volume and grade of deposits through drilling of core samples, trenching and sampling activities in an ore body that is classified as either a mineral resource or a proven and probable reserve; (ii) determining the optimal methods of extraction and metallurgical and treatment processes; (iii) studies related to surveying, transportation and infrastructure requirements; (iv) permitting activities; and (v) economic evaluations to determine whether development of the mineralized material is commercially justified, including scoping, prefeasibility and final feasibility studies.

Exploration and evaluation expenditures are expensed as incurred unless management determines that probable future economic benefits will be generated as a result of the expenditures. Once the technical feasibility and commercial viability of a program or project has been demonstrated with a prefeasibility study, and we have recognized reserves in accordance with National Instrument 43-101, we account for future expenditures incurred in the development of that program or project in

accordance with our policy for Property, Plant & Equipment, as described in note 2(m).

H)	Earnings per Share

Earnings per share is computed by dividing net income available to common shareholders by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding for the period. Diluted earnings per share reflect the potential dilution that could occur if additional common shares are assumed to be issued under securities that entitle their holders to obtain common shares in the future. For stock options, the number of additional shares for inclusion in diluted earnings per share calculations is determined using the treasury stock method. Under this method, stock options, whose exercise price is less than the average market price of our common shares, are assumed to be exercised and the proceeds are used to repurchase common shares at the average market price for the period. The incremental number of common shares issued under stock options and repurchased from proceeds is included in the calculation of diluted earnings per share.

I)	Taxation

Current tax for each taxable entity is based on the local taxable income at the local statutory tax rate enacted or substantively enacted at the balance sheet date and includes adjustments to tax payable or recoverable in respect of previous periods.

Deferred tax is recognized using the balance sheet method in respect of all temporary differences between the tax bases of assets and liabilities, and their carrying amounts for financial reporting purposes, except as indicated below.

Deferred income tax liabilities are recognized for all taxable temporary differences, except:

●

Where the deferred income tax liability arises from the initial recognition of goodwill, or the initial recognition of an asset or liability in an acquisition that is not a business combination and, at the time of the acquisition, affects neither the accounting profit nor taxable profit or loss; and

●

In respect of taxable temporary differences associated with investments in subsidiaries and interests in joint arrangements, where the timing of the reversal of the temporary differences can be controlled and it is probable that the temporary differences will not reverse in the foreseeable future.

Deferred income tax assets are recognized for all deductible temporary differences and the carry forward of unused tax assets and unused tax losses, to the extent that it is probable that taxable profit will be available against

which the deductible temporary differences and the carry forward of unused tax assets and unused tax losses can be utilized, except:

●

Where the deferred income tax asset relating to the deductible temporary difference arises from the initial recognition of an asset or liability in an acquisition that is not a business combination and, at the time of the acquisition, affects neither the accounting profit nor taxable profit or loss; and

●

In respect of deductible temporary differences associated with investments in subsidiaries and interests in joint arrangements, deferred tax assets are recognized only to the extent that it is probable that the temporary differences will reverse in the foreseeable future and taxable profit will be available against which the temporary differences can be utilized.

The carrying amount of deferred income tax assets is reviewed at each balance sheet date and reduced to the extent that it is no longer probable that sufficient taxable profit will be available to allow all or part of the deferred income tax asset to be utilized. To the extent that an asset not previously recognized fulfills the criteria for recognition, a deferred income tax asset is recorded.

Deferred tax is measured on an undiscounted basis at the tax rates that are expected to apply in the periods in which the asset is realized or the liability is settled, based on tax rates and tax laws enacted or substantively enacted at the balance sheet date.

Current and deferred tax relating to items recognized directly in equity are recognized in equity and not in the income statement.

Royalties and Special Mining Taxes

Income tax expense includes the cost of royalty and special mining taxes payable to governments that are calculated based on a percentage of taxable profit whereby taxable profit represents net income adjusted for certain items defined in the applicable legislation.

Indirect Taxes

Indirect tax recoverable is recorded at its undiscounted amount, and is disclosed as non-current if not expected to be recovered within twelve months.

J)	Other Investments

Investments in publicly quoted equity securities that are neither subsidiaries nor associates are categorized as fair value through other comprehensive income (“FVOCI”) pursuant to the irrevocable election available in IFRS 9 for these instruments. FVOCI equity investments (referred to

as “other investments”) are recorded at fair value with all realized and unrealized gains and losses recorded permanently in OCI.

K)	Inventory

Material extracted from our mines is classified as either ore or waste. Ore represents material that, at the time of extraction, we expect to process into a saleable form and sell at a profit. Raw materials are comprised of both ore in stockpiles and ore on leach pads as processing is required to extract benefit from the ore. Ore is accumulated in stockpiles that are subsequently processed into gold/copper in a saleable form. The recovery of gold and copper from certain oxide ores is achieved through the heap leaching process. Work in process represents gold/copper in the processing circuit that has not completed the production process, and is not yet in a saleable form. Finished goods inventory represents gold/copper in saleable form. Mine operating supplies represent commodity consumables and other raw materials used in the production process, as well as spare parts and other maintenance supplies that are not classified as capital items.

Inventories are valued at the lower of cost and net realizable value. Cost is determined on a weighted average basis and includes all costs incurred, based on a normal production capacity, in bringing each product to its present location and condition. Cost of inventories comprises direct labor, materials and contractor expenses, including non-capitalized stripping costs; depreciation on PP&E including capitalized stripping costs; and an allocation of general and administrative costs. As ore is removed for processing, costs are removed based on the average cost per ounce/pound in the stockpile.

We record provisions to reduce inventory to net realizable value to reflect changes in economic factors that impact inventory value and to reflect present intentions for the use of slow moving and obsolete supplies inventory. Net realizable value is determined with reference to relevant market prices less applicable variable selling expenses. Provisions recorded also reflect an estimate of the remaining costs of completion to bring the inventory into its saleable form. Provisions are also recorded to reduce mine operating supplies to net realizable value, which is generally calculated by reference to its salvage or scrap value, when it is determined that the supplies are obsolete. Provisions are reversed to reflect subsequent recoveries in net realizable value where the inventory is still on hand.

L)	Production Stage

A mine that is under construction is determined to enter the production stage when the project is in the location and condition necessary for it to be capable of operating in the manner intended by management. We use the following factors to assess whether these criteria have been met: (1) the level of capital expenditures compared to construction cost estimates; (2) the completion of a reasonable period of testing of mine plant and equipment; (3) the ability to produce minerals in saleable form (within specifications); and (4) the ability to sustain ongoing production of minerals.

When a mine construction project moves into the production stage, the capitalization of certain mine construction costs ceases and costs are either capitalized to inventory or expensed, except for capitalizable costs related to property, plant and equipment additions or improvements, open pit stripping activities that provide a future benefit, underground mine development or expenditures that meet the criteria for capitalization in accordance with IAS 16 Property Plant and Equipment.

Pre-production stripping costs (note 2m (iii)) are capitalized until an “other than de minimis” level of mineral is extracted, after which time such costs are either capitalized to inventory or, if it qualifies as an open pit stripping activity that provides a future benefit, to PP&E. We consider various relevant criteria to assess when an “other than de minimis” level of mineral is produced. Some of the criteria considered would include, but are not limited to, the following: (1) the amount of minerals mined versus total ounces in life of mine (“LOM”) ore; (2) the amount of ore tons mined versus total LOM expected ore tons mined; (3) the current stripping ratio versus the LOM strip ratio; and (4) the ore grade versus the LOM grade.

M)	Property, Plant and Equipment

Buildings, Plant and Equipment

At acquisition, we record buildings, plant and equipment at cost, including all expenditures incurred to prepare an asset for its intended use. These expenditures consist of: the purchase price; brokers’ commissions; and installation costs including architectural, design and engineering fees, legal fees, survey costs, site preparation costs, freight charges, transportation insurance costs, duties, testing and preparation charges.

We capitalize costs that meet the asset recognition criteria. Costs incurred that do not extend the productive capacity or useful economic life of an asset are considered repairs and maintenance expense and are accounted for as a cost of the inventory produced in the period.

Buildings, plant and equipment are depreciated on a straight-line basis over their expected useful life, which commences when the assets are considered available for use. Once buildings, plant and equipment are considered available for use they are measured at cost less accumulated depreciation and applicable impairment losses.

Depreciation on equipment utilized in the development of assets, including open pit and underground mine development, is recapitalized as development costs attributable to the related asset.

Estimated useful lives of Major Asset Categories


Buildings, plant and equipment		7 – 38 years
Underground mobile equipment		5 - 7 years
Light vehicles and other mobile equipment		2 - 3 years
Furniture, computer and office equipment		2 - 3 years

Leasing Arrangements

The determination of whether an arrangement is, or contains, a lease is based on the substance of the arrangement at inception date, including whether the fulfillment of the arrangement is dependent on the use of a specific asset or assets or whether the arrangement conveys a right to use the asset.

Leasing arrangements that transfer substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership of the asset to Barrick are classified as finance leases. Assets acquired via a finance lease are recorded as an asset with a corresponding liability at an amount equal to the lower of the fair value of the leased property and the present value of the minimum lease payments. Each lease payment is allocated between the liability and finance costs using the effective interest method, whereby a constant rate of interest expense is recognized on the balance of the liability outstanding. The interest element of the lease is charged to the consolidated statement of income as a finance cost.

PP&E assets acquired under finance leases are depreciated over the shorter of the useful life of the asset and the lease term.

All other leases are classified as operating leases. Operating lease payments are recognized as an operating cost in the consolidated statements of income on a straight-line basis over the lease term.

Mineral Properties

Mineral properties consist of: the fair value attributable to mineral reserves and resources acquired in a business

combination or asset acquisition; underground mine development costs; open pit mine development costs; capitalized exploration and evaluation costs; and capitalized interest. In addition, we incur project costs which are generally capitalized when the expenditures result in a future benefit.

i) Acquired Mining Properties

On acquisition of a mining property, we prepare an estimate of the fair value attributable to the proven and probable mineral reserves, mineral resources and exploration potential attributable to the property. The estimated fair value attributable to the mineral reserves and the portion of mineral resources considered to be probable of economic extraction at the time of the acquisition is depreciated on a units of production (“UOP”) basis whereby the denominator is the proven and probable reserves and the portion of mineral resources considered to be probable of economic extraction. The estimated fair value attributable to mineral resources that are not considered to be probable of economic extraction at the time of the acquisition is not subject to depreciation until the resources become probable of economic extraction in the future. The estimated fair value attributable to exploration licenses is recorded as an intangible asset and is not subject to depreciation until the property enters production.

ii) Underground Mine Development Costs

At our underground mines, we incur development costs to build new shafts, drifts and ramps that will enable us to physically access ore underground. The time over which we will continue to incur these costs depends on the mine life. These underground development costs are capitalized as incurred.

Capitalized underground development costs incurred to enable access to specific ore blocks or areas of the underground mine, and which only provide an economic benefit over the period of mining that ore block or area, are depreciated on a UOP basis, whereby the denominator is estimated ounces/pounds of gold/copper in proven and probable reserves and the portion of resources within that ore block or area that is considered probable of economic extraction.

If capitalized underground development costs provide an economic benefit over the entire mine life, the costs are depreciated on a UOP basis, whereby the denominator is the estimated ounces/pounds of gold/copper in total accessible proven and probable reserves and the portion of resources that is considered probable of economic extraction.

iii) Open Pit Mining Costs

In open pit mining operations, it is necessary to remove overburden and other waste materials to access ore from which minerals can be extracted economically. The process of mining overburden and waste materials is referred to as stripping. Stripping costs incurred in order to provide initial access to the ore body (referred to as pre-production stripping) are capitalized as open pit mine development costs.

Stripping costs incurred during the production stage of a pit are accounted for as costs of the inventory produced during the period that the stripping costs are incurred, unless these costs are expected to provide a future economic benefit to an identifiable component of the ore body. Components of the ore body are based on the distinct development phases identified by the mine planning engineers when determining the optimal development plan for the open pit. Production phase stripping costs generate a future economic benefit when the related stripping activity: (i) improves access to a component of the ore body to be mined in the future; (ii) increases the fair value of the mine (or pit) as access to future mineral reserves becomes less costly; and (iii) increases the productive capacity or extends the productive life of the mine (or pit). Production phase stripping costs that are expected to generate a future economic benefit are capitalized as open pit mine development costs.

Capitalized open pit mine development costs are depreciated on a UOP basis whereby the denominator is the estimated ounces/pounds of gold/copper in proven and probable reserves and the portion of resources considered probable of economic extraction based on the current LOM plan in the current component of the ore body that has been made more accessible through the stripping activity and all future components in the current plan that benefit from the particular stripping activity. Capitalized open pit mine development costs are depreciated once the open pit has entered production and the future economic benefit is being derived.

Construction-in-Progress

Assets under construction at operating mines are capitalized as construction-in-progress. The cost of construction-in-progress comprises its purchase price and any costs directly attributable to bringing it into working condition for its intended use. Construction-in-progress amounts related to development projects are included in the carrying amount of the development project. Construction-in-progress amounts incurred at operating mines are presented as a separate asset within PP&E. Construction-in-progress also includes deposits on long

lead items. Construction-in-progress is not depreciated. Depreciation commences once the asset is complete and available for use.

Capitalized Interest

We capitalize interest costs for qualifying assets. Qualifying assets are assets that require a significant amount of time to prepare for their intended use, including projects that are in the exploration and evaluation, development or construction stages. Qualifying assets also include significant expansion projects at our operating mines. Capitalized interest costs are considered an element of the cost of the qualifying asset which is determined based on gross expenditures incurred on an asset. Capitalization ceases when the asset is substantially complete or if active development is suspended or ceases. Where the funds used to finance a qualifying asset form part of general borrowings, the amount capitalized is calculated using a weighted average of rates applicable to the relevant borrowings during the period. Where funds borrowed are directly attributable to a qualifying asset, the amount capitalized represents the borrowing costs specific to those borrowings. Where surplus funds available out of money borrowed specifically to finance a project are temporarily invested, the total capitalized interest is reduced by income generated from short-term investments of such funds.

Insurance

We record losses relating to insurable events as they occur. Proceeds receivable from insurance coverage are recorded at such time as receipt is receivable or virtually certain and the amount receivable is fixed or determinable. For business interruption the amount is only recognized when it is virtually certain or receivable as supported by receipt of notification of a minimum or proposed settlement amount from the insurance adjuster.

N)	Goodwill

Under the acquisition method of accounting, the costs of business combinations are allocated to the assets acquired and liabilities assumed based on the estimated fair value at the date of acquisition. The excess of the fair value of consideration paid over the fair value of the identifiable net assets acquired is recorded as goodwill. Goodwill is not amortized; instead it is tested annually for impairment at the start of the fourth quarter for all of our segments. In addition, at each reporting period we assess whether there is an indication that goodwill is impaired and, if there is such an indication, we would test for goodwill impairment at that time. At the date of acquisition, goodwill is assigned to the cash generating unit (“CGU”) or group of CGUs that is expected to benefit from the synergies of the business

combination. For the purposes of impairment testing, goodwill is allocated to the Company’s operating segments, which are our individual mine sites and corresponds to the level at which goodwill is internally monitored by the Chief Operating Decision Maker (“CODM”), the President.

The recoverable amount of an operating segment is the higher of Value in Use (“VIU”) and Fair Value Less Costs of Disposal (“FVLCD”). A goodwill impairment is recognized for any excess of the carrying amount of the operating segment over its recoverable amount. Goodwill impairment charges are not reversible.

O)	Intangible Assets

Intangible assets acquired by way of an asset acquisition or business combination are recognized if the asset is separable or arises from contractual or legal rights and the fair value can be measured reliably on initial recognition.

On acquisition of a mineral property in the exploration stage, we prepare an estimate of the fair value attributable to the exploration licenses acquired, including the fair value attributable to mineral resources, if any, of that property. The fair value of the exploration license is recorded as an intangible asset (acquired exploration potential) as at the date of acquisition. When an exploration stage property moves into development, the acquired exploration potential attributable to that property is transferred to mining interests within PP&E.

P)	Impairment of Non-Current Assets

We review and test the carrying amounts of PP&E and intangible assets with finite lives when an indicator of impairment is considered to exist. Impairment assessments on PP&E and intangible assets are conducted at the level of the CGU, which is the lowest level for which identifiable cash flows are largely independent of the cash flows of other assets and includes any liabilities specific to the CGU. For operating mines and projects, the individual mine/project represents a CGU for impairment testing.

The recoverable amount of a CGU is the higher of VIU and FVLCD. An impairment loss is recognized for any excess of the carrying amount of a CGU over its recoverable amount where both the recoverable amount and carrying value include the associated other assets and liabilities, including taxes where applicable, of the CGU. Where it is not appropriate to allocate the loss to a separate asset, an impairment loss related to a CGU is allocated to the carrying amount of the assets of the CGU on a pro rata basis based on the carrying amount of its non-monetary assets.

Impairment Reversal

Impairment losses for PP&E and intangible assets are reversed if there has been a change in the estimates used to determine the asset’s recoverable amount since the last impairment loss was recognized, and it has been determined that the asset is no longer impaired or that impairment has decreased. This reversal is recognized in the consolidated statements of income and is limited to the carrying value that would have been determined, net of any depreciation where applicable, had no impairment charge been recognized in prior years. When an impairment reversal is undertaken, the recoverable amount is assessed by reference to the higher of VIU and FVLCD.

Debt

Debt is recognized initially at fair value, net of financing costs incurred, and subsequently measured at amortized cost. Any difference between the amounts originally received and the redemption value of the debt is recognized in the consolidated statements of income over the period to maturity using the effective interest method.

R)	Derivative Instruments and Hedge Accounting

Derivative Instruments

Derivative instruments are recorded at fair value on the consolidated balance sheet, classified based on contractual maturity. Derivative instruments are classified as either hedges of the fair value of recognized assets or liabilities or of firm commitments (“fair value hedges”), hedges of highly probable forecasted transactions (“cash flow hedges”) or non-hedge derivatives. Derivatives designated as either a fair value or cash flow hedge that are expected to be highly effective in achieving offsetting changes in fair value or cash flows are assessed on an ongoing basis to determine that they actually have been highly effective throughout the financial reporting periods for which they were designated. Derivative assets and derivative liabilities are shown separately in the balance sheet unless there is a legal right to offset and intent to settle on a net basis.

Fair Value Hedges

Changes in the fair value of derivatives that are designated and qualify as fair value hedges are recorded in the consolidated statements of income, together with any changes in the fair value of the hedged asset or liability or firm commitment that is attributable to the hedged risk.

Cash Flow Hedges

The effective portion of changes in the fair value of derivatives that are designated and qualify as cash flow hedges is recognized in equity. The gain or loss relating to the ineffective portion is recognized in the consolidated statements of income. Amounts accumulated in equity are

transferred to the consolidated statements of income in the period when the forecasted transaction impacts earnings. When the forecasted transaction that is hedged results in the recognition of a non-financial asset or a non-financial liability, the gains and losses previously deferred in equity are transferred from equity and included in the measurement of the initial carrying amount of the asset or liability.

When a derivative designated as a cash flow hedge expires or is sold and the forecasted transaction is still expected to occur, any cumulative gain or loss relating to the derivative that is recorded in equity at that time remains in equity and is recognized in the consolidated statements of income when the forecasted transaction occurs. When a forecasted transaction is no longer expected to occur, the cumulative gain or loss that was recorded in equity is immediately transferred to the consolidated statements of income.

Non-Hedge Derivatives

Derivative instruments that do not qualify as either fair value or cash flow hedges are recorded at their fair value at the balance sheet date, with changes in fair value recognized in the consolidated statements of income.

S)	Embedded Derivatives

Derivatives embedded in other financial instruments or executory contracts are accounted for as separate derivatives when their risks and characteristics are not closely related to their host financial instrument or contract. In some cases, the embedded derivatives may be designated as hedges and are accounted for as described above.

T)	Environmental Rehabilitation Provision

Mining, extraction and processing activities normally give rise to obligations for environmental rehabilitation. Rehabilitation work can include facility decommissioning and dismantling; removal or treatment of waste materials; site and land rehabilitation, including compliance with and monitoring of environmental regulations; security and other site-related costs required to perform the rehabilitation work; and operation of equipment designed to reduce or eliminate environmental effects. The extent of work required and the associated costs are dependent on the requirements of relevant authorities and our environmental policies. Routine operating costs that may impact the ultimate closure and rehabilitation activities, such as waste material handling conducted as an integral part of a mining or production process, are not included in the provision. Costs arising from unforeseen circumstances, such as the contamination caused by

unplanned discharges, are recognized as an expense and liability when the event that gives rise to an obligation occurs and reliable estimates of the required rehabilitation costs can be made.

Provisions for the cost of each rehabilitation program are normally recognized at the time that an environmental disturbance occurs or a constructive obligation is determined. When the extent of disturbance increases over the life of an operation, the provision is increased accordingly. The major parts of the carrying amount of provisions relate to tailings pond closure/rehabilitation; demolition of buildings/mine facilities; ongoing water treatment; and ongoing care and maintenance and security of closed mines. Costs included in the provision encompass all closure and rehabilitation activity expected to occur progressively over the life of the operation at the time of closure and post-closure in connection with disturbances as at the reporting date. Estimated costs included in the determination of the provision reflect the risks and probabilities of alternative estimates of cash flows required to settle the obligation at each particular operation. The expected rehabilitation costs are estimated based on the cost of external contractors performing the work or the cost of performing the work internally depending on management’s intention.

The timing of the actual rehabilitation expenditure is dependent upon a number of factors such as the life and nature of the asset, the operating license conditions and the environment in which the mine operates. Expenditures may occur before and after closure and can continue for an extended period of time depending on rehabilitation requirements. Rehabilitation provisions are measured at the expected value of future cash flows, which exclude the effect of inflation, discounted to their present value using a current US dollar real risk-free pre-tax discount rate. The unwinding of the discount, referred to as accretion expense, is included in finance costs and results in an increase in the amount of the provision. Provisions are updated each reporting period for changes to expected cash flows and for the effect of changes in the discount rate, and the change in estimate is added or deducted from the related asset and depreciated over the expected economic life of the operation to which it relates.

Significant judgments and estimates are involved in forming expectations of future activities and the amount and timing of the associated cash flows. Those expectations are formed based on existing environmental and regulatory requirements or, if more stringent, our environmental policies which give rise to a constructive obligation.

When provisions for closure and rehabilitation are initially recognized, the corresponding cost is capitalized as an asset, representing part of the cost of acquiring the future economic benefits of the operation. The capitalized cost of closure and rehabilitation activities is recognized in PP&E and depreciated over the expected economic life of the operation to which it relates.

Adjustments to the estimated amount and timing of future closure and rehabilitation cash flows are a normal occurrence in light of the significant judgments and estimates involved. The principal factors that can cause expected cash flows to change are: the construction of new processing facilities; changes in the quantities of material in reserves and resources with a corresponding change in the life of mine plan; changing ore characteristics that impact required environmental protection measures and related costs; changes in water quality that impact the extent of water treatment required; changes in discount rates; changes in foreign exchange rates; and changes in laws and regulations governing the protection of the environment.

Rehabilitation provisions are adjusted as a result of changes in estimates and assumptions. Those adjustments are accounted for as a change in the corresponding cost of the related assets, including the related mineral property, except where a reduction in the provision is greater than the remaining net book value of the related assets, in which case the value is reduced to nil and the remaining adjustment is recognized in the consolidated statements of income. In the case of closed sites, changes in estimates and assumptions are recognized immediately in the consolidated statements of income. For an operating mine, the adjusted carrying amount of the related asset is depreciated prospectively. Adjustments also result in changes to future finance costs.

U)	Litigation and Other Provisions

Provisions are recognized when a present obligation exists (legal or constructive), as a result of a past event, for which it is probable that an outflow of resources will be required to settle the obligation, and a reliable estimate can be made of the amount of the obligation. Provisions are discounted to their present value using a current US dollar real risk-free pre-tax discount rate and the accretion expense is included in finance costs.

Certain conditions may exist as of the date the financial statements are issued, which may result in a loss to the Company, but which will only be resolved when one or more future events occur or fail to occur. In assessing loss contingencies related to legal proceedings that are pending against us or unasserted claims that may result in such

proceedings, the Company with assistance from its legal counsel evaluate the perceived merits of any legal proceedings or unasserted claims as well as the perceived merits of the amount of relief sought or expected to be sought.

If the assessment of a contingency suggests that a loss is probable, and the amount can be reliably estimated, then a loss is recorded. When a contingent loss is not probable but is reasonably possible, or is probable but the amount of loss cannot be reliably estimated, then details of the contingent loss are disclosed. Loss contingencies considered remote are generally not disclosed unless they involve guarantees, in which case we disclose the nature of the guarantee. Legal fees incurred in connection with pending legal proceedings are expensed as incurred. Contingent gains are only recognized when the inflow of economic benefits is virtually certain.

V)	Stock-Based Compensation

Barrick offers equity-settled (Employee Stock Option Plan (“ESOP”), Employee Share Purchase Plan (“ESPP”)), cash-settled (Restricted Share Units (“RSU”), Deferred Share Units (“DSU”), Performance Restricted Share Units (“PRSU”)) and Performance Granted Share Units (“PGSU”) awards to certain employees, officers and directors of the Company.

Equity-settled awards are measured at fair value using the Lattice model with market related inputs as of the date of the grant. The cost is recorded over the vesting period of the award to the same expense category as the award recipient’s payroll costs (i.e., cost of sales, general and administrative) and the corresponding entry is recorded in equity. Equity-settled awards are not remeasured subsequent to the initial grant date.

Cash-settled awards are measured at fair value initially using the market value of the underlying shares on the day preceding the date of the grant of the award and are required to be remeasured to fair value at each reporting date until settlement. The cost is then recorded over the vesting period of the award. This expense, and any changes in the fair value of the award, is recorded to the same expense category as the award recipient’s payroll costs. The cost of a cash-settled award is recorded within liabilities until settled.

We use the accelerated method (also referred to as ‘graded’ vesting) for attributing stock option expense over the vesting period. Stock option expense incorporates an expected forfeiture rate. The expected forfeiture rate is estimated based on historical forfeiture rates and

expectations of future forfeiture rates. We make adjustments if the actual forfeiture rate differs from the expected rate.

Employee Stock Option Plan (“ESOP”)

Under Barrick’s ESOP, certain officers and key employees of the Corporation may purchase common shares at an exercise price that is equal to the closing share price on the day before the grant of the option. The grant date is the date when the details of the award, including the number of options granted to the individual and the exercise price, are approved. Stock options vest equally over four years, beginning in the year after granting. The ESOP arrangement has graded vesting terms, and therefore multiple vesting periods must be valued and accounted for separately over their respective vesting periods. The compensation expense of the instruments issued for each grant under the ESOP is calculated using the Lattice model. The compensation expense is adjusted by the estimated forfeiture rate which is estimated based on historical forfeiture rates and expectations of future forfeiture rates. We make adjustments if the actual forfeiture rate differs from the expected rate.

Restricted Share Units (“RSU”)

Under our RSU plan, selected employees are granted RSUs where each RSU has a value equal to one Barrick common share. RSUs generally vest within three years and primarily settle in cash upon vesting. Additional RSUs are credited to reflect dividends paid on Barrick common shares over the vesting period.

A liability for RSUs is measured at fair value on the grant date and is subsequently adjusted for changes in fair value. The liability is recognized on a straight-line basis over the vesting period, with a corresponding charge to compensation expense, as a component of corporate administration and operating segment administration. Compensation expenses for RSUs incorporate an estimate for expected forfeiture rates based on which the fair value is adjusted.

Deferred Share Units (“DSU”)

Under our DSU plan, Directors must receive at least 75% of their basic annual retainer in the form of DSUs or cash to purchase common shares that cannot be sold, transferred or otherwise disposed of until the Director leaves the Board. Each DSU has the same value as one Barrick common share. DSUs must be retained until the Director leaves the Board, at which time the cash value of the DSUs is paid out. Additional DSUs are credited to reflect dividends paid on Barrick common shares. The initial fair value of the liability is calculated as of the grant date and is

recognized immediately. Subsequently, at each reporting date and on settlement, the liability is remeasured, with any change in fair value recorded as compensation expense in the period. Officers may also elect to receive a portion or all of their incentive compensation in the form of DSUs. The plan also allows granting of DSUs to other officers and employees at the discretion of the Board Compensation Committee.

Performance Restricted Share Units (“PRSU”)

Under our PRSU plan, selected employees are granted PRSUs, where each PRSU has a value equal to one Barrick common share. PRSUs vest at the end of a three-year period and are settled in cash on the third anniversary of the grant date. Additional PRSUs are credited to reflect dividends paid on Barrick common shares over the vesting period. Vesting, and therefore the liability, is based on the achievement of performance goals and the target settlement ranges from 0% to 200% of the original grant of units.

The value of a PRSU reflects the value of a Barrick common share and the number of shares issued is adjusted for its relative performance against certain competitors and other internal financial performance measures. Therefore, the fair value of the PRSUs is determined with reference to the closing stock price at each remeasurement date.

The initial fair value of the liability is calculated as of the grant date and is recognized within compensation expense using the straight-line method over the vesting period. Subsequently, at each reporting date and on settlement, the liability is remeasured, with any changes in fair value recorded as compensation expense. The fair value is adjusted for the revised estimated forfeiture rate.

Performance Granted Share Units (“PGSU”)

Under our PGSU plan, selected employees are granted PGSUs, where each PGSU has a value equal to one Barrick common share. Annual PGSU awards are determined based on a multiple ranging from one to six times base salary (depending on position and level of responsibility) multiplied by a performance factor. The number of PGSUs granted to a plan participant is determined by dividing the dollar value of the award by the closing price of Barrick common shares on the day prior to the grant, or if the grant date occurs during a blackout period, by the greater of (i) the closing price of Barrick common shares on the day prior to the grant date and (ii) the closing price of Barrick common shares on the first day following the expiration of the blackout. Upon vesting, the after-tax value of the award is used to purchase common shares and these shares cannot be sold until the employee retires or leaves

Barrick. PGSUs vest at the end of the third year from the date of the grant.

Employee Share Purchase Plan (“ESPP”)

Under our ESPP plan, Barrick employees can purchase Company shares through payroll deduction. Each year, employees may contribute 1%-6% of their combined base salary and annual short-term incentive, and Barrick will match 50% of the contribution, up to a maximum of C$5,000 per year.

Both Barrick and the employee make the contributions on a semi-monthly basis with the funds being transferred to a custodian who purchases Barrick Common Shares in the open market. Shares purchased with employee contributions have no vesting requirement; however, shares purchased with Barrick’s contributions vest approximately one year from contribution date. All dividend income is used to purchase additional Barrick shares.

Barrick records an expense equal to its semi-monthly cash contribution. No forfeiture rate is applied to the amounts accrued. Where an employee leaves prior to vesting, any accrual for contributions by Barrick during the year related to that employee is reversed.

W)	Post-Retirement Benefits

Defined Contribution Pension Plans

Certain employees take part in defined contribution employee benefit plans whereby we contribute up to 6% of the employee’s annual salary. We also have a retirement plan for certain officers of Barrick under which we contribute 15% of the officer’s annual salary and annual short-term incentive. The contributions are recognized as compensation expense as incurred. The Company has no further payment obligations once the contributions have been paid.

Defined Benefit Pension Plans

We have qualified defined benefit pension plans that cover certain former United States and Canadian employees and provide benefits based on employees’ years of service. Our policy is to fund the amounts necessary on an actuarial basis to provide enough assets to meet the benefits payable to plan members. Independent trustees administer

assets of the plans, which are invested mainly in fixed-income and equity securities.

As well as the qualified plans, we have non-qualified defined benefit pension plans covering certain employees and former directors of Barrick. No funding is done on these plans and contributions for future years are required to be equal to benefit payments.

Actuarial gains and losses arising from experience adjustments and changes in actuarial assumptions are charged or credited to equity in OCI in the period in which they arise.

Our valuations are carried out using the projected unit credit method. We record the difference between the fair value of the plan assets and the present value of the plan obligations as an asset or liability on the consolidated balance sheets.

Pension Plan Assets and Liabilities

Pension plan assets, which consist primarily of fixed-income and equity securities, are valued using current market quotations. Plan obligations and the annual pension expense are determined on an actuarial basis and are affected by numerous assumptions and estimates including the market value of plan assets, estimates of the expected return on plan assets, discount rates, future wage increases and other assumptions.

The discount rate and life expectancy are the assumptions that generally have the most significant impact on our pension cost and obligation.

Other Post-Retirement Benefits

We provide post-retirement medical, dental, and life insurance benefits to certain employees. Actuarial gains and losses resulting from variances between actual results and economic estimates or actuarial assumptions are recorded in OCI.

X)	New Accounting Standards Adopted during the Year

The Company has adopted IFRS 9 (2014) effective January 1, 2015.

IFRS 9 (2014)

We have early adopted all of the requirements of IFRS 9 Financial Instruments 2014 (“IFRS 9”) as of January 1, 2015. IFRS 9 uses a single approach to determine whether a financial asset is classified and measured at amortized cost or fair value, replacing the multiple rules in IAS 39. The approach in IFRS 9 is based on how an entity manages its financial instruments and the contractual cash flow

characteristics of the financial asset. Most of the requirements in IAS 39 for classification and measurement of financial liabilities were carried forward in IFRS 9. IFRS 9 introduced a single expected credit loss impairment model, which is based on changes in credit quality since initial recognition. The adoption of the expected credit loss impairment model did not have a significant impact on the Company’s financial statements.

IFRS 9 changes the requirements for hedge effectiveness and consequently for the application of hedge accounting. The IAS 39 effectiveness test is replaced with a requirement for an economic relationship between the hedged item and hedging instrument, and for the ‘hedged ratio’ to be the same as that used by the entity for risk management purposes. Certain restrictions that prevented some hedging strategies and hedging instruments from qualifying for hedge accounting were removed under IFRS 9. Generally, the mechanics of hedge accounting remain unchanged.

As a result of the early adoption of IFRS 9, we have changed our accounting policy for financial instruments retrospectively, except as described below. The change did not result in a change in carrying value of any of our financial instruments on transition date. The two main areas of change are the accounting for a) equity securities previously classified as available for sale and b) derivative instruments, which includes the accounting for hedging relationships that now qualify for hedge accounting and the exclusion of the time value component of options from hedging instruments.

i)	Impact of adoption on the accounting for equity securities previously designated as available for sale

The revised policy on the accounting for Other Investments, which represent equity securities previously designated as available for sale, is described in note 2j. The adjustment to opening retained earnings on January 1, 2015 was $95 million with a corresponding adjustment to accumulated other comprehensive income. There was no impact on net loss for 2015.

ii)	Impact of adoption on accounting for derivative instruments

We have reassessed all of our existing hedging relationships that qualified for hedge accounting under IAS 39 upon adoption of IFRS 9 and these have continued to qualify for hedge accounting under IFRS 9. We have also reassessed economic hedges that did not qualify for hedge accounting under IAS 39. IFRS 9 has enabled us to apply hedge accounting for most of our fuel positions, thus reducing the volatility of reported net income. These

positions previously did not qualify for hedge accounting since component hedging was not permitted under IAS 39. We have applied these changes prospectively from January 1, 2015.

Under IFRS 9, we also began separating the intrinsic value and time value of option contracts and designating only the change in intrinsic value as the hedging instrument. IFRS 9 does not require restatement of comparatives. However, we have reflected the retrospective impact of the adoption of IFRS 9 relating to the change in accounting for time value of option contracts as an adjustment to opening retained earnings. The adjustment to opening retained earnings on January 1, 2015 was $4 million with a corresponding adjustment to accumulated other comprehensive income. There was no impact on net loss for 2015.

We recognize a financial asset or a financial liability when we become a party to the contractual provisions of the instrument. Financial assets are initially measured at fair value and are derecognized either when we have transferred substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership of the financial asset or when cash flows expire.

We classify and measure financial assets (excluding derivatives) on initial recognition as described below:

●

Cash and equivalents and restricted cash include cash, term deposits, treasury bills and money market investments with original maturities of less than 90 days. All of these are classified as financial assets at fair value through profit or loss and are measured at fair value. Unrealized gains or losses related to changes in fair value are reported in income;

●

Trade and other receivables are classified as and measured at amortized cost using the effective interest method, less impairment allowance, if any;

●

Equity instruments are designated as financial assets at fair value through other comprehensive income and are recorded at fair value on the settlement date, net of transaction costs. Future changes in fair value are recognized in other comprehensive income and are not recycled into income.

Financial liabilities (excluding derivatives) are derecognized when the obligation specified in the contract is discharged, cancelled or expired. For financial liabilities, IFRS 9 retains most of the IAS 39 requirements and since we do not have any financial liabilities designated at fair value through profit or loss, the adoption of IFRS 9 did not impact our accounting policies for financial liabilities.

Y)	New Accounting Standards Issued But Not Yet Effective

IFRS 15 Revenue from Contracts with Customers

In May 2014, the IASB issued IFRS 15 Revenue from Contracts with Customers, which covers principles that an entity shall apply to report useful information to users of financial statements about the nature, amount, timing, and uncertainty of revenue and cash flows arising from a contract with a customer. In September 2015, the IASB deferred the effective date of the standard to annual reporting periods beginning on or after January 1, 2018, with earlier application permitted. We are currently assessing the impact on our consolidated financial statements along with timing of our adoption of IFRS 15.

IFRS 16 Leases

In January 2016, the IASB issued IFRS 16 Leases, which requires lessees to recognize assets and liabilities for most leases. Application of the standard is mandatory for annual reporting periods beginning on or after January 1, 2019, with earlier application permitted, provided the new revenue standard, IFRS 15 Revenue from Contracts with Customers, has been applied or is applied at the same date as IFRS 16. We are currently assessing the impact on our consolidated financial statements along with timing of our adoption of IFRS 16.

3 > CRITICAL JUDGMENTS, ESTIMATES, ASSUMPTIONS AND RISKS

Many of the amounts included in the consolidated balance sheet require management to make judgments and/or estimates. These judgments and estimates are continuously evaluated and are based on management’s experience and knowledge of the relevant facts and circumstances. Actual results may differ from the estimates. Information about such judgments and estimates is contained in the description of our accounting policies and/or other notes to the financial statements. The key areas where judgments, estimates and assumptions have been made are summarized below.

Life of Mine (“LOM”) Plans and Reserves and Resources

Estimates of the quantities of proven and probable mineral reserves and mineral resources form the basis for our LOM plans, which are used for a number of important business and accounting purposes, including: the calculation of depreciation expense; the capitalization of production phase stripping costs; and forecasting the timing of the payments related to the environmental rehabilitation provision. In addition, the underlying LOM plans are used in the impairment tests for goodwill and non-current assets. In certain cases, these LOM plans have made assumptions

about our ability to obtain the necessary permits required to complete the planned activities. We estimate our ore reserves and mineral resources based on information compiled by qualified persons as defined in accordance with the Canadian Securities Administrators’ National Instrument 43-101 Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects requirements. As at December 31, 2015, we have used a per ounce gold price of $1,000 short-term and $1,200 long-term to calculate our gold reserves, compared with $1,100 per ounce short and long-term used as at December 31, 2014. Refer to notes 18 and 20.

Inventory

The measurement of inventory including the determination of its net realizable value, especially as it relates to ore in stockpiles, involves the use of estimates. Estimation is required in determining the tonnage, recoverable gold and copper contained therein, and in determining the remaining costs of completion to bring inventory into its saleable form. Judgment also exists in determining whether to recognize a provision for obsolescence on mine operating supplies, and estimates are required to determine salvage or scrap value of supplies.

Impairment and Reversal of Impairment for Non-current Assets and Impairment of Goodwill

Goodwill and non-current assets are tested for impairment if there is an indicator of impairment, and in the case of goodwill, annually during the fourth quarter for all of our operating segments. Calculating the estimated fair values of CGUs for non-current asset impairment tests and CGUs or groups of CGUs for goodwill impairment tests requires management to make estimates and assumptions with respect to future production levels, operating and capital costs in our LOM plans, future metal prices, foreign exchange rates, Net Asset Value (“NAV”) multiples, value of reserves outside LOM plans in relation to the assumptions related to comparable entities and the market values per ounce and per pound and discount rates. Changes in any of the assumptions or estimates used in determining the fair values could impact the impairment analysis. Refer to notes 2n, 2p and 20 for further information.

Provisions for Environmental Rehabilitation

Management assesses its provision for environmental rehabilitation on an annual basis or when new information becomes available. This assessment includes the estimation of the future rehabilitation costs, the timing of these expenditures, and the impact of changes in discount rates and foreign exchange rates. The actual future expenditures may differ from the amounts currently provided if the estimates made are significantly different than actual results or if there are significant changes in

environmental and/or regulatory requirements in the future. Refer to notes 2u and 26 for further information.

Taxes

Management is required to make estimations regarding the tax basis of assets and liabilities and related deferred income tax assets and liabilities, amounts recorded for uncertain tax positions, the measurement of income tax expense and indirect taxes, and estimates of the timing of repatriation of earnings, which would impact the recognition of withholding taxes and taxes related to the outside basis on subsidiaries/associates. A number of these estimates require management to make estimates of future taxable profit, as well as the recoverability of indirect taxes, and if actual results are significantly different than our estimates, the ability to realize the deferred tax assets and indirect tax receivables recorded on our balance sheet could be impacted. Refer to notes 2i, 11 and 29 for further information.

Contingencies

Contingencies can be either possible assets or possible liabilities arising from past events which, by their nature, will only be resolved when one or more future events not wholly within our control occur or fail to occur. The assessment of such contingencies inherently involves the exercise of significant judgment and estimates of the outcome of future events. In assessing loss contingencies related to legal proceedings that are pending against us or unasserted claims that may result in such proceedings or regulatory or government actions that may negatively impact our business or operations, the Company with assistance from its legal counsel evaluates the perceived merits of any legal proceedings or unasserted claims or actions as well as the perceived merits of the nature and amount of relief sought or expected to be sought, when determining the amount, if any, to recognize as a contingent liability or assessing the impact on the carrying value of assets. Contingent assets are not recognized in the consolidated financial statements. Refer to note 35 for more information.

Pascua-Lama

As a result of our decision to suspend the construction of our Pascua-Lama project, significant judgment and estimation has been used in determining our accrued liabilities, including: demobilization, contract claims and severance. For contractors, it is necessary to estimate accruals for work completed but not yet invoiced based on subjective assessments of the stage of completion of their work in relation to invoices rendered; and for costs arising from existing contracts for legal or constructive obligations arising from our demobilization actions. In addition, the

Pascua-Lama project received $382 million (2014: $403 million) in value added tax (“VAT”) refunds in Chile relating to the development of the Chilean side of the project. Under the current arrangement this amount plus interest of $170 million (2014: $137 million) must be repaid if the project does not evidence exports for an amount of $3,538 million within a term that expires on June 30, 2018. Barrick expects to apply for an extension of the 2018 deadline sometime in the next two years. We have also recorded $308 million in VAT recoverable in Argentina as of December 31, 2015 ($461 million, December 31, 2014) relating to the development of the Argentine side of the project. These amounts may not be recoverable if the project does not enter into production and are subject to devaluation risk as the amounts are recoverable in Argentinean pesos.

Streaming Transactions

The upfront cash deposit received from Royal Gold on the gold and silver streaming transaction has been accounted for as deferred revenue as we have determined that it is not a derivative as it will be satisfied through the delivery of non-financial items (i.e., gold and silver) rather than cash or financial assets. It is our intention to settle the obligations under the streaming arrangement through our own production and if we were to fail to settle the obligations with Royal Gold through our own production, this would lead to the streaming arrangement becoming a derivative. This would cause a change to the accounting treatment, resulting in the revaluation of the fair value of the agreement through profit and loss on a recurring basis. Refer to note 24 for further details.

Our silver sale agreement with Silver Wheaton Corp (“Silver Wheaton”) requires us to deliver 25% of the life of mine silver production from the Pascua-Lama project once it is constructed and 100% of silver from Lagunas Norte, Pierina and Veladero mines until March 31, 2018. The completion date for Pascua-Lama was originally December 31, 2015 but was subsequently extended to June 30, 2020. Per the terms of the amended silver purchase agreement, if the requirements of the completion guarantee have not been satisfied by June 30, 2020, the agreement may be terminated by Silver Wheaton, in which case, they will be entitled to the return of the upfront cash consideration paid less credit for silver delivered up to the date of that event. The cash liability at December 31, 2015 is $313 million.

Refer to note 27 for a summary of our key financial risks.

Other Notes to the Financial Statements

Note


Divestitures			4
Segment information			5
Revenue			6
Cost of sales			7
Exploration, evaluation and project expenses			8
Other expense (income)			9
General and administrative expenses			10
Income tax (recovery) expense			11
Loss per share			12
Finance costs			13
Cash flow – other items			14
Investments			15
Inventories			16
Accounts receivable and other current assets			17
Property, plant and equipment			18
Goodwill and other intangible assets			19
Impairment of goodwill and non-current assets			20
Other assets			21
Accounts payable			22
Other current liabilities			23
Financial instruments			24
Fair value measurements			25
Provisions			26
Financial risk management			27
Other non-current liabilities			28
Deferred income taxes			29
Capital stock			30
Non-controlling interests			31
Remuneration of key management personnel			32
Stock-based compensation			33
Post-retirement benefits			34
Contingencies			35

4 > DIVESTITURES


For the year ended December 31
	2015		2014
Gross cash proceeds on divesture
Zaldívar		$ 950		$ -
Cowal		550		-
Porgera		298		-
Spring Valley		58		-
Ruby Hill		52		-
Marigold		-		86
Kanowna		-		67
Plutonic		-		22
Other		2		-
		$ 1,910		$ 175
Less: cash divested		(6)		(9)
		$ 1,904		$ 166

A)	Disposition of 50 percent interest in Zaldívar mine

On December 1, 2015, we completed the sale of 50% of our Zaldívar copper mine in Chile to Antofagasta Plc for total consideration of $1.005 billion. We received $950 million upon closing of the transaction, net of $10 million for working capital items, $20 million being held in escrow pending finalization of working capital adjustment and the remaining $25 million will be received over the next five years. As the agreed selling price is lower than the previously recorded book values of the Zaldívar cash generating unit, we recorded a goodwill impairment charge of $427 million for the full year 2015. The transaction resulted in a loss of $16 million for the year ended December 31, 2015 based on movements in working capital from the date of announcement until the date of completing the transaction. The transaction remains subject to a net working capital adjustment period to complete the review of the working capital. The net working capital of Zaldívar (on a 100% basis) was $522 million as at December 1, 2015. We have determined that Zaldívar will be accounted for as a joint venture and upon closing we began accounting for our investment under the equity method. The purchase price allocation underlying our equity method investment and the ultimate gain/loss on disposition of our 50% of Zaldívar will be finalized when the working capital adjustment is finalized.

B)	Divestments of Ruby Hill and Spring Valley

On December 17, 2015, we closed the sale of our Ruby Hill mine and Spring Valley, a development stage project, for total cash consideration of $110 million. The transaction resulted in a gain of $110 million for the year ended December 31, 2015.

C)	Assets held-for-sale

On November 11, 2015, we announced the sale of Bald Mountain and our remaining 50% interest in Round Mountain to Kinross for cash consideration of $610 million. The transaction was subject to customary closing conditions and closed on January 11, 2016. As at December 31, 2015, all of the assets and liabilities of Bald Mountain and our 50% interest in Round Mountain (refer to table below) were classified as held for sale. As the agreed selling price is lower than previously recorded book values, we recorded an impairment of $81 million in the fourth quarter 2015.


As at December 31 2015

Assets

Current assets

Inventories			$ 149

Other current assets			1

Total current assets			$ 150

Non-current assets

Property, plant and equipment			605

Other			3

Total assets			$ 758

Liabilities

Current liabilities			$ 40

Non-current liabilities

Provisions and other			109

Total liabilities			$ 149

D)	Disposition of Cowal and 50 percent interest in Porgera mines

On July 23, 2015, we completed the sale of our Cowal mine in Australia for cash consideration of $550 million. The transaction resulted in a gain of $34 million for the year ended December 31, 2015.

On August 31, 2015, we completed the sale of 50% of our interest in the Porgera mine in Papua New Guinea to Zijin Mining Group Company (“Zijin”) for cash consideration of $298 million. The transaction resulted in a gain of $39 million for the year ended December 31, 2015. Subsequent to completion of the transaction, we account for Porgera as a joint operation and include our share of Porgera’s assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses in our financial statements.

E)	Disposition of 50 percent interest in Jabal Sayid

On July 13, 2014, Barrick entered into an agreement to form a joint venture with Ma’aden to operate the Jabal Sayid copper project. Ma’aden, which is 50% owned by the Saudi Arabian government, acquired its 50% interest in the new joint venture company for cash consideration of $216 million. The transaction closed on December 3, 2014. The transaction resulted in a loss of control; consequently the assets and liabilities were written down to their fair value less costs of disposal, which resulted in an impairment loss of $514 million, including $316 million of goodwill recorded in 2014. Refer to note 20 for further details of the impairment loss.

Jabal Sayid is a joint arrangement which is structured through a separate entity of which Barrick is a 50% shareholder. The terms of the contractual arrangement provide that we have rights to 50% of the net earnings of the entity, and therefore we concluded that it was a joint venture and, as such, we account for our investment under the equity method.

F)	Disposition of Australian assets

On January 31, 2014, we closed the sale of our Plutonic mine for total cash consideration of $22 million. In addition, on March 1, 2014, we completed the sale of our Kanowna mine for total cash consideration of $67 million. The transactions resulted in a loss of $5 million for the year ended December 31, 2014.

Barrick’s business is organized into fifteen individual minesites, one publicly traded company and one project. Barrick’s Chief Operating Decision Maker (“CODM”), the President, reviews the operating results, assesses performance and makes capital allocation decisions at the minesite, Company and/or project level. Therefore, each individual minesite and Acacia are operating segments for financial reporting purposes. For segment reporting purposes, we present our reportable operating segments as follows: eight individual gold mines, two individual copper mines, Acacia and our Pascua-Lama project. The remaining operating segments have been grouped into an “other” category consisting of our remaining gold mines. The prior periods have been restated to reflect the change in presentation.

Segment performance is evaluated based on a number of measures including operating income before tax, production levels and unit production costs. Certain costs are managed on a consolidated basis and are therefore not reflected in segment income. Starting January 1, 2015, we transferred most of the functional services to minesites in order to hold the minesites directly accountable for the cost of the functional services they require to run their business, resulting in the allocation of our general and administration costs to individual minesites.

6 > REVENUE


For the years ended December 31	2015		2014

Gold bullion sales¹

Spot market sales		$ 7,559		$ 8,471

Concentrate sales		254		273

		$ 7,813		$ 8,744

Copper sales¹

Copper cathode sales		$ 501		$ 710

Concentrate sales		501		514
		$ 1,002		$ 1,224
Other sales²		$ 214		$ 271

Total		$ 9,029		$ 10,239

Revenues include amounts transferred from OCI to earnings for commodity cash flow hedges (see note 24d).

Revenues include the sale of by-products from our gold and copper mines and energy sales to third parties from our Monte Rio power plant in the Dominican Republic.

Principal Products

All of our gold mining operations produce gold in doré form, except Acacia’s gold mines of Bulyanhulu and Buzwagi, which produce both gold doré and gold concentrate. Gold doré is unrefined gold bullion bars usually consisting of 90% gold that is refined to pure gold bullion prior to sale to our customers. Concentrate is a processing product containing the valuable ore mineral from which most of the waste mineral has been eliminated. Our Lumwana mine produces a concentrate that primarily contains copper. At our Zaldívar mine we produce copper cathode, which consists of 99.9% copper.

Revenue

Revenue is presented net of direct sales taxes of $34 million (2014: $48 million). Incidental revenues from the sale of by-products, primarily copper, silver and energy at our gold mines, are classified within other sales.

Provisional Copper and Gold Sales

We have provisionally priced sales for which price finalization, referenced to the relevant copper and gold index, is outstanding at the balance sheet date. Our exposure at December 31, 2015 to the impact of movements in market commodity prices for provisionally priced sales is set out in the following table:


	Volumes subject to final pricing			Impact on net income before taxation of 10% movement in market price ($M)
As at December 31		2015	2014		2015	2014

Copper pounds (millions)		55	82		$ 11	$ 24

Gold ounces (000s)		16	28		2	3

For the year ended December 31, 2015, our provisionally priced copper sales included provisional pricing losses of $67 million (2014: $38 million loss) and our provisionally priced gold sales included provisional pricing losses of $3 million (2014: $1 million loss).

At December 31, 2015, our provisionally priced copper and gold sales subject to final settlement were recorded at average prices of $2.10/lb (2014: $2.88/lb) and $1,068/oz (2014: $1,201/oz), respectively. The sensitivities in the above tables have been determined as the impact of a 10% change in commodity prices at each reporting date, while holding all other variables, including foreign currency exchange rates, constant.

7 > COST OF SALES


For the years ended December 31	2015		2014
Direct mining cost ^1,2,3	$	4,738	$	4,803

Depreciation		1,771		1,648
Royalty expense		336		303
Community relations		62		76
Total	$	6,907	$	6,830

¹	Direct mining cost includes charges to reduce the cost of inventory to net realizable value of $285 million (2014: $121 million).

²	Direct mining cost includes the costs of extracting by-products.

³	Includes employee costs of $1,302 million (2014: $1,381 million).

Cost of Sales

Cost of sales consists of direct mining costs (which include personnel costs, certain general and administrative costs, energy costs (principally diesel fuel and electricity), maintenance and repair costs, operating supplies, external services, third-party smelting and transport fees), depreciation related to sales, royalty expenses, and community relations expense at our operating sites. Cost of sales also includes costs associated with power sales to third parties from our Monte Rio power plant in the Dominican Republic. Cost of sales is based on the weighted average cost of contained or recoverable ounces sold and royalty expense for the period. Costs also include any impairment to reduce inventory to its net realizable value.

Beginning on January 1, 2015, we transferred most of the functional services to mine sites in order to hold the mine sites directly accountable for the cost of the functional services they require to run the business, resulting in the allocation of our general and administrative costs to individual mine sites. These costs now form part of mine site G&A costs, which are included within direct mining costs.

Royalties

Certain of our properties are subject to royalty arrangements based on mineral production at the properties. The primary type of royalty is a net smelter return (NSR) royalty. Under this type of royalty we pay the holder an amount calculated as the royalty percentage multiplied by the value of gold production at market gold prices less third-party smelting, refining and transportation costs. Other types of royalties include:

Ø	Net profits interest (NPI) royalty to other than a government,

Ø	Modified net smelter return (NSR) royalty,

Ø	Net smelter return sliding scale (NSRSS) royalty,

Ø	Gross proceeds sliding scale (GPSS) royalty,

Ø	Gross smelter return (GSR) royalty,

Ø	Net value (NV) royalty,

Ø	Land tenement (LT) royalty, and a

Ø	Gold revenue royalty.

Royalty expense is recorded on completion of the production or sales process.


		Producing mines and projects		Type of royalty
		Goldstrike		0%-5% NSR, 0%-6% NPI

		Cortez		1.5% GSR

		Cortez - Pipeline/South		0.4%-9% GSR
		Pipeline deposit		0.4%-9% GSR

		Cortez - portion of Pipeline/		5% NV
		South Pipeline deposit		5% NV

		Pueblo Viejo		3.2% NSR (for gold & silver)

		Lagunas Norte		2.51% NSR

		Veladero		3.75% gross proceeds

		Porgera		2% NSR, 0.25% other

		Kalgoorlie		2.5% of gold revenue

		Acacia

		Bulyanhulu		4% NSR
		North Mara - Nyabirama and		4% NSR, 1% LT
		Nyabigena pit		4% NSR, 1% LT
		North Mara - Gokona pit		4% NSR, 1.1% LT

		Buzwagi		4% NSR, 30% NPI¹

		Pascua-Lama Project -		1.43%-9.56% GPSS
		Chile gold production		1.43%-9.56% GPSS

		Pascua-Lama Project -

		Chile copper production		1.92% NSR

		Pascua-Lama Project -		3% modified NSR
		Argentina production		3% modified NSR

		Other Mines - Gold

		Williams		1.5% NSR, 0.75%-1% NV

		Hemlo - Interlake property		50% NPI, 3% NSR

		Round Mountain		3.53%-6.35% NSRSS²

		Bald Mountain		3.5%-7% NSRSS, 2.9%-4% NSR, 10% NPI²
		Other Mines - Copper

		Lumwana		6% GSR Jan to Dec 2014
				20% GSR Jan to June 2015
				9% GSR July to Dec 2015

		Kabanga		4% NSR

		Other

		Cerro Casale		3% NSR (capped at $3 million cumulative)
		Donlin Gold Project		1.5% NSR (first 5 years or until advance royalty is repaid),
				4.5% NSR (thereafter),
				8.0% NPI³
				3% NPI, $0.4 cent mill tonnage fee

The NPI is calculated as a percentage of profits realized from the Buzwagi mine after all capital, exploration, and development costs and interest incurred in relation to the Buzwagi mine have been recouped and all operating costs relating to the Buzwagi mine have been paid. No amount is currently payable.

²	These mines have been disposed of on January 11, 2016.

³	The NPI is calculated as a percentage of profits realized from the mine after all funds invested to date with interest at an agreed upon rate are recovered. No amount is currently payable.

8 > EXPLORATION, EVALUATION AND PROJECT EXPENSES


For the years ended December 31	2015		2014

Exploration:
Minesite exploration		$ 34		$ 32
Global programs		109		131

		$ 143		$ 163
Evaluation costs		20		21

Exploration and evaluation expense¹		$ 163		$ 184

Advanced project costs:
Pascua-Lama		117		88
Jabal Sayid		-		30

Other project related costs:
Cerro Casale		7		14
Kainantu		-		4
Reko Diq		4		12
Corporate development		61		35

Community relations related to projects		3		25

Exploration, evaluation and project expenses		$ 355		$ 392

¹	Approximates the impact on operating cash flow.

9 > OTHER EXPENSE (INCOME)

A Other Expense (Income)


For the years ended December 31	2015		2014

Other Expense:
Consulting fees		$ 12		$ 28
Bank charges		19		16
Office closure costs		30		15
Toll milling		5		-
Mine site severance and non-operational costs		27		12
World Gold Council fees		-		3
Pension and other post-retirement benefits		3		3

Total other expense		$ 96		$ 77


Other Income:
Gain on sale of non-current assets/investments¹		$ (187)		$ (52)
Insurance recovery		(3)		(7)
Management fee income		(2)		(5)
Royalty income		(4)		(4)
Incidental income		(13)		(23)

Total other income		$ (209)		$ (91)

Net other expense (income)		$ (113)		$ (14)

¹	2015 includes gains of $110 million from the sale of Ruby Hill and Spring Valley, $39 million from the sale of Porgera, and $34 million from the sale of Cowal. 2014 includes gains of $21 million from the sale of Marigold and $5 million losses from the sale of Plutonic and Kanowna (see note 4)



B Impairment Charges
For the years ended December 31	2015		2014

Impairment of non-current assets¹		$ 1,726		$ 2,672
Impairment of other intangibles¹		-		7

		$ 1,726		$ 2,679
Impairment of goodwill¹		2,171		1,409
Impairment of other investments		-		18

Total		$ 3,897		$ 4,106

¹	Refer to note 20 for further details.


10> GENERAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

For the years ended December 31	2015		2014

Corporate administration²		$ 191		$ 217
Operating segment administration		42		168

Total¹		$ 233		$ 385

¹	Includes employee costs of $155 million (2014: $231 million).

²	Includes $29 million (2014: $24 million) related to one-time severance payments.

11 > INCOME TAX (RECOVERY) EXPENSE


For the years ended December 31	2015		2014
Tax on profit
Current tax
Charge for the year		$ 476		$ 750
Adjustment in respect of prior years		(71)		(64)

		$ 405		$ 686

Deferred tax
Origination and reversal of temporary differences in the current year		$ (551)		$ (436)
Adjustment in respect of prior years		115		56

		$ (436)		$ (380)

Income tax (recovery) expense		$ (31)		$ 306

Tax expense related to continuing operations

Current
Canada		$ 3		$ -
International		402		686

		$ 405		$ 686

Deferred
Canada		$ (32)		$ (181)
International		(404)		(199)

		$ (436)		$ (380)

Income tax (recovery) expense		$ (31)		$ 306

Currency Translation

Deferred tax balances are subject to remeasurement for changes in currency exchange rates each period. The most significant balances are Argentinean deferred tax liabilities. In 2015 and 2014, tax expense of $62 million and $46 million, respectively, primarily arose from translation losses due to the weakening of the Argentinean peso against the US dollar. These losses are included within deferred tax recovery/expense.

Internal Restructures

In fourth quarter 2015, a deferred tax recovery of $116 million arose from a loss that was realized on internal restructuring of subsidiary corporations. This resulted in a net increase in deferred tax assets.

In second quarter 2014, a deferred tax recovery of $112 million arose from a restructure of internal debt to equity in subsidiary corporations, which resulted in the release of a deferred tax liability and a net increase in deferred tax assets.


Reconciliation to Canadian Statutory Rate

For the years ended December 31	2015		2014
At 26.5% statutory rate		$ (833)		$ (703)
Increase (decrease) due to:
Allowances and special tax deductions¹		(103)		(93)
Impact of foreign tax rates²		(110)		18
Expenses not tax deductible		55		96
Goodwill impairment charges not tax deductible		736		373
Impairment charges not recognized in deferred tax assets		246		334
Net currency translation losses on deferred tax balances		62		46
Current year tax losses not recognized in deferred tax assets		56		20
Internal restructures		(116)		(112)
De-recognition of a deferred tax asset		20		-
Non-recognition of US AMT credits		19		43
Adjustments in respect of prior years		44		(8)
Increase to income tax related contingent liabilities		13		-
Impact of tax rate changes		-		20
Other withholding taxes		12		40
Mining taxes		(125)		227
Other items		(7)		5

Income tax (recovery) expense		$ (31)		$ 306

¹	We are able to claim certain allowances and tax deductions unique to extractive industries that result in a lower effective tax rate.

²	We operate in multiple foreign tax jurisdictions that have tax rates different than the Canadian statutory rate.

De-recognition of a Deferred Tax Asset

In second quarter 2015, we recorded a deferred tax expense of $20 million related to de-recognition of a deferred tax asset in Pueblo Viejo.

Non-Recognition of US Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) Credits

In fourth quarter 2015 and 2014, we recorded a deferred tax expense of $19 million and $43 million, respectively, related to US AMT credits which are not probable to be realized based on our current life of mine plans.

Tax Rate Changes

In third quarter 2014, a tax rate change was enacted in Chile, resulting in current tax expense of $2 million.

In fourth quarter 2014, a tax rate change was enacted in Peru, reducing corporate income tax rates. This resulted in a deferred tax expense of $18 million due to recording the deferred tax asset in Peru at the lower rates.

The information above reflects the amounts presented in the financial information of the joint venture adjusted for differences between IFRS and local GAAP.

Ore on leach pads

The recovery of gold and copper from certain oxide ores is achieved through the heap leaching process. Our Pierina, Lagunas Norte, Veladero, Cortez, Bald Mountain and Round Mountain mines all use a heap leaching process for gold and 50% owned Zaldívar mine uses a heap leaching process for copper. Under this method, ore is placed on leach pads where it is treated with a chemical solution, which dissolves the gold or copper contained in the ore. The resulting “pregnant” solution is further processed in a plant where the gold or copper is recovered. For accounting purposes, costs are added to ore on leach pads based on current mining and leaching costs, including applicable depreciation, depletion and amortization relating to mining operations. Costs are removed from ore on leach pads as ounces or pounds are recovered based on the average cost per recoverable ounce of gold or pound of copper on the leach pad.

Estimates of recoverable gold or copper on the leach pads are calculated from the quantities of ore placed on the leach pads (measured tons added to the leach pads), the grade of ore placed on the leach pads (based on assay data) and a recovery percentage (based on ore type).

Although the quantities of recoverable gold or copper placed on the leach pads are reconciled by comparing the grades of ore placed on pads to the quantities of gold or copper actually recovered (metallurgical balancing), the nature of the leaching process inherently limits the ability to precisely monitor inventory levels. As a result, the metallurgical balancing process is regularly monitored and estimates are refined based on actual results over time. Historically, our operating results have not been materially impacted by variations between the estimated and actual recoverable quantities of gold or copper on our leach pads. At December 31, 2015, the weighted average cost per recoverable ounce of gold on leach pads was $596 per ounce (2014: $687 per ounce of gold and $1.24 per pound of copper). Variations between actual and estimated quantities resulting from changes in assumptions and estimates that do not result in write-downs to net realizable value are accounted for on a prospective basis.

The ultimate recovery of gold or copper from a leach pad will not be known until the leaching process is concluded. Based on current mine plans, we expect to place the last ton of ore on our current leach pads at dates for gold ranging from 2016 to 2028. Including the estimated time required for residual leaching, rinsing and reclamation

activities, we expect that our leaching operations will terminate within a period of up to 6 years following the date that the last ton of ore is placed on the leach pad.

The current portion of ore inventory on leach pads is determined based on estimates of the quantities of gold or copper at each balance sheet date that we expect to recover during the next 12 months.


Ore in Stockpiles
	As at Dec. 31, 2015		As at Dec. 31, 2014
Gold
Goldstrike		$ 906		$ 760
Pueblo Viejo		406		340
Porgera		77		257
Cortez		179		159
Cowal		-		176
Kalgoorlie		113		103
Buzwagi		38		69
North Mara		48		43
Lagunas Norte		80		54
Veladero		34		32
Turquoise Ridge		20		18
Other		11		25
Copper
Zaldívar		-		108
Lumwana		48		74
		$ 1,960		$ 2,218

Ore on Leach pads
	As at Dec. 31, 2015		As at Dec. 31, 2014
Gold
Veladero		$ 136		$ 149
Cortez		71		40
Bald Mountain		-		108
Round Mountain		-		21
Lagunas Norte		81		37
Pierina		4		2
Copper
Zaldívar		-		392
		$ 292		$ 749

Purchase Commitments

At December 31, 2015, we had purchase obligations for supplies and consumables of approximately $1,151 million (2014: $1,154 million).

A Mineral Property Costs Not Subject to Depreciation


	Carrying amount at Dec. 31, 2015		Carrying amount at Dec. 31, 2014

Construction-in-progress¹		$ 529		$ 1,490
Acquired mineral resources and exploration potential		42		264
Projects
Pascua-Lama		1,287		1,910
Cerro Casale²		444		444
Donlin Gold		148		138

		$ 2,450		$ 4,246

¹	Represents assets under construction at our operating mine sites.

²	Amounts are presented on a 100% basis and include our partner’s non-controlling interest.

B Changes in Gold and Copper Mineral Life of Mine Plan

As part of our annual business cycle, we prepare updated estimates of proven and probable gold and copper mineral reserves and the portion of resources considered probable of economic extraction for each mineral property. This forms the basis for our LOM

plans. We prospectively revise calculations of amortization expense for property, plant and equipment amortized using the UOP method, where the denominator is our LOM ounces. The effect of changes in our LOM on amortization expense for 2015 was a $94 million decrease (2014: $201 million increase). The effect of changes in our LOM on amortization expense for fourth quarter 2015 was a $56 million decrease (2014: $57 million increase).

C Capital Commitments and Operating Leases

In addition to entering into various operational commitments in the normal course of business, we had commitments of approximately $120 million at December 31, 2015 (2014: $159 million) for construction activities at our sites and projects.

Operating leases are recognized as an operating cost in the consolidated statements of income on a straight-line basis over the lease term. At December 31, 2015, we have operating lease commitments totaling $161 million, of which $36 million is expected to be paid within a year, $95 million is expected to be paid within two to five years and the remaining amount to be paid beyond five years.

On a total basis, the gross amount and accumulated impairment losses are as follows:

20 > IMPAIRMENT OF GOODWILL AND NON-CURRENT ASSETS

In accordance with our accounting policy, goodwill is tested for impairment in the fourth quarter and also when there is an indicator of impairment. Non-current assets are tested for impairment when events or changes in circumstances suggest that the carrying amount may not be recoverable.

When there is an indicator of impairment of non-current assets within an operating segment consisting of a CGU that does not contain goodwill, we test the non-current assets for impairment and recognize any impairment loss on the non-current assets. When there is an indicator of impairment of non-current assets within an operating segment that contains goodwill, we test the non-current assets for impairment first and recognize any impairment loss on goodwill first and then any remaining impairment loss is applied against the non-current assets.

An impairment loss is recognized when the carrying amount exceeds the recoverable amount. The recoverable amount of each operating segment for goodwill testing purposes has been determined based on its estimated FVLCD, which has been determined to be greater than the VIU amounts. The recoverable amount for non-current asset testing is calculated using the same approach as for goodwill; however, the assessment is done at the CGU level, which is the lowest level for which identifiable cash flows are largely independent of the cash flows of other assets. A CGU is generally an individual operating mine or development project.

Summary of impairments (reversals)

For the year ended December 31, 2015, we recorded impairment losses of $1.7 billion (2014: $2.7 billion) for non-current assets and $2.2 billion (2014: $1.4 billion) for goodwill, as summarized in the following table:


For the years ended December 31	2015		2014
Pueblo Viejo	$	1,112		$ (9)
Pascua-Lama		399		382
Bald Mountain/Round Mountain¹		81		-
Buzwagi		37		-
Lagunas Norte		36		-
Oil Royalty		36		-
Cortez		2		46
Cerro Casale		-		1,476
Lumwana		-		720
Jabal Sayid		-		198
Other Investments		-		18
Exploration (Tusker, Kainantu, Saudi Licenses)		-		7
Porgera		-		(160)
Other		23		19
Total non-current asset impairment losses		$ 1,726		$ 2,697
Goldstrike	$	730	$	-
Zaldívar		427		712
Pueblo Viejo		412		-
Cortez		355		-
Lagunas Norte		247		-
Jabal Sayid		-		316
Lumwana		-		214
Bald Mountain		-		131
Round Mountain		-		36
Total goodwill impairment losses		$ 2,171		$ 1,409
Total impairment losses	$	3,897		$ 4,106

¹	As discussed in note 4c, we have disposed of Bald Mountain and Round Mountain in a single transaction. Accordingly, the impairment loss has been calculated together.

2015 Indicators of Impairment

Fourth Quarter 2015

In fourth quarter 2015, as per our policy, we performed our annual goodwill impairment test. Primarily as a result of the lower gold price assumptions used in this year’s test which are consistent with current market conditions, we identified that the carrying values of our Pueblo Viejo, Goldstrike, Cortez and Lagunas Norte mines exceeded their FVLCD. At Pueblo Viejo, a goodwill impairment loss of $412 million and a non-current asset impairment loss of $1,101 million was recorded and the recoverable amount after the impairment, based on the mine’s FVLCD, was $3.2 billion (100% basis). At Goldstrike, a goodwill impairment loss of $730 million was recorded and the recoverable amount after the impairment, based on the mine’s FVLCD, was $2.7 billion. At Cortez, a goodwill impairment loss of $355 million was recorded and the recoverable amount after the impairment, based on the mine’s FVLCD, was $3.4 billion. At Lagunas Norte, a goodwill impairment loss of $247 million and a non-current asset impairment loss of $36 million was recorded and the recoverable amount after the impairment, based on the mine’s FVLCD, was $480 million. Refer to note 19 for our remaining goodwill balances.

As at December 31, 2015, all of the assets and liabilities of Bald Mountain and Round Mountain were classified as held-for-sale. As the agreed selling price is lower than previously recognized carrying values, we recorded a non-current asset impairment loss of $81 million.

Throughout fourth quarter 2015, the trading price of the Company’s shares declined such that the carrying value of our net assets exceeded our market capitalization. We have determined that this is an indicator of impairment and tested the remaining assets that were not included in the annual goodwill impairment test. As a result, we determined two additional impairments. At our Pascua-Lama project, we recorded an impairment loss of $404 million (net of a $46 million reversal related to a specific PP&E asset). The recoverable amount after the impairment, based on the project’s FVLCD, was $810 million. At our Buzwagi mine in Tanzania (part of our Acacia subsidiary), we recorded a non-current asset impairment loss of $37 million. The recoverable amount after the impairment, based on the mine’s FVLCD, was $81 million (100% basis).

We evaluated the FVLCD of an oil royalty that we received as part of the consideration for one of the Barrick Energy dispositions in 2013 and concluded that due to the significant decline in current oil prices in fourth quarter 2015 and the corresponding constraints on capital investment in the oil industry, its carrying value was not

recoverable. We recorded an impairment of $36 million and reduced its carrying value to nil.

Third Quarter 2015

In July 2015, the Zambian government passed legislation that amended the country’s mining tax regime. This was an indicator of potential reversal of previous impairments recorded on our Lumwana mine in fourth quarter 2014. In third quarter 2015, we evaluated the FVLCD and concluded that, based on the current mine plan, lower short-term copper prices and a higher observable discount rate offset the lower royalty rate. Therefore no reversal of impairment was required at that time.

As at September 30, 2015, all of the assets and liabilities of Zaldívar were classified as held-for-sale as the transaction will result in a loss of control. The agreed selling price was lower than our previous assessment of FVLCD due to lower short-term copper prices, the impact of 10 months’ worth of production on the fair value and an increase in observable discount rates. For the year ended December 31, 2015 we recorded a goodwill impairment loss of $427 million as a result of this transaction.

In third quarter 2015, a net reversal of $16 million was recognized relating to the termination of contracts of certain leased assets at Pascua-Lama that had previously been impaired. They are now carried at their expected realizable value.

Second Quarter 2015

In second quarter 2015, we determined that we expect to sell the Monte Rio power asset at our Pueblo Viejo mine. Power supply to Pueblo Viejo is not impacted by this disposition. In third quarter 2015, we entered into an agreement to sell the asset and recorded a partial reversal of this impairment based on the agreed upon sales price. For the year ended December 31, 2015, we recorded an impairment loss of $11 million to reduce its carrying value down to its net realizable value.

2014 Indicators of Impairment

In second quarter 2014, our Jabal Sayid project in Saudi Arabia met the criteria as an asset held-for-sale. Accordingly, we were required to allocate goodwill from the Copper Operating Unit to Jabal Sayid and test the Jabal Sayid group of assets for impairment. We determined that the carrying value exceeded the FVLCD, and consequently recorded $514 million in impairment charges, including the full amount of goodwill allocated on a relative fair value basis, of $316 million. The recoverable amount after the impairment, based on FVLCD, was $560 million. In fourth quarter

2014, we closed a transaction to sell a 50 percent interest of Jabal Sayid for cash proceeds of $216 million.

We reached an agreement to sell a power-related asset at our Pueblo Viejo mine for proceeds that exceeded its carrying value. This asset had previously been impaired in fourth quarter 2012, and therefore we recognized an impairment reversal of $9 million. This transaction closed on September 30, 2014.

In fourth quarter 2014, as described in note 19, we reorganized our internal management reporting structure. As a result, the goodwill attributable to our former North America Portfolio, Australia Pacific and Copper segments was allocated to the individual CGUs within those operating segments on a relative fair value basis. The allocation of goodwill to the carrying value of our Bald Mountain and Round Mountain CGUs resulted in their carrying values exceeding their FVLCD and, as a result, we recorded goodwill impairment losses of $131 million and $36 million, respectively. The recoverable amounts after the impairment of Bald Mountain and Round Mountain, based on FVLCD, were $482 million and $131 million, respectively.

On December 18, 2014, the Zambian government passed changes to the country’s mining tax regime that would replace the current corporate income tax and variable profit tax with a 20 percent royalty which took effect on January 1, 2015. The application of a 20 percent royalty rate compared to the 6 percent royalty rate the Company was paying has a significant negative impact on the expected future cash flows of our Lumwana mine and was considered an indicator of impairment. As a result, we conducted an impairment test and as a result of the new royalty rate along with the decrease in our copper price assumptions, recorded $930 million in impairment charges, including the full amount of goodwill of $214 million allocated to Lumwana as a result of the change in segments (see note 19). The recoverable amount after the impairment, based on FVLCD, was $300 million.

Our Zaldívar mine experienced a significant decrease in the estimated FVLCD of the mine, primarily as a result of the decrease in fourth quarter 2014 of our forecast of the long-term copper price and, to a lesser extent, as a result of the final assessment of the tax rate increase in Chile. Accordingly, we recorded a goodwill impairment loss of $712 million on this CGU. The recoverable amount after the impairment, based on FVLCD, was $2,411 million.

In November 2014, we completed a strategy optimization study for our Cerro Casale project with the goal of identifying a development model that would improve the project economics and risk by reducing the upfront capital requirements in order to generate a higher return on our investment. The study was unable to identify an alternative that provided an overall rate of return above our hurdle rate for a project of this size and complexity. As a result, the budget for 2015 for the project was significantly reduced, with the 2015 budget focused on preserving the optionality of the project. We will continue activities to protect the asset and assess alternative ways to develop the project in a more economic manner; however, management’s expectation of achieving a suitable rate of return in the metal price environment has been diminished. The foregoing developments were deemed to be indicators of impairment, and as a result, we assessed the recoverable amount of the project and have recorded an impairment loss on the project of $1,467 million. The recoverable amount after the impairment, based on the project’s estimated FVLCD, was $500 million (100% basis).

In December 2014, the Chilean Supreme Court declined to consider Barrick’s appeal of the Environmental Court Decision on Pascua-Lama on procedural grounds (see note 35). As a result, the Superintendencia del Medio Ambiente (“SMA”) will now re-evaluate the resolution. Although we cannot reasonably predict the outcome of the resolution, this risk, in combination with the decrease in our long-term silver price assumption in fourth quarter 2014 due to declining market prices, and the continued uncertainty about the timing, cost and permitting of the project, were deemed to be indicators of impairment. As a result, we assessed the recoverable amount of the project and have recorded an impairment loss on Pascua-Lama of $382 million. The recoverable amount after the impairment, based on the project’s estimated FVLCD, was $1,200 million, which is equal to the project’s carrying value at the start of the year.

At our Porgera mine in Papua New Guinea, we have revised our LOM plan to include a portion of the open pit resources that were removed from the plan in the prior year. In 2013, we did not have a feasible plan to access the open pit reserves due to technical and financial issues with respect to the west wall of the open pit. In 2014, management resolved these technical issues and developed an optimized mine plan to sequence the west wall cutback in an economical manner. As a result, management was able to bring a significant portion of the ounces from the open pit back into the LOM plan. The new plan resulted in an increase

in the estimated mine life from 8 to 12 years, and an increase in the estimated FVLCD of the mine, which has resulted in a partial reversal of a previous impairment loss of $160 million. The recoverable amount after the impairment reversal, based on FVLCD, was $600 million.

The annual update to the LOM plan at Cortez resulted in a cessation of mining in one of the open pits at the mine. This was identified as an indicator of impairment, resulting in the impairment of assets specifically related to this pit of $46 million.

Key assumptions

The key assumptions and estimates used in determining the FVLCD are related to commodity prices, discount rates, NAV multiples for gold assets, operating costs, exchange rates, capital expenditures, the LOM production profile, continued license to operate, evidence of value from current year disposals and for our projects the expected start of production. In addition, assumptions are related to observable market evaluation metrics, including identification of comparable entities, and associated market values per ounce and per pound of reserves and/or resources, as well as the valuation of resources beyond what is included in LOM plans.

Gold

For the gold segments, excluding Pascua-Lama and Cerro Casale, FVLCD for each of the CGUs was determined by calculating the net present value (“NPV”) of the future cash flows expected to be generated by the mines and projects within the segments (level 3 of the fair value hierarchy). The estimates of future cash flows were derived from the most recent LOM plans and, where the LOM plans excludes a material portion of total reserves and resources, we assign value to reserves and resources not considered in these models. Based on observable market or publicly available data, including forward prices and equity sell-side analyst forecasts, we make an assumption of future gold and silver prices to estimate future revenues. The future cash flows for each gold mine are discounted using a real weighted average cost of capital (“WACC”), which reflects specific market risk factors for each mine. Some gold companies trade at a market capitalization greater than the NPV of their expected cash flows. Market participants describe this as a “NAV multiple”, which represents the multiple applied to the NPV to arrive at the trading price. The NAV multiple is generally understood to take account of a variety of additional value factors such as the exploration potential of the mineral property, namely the ability to find and produce more metal than what is currently included in the LOM plan or reserve and resource estimates, and the benefit of gold price optionality. As a result, we applied a specific NAV multiple to the NPV of

each CGU within each gold segment based on the NAV multiples observed in the market in recent periods and that we judged to be appropriate to the CGU.

Pascua-Lama and Cerro Casale

The FVLCD for Pascua-Lama and Cerro Casale was determined by considering observable market values for comparable assets expressed as dollar per ounce and dollar per pound of proven and probable reserves (level 3 of the fair value hierarchy). We used the market approach as the LOMs for Pascua-Lama and Cerro Casale have significant uncertainty with respect to the estimated timeline for the project and the estimated remaining construction costs. The observable market values were adjusted, where appropriate, for country risk if the comparable asset was in a different country and any change in metal prices since the valuation date of the comparable asset.

Copper

For our copper operating segments, the FVLCD for each of the CGUs was determined based on the NPV of future cash flows expected to be generated using the most recent LOM plans (level 3 of the fair value hierarchy). Based on observable market or publicly available data including spot and forward prices and equity sell-side analyst consensus, we make an assumption of future copper prices to estimate future revenues. The future cash flows for each copper mine were discounted using a WACC depending on the location and market risk factors for each mine.

Our gold price assumptions used in our 2015 impairment testing are 2016: $1,000, 2017: $1,100 and 2018+: $1,200. In fourth quarter 2015, market consensus prices ranged from $1,000 to $1,250 in the short term and $800 to $1,300 in the long term. Consequently, our gold price assumptions are consistent with the assumptions a market participant would use to value a gold mining property. In 2014, impairment test gold prices were $1,250 for 2015-2016 and $1,300 for 2017 onwards. The other key assumptions used in our impairment testing are summarized in the table below:


	2015		2014
Silver price per oz (long-term)		$19		$21
Copper price per lb (long-term)		$3.00		$3.00
WACC - gold (range)		3% - 8%		3% - 8%
WACC - gold (avg)		4%		5%
WACC - copper (range)		7%		7% - 9%
WACC - copper (avg)		7%		7%
NAV multiple - gold (avg)		1.1		1.1
LOM years - gold (avg)¹		18		12
Value per ounce of gold²		$45 - $70		$45 - $80
Value per ounce of silver²		$0.71 -$1.11		$0.73 -$1.29
Value per pound of copper²		$0.03 - $0.04		$0.05 - $0.06

¹	The average LOM years is longer in 2015 as a result of the disposition of some of our shorter life mines and extensions in mine life of some of our remaining assets

²	The value per ounce/pound used is dependent on the characteristics of the property being valued

Sensitivities

Should there be a significant decline in commodity prices, we would take actions to assess the implications on our life of mine plans, including the determination of reserves and resources, and the appropriate cost structure for the operating segments. The recoverable amount of the CGUs would also be impacted by other market factors such as changes in net asset value multiples and the value per ounce/pound of comparable market entities.

We performed a sensitivity analysis on the gold price, which is the key assumption that impacts the impairment calculations. We assumed a $100 per ounce change in our gold price assumptions, while holding all other assumptions constant, to determine the impact on impairment losses recorded, and whether any additional operating segments would be impacted. We note that this sensitivity identifies the key assets where the increase/decrease in the sales price, in isolation, could cause the carrying value of our operating segments to exceed its recoverable amount for the purposes of the goodwill impairment test or the carrying value of any of our CGUs to exceed its recoverable amount for the purposes of the non-current asset impairment test. The results of this analysis are as follows:


			Impairment based on
Operating Segment	Impairment Recorded		Gold price + $100		Gold price - $100
Pueblo Viejo
Goodwill		$412		$-		$412
Non-current assets		1,101		-		2,519
Lagunas Norte
Goodwill		247		65		247
Non-current assets		36		-		321
Goldstrike
Goodwill		730		-		730
Non-current assets		-		-		1,088
Cortez
Goodwill		355		-		869
Non-current assets		-		-		735
Buzwagi non-current assets		37		25		42
Veladero goodwill		-		-		112
Turquoise Ridge goodwill		-		-		316

We also performed a sensitivity analysis on our WACC, which is another key input that impacts the impairment calculations. We assumed a +/-10% change on the WACC, while holding all other assumptions constant, to determine the impact on impairment losses recorded, and whether any additional operating segments would be impacted. The results of this analysis are as follows:


			Impairment based on
Operating Segment	Impairment Recorded		WACC +10%		WACC -10%
Pueblo Viejo
Goodwill		$412		$412		$412
Non-current assets		1,101		1,333		843
Lagunas Norte
Goodwill		247		247		247
Non-current assets		36		51		-
Buzwagi non-current assets		37		37		37
Goldstrike goodwill		730		730		647
Cortez goodwill		355		447		-

In addition, for our Cerro Casale and Pascua-Lama projects, we have determined our valuation based on a market approach. The key assumption that impacts the impairment calculations, should there be an indication of impairment for these CGUs, is the value per ounce of gold and per pound of copper based on an analysis of comparable companies. We assumed a negative 10% change for the assumption of gold, silver and copper value per unit, while holding all other assumptions constant, and based on the results of the impairment testing performed in fourth quarter 2015 for Cerro Casale and Pascua-Lama, the fair value of the CGUs would have been reduced from $500 million to $450 million and $810 million to $730 million, respectively. We note that this sensitivity identifies the

decrease in the value that, in isolation, would cause the carrying value of the CGU to exceed its recoverable amount. For Cerro Casale and Pascua-Lama, this value decrease is linear to the decrease in value per ounce/pound.

Based on the results of the impairment test performed in fourth quarter 2015, the carrying value of the CGUs that are most sensitive to the change in sales prices used in the annual test are:


As at December 31, 2015	Carrying value
Pueblo Viejo²		$3,729
Cortez^{1, 2}		3,304
Goldstrike²		2,610
Turquoise Ridge¹		1,140
Veladero¹		1,084
Pascua-Lama²		742
Cerro Casale		511
Lagunas Norte²		465
Lumwana		351
Buzwagi²		81

¹	Carrying value includes goodwill.

²	These CGUs have been impaired in 2015 and therefore their fair value approximates carrying value.

21 > OTHER ASSETS


	As at Dec. 31, 2015		As at Dec. 31, 2014
Derivative assets (note 24f)		$ 1		$ 2
Goods and services taxes recoverable¹		397		565

Notes receivable		105		112
Due from joint venture²		186		164
Restricted cash³		91		59
Prepayments		60		64
Other nvestments		8		35
Other		175		237
		$ 1,023		$ 1,238

¹	Includes VAT and fuel tax receivables of $308 million in Argentina, $52 million in Tanzania and $37 million in Chile (Dec. 31, 2014: $461 million, $62 million and $42 million, respectively). The VAT in Argentina is recoverable once Pascua-Lama enters production.

²	Primarily represents the non-interest bearing shareholder loan due from the Jabal Sayid JV as a result of the divestment of 50 percent interest in Jabal Sayid.

³	Represents cash balance at Pueblo Viejo that is contractually restricted to the disbursements for environmental rehabilitation that are expected to occur near the end of Pueblo Viejo’s mine life.

22 > ACCOUNTS PAYABLE


	As at Dec. 31, 2015		As at Dec. 31, 2014
Accounts payable		$ 736		$ 974
Accruals		422		679
		$ 1,158		$ 1,653

23 > OTHER CURRENT LIABILITIES


	As at Dec. 31, 2015		As at Dec. 31, 2014
Provision for environmental rehabilitation (note 26b)		$ 62		$ 109
Derivative liabilities (note 24f)		160		158
Deposit on gold and silver streaming agreement		36		-
Restricted stock units (note 33b)		21		15
Deposit on silver sale agreements		22		40
Other		36		95
		$ 337		$ 417

Financial instruments include cash; evidence of ownership in an entity; or a contract that imposes an obligation on one party and conveys a right to a second entity to deliver/receive cash or another financial instrument. Information on certain types of financial instruments is included elsewhere in these consolidated financial statements as follows: accounts receivable (note 17); investments (note 15); restricted share units (note 33b).

Cash and equivalents include cash, term deposits, treasury bills and money market investments with original maturities of less than 90 days.

Of total cash and cash equivalents as of December 31, 2015, $621 million (2014: $614 million) was held in subsidiaries which have regulatory regulations, contractual restrictions or operate in countries where exchange controls and other legal restrictions apply and are therefore not available for general use by the Company. In addition, $62 million (2014: $242 million) of cash and equivalents is held in subsidiaries where we have determined the cash is reinvested for the foreseeable future for the calculation of deferred income tax. This cash can be repatriated; however, there would be a tax cost of doing so, which has not yet been recognized in these financial statements.

1.75%/2.9%/4.4%/5.7% notes

In June 2011, Barrick, and our wholly-owned subsidiary Barrick North America Finance LLC (“BNAF”), issued an aggregate of $4.0 billion in debt securities comprised of: $700 million of 1.75% notes that had an original maturity date in 2014 and $1.1 billion of 2.90% notes that had an original maturity date in 2016 issued by Barrick (collectively, the “Barrick Notes”) as well as $1.35 billion of 4.40% notes that mature in 2021 and $850 million of 5.70% notes that mature in 2041 issued by BNAF (collectively, the “BNAF Notes”). Barrick provides an unconditional and irrevocable guarantee of the BNAF Notes. The Barrick Notes and the guarantee in respect of the BNAF Notes will rank equally with Barrick’s other unsecured and unsubordinated obligations.

During 2013, the entire balance ($700 million) of the 1.75% notes was repaid along with $871 million of the $1.1 billion of 2.9% notes. During 2015, the remainder ($229 million) of the $1.1 billion of 2.9% notes was repaid.

3.85% and 5.25% Notes

On April 3, 2012, we issued an aggregate of $2 billion in debt securities comprised of $1.25 billion of 3.85% notes that mature in 2022 and $750 million of 5.25% notes that mature in 2042. During 2015, $913 million of the 3.85% notes was repaid.

Other Fixed Rate Notes

On October 16, 2009, we issued two tranches of debentures totaling $1.25 billion through our wholly-owned indirect subsidiary Barrick (PD) Australia Finance Pty Ltd. (“BPDAF”) consisting of $850 million of 30-year notes with a coupon rate of 5.95%, and $400 million of 10-year notes with a coupon rate of 4.95%. We also provide an unconditional and irrevocable guarantee of these payments, which rank equally with our other unsecured and unsubordinated obligations.

On March 19, 2009, we issued an aggregate of $750 million of 10-year notes with a coupon rate of 6.95% for general corporate purposes. The notes are unsecured, unsubordinated obligations and rank equally with our other

unsecured, unsubordinated obligations. During 2015, $275 million was repaid.

In September 2008, we issued an aggregate of $1.25 billion of notes through our wholly-owned indirect subsidiaries Barrick North America Finance LLC and Barrick Gold Financeco LLC (collectively, the “LLCs”) consisting of $500 million of 5-year notes with a coupon rate of 6.125%, $500 million of 10-year notes with a coupon rate of 6.8%, and $250 million of 30-year notes with a coupon rate of 7.5%. We also provide an unconditional and irrevocable guarantee of these payments, which rank equally with our other unsecured and unsubordinated obligations.

During 2013, the entire balance ($500 million) of the 5-year notes with a coupon rate of 6.125% that was due in September 2013 was repaid.

Pueblo Viejo Project Financing Agreement

In April 2010, Barrick and Goldcorp finalized terms for $1.035 billion (100% basis) in project financing for Pueblo Viejo. The project financing was non-recourse subject to guarantees provided by Barrick and Goldcorp for their proportionate share which will terminate upon Pueblo Viejo meeting certain operating completion tests and are subject to an exclusion for certain political risk events. On February 17, 2015, we received notification that the completion tests have been met, resulting in termination of the guarantees. The lending syndicate is comprised of international financial institutions including export development agencies and commercial banks. The amount was divided into three tranches of $400 million, $375 million and $260 million with tenors of 15, 15 and 12 years, respectively. The $400 million tranche bears a coupon of LIBOR+3.25% pre-completion and scales gradually to LIBOR+5.10% (inclusive of political risk insurance premium) for years 13-15. The $375 million tranche bears a fixed coupon of 3.86% for the entire 15 years. The $260 million tranche bears a coupon of LIBOR+3.25% pre-completion and scales gradually to LIBOR+4.85% (inclusive of political risk insurance premium) for years 11-12.

We have drawn the entire $1.035 billion to date. During the year, $211 million of loans was repaid. The remaining principal balance under the Pueblo Viejo Financing Agreement is $677 million.

Refinancing of the Credit Facility

In January 2012, we finalized a credit and guarantee agreement (the “Credit Facility”, previously referred to as

the “2012 Credit Facility”) with certain Lenders, which requires such Lenders to make available to us a credit facility of $4.0 billion or the equivalent amount in Canadian dollars. The Credit Facility, which is unsecured, currently has an interest rate of LIBOR plus 2.00% on drawn amounts, and a commitment rate of 0.35% on undrawn amounts. In December 2015, $3.61 billion of the $4 billion credit facility was extended from January 2020 to January 2021. The remaining $390 million currently terminates in January 2020. The 2012 Credit Facility is undrawn as at December 31, 2015.

2.50%/4.10%/5.75% notes

On May 2, 2013, we issued an aggregate of $3 billion in notes through Barrick and our wholly-owned indirect subsidiary Barrick North America Finance LLC consisting of $650 million of 2.50% notes that mature in 2018, $1.5 billion of 4.10% notes that mature in 2023 and $850 million of 5.75% notes issued by BNAF that mature in 2043. $2.0 billion of the net proceeds from this offering were used to repay existing indebtedness under our $4 billion revolving credit facility. We provided an unconditional and irrevocable guarantee on the $850 million of 5.75% notes issued by BNAF, which will rank equally with our other unsecured and unsubordinated obligations.

During 2013, $398 million of the $650 million 2.50% notes were repaid. During 2015, $769 million of 4.1% notes and $129 million of 2.5% notes were repaid.

Acacia Credit Facility

In January 2013, Acacia concluded negotiations with a group of commercial banks for the provision of an export credit backed term loan facility (the “Facility”) for the amount of US$142 million. The Facility was put in place to fund a substantial portion of the construction costs of the new CIL circuit at the process plant at the Bulyanhulu Project (the “Project”). The Facility is collateralized by the Project, has a term of seven years and, when drawn, the spread over LIBOR will be 250 basis points. The Facility is repayable in equal installments over the term of the Facility, after a two-year repayment holiday period. The interest rate has been fixed at an effective rate of 3.6% through the use of an interest rate swap. At December 31, 2014, the full value of the Facility was drawn and in 2015, $14 million was repaid.

In the normal course of business, our assets, liabilities and forecasted transactions, as reported in US dollars, are impacted by various market risks including, but not limited to:

Item

Impacted by

●

Sales

●

Prices of gold, silver and copper

^¡

By-product credits

^¡

Prices of silver, copper and gold

●

Cost of sales

^¡

Consumption of diesel fuel, propane, natural gas, and electricity

^¡

Prices of diesel fuel, propane, natural gas, and electricity

^¡

Non-US dollar expenditures

^¡

Currency exchange rates – US dollar versus A$, ARS, C$, CLP, EUR, PGK, TZS, ZAR, and ZMW

●

General and administration, exploration and evaluation costs

●

Currency exchange rates – US dollar versus A$, ARS, C$, CLP, GBP, PGK, TZS, ZAR, and ZMW

●

Capital expenditures

^¡

Non-US dollar capital expenditures

^¡

Currency exchange rates – US dollar versus A$, ARS, C$, CLP, EUR, GBP, PGK, and ZAR

^¡

Consumption of steel

^¡

Price of steel

●

Interest earned on cash and equivalents

●

US dollar interest rates

●

Interest paid on fixed-rate borrowings

●

US dollar interest rates

The time frame and manner in which we manage those risks varies for each item based upon our assessment of the risk and available alternatives for mitigating risk. For these particular risks, we believe that derivatives are an appropriate way of managing the risk.

We use derivatives as part of our risk management program to mitigate variability associated with changing market values related to the hedged item. Many of the derivatives we use meet the hedge effectiveness criteria and are designated in a hedge accounting relationship.

Certain derivatives are designated as either hedges of the fair value of recognized assets or liabilities or of firm commitments (“fair value hedges”) or hedges of highly probable forecasted transactions (“cash flow hedges”), collectively known as “accounting hedges”. Hedges that are expected to be highly effective in achieving offsetting changes in fair value or cash flows are assessed on an ongoing basis to determine that they actually have been highly effective throughout the financial reporting periods for which they were designated. Some of the derivative instruments we use are effective in achieving our risk management objectives, but they do not meet the strict hedge accounting criteria. These derivatives are considered to be “non-hedge derivatives”.

¹ Fuel contracts represent a combination of WTI swaps and BRENT options. These derivatives hedge physical supply contracts based on the price of fuel across our operating mine sites plus a spread. WTI represents West Texas Intermediate and BRENT represents Brent Crude Oil.

As of December 31, 2015, we had 19 counterparties to our derivative positions. We proactively manage our exposure to individual counterparties in order to mitigate both credit and liquidity risks. We have one counterparty with which we hold a net asset position of $0.2 million, and 18 counterparties with which we are in a net liability position, for a total net liability of $263 million. On an ongoing basis, we monitor our exposures and ensure that none of the counterparties with which we hold outstanding contracts has declared insolvency.

US Dollar Interest Rate Contracts

Fair Value Hedges

During 2014, we closed out $400 million of pay-variable receive-fixed swap positions which were used to hedge the fair value of a portion of our long-term fixed-rate debt.

Cash Flow Hedges

At December 31, 2015, Acacia has $128 million of pay-fixed receive-float interest rate swaps to hedge the floating rate debt associated with the Bulyanhulu plant expansion. These contracts, designated as cash flow hedges, convert the floating rate debt as it is drawn against the Financing agreement.

Currency Contracts

Cash Flow Hedges

During the year, no currency contracts have been designated against forecasted non-US dollar denominated expenditures. In total, we have A$85 million designated as cash flow hedges of our anticipated operating, administrative and sustaining capital spend. The outstanding contracts hedge the variability of the US dollar amount of those expenditures caused by changes in currency exchange rates over the next year. The effective portion of changes in fair value of the currency contracts is recorded in OCI until the forecasted expenditure impacts earnings. Gains and losses from hedge ineffectiveness are recognized in current earnings classified in the consolidated statement of income as gains (losses) on non-hedge derivatives.

During 2014, we sold back and effectively closed out approximately C$149 million of our Canadian dollar option contracts as a loss mitigation strategy. We crystallized losses of approximately $1 million, which were recognized in the consolidated statement of income based on the original hedge contract maturity dates. At December 31, 2015, none of these losses remain crystallized in OCI.

During 2013, we sold back and effectively closed out approximately A$990 million of our Australian dollar forward contracts as a loss mitigation strategy. No cash settlement occurred and payments will net at maturity (2014-2016). Including Australian dollar contracts closed out in 2012, $14 million of losses remain crystalized in OCI at December 31, 2015.

Non-hedge Derivatives

The non-hedge currency contracts are used to mitigate the variability of the US dollar amount of non-US dollar denominated exposures that do not meet the strict hedge effectiveness criteria. Changes in the fair value of the non-hedge currency contracts are recorded in the consolidated statement of income as gains (losses) on non-hedge derivatives.

During the year, we did not write any currency options. As a result, there are no outstanding notional amounts to report at December 31, 2015.

Commodity Contracts

Diesel/Propane/Electricity/Natural Gas

Cash Flow Hedges

During the year, 8,040 thousand barrels of WTI were designated against forecasted fuel consumption at our mines, some of which are hedges which matured within the year. These contracts are now being designated as hedging instruments as a result of adopting IFRS 9 and did not qualify for hedge accounting prior to January 1, 2015. In total, we have 4,988 thousand barrels of WTI designated as cash flow hedges of our exposure to forecasted fuel purchases at our mines.

Non-hedge Derivatives

During the year, we entered into a contract to purchase 294 thousand barrels of Brent to economically hedge our exposure to forecasted fuel purchases for expected consumption at our mines. In total, on a combined basis we have 466 thousand barrels of Brent swaps outstanding that economically hedge our exposure to forecasted fuel purchases at our mines.

During the year, we did not write any fuel options. As a result, there are no outstanding notional amounts to report at December 31, 2015.

Metals Contracts

Cash Flow Hedges

During 2013, we purchased 251 million pounds of copper collars for 2014 which matured evenly throughout 2014. These contracts contained purchased put and sold call options with weighted average strike prices of $3.00/lb and $3.75/lb, respectively. At December 31, 2014, there are no remaining positions classified as cash flow hedges or

economic hedges of our Zaldívar mine. Previously, these contracts were designated as cash flow hedges, with the effective portion of the hedge recognized in OCI and the ineffective portion, together with the changes in time value, recognized in non-hedge derivative gains (losses). Provided that the spot copper price remained within the collar band, any unrealized gain (loss) on the collar was attributable to time value.

During 2014, we recorded unrealized losses on our copper collars of $6 million to changes in time value. This was included in current period earnings as losses on non-hedge derivative activities. Gains and losses from hedge ineffectiveness and time value of options, which are generally excluded, are recognized in the consolidated statement of income as gains on non-hedge derivatives.

During 2013, we early terminated 65 million ounces of silver hedges. We realized net cash proceeds of approximately $190 million with $16 million remaining crystallized in OCI at December 31, 2015, to be recognized in revenue as the exposure occurs. Any unrealized changes and realized gains/losses on ineffective amounts or time value have been recognized in the consolidated statements of income as gains on non-hedge derivatives.

Non-Hedge Derivatives

We enter into purchased and written contracts with the primary objective of increasing the realized price on some of our gold sales. During the year, we did not write any metal options. As a result, there are no outstanding notional amounts to report at December 31, 2015.

Cash Flow Hedge Gains (Losses) in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (“AOCI”)


E Gains (Losses) on Non-hedge Derivatives
For the years ended December 31	2015		2014

Commodity contracts
Gold		$ -		$1
Silver		5		-
Copper		-		3
Fuel		(10)		(181)
Currency contracts		(8)		(8)
Interest rate contracts		-		2
		$ (13)		$ (183)

Gains (losses) attributable to copper option collar hedges¹		$ -		$ (6)
Gains (losses) attributable to currency option collar hedges¹		-		1
Hedge ineffectiveness		(25)		(5)
		$ (25)		$ (10)
		$ (38)		$ (193)

¹	Represents unrealized gains (losses) attributable to changes in time value of the collars, which were excluded from the hedge effectiveness assessment in 2014.

F Derivative Assets and Liabilities


	2015		2014
At January 1		$ (278)		$ (59)
Derivatives cash (inflow) outflow
Operating activities		211		14
Financing activities		-		(9)
Change in fair value of:
Non-hedge derivatives		(13)		(183)
Cash flow hedges:
Effective portion		(177)		(41)
Ineffective portion		25		5
Excluded from effectiveness changes		(31)		(5)
At December 31		$ (263)		$ (278)
Classification:
Other current assets		$ -		$ 7
Other long-term assets		1		2
Other current liabilities		(160)		(158)
Other long-term obligations		(104)		(129)
		$ (263)		$ (278)

currency swap curves and CDS rates. The fair value of commodity forward contracts is determined by discounting contractual cash flows using a discount rate derived from observed LIBOR and swap rate curves and CDS rates. Contractual cash flows are calculated using a forward pricing curve derived from observed forward prices for each commodity. Derivative instruments are classified within Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy.

Receivables from Provisional Copper and Gold Sales

The fair value of receivables arising from copper and gold sales contracts that contain provisional pricing mechanisms is determined using the appropriate quoted forward price from the exchange that is the principal active market for the particular metal. As such, these receivables, which meet the definition of an embedded derivative, are classified within Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy.

Other Long-Term Assets

The fair value of property, plant and equipment, goodwill, intangibles and other assets is determined primarily using an income approach based on unobservable cash flows and a market multiples approach where applicable, and as a result is classified within Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy. Refer to note 20 for disclosure of inputs used to develop these measures.

26 > PROVISIONS

A Provisions


	As at Dec. 31,		As at Dec. 31,
	2015		2014

Environmental rehabilitation (“PER”)		$ 1,920		$ 2,375
Post-retirement benefits		86		103
Share-based payments		24		21
Other employee benefits		46		33
Other		26		29

		$ 2,102		$ 2,561

B Environmental Rehabilitation


	2015		2014

At January 1		$ 2,484		$ 2,359
PERs divested during the year		(170)		(17)
PERs arising (decreasing) in the year		(229)		125
Impact of revisions to expected cash flows recorded in earnings		38		58
Settlements
Cash payments		(89)		(108)
Settlement gains		(6)		(8)
Accretion		63		75
Assets held for sale		(109)		-
At December 31		$ 1,982		$ 2,484
Current portion (note 23)		(62)		(109)
		$ 1,920		$ 2,375

The eventual settlement of all PERs is expected to take place between 2015 and 2054.

The PER has decreased in fourth quarter 2015 by $162 million primarily due to changes in cost estimates, partially offset by changes in discount rates. For the year ended December 31, 2015, our PER balance decreased by $502 million as a result of divestments as well as various impacts at our mine sites including new requirements related to water treatment, expanded footprints of our operations and updated estimates for reclamation activities. A 1% increase in the discount rate would result in a decrease in PER by $286 million and a 1% decrease in the discount rate would result in an increase in PER by $374 million, while holding the other assumptions constant.

Our financial instruments are comprised of financial liabilities and financial assets. Our principal financial liabilities, other than derivatives, comprise accounts payable and debt. The main purpose of these financial instruments is to manage short-term cash flow and raise funds for our capital expenditure program. Our principal financial assets, other than derivative instruments, are cash and equivalents and accounts receivable, which arise directly from our operations. In the normal course of business, we use derivative instruments to mitigate exposure to various financial risks.

We manage our exposure to key financial risks in accordance with our financial risk management policy. The objective of the policy is to support the delivery of our financial targets while protecting future financial security. The main risks that could adversely affect our financial assets, liabilities or future cash flows are as follows:

a)	Market risk, including commodity price risk, foreign currency and interest rate risk;

b)	Credit risk;

c)	Liquidity risk; and

d)	Capital risk management.

Management designs strategies for managing each of these risks, which are summarized below. Our senior management oversees the management of financial risks. Our senior management ensures that our financial risk-taking activities are governed by policies and procedures and that financial risks are identified, measured and managed in accordance with our policies and our risk appetite. All derivative activities for risk management purposes are carried out by the appropriate functions.

a) Market Risk

Market risk is the risk that changes in market factors, such as commodity prices, foreign exchange rates or interest rates, will affect the value of our financial instruments. We manage market risk by either accepting it or mitigating it through the use of derivatives and other economic hedging strategies.

Commodity Price Risk

Gold and Copper

We sell our gold and copper production in the world market. The market prices of gold and copper are the primary drivers of our profitability and ability to generate both operating and free cash flow. All of our future gold and copper production is unhedged in order to provide our

shareholders with full exposure to changes in the market gold and copper prices.

Fuel

On average we consume approximately 4 million barrels of diesel fuel annually across all our mines. Diesel fuel is refined from crude oil and is therefore subject to the same price volatility affecting crude oil prices. Therefore, volatility in crude oil prices has a significant direct and indirect impact on our production costs. To mitigate this volatility, we employ a strategy of using financial contracts to hedge our exposure to oil prices.

Foreign Currency Risk

The functional and reporting currency for all of our operating segments is the US dollar and we report our results using the US dollar. The majority of our operating and capital expenditures are denominated and settled in US dollars. We have exposure to the Australian dollar and Canadian dollar through a combination of mine operating costs and general and administrative costs; and to the Papua New Guinea kina, Peruvian sol, Chilean peso, Argentinean peso, Dominican Republic peso and Zambian kwacha through mine operating costs. Consequently, fluctuations in the US dollar exchange rate against these currencies increase the volatility of cost of sales, general and administrative costs and overall net earnings, when translated into US dollars. To mitigate these inherent risks and provide greater certainty over certain costs, we had foreign currency hedges in place for some of our Australian dollar, Canadian dollar and Chilean peso exposures. We have had a significant decrease in our hedging program over the last few years and as a result, we now have greater exposure to fluctuations in the value of the Chilean peso and Australian and Canadian dollars compared to the US dollar.

The following table shows gains (losses) associated with a 10% change in exchange rate of the Australian dollar:

Impact of a 10% change in exchange rate of Australian dollar


	Average Exchange				Effect on Net
	Rate				Earnings				Effect on Equity
	2015		2014		2015		2014		2015		2014

10% strengthening		$ 0.75		$ 0.90		$ (11)		$ (33)		$ (11)		$ (33)
10% weakening		0.75		0.90		11		33		11		33

Interest Rate Risk

Interest rate risk refers to the risk that the value of a financial instrument or cash flows associated with the instruments will fluctuate due to changes in market interest rates. Currently, our interest rate exposure mainly relates to interest receipts on our cash balances ($2.5 billion at the end of the year); the mark-to-market value of derivative instruments; the fair value and ongoing payments under US dollar interest-rate swaps; and to the interest payments on our variable-rate debt ($0.6 billion at December 31, 2015).

The following table shows the approximate interest rate sensitivities of our financial assets and liabilities as at December 31:

Impact of a 1% change in interest rate

Effect on Net Earnings

Effect on Equity

2015

2014

2015

2014

1% increase

$ 13

$ 12

$ 13

$ 12

1% decrease

(13)

(12)

(13)

(12)

b) Credit Risk

Credit risk is the risk that a third party might fail to fulfill its performance obligations under the terms of a financial instrument. Credit risk arises from cash and equivalents, trade and other receivables as well as derivative assets. For cash and equivalents and trade and other receivables, credit risk exposure equals the carrying amount on the balance sheet, net of any overdraft positions. To mitigate our inherent exposure to credit risk we maintain policies to limit the concentration of credit risk, review counterparty creditworthiness on a monthly basis, and ensure liquidity of available funds. We also invest our cash and equivalents in highly rated financial institutions, primarily within the United States and other investment grade countries¹. Furthermore, we sell our gold and copper production into the world market and to private customers with strong credit ratings. Historically customer defaults have not had a significant impact on our operating results or financial position.

For derivatives with a positive fair value, we are exposed to credit risk equal to the carrying value. When the fair value of a derivative is negative, we assume no credit risk. We mitigate credit risk on derivatives by:

●

Entering into derivatives with high credit-quality counterparties;

●

Limiting the amount of net exposure with each counterparty; and

●

Monitoring the financial condition of counterparties on a regular basis.

The Company’s maximum exposure to credit risk at the reporting date is the carrying value of each of the financial assets disclosed as follows:


	As at Dec. 31,		As at Dec. 31,
	2015		2014
Cash and equivalents		$ 2,455		$ 2,699

Accounts receivable		275		418
Net derivative assets by counterparty		-		1
		$ 2,730		$ 3,118

¹	Investment grade countries include Canada, Chile, Australia, and Peru. Investment grade countries are defined as being rated BBB- or higher by S&P.

c) Liquidity Risk

Liquidity risk is the risk of loss from not having access to sufficient funds to meet both expected and unexpected cash demands. We manage our exposure to liquidity risk by maintaining cash reserves, access to undrawn credit facilities and access to public debt markets, by staggering the maturities of outstanding debt instruments to mitigate refinancing risk and by monitoring of forecasted and actual cash flows. Details of the undrawn credit facility are included in note 24.

Our capital structure comprises a mix of debt and shareholders’ equity. As at December 31, 2015, our total debt was $10.0 billion (debt net of cash and equivalents was $7.5 billion) compared to total debt as at December 31, 2014 of $13.1 billion (debt net of cash and equivalents was $10.4 billion).

As part of our capital allocation strategy, we are constantly evaluating our capital expenditures and making reductions where the risk-adjusted returns do not justify the investment. Our primary source of liquidity is our operating cash flow. Other options to enhance liquidity include drawing the $4.0 billion available under our Credit Facility (subject to compliance with covenants and the making of certain representations and warranties, this facility is available for drawdown as a source of financing), further asset sales and issuances of debt or equity securities in the public markets or to private investors, which could be undertaken for liquidity enhancement and/or in connection with establishing a strategic partnership. Many factors, including, but not limited to, general market conditions and then prevailing metals prices could impact our ability to issue securities on acceptable terms, as could our credit ratings. Moody’s and S&P rate

d) Capital Risk Management

Our objective when managing capital is to provide value for shareholders by maintaining an optimal short-term and long-term capital structure in order to reduce the overall cost of capital while preserving our ability to continue as a going concern. Our capital management objectives are to safeguard our ability to support our operating requirements on an ongoing basis, continue the development and exploration of our mineral properties and support any expansion plans. Our objectives are also to ensure that we maintain a strong balance sheet and optimize the use of debt and equity to support our business and provide financial flexibility in order to maximize shareholder value. We define capital as total debt less cash and equivalents and it is managed by management subject to approved policies and limits by the Board of Directors. We have no significant financial covenants or capital requirements with our lenders or other parties other than what is discussed under liquidity risk in note 27.

28 > OTHER NON-CURRENT LIABILITIES


	As at Dec. 31, 2015		As at Dec. 31, 2014
Deposit on silver sale agreement		$716		$668
Deposit on gold and silver streaming agreement		565		-

Derivative liabilities (note 24f)		104		129

Deferred revenue		2		85
Provision for supply contract restructuring costs		-		8
Provision for offsite remediation		55		56
Other		144		239
		$ 1,586		$ 1,185

Silver Sale Agreement

Our silver sale agreement with Silver Wheaton Corp. (“Silver Wheaton”) requires us to deliver 25 percent of the life of mine silver production from the Pascua-Lama project and 100 percent of silver production from the Lagunas Norte, Pierina and Veladero mines (“South American mines”) until the end of 2018. In return, we were entitled to an upfront cash payment of $625 million payable over three years from the date of the agreement, as well as ongoing payments in cash of the lesser of $3.90 (subject to an annual inflation adjustment of 1 percent starting three years after project completion at Pascua-Lama) and the prevailing market price for each ounce of silver delivered under the agreement.

An imputed interest expense is being recorded on the liability at the rate implicit in the agreement. The liability plus imputed interest will be amortized based on the difference between the effective contract price for silver and the amount of the ongoing cash payment per ounce of silver delivered under the agreement.

Gold and Silver Streaming Agreement

On September 29, 2015, we closed a gold and silver streaming transaction with Royal Gold, Inc. (“Royal Gold”) for production linked to Barrick’s 60 percent interest in the Pueblo Viejo mine. Royal Gold made an upfront cash payment of $610 million and will continue to make cash payments for gold and silver delivered under the agreement. The $610 million upfront payment is not repayable and Barrick is obligated to deliver gold and silver based on Pueblo Viejo’s production. We have accounted for the upfront payment as deferred revenue and will recognize it in earnings, along with the ongoing cash payments, as the gold and silver is delivered to Royal Gold. We will also be recording accretion expense on the deferred revenue balance as the time value of the upfront deposit represents a significant component of the transaction.

Under the terms of the agreement, Barrick will sell gold and silver to Royal Gold equivalent to:

●

7.5 percent of Barrick’s interest in the gold produced at Pueblo Viejo until 990,000 ounces of gold have been delivered, and 3.75 percent thereafter.

●

75 percent of Barrick’s interest in the silver produced at Pueblo Viejo until 50 million ounces have been delivered, and 37.5 percent thereafter. Silver will be delivered based on a fixed recovery rate of 70 percent. Silver above this recovery rate is not subject to the stream.

Barrick will receive ongoing cash payments from Royal Gold equivalent to 30 percent of the prevailing spot prices for the first 550,000 ounces of gold and 23.1 million ounces of silver delivered. Thereafter payments will double to 60 percent of prevailing spot prices for each subsequent ounce of gold and silver delivered. Ongoing cash payments to Barrick are tied to prevailing spot prices rather than fixed in advance, maintaining exposure to higher gold and silver prices in the future.

29 > DEFERRED INCOME TAXES

Recognition and Measurement

We record deferred income tax assets and liabilities where temporary differences exist between the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities in our balance sheet and their tax bases. The measurement and recognition of deferred income tax assets and liabilities takes into account: substantively enacted rates that will apply when temporary differences reverse; interpretations of relevant tax legislation; estimates of the tax bases of assets and liabilities; and the deductibility of expenditures for income tax purposes. In addition, the measurement and recognition of deferred tax assets takes into account tax planning strategies. We recognize the effect of changes in our assessment of these estimates and factors when they occur. Changes in deferred income tax assets and liabilities are allocated between net income, other comprehensive income, and goodwill based on the source of the change.

Current income taxes of $89 million have been provided on the undistributed earnings of certain foreign subsidiaries. Deferred income taxes have not been provided on the undistributed earnings of all other foreign subsidiaries for which we are able to control the timing of the remittance, and it is probable that there will be no remittance in the foreseeable future. These undistributed earnings amounted to $2,500 million as at December 31, 2015.

Sources of Deferred Income Tax Assets and Liabilities


	As at Dec. 31, 2015		As at Dec. 31, 2014
Deferred tax assets

Tax loss carry forwards		$ 475		$ 369
Alternative minimum tax (“AMT”) credits		22		11

Environmental rehabilitation		560		586

Property, plant and equipment		320		81
Post-retirement benefit obligations and other employee benefits		42		73

Accrued interest payable		61		51

Derivative instruments		106		32

Other		52		55

		$ 1,638		$ 1,258

Deferred tax liabilities

Property, plant and equipment		(1,713)		(2,216)
Inventory		(438)		(404)
		$ (513)		$ (1,362)
Classification:
Non-current assets		$ 1,040		$ 674

Non-current liabilities		(1,553)		(2,036)
		$ (513)		$ (1,362)

The deferred tax asset of $1,040 million includes $925 million expected to be realized in more than one year. The deferred tax liability of $1,553 million includes $1,351 million expected to be realized in more than one year.

Expiry Dates of Tax Losses and AMT Credits


	2016		2017		2018		2019		2020+		No expiry date		Total
Non-capital tax losses¹
Canada		$ -		$ -		$ -		$-		$1,539		$ -		$1,539
Dominican Republic		-		-		-		-		-		47		47
Barbados		627		148		4,751		926		725		-		7,177
Chile		-		-		-		-		-		666		666
Tanzania		-		-		-		-		-		179		179
Zambia		-		-		186		-		416		-		602
Other		9		5		7		-		-		461		482
		$636		$153		$4,944		$926		$2,680		$1,353		$10,692
AMT credits²												$134		$134

¹	Represents the gross amount of tax loss carry forwards translated at closing exchange rates at December 31, 2015.

²	Represents the amounts deductible against future taxes payable in years when taxes payable exceed “minimum tax” as defined by United States tax legislation.

The non-capital tax losses include $8,872 million of losses which are not recognized in deferred tax assets. Of these, $627 million expire in 2016, $148 million expire in 2017, $4,937 million expire in 2018, $926 million expire in 2019, $1,365 million expire in 2020 or later, and $869 million have no expiry date.

The AMT credits include $112 million which are not recognized in deferred tax assets.

Recognition of Deferred Tax Assets

We recognize deferred tax assets taking into account the effects of local tax law. Deferred tax assets are fully recognized when we conclude that sufficient positive evidence exists to demonstrate that it is probable that a deferred tax asset will be realized. The main factors considered are:

●

Historic and expected future levels of taxable income;

●

Tax plans that affect whether tax assets can be realized; and

●

The nature, amount and expected timing of reversal of taxable temporary differences.

Levels of future income are mainly affected by: market gold, copper and silver prices; forecasted future costs and expenses to produce gold and copper reserves; quantities of proven and probable gold and copper reserves; market interest rates; and foreign currency exchange rates. If these factors or other circumstances change, we record an adjustment to the recognition of deferred assets to reflect our latest assessment of the amount of deferred tax assets that is probable will be realized.

A deferred income tax asset totaling $558 million (December 31, 2014: $505 million) has been recorded in Canada. This deferred tax asset primarily arose from derivative realized losses, finance costs, and general and administrative expenses. A deferred tax asset totaling $116 million (December 31, 2014: $nil) has been recorded in a foreign subsidiary. This deferred tax asset primarily arose from a realized loss on internal restructuring of subsidiary corporations. Projections of various sources of income support the conclusion that the realizability of these deferred tax assets is probable and consequently, we have fully recognized these deferred tax assets.

Deferred Tax Assets Not Recognized


	As at December 31, 2015		As at December 31, 2014

Australia and Papua New Guinea		$ 383		$ 367
Canada		374		371
US		113		93
Dominican Republic		18		-
Chile		787		776
Argentina		647		823
Barbados		72		68
Tanzania		131		92
Zambia		190		-
Saudi Arabia		70		67
		$ 2,785		$ 2,657

Deferred Tax Assets Not Recognized relate to: non-capital loss carry forwards of $516 million (2014: $348 million), capital loss carry forwards with no expiry date of $602 million (2014: $518 million), US AMT credits of $112 million (2014: $92 million) and other deductible temporary differences with no expiry date of $1,555 million (2014: $1,699 million).


Source of Changes in Deferred Tax Balances
For the years ended December 31	2015		2014
Temporary differences
Property, plant and equipment		$ 741		$ 228
Environmental rehabilitation		(25)		(17)
Tax loss carry forwards		106		118
AMT credits		10		2
Inventory		(34)		4
Derivatives		74		22
Other		(23)		38

		$ 849		$ 395
Intraperiod allocation to:

Loss from continuing operations before income taxes		$ 436		$ 380
Zaldívar disposition		388		-
Cowal disposition		7		-
OCI		20		15
Other		(2)		-
		$ 849		$ 395

Income Tax Related Contingent Liabilities
	2015		2014
At January 1		$ 49		$ 51

Additions based on tax positions related to the current year		13		1

Reductions for tax positions of prior years		(1)		(3)

At December 31¹		$ 61		$ 49

¹If reversed, the total amount of $61 million would be recognized as a benefit to income taxes on the income statement, and therefore would impact the reported effective tax rate.

We anticipate the amount of income tax related contingent liabilities to decrease within 12 months of the reporting date by approximately $1 million to $2 million, related primarily to the expected settlement of income tax and mining tax assessments.

We further anticipate that it is reasonably possible for the amount of income tax related contingent liabilities to decrease within 12 months of the reporting date by approximately $58 million through a potential settlement with tax authorities that may result in a reduction of available tax pools.

30 > CAPITAL STOCK

Authorized Capital Stock

Our authorized capital stock includes an unlimited number of common shares (issued 1,165,081,379 common shares); an unlimited number of first preferred shares issuable in series (the first series is designated as the “First Preferred Shares, Series A” and consists of 10,000,000 first preferred shares (issued nil); the second series is designated as the “First Preference Shares, Series B” and consists of 10,000,000 first preferred shares (issued nil); and the third series is designated as the “First Preferred Shares, Series C Special Voting Share” and consists of 1 Special Voting Share (issued nil)); and an unlimited number of second preferred shares issuable in series (the first series is designated as the “Second Preferred Shares, Series A” and consists of 15,000,000 second preferred shares (issued nil)). Our common shares have no par value.

Dividends

In 2015, we declared and paid dividends in US dollars totaling $0.14 per share, $160 million (2014: $0.20 per share, $232 million).

The Company implemented a dividend reinvestment plan in 2015 resulting in $3 million reinvested into the Company.

¹ Primarily represents the increase in non-controlling interests as a result of divestment of 10% of issued ordinary share capital of Acacia (see note 4g).

² Primarily represents disbursements made to non-controlling interest at Pueblo Viejo.

B) SUMMARIZED FINANCIAL INFORMATION ON SUBSIDIARIES WITH MATERIAL NON-CONTROLLING INTERESTS

Under the terms of Pueblo Viejo’s project financing agreement described in note 24b, Pueblo Viejo Dominicana Corporation is prohibited from making cash payments to Barrick and Goldcorp in the form of dividends or certain shareholder loan interest and principal payments until Pueblo Viejo achieves specified requirements, including requirements relating to operational, social, and environmental matters.

The project financing agreement contains covenants which limit certain activities by Pueblo Viejo Dominicana, including Pueblo Viejo’s ability to sell assets and incur debt. Furthermore, Pueblo Viejo’s material tangible and intangible assets, including the proceeds from metal sales, are segregated and pledged for the benefit of the project lenders, thus restricting our access to those assets and our ability to use those assets to settle our liabilities to third parties.

Key management personnel include the members of the Board of Directors and the Executive leadership team. Compensation for key management personnel (including Directors) was as follows:

¹ Includes annual salary and annual short-term incentives/other bonuses earned in the year.

¹ Based on the closing market share price on December 31, 2014 of C$12.52 and US$10.75.

As at December 31, 2015, there was $1 million (2014: $3 million) of total unrecognized compensation cost relating to unvested stock options. We expect to recognize this cost over a weighted average period of 1 year (2014: 1 year).

B Restricted Share Units (RSUs) and Deferred Share Units (DSUs)

Under our RSU plan, selected employees are granted RSUs where each RSU has a value equal to one Barrick common share. RSUs generally vest from two-and-a-half years to three years and are settled in cash upon vesting. Additional RSUs are credited to reflect dividends paid on Barrick common shares over the vesting period.

Compensation expense for RSUs incorporates an expected forfeiture rate. The expected forfeiture rate is estimated based on historical forfeiture rates and expectations of future forfeiture rates. We make adjustments if the actual forfeiture rate differs from the expected rate. At December 31, 2015, the weighted average remaining contractual life of RSUs was 1.37 years (2014: 1.46 years).

Compensation expense for RSUs was a$5 million credit to earnings in 2015 (2014: $8 million) and is presented as a component of corporate administration and operating segment administration, consistent with the classification of other elements of compensation expense for those employees who had RSUs.

Under our DSU plan, Directors must receive a specified portion of their basic annual retainer in the form of DSUs, with the option to elect to receive 100% of such retainer in DSUs. Officers may also elect to receive a portion or all of their incentive compensation in the form of DSUs. Each DSU has the same value as one Barrick common share. DSUs must be retained until the Director or officer leaves

the Board or Barrick, at which time the cash value of the DSUs will be paid out. Additional DSUs are credited to reflect dividends paid on Barrick common shares. DSUs are recorded at fair value on the grant date and are adjusted for changes in fair value. The fair value of amounts granted each period together with changes in fair value are expensed.

DSU and RSU Activity


	DSUs (thousands)		Fair value ($ millions)		RSUs (thousands)		Fair value ($ millions)
At January 1, 2014		201		$ 4.7		2,850		$ 29.8
Settled for cash		(53)		(0.6)		(992)		(17.2)
Forfeited		-		-		(629)		(11.5)
Granted		113		1.6		2,327		42.9
Credits for dividends		-		-		49		0.7
Change in value		-		(2.9)		-		(14.6)
At December 31, 2014		261		$ 2.8		3,605		$ 30.1
Settled for cash		(34)		(0.2)		(1,492)		(11.1)
Forfeited		-		-		(54)		(0.6)
Granted		238		2.0		4,458		48.9
Credits for dividends		-		-		110		1.0
Change in value		-		(1.1)		-		(29.0)
At December 31, 2015		465		$3.5		6,627		$39.3

C	Performance Restricted Share Units (PRSUs)

In 2008, Barrick launched a PRSU plan. Under this plan, selected employees are granted PRSUs, where each PRSU has a value equal to one Barrick common share. At December 31, 2015, 1,169 thousand units were outstanding at a fair value of $6 million (2014: 1,675 thousand units, fair value $6 million).

D	Performance Granted Share Units (PGSUs)

In 2014, Barrick launched a PGSU plan. Under this plan, selected employees are granted PGSUs, where each PGSU has a value equal to one Barrick common share. At December 31, 2015, 589 units had been granted at a fair value of $1 million (2014: nil).

E	Employee Share Purchase Plan (ESPP)

In 2008, Barrick launched an Employee Share Purchase Plan. This plan enables Barrick employees to purchase Company shares through payroll deduction. During 2015, Barrick contributed and expensed $0.4 million to this plan (2014: $0.6 million).

34 > POST-RETIREMENT BENEFITS

Barrick operates various post-employment plans, including both defined benefit and defined contribution pension plans and other post-retirement plans. The table below outlines where the Company’s post-employment amounts and activity are included in the financial statements:


For the years ended December 31	2015		2014
Balance sheet obligations for:
Defined pension benefits		$ 80		$ 96
Other post-retirement benefits		6		7

Liability in the balance sheet		$ 86		$ 103

Income statement charge included income statement for:
Defined pension benefits		$ 3		$ 3
Other post-retirement benefits		-		-

		$ 3		$ 3

Measurements for:
Defined pension benefits		$ 7		$ (29)
Other post-retirement benefits		1		(1)

		$ 8		$ (30)

The amounts recognized in the balance sheet are determined as follows:


For the years ended December 31	2015		2014
Present value of funded obligations		$ 219		$ 241
Fair value of plan assets		(201)		(218)
Deficit of funded plans		$ 18		$ 23
Present value of unfunded obligations		62		73
Total deficit of defined benefit pension plans		$ 80		$ 96
Impact of minimum funding requirement/asset ceiling		-		-
Liability in the balance sheet		$ 80		$ 96

A	Defined Benefit Pension Plans

We have qualified defined benefit pension plans that cover certain of our former United States and Canadian employees and provide benefits based on an employee’s years of service. The plans operate under similar regulatory frameworks and generally face similar risks. The majority of benefit payments are from trustee-administered funds; however, there are also a number of unfunded plans where the Company meets the benefit payment obligation as it falls due. Plan assets held in trust are governed by local regulations and practice in each country. Responsibility for governance of the plans - overseeing all aspects of the plans including investment decisions and contribution schedules - lies with the Company. We have set up pension committees to assist in the management of the plans and have also appointed experienced independent professional experts such as actuaries, custodians and trustees.

We provide post-retirement medical, dental, and life insurance benefits to certain employees in the US. All of these plans are unfunded.

The weighted average duration of the defined benefit obligation is 11 years (2014: 11 years).

Certain employees take part in defined contribution employee benefit plans and we also have a retirement plan for certain officers of the Company. Our share of contributions to these plans, which is expensed in the year it is earned by the employee, was $38 million in 2015 (2014: $42 million).

35 > CONTINGENCIES

Certain conditions may exist as of the date the financial statements are issued that may result in a loss to the Company, but which will only be resolved when one or more future events occur or fail to occur. The impact of any resulting loss from such matters affecting these financial statements and noted below may be material.

Litigation and Claims

In assessing loss contingencies related to legal proceedings that are pending against us or unasserted claims that may result in such proceedings, the Company with assistance from its legal counsel evaluate the perceived merits of any legal proceedings or unasserted claims as well as the perceived merits of the amount of relief sought or expected to be sought.

U.S. Shareholder Class Action

On December 6, 2013, lead counsel and plaintiffs in the securities class action filed a consolidated amended complaint (the “Complaint”) in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (the “Court”), on behalf of anyone who purchased the common stock of the Company between May 7, 2009, and November 1, 2013. The Complaint asserts claims against the Company and individual defendants Jamie Sokalsky, Aaron Regent, Ammar Al-Joundi, Igor Gonzales, Peter Kinver, George Potter and Sybil Veenman (collectively, the “Defendants”). The Complaint alleges that the Defendants made false and misleading statements to the investing public relating (among other things) to the cost of the Pascua-Lama project (the “Project”), the amount of time it would take before production commenced at the Project, and the environmental risks of the Project, as well as alleged internal control failures. The Complaint seeks an unspecified amount of damages.

The Complaint largely tracks the legal theories advanced in three prior complaints filed on June 5, 2013, June 14, 2013 and August 2, 2013. The Court consolidated those complaints and appointed lead counsel and lead plaintiffs for the resulting consolidated action in September 2013.

On April 1, 2015, the Court issued its ruling on the Defendants’ motion to dismiss. The Court dismissed the plaintiffs’ claims relating to the cost and scheduling of the Project. However, the Court allowed the plaintiffs’ claims relating to the environmental risks of the Project and alleged internal control failures to go forward. The Court denied Barrick’s motion for reconsideration of certain aspects of that ruling on June 2, 2015, and discovery is continuing in the case. The Company intends to vigorously defend this matter. No amounts have been recorded for

any potential liability arising from this matter, as the Company cannot reasonably predict the outcome.

Proposed Canadian Securities Class Actions

Between April and September 2014, eight proposed class actions were commenced against the Company in Canada in connection with the Pascua-Lama project. Four of the proceedings were commenced in Ontario, two were commenced in Alberta, one was commenced in Saskatchewan, and one was commenced in Quebec. The allegations in each of the eight Canadian proceedings are substantially similar to those in the Complaint filed by lead counsel and plaintiffs in the U.S. shareholder class action (see “U.S. Shareholder Class Action” above). Of the eight proposed class actions, three of the Ontario claims, both of the Alberta claims, the Quebec claim and the Saskatchewan claim have been formally served on the Company.

The first Ontario and Alberta actions were commenced by Statement of Claim on April 15, 2014 and April 17, 2014, respectively, and served on May 20, 2014 and July 29, 2014, respectively. The same law firm acts for the plaintiffs in these two proceedings, and the Statements of Claim are largely identical. Aaron Regent, Jamie Sokalsky and Ammar Al-Joundi are also named as defendants in the two actions. Both actions purport to be on behalf of anyone who, during the period from May 7, 2009 to May 23, 2013, purchased Barrick securities in Canada. Both actions seek $4.3 billion in general damages and $350 million in special damages for alleged misrepresentations in the Company’s public disclosure. The first Alberta action was discontinued by plaintiffs’ counsel on June 26, 2015.

The second Ontario action was commenced by Notice of Action on April 24, 2014, and the Statement of Claim was served on May 27, 2014. Aaron Regent, Jamie Sokalsky, Ammar Al-Joundi and Peter Kinver are also named as defendants. Following a September 8, 2014 amendment to the Statement of Claim, this action purports to be on behalf of anyone who acquired Barrick securities during the period from October 29, 2010 to October 30, 2013, and seeks $3 billion in damages for alleged misrepresentations in the Company’s public disclosure. The amended claim also reflects the addition of a law firm that previously acted as counsel in a third Ontario action, which was commenced by Notice of Action on April 28, 2014 and included similar allegations but was never served and is not expected to be pursued.

The Quebec action was commenced and served on April 30, 2014. Aaron Regent, Jamie Sokalsky, Ammar Al-Joundi and Peter Kinver are also named as defendants. This action purports to be on behalf of any person who resides

in Quebec and acquired Barrick securities during the period from May 7, 2009 to November 1, 2013. The action seeks unspecified damages for alleged misrepresentations in the Company’s public disclosure.

The second Alberta action was commenced by Statement of Claim on May 23, 2014, and served on June 6, 2014. Aaron Regent, Jamie Sokalsky, Ammar Al-Joundi and Peter Kinver are also named as defendants. This action purports to be on behalf of any person who acquired Barrick securities during the period from May 7, 2009 to November 1, 2013, and seeks $6 billion in damages for alleged misrepresentations in the Company’s public disclosure.

The Saskatchewan action was commenced by Statement of Claim on May 26, 2014, and served on May 28, 2014. Aaron Regent, Jamie Sokalsky, Ammar Al-Joundi and Peter Kinver are also named as defendants. This action purports to be on behalf of any person who acquired Barrick securities during the period from May 7, 2009 to November 1, 2013, and seeks $6 billion in damages for alleged misrepresentations in the Company’s public disclosure.

The fourth Ontario action was commenced on September 5, 2014. Aaron Regent, Jamie Sokalsky, Ammar Al-Joundi and Peter Kinver are also named as defendants. This action purports to be on behalf of any person who acquired Barrick securities during the period from May 7, 2009 to November 1, 2013 in Canada. The action seeks $3 billion in damages plus an unspecified amount for alleged misrepresentations in the Company’s public disclosure. The Statement of Claim was amended on October 20, 2014, to include two additional law firms, one of which is acting as counsel in the first Ontario action referred to above. The Amended Statement of Claim was served on October 22, 2014.

In November 2014, an Ontario court heard a motion to determine which of the competing counsel groups will take the lead in the Ontario litigation. On December 10, 2014, the court issued a decision in favor of the counsel group that commenced the first and fourth Ontario actions, which will be consolidated in a single action. On May 21, 2015, the Divisional Court affirmed the lower court’s decision. The losing counsel group sought and obtained leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal for Ontario. The appeal is scheduled to be heard in April 2016.

The Company intends to vigorously defend all of the proposed Canadian securities class actions. No amounts have been recorded for any potential liability arising from any of the proposed class actions, as the Company cannot reasonably predict the outcome.

Pascua-Lama – SMA Regulatory Sanctions

In May 2013, Compañía Minera Nevada (“CMN”), Barrick’s Chilean subsidiary that holds the Chilean portion of the Pascua-Lama project (the “Project”), received a Resolution (the “Resolution”) from Chile’s environmental regulator (the Superintendencia del Medio Ambiente, or “SMA”) that requires the company to complete the water management system for the Project in accordance with the Project’s environmental permit before resuming construction activities in Chile. The Resolution also required CMN to pay an administrative fine of approximately $16 million for deviations from certain requirements of the Project’s Chilean environmental approval, including a series of reporting requirements and instances of non-compliance related to the Project’s water management system. CMN paid the administrative fine in May 2013.

In June 2013, CMN began engineering studies to review the Project’s water management system in accordance with the Resolution. These studies indicate that an increase in the capacity of the final water management system for the Project may be required above the volume approved in the Project’s Chilean environmental approval. The studies were suspended in the second half of 2015 as a result of CMN’s decision to file a temporary and partial closure plan for the Project (for more information about this plan, see “Pascua-Lama – Constitutional Protection Action” below) and the fact that CMN is currently modifying certain aspects of the existing water management system. An increase in the capacity of the final water management system may require a new environmental approval and the construction of additional water management facilities, which could impact the schedule and estimated budget for completion of water management activities in Chile to the satisfaction of the authorities.

In June 2013, a group of local farmers and indigenous communities challenged the Resolution. The challenge, which was brought in the Environmental Court of Santiago, Chile (the “Environmental Court”), claims that the fine was inadequate and requests more severe sanctions against CMN including the revocation of the Project’s environmental permit. The SMA presented its defense of the Resolution in July 2013. On August 2, 2013, CMN joined as a party to this proceeding and vigorously defended the Resolution. On March 3, 2014, the Environmental Court annulled the Resolution and remanded the matter back to the SMA for further consideration in accordance with its decision (the “Environmental Court Decision”). In particular, the Environmental Court ordered the SMA to issue a new administrative decision that recalculates the amount of the fine to be paid by CMN using a different methodology and addresses certain other errors it

identified in the Resolution. A new resolution from the SMA could include more severe sanctions against CMN such as a material increase in the amount of the fine above the approximately $16 million imposed by the SMA in May 2013 and/or the revocation of the Project’s environmental permit. The Environmental Court did not annul the portion of the SMA Resolution that required the Company to halt construction on the Chilean side of the project until the water management system is completed in accordance with the project’s environmental permit. On December 30, 2014, the Chilean Supreme Court declined to consider CMN’s appeal of the Environmental Court Decision on procedural grounds. As a result of the Supreme Court’s ruling, on April 22, 2015, the SMA reopened the administrative proceeding against CMN in accordance with the Environmental Court Decision.

On May 14, 2015, CMN filed a petition to limit the scope of the new administrative proceeding to the original allegations considered by the environmental regulator at the time it issued the Resolution and to assert additional defenses. CMN presented supporting documents and witness testimony in January 2016 in response to an order from the SMA. The SMA also conducted a site visit in January 2016. A final resolution from the SMA in this matter is pending.

Also on April 22, 2015, CMN was notified that the SMA has initiated a new administrative proceeding for alleged deviations from certain requirements of the Project’s environmental approval, including with respect to the Project’s environmental impact and a series of monitoring requirements. In May 2015, CMN submitted a compliance program to address certain of the allegations and presented its defense to the remainder of the alleged deviations. The SMA rejected CMN’s proposed compliance program on June 24, 2015, and denied CMN’s administrative appeal of that decision on July 31, 2015. CMN appealed the SMA’s decision to the Environmental Court, which held a hearing on November 26, 2015. Decisions are pending from the Environmental Court with respect to CMN’s appeal and from the SMA with respect to CMN’s defense to the remainder of the alleged deviations. The new administrative proceeding against CMN is separate from the original administrative proceeding described above, and could result in additional sanctions including new administrative fines and/or the revocation of the Project’s environmental permit.

The Company has recorded an estimated amount for the potential liability arising from administrative fines in these matters. In the Company’s view, it would be prejudicial to disclose the amount of that estimate as the proceedings

are ongoing and the SMA has not issued any additional proposed administrative fines.

Pascua-Lama – Constitutional Protection Action

CMN filed a temporary and partial closure plan for the Pascua-Lama project (the “Temporary Closure Plan”) with the Chilean mining authority (Sernageomin) on August 31, 2015. Sernageomin approved the Temporary Closure Plan on September 29, 2015, and issued a resolution requiring CMN to comply with certain closure-related maintenance and monitoring obligations for a period of two years. The Temporary Closure Plan does not address certain facilities, including the Project’s water management system, which remain subject to the requirements of the Project’s original environmental approval and other regulations.

On December 4, 2015, a constitutional protection action was filed in the Court of Appeals of Santiago, Chile by a group of local farmers and other individuals against CMN and Sernageomin in order to challenge the Temporary Closure Plan and the resolution that approved it. The plaintiffs assert that the Temporary Closure Plan cannot be approved until the water management system for the Project has been completed in accordance with the Project’s environmental permit. The action has been admitted for review by the court, which is expected to schedule a hearing in this matter prior to issuing a decision. The Company intends to vigorously defend this matter. No amounts have been recorded for any potential liability arising from this matter, as the Company cannot reasonably predict the outcome.

Veladero

On September 13, 2015, a valve on a leach pad pipeline at the Company’s Veladero mine in San Juan Province, Argentina failed, resulting in a release of cyanide-bearing process solution into a nearby waterway through a diversion channel gate that was open at the time of the incident. Minera Argentina Gold S.A. (“MAGSA”), Barrick’s Argentine subsidiary that operates the Veladero mine, notified regulatory authorities of the situation. Environmental monitoring was conducted by MAGSA and independent third parties following the incident. The Company believes this monitoring demonstrates that the incident posed no risk to human health at downstream communities. A temporary restriction on the addition of new cyanide to the mine’s processing circuit was lifted on September 24, 2015, and mine operations have returned to normal. Monitoring and inspection of the mine site will continue in accordance with a court order.

On October 9, 2015, the San Juan mining authority initiated an administrative sanction process against MAGSA for

alleged violations of the mining code relating to the valve failure and release of cyanide-bearing process solution. MAGSA submitted its response to these allegations in October 2015 and provided additional information in January 2016. This process is expected to result in a fine. A decision from the San Juan mining authority is pending. No amounts have been recorded for any potential liability under this matter, as the Company cannot reasonably predict the outcome.

Pueblo Viejo – Amparo Action

In October 2014, Pueblo Viejo Dominicana Corporation (“PVDC”) received a copy of an action filed in an administrative court (the “Administrative Court”) in the Dominican Republic by Rafael Guillen Beltre (the “Petitioner”), who claims to be affiliated with the Dominican Christian Peace Organization. The action alleges that environmental contamination in the vicinity of the Pueblo Viejo mine has caused illness and affected water quality in violation of the Petitioner’s fundamental rights under the Dominican Constitution and other laws. The primary relief sought in the action, which is styled as an “Amparo” remedy, is the suspension of operations at the Pueblo Viejo mine as well as other mining projects in the area until an investigation into the alleged environmental contamination has been completed by the relevant governmental authorities. On November 21, 2014, the Administrative Court granted PVDC’s motion to remand the matter to a trial court in the Municipality of Cotuí (the “Trial Court”) on procedural grounds. On June 25, 2015, the Trial Court rejected the Petitioner’s amparo action, finding that the Petitioner failed to produce evidence to support his allegations. The Petitioner appealed the Trial Court’s decision to the Constitutional Court on July 21, 2015. On July 28, 2015, PVDC filed a motion to challenge the timeliness of this appeal as it was submitted after the expiration of the applicable filing deadline. The Company intends to vigorously defend this matter. No amounts have been recorded for any potential liability or asset impairment arising from this matter, as the Company cannot reasonably predict any potential losses.

Argentine Glacier Legislation and Constitutional Litigation

On September 30, 2010, the National Law on Minimum Requirements for the Protection of Glaciers was enacted in Argentina, and came into force in early November 2010. The federal law bans new mining exploration and exploitation activities on glaciers and in the “peri-glacial” environment, and subjects ongoing mining activities to an environmental audit. If such audit identifies significant impacts on glaciers and peri-glacial environment, the relevant authority is empowered to take action, which according to the legislation could include the suspension or

relocation of the activity. In the case of the Veladero mine and the Pascua-Lama project, the competent authority is the Province of San Juan. In late January 2013, the Province announced that it had completed the required environmental audit, which concluded that Veladero and Pascua-Lama do not impact glaciers or peri-glaciers.

The constitutionality of the federal glacier law is the subject of a challenge before the National Supreme Court of Argentina, which has not yet ruled on the issue. On October 27, 2014, the Company submitted its response to a motion by the federal government to dismiss the constitutional challenge to the federal glacier law on standing grounds. A decision on the motion is pending. If the federal government’s arguments with respect to standing are accepted then the case will be dismissed. If they are not accepted then the National Supreme Court of Argentina will proceed to hear evidence on the merits. No amounts have been recorded for any potential liability or asset impairment under this matter, as the Company cannot reasonably predict the outcome and in any event the provincial audit concluded that the Company’s activities do not impact glaciers or peri-glaciers.

Perilla Complaint

In 2009, Barrick Gold Inc. and Placer Dome Inc. were purportedly served in Ontario with a complaint filed in November 2008 in the Regional Trial Court of Boac (the “Court”), on the Philippine island of Marinduque, on behalf of two named individuals and purportedly on behalf of the approximately 200,000 residents of Marinduque. The complaint alleges injury to the economy and the ecology of Marinduque as a result of the discharge of mine tailings from the Marcopper mine into Calancan Bay, the Boac River, and the Mogpog River. The plaintiffs are claiming for abatement of a public nuisance allegedly caused by the tailings discharge and for nominal damages for an alleged violation of their constitutional right to a balanced and healthful ecology. In June 2010, Barrick Gold Inc. and Placer Dome Inc. filed a motion to have the Court resolve their unresolved motions to dismiss before considering the plaintiffs’ motion to admit an amended complaint and also filed an opposition to the plaintiffs’ motion to admit on the same basis. It is not known when these motions or the outstanding motions to dismiss will be decided by the Court. The Company intends to defend the action vigorously. No amounts have been recorded for any potential liability under this complaint, as the Company cannot reasonably predict the outcome.

Writ of Kalikasan

In February 2011, a Petition for the Issuance of a Writ of Kalikasan with Prayer for Temporary Environmental Protection Order was filed in the Supreme Court of the Republic of the Philippines (the “Supreme Court”) in Eliza M. Hernandez, Mamerto M. Lanete and Godofredo L. Manoy versus Placer Dome Inc. and Barrick Gold Corporation (the “Petition”). In March 2011, the Supreme Court issued an En Banc Resolution and Writ of Kalikasan, directed service of summons on Placer Dome Inc. and the Company, ordered Placer Dome Inc. and the Company to make a verified return of the Writ with ten (10) days of service and referred the case to the Court of Appeal for hearing. The Petition alleges that Placer Dome Inc. violated the petitioners’ constitutional right to a balanced and healthful ecology as a result of, among other things, the discharge of tailings into Calancan Bay, the 1993 Maguila-Guila dam break, the 1996 Boac river tailings spill and failure of Marcopper to properly decommission the Marcopper mine. The petitioners have pleaded that the Company is liable for the alleged actions and omissions of Placer Dome Inc., which was a minority indirect shareholder of Marcopper at all relevant times, and is seeking orders requiring the Company to environmentally remediate the areas in and around the mine site that are alleged to have sustained environmental impacts. The petitioners purported to serve the Company in March 2011, following which the Company filed an Urgent Motion For Ruling on Jurisdiction with the Supreme Court challenging the constitutionality of the Rules of Procedure in Environmental Cases (the “Environmental Rules”) pursuant to which the Petition was filed, as well as the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court over the Company. In November 2011, two local governments, or “baranguays” (Baranguay San Antonio and Baranguay Lobo) filed a motion with the Supreme Court seeking intervenor status with the intention of seeking a dismissal of the proceedings. No decision has as yet been issued with respect to the Urgent Motion for Ruling on Jurisdiction, the motion for intervention, or certain other matters before the Supreme Court. The Company intends to continue to defend the action vigorously. No amounts have been recorded for any potential liability under this matter, as the Company cannot reasonably predict the outcome.

Cerro Casale

One of the environmental permits related to the open pit and water management system at the Company’s 75 percent-owned Cerro Casale project in Chile is subject to an environmental regulation (the “Regulation”) that, if applied as written, would have required the Company to begin construction of the project by January 26, 2015 or risk cancellation of the environmental permit. The Company sought relief from the Regulation as construction was not

feasible and did not begin by that date. On October 15, 2015, the Chilean environmental authority issued a resolution confirming that initial project activities were timely commenced as required by the environmental permit and the matter is now closed. Permits required for the majority of the project’s proposed operations were obtained under a second environmental approval (the “Cerro Casale environmental permit”) that is subject to a January 2018 construction deadline. The Company expects to obtain relief from this deadline through the procedure outlined above.

The Cerro Casale environmental permit was challenged in 2013 by local and indigenous community members for alleged procedural deficiencies in the community consultation process and other aspects of the evaluation of the project by the Chilean environmental authority. The challenge was brought before the Chilean cabinet, which has jurisdiction over procedural claims of this nature. On January 19, 2015, the cabinet ministers rejected the majority of claims made against the Cerro Casale environmental permit while also imposing new limitations on the volume of groundwater that the project may extract for mining operations. The Company appealed this decision to the Environmental Court, which held a hearing on August 27, 2015. A decision of the Environmental Court is pending in this matter. The Company intends to defend the action vigorously. No amounts have been recorded for any potential liability or asset impairment arising from this matter, as the Company cannot reasonably predict the outcome


Barrick Gold Corporation
For the years ended December 31 (in millions of United States dollars, except per share data)	2015			2014
Revenue (notes 5 and 6)	$	9,029		$	10,239
Costs and expenses
Cost of sales (notes 5 and 7)		6,907			6,830
General and administrative expenses (note 10)		233			385
Exploration, evaluation and project expenses (notes 5 and 8)		355			392
Impairment charges (note 9b)		3,897			4,106
Loss on currency translation		120			132
Closed mine rehabilitation		3			83
Loss from equity investees (note 15)		7			-
Loss on non-hedge derivatives (note 24e)		38			193
Other expense (income) (note 9a)		(113	)		(14	)
Loss before finance items and income taxes		(2,418	)		(1,868	)
Finance items
Finance income		13			11
Finance costs (note 13)		(739	)		(796	)
Loss before income taxes		(3,144	)		(2,653	)
Income tax recovery (expense) (note 11)		31			(306	)
Net loss	$	(3,113	)	$	(2,959	)
Attributable to:
Equity holders of Barrick Gold Corporation	$	(2,838	)	$	(2,907	)
Non-controlling interests (note 31)	$	(275	)	$	(52	)

Earnings per share data attributable to the equity holders of Barrick Gold Corporation (note 12)
Net loss
Basic	$	(2.44	)	$	(2.50	)
Diluted	$	(2.44	)	$	(2.50	)


Barrick Gold Corporation
For the years ended December 31 (in millions of United States dollars)	2015			2014
Net loss	$	(3,113	)	$	(2,959	)
Other comprehensive income (loss), net of taxes

Movement in equity investments fair value reserve:
Net unrealized change on equity investments, net of tax $nil and $nil		(11	)		18
Net realized change on equity investments, net of tax $nil and $nil		18			-
Impairment losses on equity investments, net of tax $nil and $nil		-			18

Items that may be reclassified subsequently to profit or loss:
Unrealized gains (losses) on derivatives designated as cash flow hedges, net of tax $43 and $6		(134	)		(35	)
Realized (gains) losses on derivatives designated as cash flow hedges, net of tax ($20) and ($1)		111			(88	)
Actuarial gain (loss) on post-employment benefit obligations, net of tax ($3) and $10		5			(19	)
Currency translation adjustments, net of tax $nil and $nil		(56	)		(43	)
Total other comprehensive loss		(67	)		(149	)
Total comprehensive loss	$	(3,180	)	$	(3,108	)
Attributable to:
Equity holders of Barrick Gold Corporation	$	(2,905	)	$	(3,056	)
Non-controlling interests	$	(275	)	$	(52	)


Barrick Gold Corporation
For the years ended December 31 (in millions of United States dollars)	2015			2014
OPERATING ACTIVITIES
Net loss	$	(3,113	)	$	(2,959	)
Adjustments for the following items:
Depreciation		1,771			1,648
Finance costs (note 13)		739			796
Impairment charges (note 9b)		3,897			4,106
Income tax (recovery) expense (note 11)		(31	)		306
(Increase) decrease in inventory		24			(78	)
Loss on non-hedge derivatives (note 24e)		38			193
Gain on sale of non-current assets/investments		(187	)		(52	)
Deposit on gold and silver streaming agreement (note 28)		610			-
Other operating activities (note 14a)		15			(442	)
Operating cash flows before interest and income taxes		3,763			3,518
Interest paid		(677	)		(707	)
Income taxes paid		(292	)		(515	)
Net cash provided by operating activities		2,794			2,296
INVESTING ACTIVITIES
Property, plant and equipment
Capital expenditures (note 5)		(1,713	)		(2,432	)
Sales proceeds		43			72
Proceeds from joint venture agreement of Jabal Sayid (note 4e)		-			216
Divestitures (note 4)		1,904			166
Investment sales		33			120
Other investing activities (note 14b)		(17	)		(92	)
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities		250			(1,950	)
FINANCING ACTIVITIES
Proceeds from divestment of 10% of issued ordinary share capital of Acacia (note 4g)		-			186
Debt (note 24b)
Proceeds		9			141
Repayments		(3,142	)		(188	)
Dividends (note 30)		(160	)		(232	)
Funding from non-controlling interests (note 31)		40			24
Disbursements to non-controlling interests (note 31)		(90	)		-
Other financing activities (note 14c)		68			9
Net cash used in financing activities		(3,275	)		(60	)
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash and equivalents		(13	)		(11	)
Net increase (decrease) in cash and equivalents		(244	)		275
Cash and equivalents at beginning of year (note 24a)		2,699			2,404
Add: cash and equivalents of assets classified as held for sale at the beginning of year		-			20
Cash and equivalents at the end of year	$	2,455		$	2,699
Less: cash and equivalents of assets classified as held for sale at the end of year (note 4)		-			-
Cash and equivalents excluding assets classified as held for sale at the end of year(note 24a)	$	2,455		$	2,699


Barrick Gold Corporation (in millions of United States dollars)	As at December 31, 2015			As at December 31, 2014
ASSETS
Current assets
Cash and equivalents (note 24a)	$	2,455		$	2,699
Accounts receivable (note 17)		275			418
Inventories (note 16)		1,717			2,722
Other current assets (note 17)		263			311
Total current assets (excluding assets classified as held for sale)		4,710			6,150
Assets classified as held-for-sale (note 4)		758			-
Total current assets		5,468			6,150

Non-current assets
Equity in investees (note 15)		1,199			206
Property, plant and equipment (note 18)		14,434			19,193
Goodwill (note 19a)		1,371			4,426
Intangible assets (note 19b)		271			308
Deferred income tax assets (note 29)		1,040			674
Non-current portion of inventory (note 16)		1,502			1,684
Other assets (note 21)		1,023			1,238
Total assets	$	26,308		$	33,879
LIABILITIES AND EQUITY
Current liabilities
Accounts payable (note 22)	$	1,158		$	1,653
Debt (note 24b)		203			333
Current income tax liabilities		-			84
Other current liabilities (note 23)		337			417
Total current liabilities (excluding liabilities classified as held for sale)		1,698			2,487
Liabilities classified as held-for-sale (note 4)		149			-
Total current liabilities		1,847			2,487

Non-current liabilities
Debt (note 24b)		9,765			12,748
Provisions (note 26)		2,102			2,561
Deferred income tax liabilities (note 29)		1,553			2,036
Other liabilities (note 28)		1,586			1,185
Total liabilities		16,853			21,017
Equity
Capital stock (note 30)		20,869			20,864
Deficit		(13,642	)		(10,739	)
Accumulated other comprehensive loss		(370	)		(199	)
Other		321			321
Total equity attributable to Barrick Gold Corporation shareholders		7,178			10,247
Non-controlling interests (note 31)		2,277			2,615
Total equity		9,455			12,862
Contingencies and commitments (notes 2, 16, 18 and 35)
Total liabilities and equity	$	26,308		$	33,879


Barrick Gold Corporation			Attributable to equity holders of the Company
(in millions of United States dollars)	Common Shares (in thousands)		Capital stock		Retained earnings (deficit)		Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)¹		Other²		Total equity attributable to shareholders		Non- controlling interests		Total equity
At January 1, 2015		1,164,670	$	20,864	$	(10,739)	$	(199)	$	321	$	10,247	$	2,615	$	12,862
Impact of adopting IFRS 9 on January 1, 2015 (note 24)		-		-		99		(99)		-		-		-		-
At January 1, 2015 (restated)		1,164,670	$	20,864	$	(10,640)	$	(298)	$	321	$	10,247	$	2,615	$	12,862
Net loss		-		-		(2,838)		-		-		(2,838)		(275)		(3,113)
Total other comprehensive income (loss)		-		-		5		(72)		-		(67)		-		(67)
Total comprehensive loss		-	$	-	$	(2,833)	$	(72)	$	-	$	(2,905)	$	(275)	$	(3,180)
Transactions with owners
Dividends		-		-		(160)		-		-		(160)		-		(160)
Dividend reinvestment plan		411		3		(3)		-		-		-		-		-
Recognition of stock option expense		-		2		-		-		-		2		-		2
Funding from non-controlling interests		-		-		-		-		-		-		41		41
Other decrease in non-controlling interests		-		-		-		-		-		-		(104)		(104)
Other decreases		-		-		(6)		-		-		(6)		-		(6)
Total transactions with owners		411	$	5	$	(169)	$	-	$	-	$	(164)	$	(63)	$	(227)
At December 31, 2015		1,165,081	$	20,869	$	(13,642)	$	(370)	$	321	$	7,178	$	2,277	$	9,455

At January 1, 2014		1,164,652	$	20,869	$	(7,581)	$	(69)	$	314	$	13,533	$	2,468	$	16,001
Net loss		-		-		(2,907)		-		-		(2,907)		(52)		(2,959)
Total other comprehensive loss		-		-		(19)		(130)		-		(149)		-		(149)
Total comprehensive loss		-	$	-	$	(2,926)	$	(130)	$	-	$	(3,056)	$	(52)	$	(3,108)
Transactions with owners
Dividends		-		-		(232)		-		-		(232)		-		(232)
Issued on exercise of stock options		18		-		-		-		-		-		-		-
De-recognition of stock option expense		-		(5)		-		-		-		(5)		-		(5)
Recognized on divestment of 10% of Acacia Mining plc		-		-		-		-		7		7		174		181
Funding from non-controlling interests		-		-		-		-		-		-		29		29
Other decrease in non-controlling interests		-		-		-		-		-		-		(4)		(4)
Total transactions with owners		18	$	(5)	$	(232)	$	-	$	7	$	(230)	$	199	$	(31)
At December 31, 2014		1,164,670	$	20,864	$	(10,739)	$	(199)	$	321	$	10,247	$	2,615	$	12,862


BARRICK YEAR END 2015		86		MANAGEMENT’S RESPONSIBILITY


BARRICK YEAR-END 2015		96		NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS


	Place of business	Entity type	Economic interest¹	Method²
Turquoise Ridge Mine³	United States	JO	75%	Our share
Kalgoorlie Mine	Australia	JO	50%	Our share
Acacia Mining plc⁴	Tanzania	Subsidiary, publicly traded	63.9%	Consolidation
Pueblo Viejo⁴	Dominican Republic	Subsidiary	60%	Consolidation
Cerro Casale Project⁴	Chile	Subsidiary	75%	Consolidation
Donlin Gold Project	United States	JO	50%	Our share
Jabal Sayid⁵	Saudi Arabia	JV	50%	Equity Method
Kabanga Project^5,6	Tanzania	JV	50%	Equity Method
Round Mountain Mine⁷	United States	JO	50%	Our share
Porgera Mine⁸	Papua New Guinea	JO	47.5%	Our share
Zaldívar^5,9	Chile	JV	50%	Equity Method
South Arturo⁴	United States	Subsidiary	60%	Consolidation


BARRICK YEAR-END 2015		100		NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS


BARRICK YEAR-END 2015		101		NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS


BARRICK YEAR-END 2015		102		NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS


BARRICK YEAR-END 2015		103		NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS


BARRICK YEAR-END 2015		107		NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS


BARRICK YEAR-END 2015		108		NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS


BARRICK YEAR-END 2015		110		NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS




John L. Thornton, Chairman		Steven J. Shapiro, Director


BARRICK YEAR-END 2015		112		NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS


			Cost of Sales
For the year ended December 31, 2015	Revenue		Direct Mining, Royalties and Community Relations		Depreciation		Exploration, Evaluation and Project Expenses		Other Expenses (Income)¹		Segment Income (Loss)

Goldstrike		$ 1,143		$ 530		$ 192		$ 9		$ 4		$ 408

Cortez		1,129		483		343		2		14		287

Pueblo Viejo		1,332		627		277		2		1		425

Lagunas Norte		673		209		169		2		8		285

Veladero		720		391		108		2		3		216

Turquoise Ridge		235		118		23		-		2		92

Porgera		506		338		37		2		4		125

Kalgoorlie		358		233		74		2		4		45

Acacia		860		694		143		26		(2)		(1)

Lumwana		501		380		60		-		8		53

Zaldívar²		528		374		50		-		-		104

Pascua-Lama		-		-		22		118		(9)		(131)

Other Mines³		1,060		658		247		5		(2)		152

		$ 9,045		$ 5,035		$ 1,745		$ 170		$ 35		$ 2,060


BARRICK YEAR-END 2015		114		NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS


			Cost of Sales
For the year ended December 31, 2014	Revenue		Direct Mining, Royalties and Community Relations		Depreciation		Exploration, Evaluation and Project Expenses		Other Expenses (Income)¹		Segment Income (Loss)

Goldstrike		$ 1,154		$ 519		$ 132		$ 1		$ 6		$ 496

Cortez		1,093		432		255		1		12		393

Pueblo Viejo		1,552		642		243		-		(2)		669

Lagunas Norte		775		243		92		2		(1)		439

Veladero		894		438		116		3		7		330

Turquoise Ridge		252		94		17		1		1		139

Porgera		644		465		80		2		13		84

Kalgoorlie		417		267		42		1		1		106

Acacia		923		564		129		18		21		191

Lumwana		515		372		98		-		5		40

Zaldívar		711		415		73		1		(2)		224

Pascua-Lama		-		-		14		113		(12)		(115)

Other Mines³		1,282		785		304		54		(17)		156

		$ 10,212		$ 5,236		$ 1,595		$ 197		$ 32		$ 3,152


Reconciliation of Segment Income to Loss from Continuing Operations Before Income Taxes

For the years ended December 31	2015	2014

Segment income	$ 2,060	$ 3,152

Other revenue¹	10	27

Other cost of sales/amortization^1,2	(156)	1

Exploration, evaluation and project expenses not attributable to segments	(185)	(195)

General and administrative expenses	(233)	(385)

Other (expense) income not attributable to segments	90	(5)

Impairment charges	(3,897)	(4,106)

Loss on currency translation	(120)	(132)

Closed mine rehabilitation	(3)	(83)

Finance income	13	11

Finance costs (includes non-segment accretion)	(685)	(745)

Loss on non-hedge derivatives	(38)	(193)

Loss before income taxes	$ (3,144)	$ (2,653)


	Segment Capital Expenditures¹
	For the year ended Dec. 31, 2015		For the year ended Dec. 31, 2014

Goldstrike		$ 160		$ 558

Cortez		148		189

Pueblo Viejo		102		134

Lagunas Norte		67		82

Veladero		242		173

Turquoise Ridge		32		30

Porgera		93		33

Kalgoorlie		34		66

Acacia		177		254

Lumwana		99		181

Zaldívar		85		111

Pascua-Lama		(81)		195

Other Mines		235		189

Segment total		$ 1,393		$ 2,195

Other items not allocated to segments		116		69

Total		$ 1,509		$ 2,264


BARRICK YEAR-END 2015		118		NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS


BARRICK YEAR-END 2015		119		NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS


BARRICK YEAR-END 2015		121		NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS


A Operating Cash Flows - Other Items

For the years ended December 31	2015		2014

Adjustments for non-cash income statement items:
Loss on currency translation		$ 120		$ 132
RSU expense		16		8
Stock option expense (recovery)		2		(5)
Loss from investment in equity investees (note 15)		7		-
Change in estimate of rehabilitation costs at closed mines		3		83
Inventory impairment charges (note 16)		285		121
Cash flow arising from changes in:
Accounts receivable		81		(24)
Other current assets		10		(177)
Accounts payable		(35)		(329)
Other current liabilities		(148)		141
Other assets and liabilities		(237)		(284)
Settlement of rehabilitation obligations		(89)		(108)

Other net operating activities		$ 15		$ (442)


B Investing Cash Flows – Other Items

For the years ended December 31	2015		2014
Value added tax recoverable on project capital expenditures		$ -		$ (66)
Other		(17)		(26)

Other net investing activities		$ (17)		$ (92)

Investing cash flow includes payments for:
Capitalized interest (note 24)		$ 15		$ 29


C Financing Cash Flows – Other Items

For the years ended December 31		2015		2014

Gain on debt extinguishment		$ 68		$ -
Derivative settlements		-		9

Other net financing activities		$ 68		$ 9


BARRICK YEAR-END 2015		122		NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS


BARRICK YEAR-END 2015		123		NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS


Reconciliation of Summarized Financial Information to Carrying Value	Jabal Sayid Zaldívar
Opening net assets		$ 111	$ 2,010
Loss for the period		-	(6)
Closing net assets, December 31		$ 111	$ 2,004
Barrick’s share of net assets (50%)		55	1,002
Working capital adjustments		-	(12)
Goodwill recognition		123	-
Carrying value		$ 178	$ 990


BARRICK YEAR-END 2015		124		NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS


BARRICK YEAR-END 2015		125		NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS


	As at Dec. 31, 2015		As at Dec. 31, 2014

Accounts receivable
Amounts due from concentrate sales		$ 76		$ 98
Amounts due from copper cathode sales		-		86
Receivable from Dominican Republic government²		47		109
Working capital adjustments held in escrow		20		-
Other receivables		132		125

		$ 275		$ 418

Other current assets
Derivative assets (note 24f)		$ -		$ 7
Goods and services taxes recoverable¹		199		208
Prepaid expenses		46		62
Other		18		34

		$ 263		$ 311


BARRICK YEAR-END 2015		126		NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS


	Buildings, plant and equipment		Mining property costs subject to depreciation^1,3		Mining property costs not subject to depreciation^1,2		Total

At January 1, 2014
Cost		$ 13,817		$ 20,769		$ 16,602		$ 51,188
Accumulated depreciation and impairments		(7,607)		(12,218)		(9,675)		(29,500)

Net carrying amount - January 1, 2014		$ 6,210		$ 8,551		$ 6,927		$ 21,688

Additions⁴		190		301		2,048		2,539
Capitalized interest		-		2		28		30
Disposals		(36)		(15)		(523)		(574)
Depreciation		(933)		(891)		-		(1,824)
Impairment charges		(105)		(422)		(2,139)		(2,666)
Transfers⁵		1,357		738		(2,095)		-

At December 31, 2014		$ 6,683		$ 8,264		$ 4,246		$ 19,193

At December 31, 2014
Cost		$ 15,273		$ 21,803		$ 16,060		$ 53,136
Accumulated depreciation and impairments		(8,590)		(13,539)		(11,814)		(33,943)

Net carrying amount - December 31, 2014		$ 6,683		$ 8,264		$ 4,246		$ 19,193


BARRICK YEAR-END 2015		127		NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS


	Closing balance December 31, 2013		Impairments		Reallocation¹		Disposals		Closing balance December 31, 2014
Goldstrike		$ 730		$ -		$ -		$ -		$ 730
Cortez		869		-		-		-		869
Pueblo Viejo		412		-		-		-		412
Lagnunas Norte		247		-		-		-		247
Veladero		195		-		-		-		195
North America Portfolio		758		-		(758)		-		-
Turquoise Ridge		-		-		528		-		528
Hemlo		-		-		63		-		63
Bald Mountain		-		(131)		131		-		-
Round Mountain		-		(36)		36		-		-
Australia Pacific		206		-		(206)		-		-
Kalgoorlie		-		-		71		-		71
Cowal		-		-		64		-		64
Porgera		-		-		71		-		71
Copper²		2,418		(316)		(2,102)		-		-
Zaldívar		-		(712)		1,888		-		1,176
Lumwana		-		(214)		214		-		-
Total		$ 5,835		$ (1,409)		$ -		$ -		$ 4,426
1 As a result of the reorganization of our operating segments in November 2014, we reallocated goodwill, which had previously been recorded in our North America Portfolio, Australia Pacific and Copper Operating Units on a relative fair value basis. The reorganized operating segments were then tested for impairment (see note 20). 2 In second quarter 2014 we reclassified Jabal Sayid to held-fo-sale pending the sale of 50% to our joint venture partner. As a result, we recorded an impairment of goodwill of $316 million.

	Opening balance January 1, 2015		Impairments		Reallocation		Disposals		Closing balance December 31, 2015
Goldstrike		$ 730		$ (730)		$ -		$ -		$ -
Cortez		869		(355)		-		-		514
Pueblo Viejo		412		(412)		-		-		-
Lagunas Norte		247		(247)		-		-		-
Veladero		195		-		-		-		195
Turquoise Ridge		528		-		-		-		528
Hemlo		63		-		-		-		63
Kalgoorlie		71		-		-		-		71
Cowal		64				-		(64)		-
Porgera		71		-		-		(71)		-
Zaldívar		1,176		(427)		-		(749)		-
Total		$ 4,426		$ (2,171)		$ -		$ (884)		$ 1,371