The Financial Crisis and Information Gaps

Fourth Progress Report on the Implementation of the
G-20 Data Gaps Initiative

Prepared by the Staff of the IMF and the FSB Secretariat
September 2013

2
Contents

Page

Acronyms ...................................................................................................................................3
Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................4
I. Introduction ............................................................................................................................6
II. Stock Take of Implementation Status ...................................................................................7
A. Development of Conceptual/Statistical Frameworks ................................................7
B. Enhancement of Existing Conceptual/Statistical Frameworks and Ongoing
Collection of Data ..........................................................................................................9III. Implementation Issues .......................................................................................................14
IV. DGI Links to Policy Work and Other Initiatives ...............................................................17
V. Strategy and Priorities Going Forward ...............................................................................18
A. Strategy ...................................................................................................................18
B. Priorities for Action Plans .......................................................................................19
VI. Way Forward .....................................................................................................................20
Tables
1. Overview of the DGI 20 Recommendations .......................................................................7
2. Summary of G-20 Economies’ Implementation Status of Enhancements to Datasets .....15
Figures
1. Implementation Schedule of DGI Recommendations: Key Milestones Ahead..................5
2. Overview of Implementation Status (number of economies) ...........................................11
Annex
1. Summary Table: Progress Report, Action Plans, and Timetables .......................................21

3
ACRONYMSBCBSBISBOPCOM
BPM6
BSA
CDS
CGFS
CPIS
CPPI Handbook
DGI
DSD
ECB
EU
FSB
FSAP
FSIs
G-20
GDP
GFS
GFSM 2001
GGO
G-SIFIs
G-SIBs
HSS
I-A
IAG
IBS
I-I
IIP
IMF
IMFC
IOSCO
ISWGPS
OECD
OTC
PGI
PPI
RPPI
SDDS
SDMX
SNA
2008 SNA
STA
TFFS
UNSD
WEO
WGSD

Basel Committee on Banking Supervision
Bank for International Settlements
IMF Committee on Balance of Payments Statistics
Balance of Payments and International Investment Position Manual,sixth edition
Balance-Sheet Approach
Credit Default Swaps
Committee on the Global Financial System
Coordinated Portfolio Investment Survey
Handbook on Commercial Property Price Indices
Data Gaps Initiative
Data Structure Definitions
European Central Bank
European Union
Financial Stability Board
Financial Sector Assessment Program
Financial Soundness Indicators
Group of Twenty
Gross Domestic ProductGovernment Finance Statistics
Government Finance Statistics Manual 2001
General Government Operations
Global Systemically Important Financial Institutions
Global Systemically Important Banks
Handbook on Securities Statistics
Institution to Aggregate
Interagency Group on Economic and Financial Statistics
International Banking Statistics
Institution to Institution
International Investment Position
International Monetary FundInternational Monetary and Financial Committee
International Organization of Securities Commissions
Inter-Secretariat Working Group on Price Statistics
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development
Over-the-counter
Principal Global Indicators
Producer Price Index
Residential Property Price IndicesSpecial Data Dissemination Standard
Statistical Data and Metadata eXchange
System of National Accounts
System of National Accounts 2008
IMF’s Statistics Department
Task Force on Finance Statistics
United Nations Statistics Division
World Economic Outlook
Working Group on Securities Databases

4

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
At their meeting in Moscow in July 2013, the G-20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank
Governors welcomed the continued progress made by the G-20 economies on closing
information gaps under the FSB and IMF G-20 Data Gaps Initiative (DGI) as aprerequisite for enhanced policy analysis. They strongly encouraged the implementation of
the recommendations in this initiative, and looked forward to the fourth annual progress
report on the DGI for their meeting in October 2013.
This report describes progress since November 2012 and the plans going forward. It
contains a number of key messages:Considerable progress has been made across the full range of the DGI
20 recommendations. Significant data enhancements are coming on stream.

The feedback from the consultation process with experts indicates that, overall, there
is strong support for, and a growing sense of ownership among G-20 economies inthe DGI.



To ensure complete implementation of the recommendations, and the timely
provision of comparable economic and financial statistics, the momentum behind theinitiative needs to be maintained and adequate resources provided for statistical work.

Strengthened collaboration among national agencies and continued international
cooperation, collaboration, and consultation is essential for the success of theinitiative.

The strategy going forward should focus on completing the ongoing work in
implementing the recommendations; and communicating to policymakers andanalysts the availability, benefits, confidentiality rules, and policy relevance of theenhanced and new data emerging from the DGI.



Notwithstanding some national implementation issues that may arise, implementationof a significant portion of the recommendations is expected to be completed by
end-2015, as can be seen in Figure 1.

The report seeks endorsement by the G-20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank
Governors of the action plans and timetables set out in Annex 1, including the key
milestones presented in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Implementation Schedule of DGI Recommendations: Key Milestones Ahead

2013(Secondhalf)

Fourth progress reporton the DGILead Agencies:
FSB and IMF

Outreach, training, andtechnical assistance activities
on implementation ofdata-reporting templates for
sectoral accounts(recommendation # 15)
Lead Agencies:
IMF and OECD

Revised list of FSIs
submitted to the IMF’s
Executive Board.
Lead Agency: IMF

2014(Second
half)

2015

Collection of data from theStage 2 enhancements of BIS
IBS (recommendations# 10 and # 11
Lead Agency: BIS

Fifth progress
report on the DGILead Agencies:
FSB and IMF

Sixth progress
report on the DGILead Agencies:
FSB and IMF

March 2014: FSB Plenary
decisions on the common
template for G-SIBs and Phase
2 and Phase 3 activities(recommendations # 8 and # 9).
Lead Agency: FSB

September 2014:
Dissemination ofquarterly IIP data by all
SDDS subscribers(recommendation # 12)
Lead Agency: IMF

March 2015: Update on
FSB progress on G-SIBs
Phase 2 and Phase 3
activities(recommendations # 8
and # 9).
Lead Agency: FSB

Lead Agency: FSB
Release of CPIS enhancementswith reporting of data for endJune 2013 measurement date(recommendation # 11)
Lead Agency: IMF

Schedule for the pilot projecton data cooperation on sectoral
accounts agreed.
(recommendation # 15)
Lead Agency: IAG

Enhancement of data on
sectoral accounts andbalance sheets(recommendation # 15)
Lead Agencies:
IMF and OECD

Publish a reference
document on
consolidation concepts
on a nationality basis(recommendation #13)
Lead Agency: BIS

Expected release of
Handbook on
Commercial Property
Price Indices (CPPI)(recommendation # 19)
Lead Agency: Eurostat

5

Publish additional
indicators of the G-20
aggregates(recommendation # 20)
Lead Agency: IAG

2014(Firsthalf)

6
I. INTRODUCTION
1.
This progress report provides an update on the status of implementation of the
20 recommendations in the report The Financial Crisis and Information Gaps presented
to the G-20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors in November 2009 by thestaff of the FSB Secretariat and the IMF. At their meeting in Moscow in July 2013, theG-20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors welcomed the continued progress madeby the G-20 economies on closing information gaps as a prerequisite for enhanced policy
analysis, strongly encouraged the implementation of the 20 recommendations under the
G-20 DGI, and looked forward to the FSB and IMF fourth progress report on the DGI for
their meeting in October 2013.1,2 The work on filling data gaps under the DGI has beenendorsed by the International Monetary and Financial Committee (IMFC) and is seen as
essential in fostering datasets to better understand emerging vulnerabilities of economies toshocks, enhance financial surveillance, and more generally support policymaking.
2.
The present report takes stock of the progress to date, describes implementation
issues and the links with policy work and other initiatives, and outlines the strategy
going forward. A detailed summary of progress in each recommendation is provided in
Annex 1.
3.
The DGI continues to be underpinned by a broad consultation process withnational authorities on their views on action plans and timetables. The DGI
implementation also involves strong collaboration and coordination among international
agencies that are members of the Interagency Group on Economic and Financial Statistics(IAG).3
4.
For ease of reference, Table 1 is a stylized overview of the DGI 20
recommendations, organized in matrix form. The rows reflect the four main areas
highlighted by the global crisis where data gaps were evident as drawn out in previous
reports on the DGI, and the columns reflect whether reporting/conceptual frameworks at thattime existed, but needed to be enhanced, or did not exist and needed to be developed to fill
those gaps.

1

http://www.imf.org/external/np/g20/

2This report is the fourth annual progress report since the launch of the DGI in 2009. Three similar annual
progress reports have been submitted to the G-20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors in May 2010,
June 2011, and September 2012. They are available at http://www.imf.org/external/np/g20
3

The members of the IAG are the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), the European Central Bank,Eurostat, the IMF (chair), the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), theUnited Nations, and the World Bank.

7
Table 1: Overview of the DGI 20 Recommendations

Build-up of risk in
the financial sector

Conceptual/statistical frameworkneeds development

Conceptual/statistical frameworks
exist and ongoing collection needs
enhancement# 3 (Tail risk in the financial system andvariations in distributions of, andconcentrations in, activity)# 2 (Financial Soundness Indicators(FSIs))# 4 (Aggregate Leverage and Maturity
Mismatches)# 5 (Credit Default Swaps)# 7 (Securities data)# 6 (Structured products)
Cross-borderfinancial linkages

Vulnerability ofdomestic economies
to shocks# 8 and # 9 (Global network
connections and systemically important
global financial institutions)# 10 and # 11 (International Banking
Statistics (IBS) and the CoordinatedPortfolio Investment Survey (CPIS))# 13 and # 14 (Financial andNonfinancial Corporations cross-border
exposures)# 12 (International Investment Position(IIP))# 16 (Distributional Information)# 15 (Sectoral Accounts)# 17 (Government Finance Statistics)# 18 (Public Sector Debt)# 19 (Real Estate Prices)

Improvingcommunication of
official statistics# 20 (Principal Global Indicators)

II. STOCK TAKE OF IMPLEMENTATION STATUS
5.
Considerable progress has been made across the full range of the DGI
20 recommendations. All the G-20 economies are implementing the DGI recommendations,but priorities and the pace of completion vary among individual G-20 economies. Work on
developing the conceptual/statistical frameworks envisaged under the DGI is nearing
completion. Significant data enhancements are coming on stream. The following two
sections summarize the status of the 20 recommendations under the DGI based on the two
broad categories in Table 1.
A. Development of Conceptual/Statistical Frameworks
6.
The developmental work on the recommendations covering the build-up of risks
in the financial system is almost complete (recommendations # 3, # 4, and # 6). In
2012/2013, the IMF published three conceptual papers on (i) a new heuristic measure offragility and tail risks, (ii) an operational framework for measuring tail risks, and (iii) near-

8coincident indicators (recommendation # 3).4 This follows the publication of the report of theInternational Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) on disclosure principles for
public offerings and listings of asset-backed securities in April 20105 (recommendation # 6),
and the completion of the BIS work on measures of maturity and leverage on banks’international balance sheets (recommendation # 4). Further work on leverage and maturity
mismatches is currently being undertaken by the FSB under its work program on shadowbanking.
7.
Significant progress was made over the last year on the developmental work
regarding cross-border financial linkages (recommendations # 8 and # 9). In March
2013, Phase 1 of the FSB project on Global Systemically Important Financial Institutions(G-SIFIs) was completed with the launch of the data hub for Global Systemically Important
Banks (G-SIBs) at the BIS (recommendation # 8).6 Phase 1 involved collecting and poolingconsistent information on the bilateral credit exposures of G-SIBs and on their aggregate
exposures to relevant risk factors, such as country and sector of counterparties. The data are
currently being shared only among individual G-SIBs’ national supervisory authorities in theform of reports. The project is expected to progress further, following the FSB Plenary
decisions in March 2014 on Phases 2 and 3 of the project that cover the collection of
improved data on bilateral funding dependencies (I-I) and more granular consolidatedbalance-sheet data (I-A), and the broadening of data sharing among the official sector to meet
legitimate public policy needs.7 This project could have significant benefits for a range ofpolicymakers and analysts including national supervisors, macro-prudential authorities, andinstitutions responsible for the surveillance of the global financial sector.
8.
In July 2013, a navigation template on available data on cross-border exposuresof financial and nonfinancial corporations was launched on the Principal Global
Indicators website–PGI8 (recommendation # 14). In addition, the BIS is advancing thework on cross-border exposures of financial and nonfinancial corporations based on thepaper published by the BIS in 2012 on concepts of nationality and global consolidation(recommendation # 13).9 This paper is currently being turned into a reference document with4

See http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2012/wp12216.pdf
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2013/wp13168.pdf
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2013/wp13115.pdf;
5

http://www.iosco.org/library/pubdocs/pdf/IOSCOPD318.pdf

6

http://www.financialstabilityboard.org/publications/r_130418.pdf

7

http://www.financialstabilityboard.org/publications/r_130905c.pdf

8

http://www.principalglobalindicators.org/default.aspx

9

http://www.bis.org/ifc/publ/ifcwork08.pdf

9
the input of experts from various international groups interested in these concepts for
publication in 2014.
9.
Regarding measuring vulnerabilities of domestic economies to shocks, inJune 2013, the OECD, in collaboration with Eurostat, finalized two reports on
distributional information on income, consumption and wealth, consistent withmacro-economic indicators (recommendation # 16). In addition, two reports were
finalized with recommendations and guidelines for improving the collection of micro data,
one on an integrated framework for collecting information on the distribution of householdincome, consumption and wealth; and the other containing guidelines for micro statistics onhousehold wealth. 10 The next step is to refine the methodology for compiling distributional
information consistent with macro-economic indicators in a timely manner.
B. Enhancement of Existing Conceptual/Statistical Frameworks andOngoing Collection of Data
10.
Significant data enhancements are coming on stream. The national statisticalsystems are at different stages of development, but all G-20 economies are either producing
data with some or all the enhancements envisaged in the DGI, have largely completed
implementation of these enhancements, or have action plans and timetables for completingthese enhancements. Figure 2 and Table 2 summarize the status of implementation and actionplans by country for the 10 DGI recommendations which involve enhancing existingstatistical frameworks. The information presented is based on publicly available data as wellas information provided by individual economies in their country status notes.11
11.
Table 2 should be interpreted carefully. Economies listed under column 2 are wellon track or have implemented the requirements specified for each recommendation,12 while
those in column 3 have provided information about their individual action plans andtimetables. It is possible for an economy to appear in both columns 2 and 3 if they have
implemented most of the requirements for the relevant recommendation and have plans forfurther improvements. Similarly, a G-20 economy could be producing a significant amountof data required for a specific recommendation and so be included in column 2, but have noreported action plans for further improvement, thus not being included in column 3.

10

Available at http://www.oecd.org/statistics/icw-framework.htm and http://www.oecd.org/statistics/guidelinesfor-micro-statistics-on-household-wealth. htm
11Country notes were compiled and crosschecked with individual G-20 economies. These notes were requested
by senior officials during the June 2012 Global Conference on the G-20 Data Gaps Initiative and are sent
annually to the individual G-20 economies for updating.
12

The 20 recommendations are described in detail in the first column of Annex 1.

10
Build-up of risk in the financial sector
12.
Considerable progress has been made in enhancing information on build up ofrisk in the financial sector (recommendations # 2, # 5, and # 7; Figure 2 and Table 2).
All G-20 economies report some FSIs to the IMF with 13 G-20 economies reporting all ormost of the core FSIs with a quarterly or higher frequency. Seven economies report the seven
FSIs expected from economies adhering to the SDDS Plus on a quarterly or higher frequency(recommendation # 2).13 Fifteen economies have action plans and timetables for further
improvements to their FSI data. The IMF has completed the consultation with national
authorities and international agencies on the review of the list of FSIs and is to present therevised list to the IMF’s Executive Board later this year.
13.
The shortage of information about the web of credit risk transfers throughover-the-counter (OTC) derivatives during the crisis prompted the Committee on the
Global Financial System (CGFS) to enhance data reporting on Credit Default
Swaps-CDS (recommendation # 5). Of the 13 central banks that have been invited by the
CGFS to provide to the BIS CDS statistics for dealers in OTC/CDS derivatives in theirjurisdiction, eight are from G-20 economies and cover the bulk of the CDS market. As seenin Table 2, those eight G-20 economies have completed the enhancements adopted by the
CGFS.14
14.
In September 2012, Part 3 of the Handbook on Securities Statistics (HSS), dealing
with equity securities issues and holdings, was published (recommendation # 7). This
followed the publication of Parts 1 and 2 dealing with debt securities issues and holdings in2009 and 2010, respectively. All G-20 economies report some securities statistics to the BIS
and most of them are well on track in enhancing their data-reporting practices in accordancewith the Handbook, or have action plans to implement reporting of debt securities statistics
according to the Handbook. A consolidated Handbook based on the published parts 1-3 isunder preparation.
Cross-border financial linkages
15.
Work on enhancing data availability with regard to cross-border financial
linkages is making good progress. Seventeen G-20 economies participate in both the IMF’s
CPIS and the BIS IBS (recommendation # 10).

13

http://fsi.imf.org/

14

See http://www.bis.org/statistics/derstats.htm

11
Figure 2. Overview of Implementation Status (number of countries)1
Implementation of enhancements are mostly completed or on track
Have plans for initiating or completing the Recommendations

19

19
17

15

19

19

17 17

16

15

13
10

7

16

13
11

10

8

7

0
#2 (FSIs)#5 (CDS)*#7#10&#11(Securities(IBS)
Statistics)#10&#11(CPIS)#12 (IIP)#15(Sectoral
Accounts)#17 (GFS)#18(Public
debt)#19(Real estate
prices)(1) Please See Table 2 for more information on the underlying data.
(*) Only countries with significant CDS markets are included. All CDS reporting countries have completed enhancements in their r eportings.

16.
With key enhancements of the IBS (recommendation # 11) approved by the
CGFS in 2012, BIS work is now focused on implementation. In the last year a major
milestone was the commencement of the reporting of Stage 1 enhancements (including
coverage of banks’ locally extended domestic currency positions). Reporting of moredetailed locational and consolidated banking statistics in terms of sector, instrument, andother breakdowns is tentatively expected to begin with data for Q4 2013 (Stage 2enhancements). All IBS reporting economies have plans for implementing the enhancementson the IBS.
17.
Regarding CPIS enhancements, preparations were undertaken in the last year
for the introduction of semi-annual reporting of the IMF’s CPIS data beginning withthe reference date of end-June 2013 (recommendation # 11). Further CPIS enhancements
are aimed at increasing economies’ participation; improving timeliness and expanding scope;and facilitating data accessibility. Collection of enhanced data for the CPIS is expected tostart in January 2014 and 17 G-20 economies are known to have plans for implementing theenhancements.
18.
All G-20 economies disseminate IIP data, of which ten (plus the Euro Area)
disseminate quarterly IIP data on a quarterly timeliness (recommendation # 12).
Additionally, three economies report quarterly IIP data with a time lag of greater than aquarter. Of the remaining non-quarterly reporters, four have action plans to commence
reporting quarterly from 2014 onwards, in line with the prescribed standard for SDDS
subscribers (Table 2).

12Vulnerability of domestic economies to shocks
19.
Progress has been made over the last year in enhancing the availability of data tomeasure vulnerability of domestic economies to shocks (recommendations # 15, # 17,# 18, and # 19). Recommendation # 15 aims at promoting the compilation and disseminationof the balance-sheet approach (BSA), the flow-of-funds, and financial and nonfinancial
sectoral accounts data. Over the last year, the IMF and the OECD focused on promulgating
the implementation of the data-reporting templates for sectoral accounts through outreach,training, and technical assistance to G-20 economies.15 While all G-20 economies produce
some components of sectoral accounts and have action plans for improvement, only half
disseminate at least some data (financial or nonfinancial) on a quarterly basis (Table 2).
20.
To support the collection of sectoral accounts data, the IAG has initiated a pilot
project on data cooperation among international agencies. The purpose is to improve thepractical cooperation between international agencies in terms of collecting, validating, anddisseminating sectoral accounts data from national agencies through the use of harmonizedreporting templates,16 and the efficient exchange of data, in particular the use of SDMX
technical standards and data structure definitions (DSDs).17 The objective is to reduce thereporting burden on national authorities and make more efficient use of resources at thenational and international agencies. Depending on the outcome of the pilot exercise for thesectoral accounts, and a similar one for GDP and its main aggregates, such an approach may
be applied to other datasets.
21.
Recommendation # 17 aims at promoting timely, cross-country standardized,
and comparable government finance statistics (GFS) based on accepted international
standards. The crisis revealed a lack of comparable and timely government finance andpublic debt data. Progress in improving these statistics remains slow. Currently seven
G-20 economies report quarterly general government data on an accrual basis in line with theGovernment Finance Statistics Manual 2001 (GFSM 2001) of which three economies report
data with a time lag of one quarter (Table 2). Key challenges faced by the economies include
the lack of source data and adequate resources, including skilled manpower on GFSM 2001
methodology. Sixteen G-20 economies have indicated action plans in some of these areas toimprove reporting.
22.
As reported in the third progress report in 2012, under the auspices of the IAG astandard template was developed for the regular reporting of key government finance
15

Eurostat and the ECB are also closely involved with the work on Recommendation # 15.

16

The templates are available at http://www.imf.org/external/np/sta/templates/sectacct/index.htm

17

SDMX has already published classifications and codes for core statistical concepts. Official DSDs for the
System of National Accounts and the BOP/IIP should be completed in 2013. Official DSDs are also envisaged
for other domains such as government finance statistics, securities statistics, and price statistics.

13
statistics. In July 2013, this standard GFS template was populated with data for
17 G-20 economies (including the Euro area) and posted on the PGI website. The coverageof these data vary with some economies reporting central rather than general government,
and on a cash basis. Once economies start reporting data consistent with the template,recommendation # 17 will be considered complete.
23.
Cross-country and comparable public sector debt data are important for fiscal
sustainability and debt sustainability analysis. The lack of such data is described in an
IMF Technical Note published in July 2012.18 Progress is being made through thedevelopment of the World Bank/IMF/OECD’s public sector debt database.19 Currently,
13 economies report general government gross debt data (recommendation # 18). Workremains in improving the timeliness of data reporting, the sectoral breakdown, the instrument
coverage, including other accounts payable and pension entitlements, as well as maturity andcurrency breakdowns.
24.
Availability of data on real estate prices has recently increased significantly.
Sixteen G-20 economies (including the Euro area) report some data on real estate prices forinclusion on the BIS website (recommendation # 19). However, reported data areheterogeneous and not comparable. With the official publication of the Handbook on
Residential Property Price Indices (RPPI) in April 2013 all G-20 economies have actionplans to improve the comparability and coverage of RPPIs. At the EU level, a regulation on
providing data on residential real estate prices to the European statistical institutions was
adopted in early 2013.20 In August 2013 the OECD launched a survey aimed at developing(i) a House Prices database in line with the Handbook on RPPIs, and (ii) a set of additional
indicators that provide a more complete picture of the residential real estate market. Work
towards the definition of the methodological framework for Commercial Property Price
Indices (CPPI) is ongoing with a Handbook on CPPI expected to be completed by early2015.
Improving communication of official statistics
25.
Considerable progress has been made in improving communication of official
statistics (recommendation # 20), but further work is needed. Over the last year, key
enhancements included the launch of the GFS template (recommendation # 17) andPhase 1 of the navigation template on cross-border exposures of financial and nonfinancial
corporations on the PGI (recommendations # 13 and # 14).21 The PGI website now includes
18

http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/cat/longres.aspx?sk=26101

19

http://www.worldbank.org/qpsd

20

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32013R0093:EN:NOT

21

There are ongoing efforts to finalize an improved version of the navigation template (Phase 2) by end-2013.

14
data for all G-20 economies and 10 non-G-20 economies with financial sectors deemed by
the IMF to be systemically important. In addition, the PGI website was enhanced byincluding the CPIS data for the G-20 economies plus the 10 non-G-20 members. Data on theaggregate GDP growth rate for G-20 economies was posted on the PGI website and theaggregate G-20 inflation rate, as compiled by the OECD, is expected to be posted during thecourse of 2013.
26.
The increasing coverage and availability of data posted on the PGI website havebeen recognized by the G-20 economies. In some G-20 economies, efforts have been madeto promote awareness of the PGI website to policymakers and data users at large.22
III. IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES
27.
During the first half of 2013, several activities were undertaken to support theimplementation of the DGI. The IMF’s Statistics Department (STA) undertook bilateral
consultations with individual G-20 economies to seek views on their action plans andtimetables. The IMF, jointly with the ECB and Eurostat, and in collaboration with themembers of the IAG, organized a regional conference for the European Union economies inFrankfurt (April 2013). A Technical Meeting was jointly organized by the IMF and the Bankof the Russian Federation in Moscow (May 2013) and a Global Conference on the DGI was
jointly organized by the IMF and the FSB Secretariat at the IMF’s headquarters inWashington, D.C., in June 2013.
28.
The feedback from the consultation process indicates that, overall, there isstrong support for, and a growing sense of ownership among G-20 economies in, the
DGI. The majority of the G-20 economies have given high priority to improving data tomeasure domestic vulnerabilities and cross-border financial interconnections, particularly
sectoral accounts, general government, IBS, and CPIS data. Although challenges remain,
there is strong commitment by the G-20 economies to implement the action plans andtimetables needed to close the data gaps. The implementation issues going forward are as
follows:

22

Source data remain a challenge, particularly data relating to nonbank financial
institutions, nonfinancial corporations, households, and local governments.
Regarding the latter, the multiplicity of local government units in certain
G-20 economies makes the collection of local government data costly for theirnational statistical agencies.

For instance, in May 2013, Bank Indonesia’s website provided a direct link to the PGI website, which helped
facilitate access to, and use of, the PGI website by the policymakers and the public.

Table 2: Summary of G-20 Economies’ Implementation Status of Enhancements to Datasets23

#2

#5

#7

# 10
And
# 11
(IBS)
# 10
and
# 11
(CPIS)
# 12

# 15

#18

#19

23

Economies that report to BIS/IBS and are on track in implementing theenhancements: Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, France, Germany, India, Indonesia,
Italy, Japan, Korea, Mexico, Russia, South Africa, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and theUnited States. (17 economies)
Economies that report to the IMF/CPIS: Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, France,
Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Korea, Mexico, Russia, South Africa, Turkey,
the United Kingdom, and the United States. (17 economies)
Economies that report quarterly IIP data on a quarterly timeliness:29 Australia, Canada,
Germany, India, Japan, Korea, Mexico, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
(10 economies)
Economies that report some or all quarterly sectoral accounts data: Australia, Canada,
France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Korea, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and the United States(10 economies)
Economies that report quarterly general government data on an accrual basis in linewith the GFSM 2001:31 Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom,
and the United States. (7 economies)
Economies that report general government gross debt data to the World Bank Public
Sector Debt Statistics website:32 Australia, Brazil, Canada, France, Germany, Indonesia,
Italy, Japan, Korea, Mexico, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
(13 economies)
Economies for which Residential Real Estate Price Index data are disseminated on the
BIS website: Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, Indonesia, Italy, Japan,
Korea, Mexico, Russia, South Africa, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
(16 economies)

Future Plans:25 Economies that have plans for initiating or completing the recommendations.
Economies that have plans to improve their FSI reporting: Australia, Brazil, Canada, China,
Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Korea, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, andthe United Kingdom. (15 economies)
Economies that have plans to improve their CDS reporting: None (All of the CDS-reporting
economies have completed the enhancements)
Economies that have plans to improve their reporting of securities statistics consistent with
the Handbook: Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, Indonesia, Italy,
Japan, Korea, Mexico, Russia, South Africa, and the United States. (15 economies)
Economies that have plans to report to the BIS/IBS or to implement the enhancements:27
All

Economies that have plans to report to the IMF/CPIS or to implement theenhancements:28 Australia, Brazil, Canada, China France, Germany, Indonesia, Italy, Japan,
Korea, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and theUnited States. (17 economies)
Economies that have plans to report quarterly IIP data or to implement BPM6
enhancements:30 Brazil, China, France, Germany, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Korea, Mexico,
Russia, South Africa, Turkey, and the United Kingdom. (13 economies)
Economies that have plans to report sectoral accounts data or to improve their reporting:All
Economies that have plans to report government finance data in line with GFSM 2001 or
improve their reporting: Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, Indonesia, Italy,
Japan, Korea, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Turkey, and the United Kingdom.
(16 economies)
Economies that have plans to enhance their reporting of public sector debt data: Brazil,
France, Germany, Indonesia, Italy, Korea, Russia, South Africa, Turkey, the United Kingdom,
and the United States. (11 economies)
Economies that have plans to improve their real estate price reporting: All.

Countries beyond the G-20 membership are also implementing the recommendations where relevant.
Sources: Rec. # 2 http://fsi.imf.org , Rec. # 5 http://www.bis.org/statistics/secstats.htm, Rec. # 7 http://www.bis.org/statistics/secstats.htm, Rec.# 10 and # 11 http://cpis.imf.org/,
http://www.bis.org/statistics/about_banking_stats.htm, Rec. # 12, # 15, # 17 http://www.principalglobalindicators.org/default.aspx, Rec. # 18 www.worldbank.org/qpsd, Rec. #19 http://www.bis.org/statistics/pp.htm
25
Based on bilateral consultations.
26
Six other economies (Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Germany, India, and Russia) report most of the core FSIs with a quarterly frequency. Five other economies (China, France, Italy, Japan, and the United Kingdom)
report most of the core FSIs with a semi-annual or annual frequency. One economy (Saudi Arabia) started reporting some data and work is ongoing to ensure consistency of the data before dissemination.
27
All non-IBS reporting countries have plans to participate in the IBS and all reporting countries have plans or timetables in place for the implementation of enhancements.
28
New forms for CPIS reportings were sent to countries and reporting of enhanced data is expected to be received starting from January 2014. All non-CPIS reporting countries have plans to participate in the CPIS.
29
In addition, 3 economies (Brazil, China, and Italy) report quarterly IIP data on a timeliness of greater than 3 months, and 6 G-20 economies (Argentina, France, Indonesia, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and South Africa)
report IIP data on an annual frequency.
30
Nine economies (Brazil, China, Germany, Italy, Japan, Korea, Mexico, Turkey, and the United Kingdom) report IIP data on a quarterly frequency and have plans to implement BPM6 enhancements, while plans ofother countries include quarterly IIP data reporting and/or implementation of BPM6 enhancements.
31
Three economies (Australia, Canada, and the United States) provide this data with a timeliness of three months or less. Two G-20 economies (Russia and South Africa) report quarterly general government data on a
cash-flow basis.
32
In addition, 4 economies provide central government debt data, of which 3 economies (Argentina, South Africa, and Turkey) report with a quarterly frequency and one economy (China) with a semi-annual frequency.
24

15

#17

Status of Implementation:24 Economies where implementation of enhancements iscompleted or on track.
Economies that report seven FSIs that are expected from the SDDS Plus adhering
economies with a quarterly or higher frequency:26 Australia, Indonesia, Korea, Mexico,South Africa, Turkey, and the United States. (7 economies)
Of the 8 Economies with significant CDS market, ones that report to the BIS OTC
survey: Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, and theUnited States. (8 economies)
Economies that report some data on securities statistics to the BIS: All.

16


Availability of adequate resources (including experienced staff resources) toundertake and sustain statistical programs remains a constraint. The cost burden
on the private sector also needs to be taken into account.

The need for increasing the granularity of data to help policymakers identify therisks and vulnerabilities could, in certain circumstances, raise confidentiality
concerns. Moreover, the lack of communication and legal restrictions imposed on thedissemination of datasets could limit potential data sharing among relevant agencies.

Production of consistent, cross-country comparable, and high-quality data,
especially for general government finance statistics, is a major challenge.
Concerted efforts to promote the reporting of GFS data fully aligned withinternational standards should be a priority. The launch on the PGI website of thestandard GFS template is seen as a step in the right direction. Reporting data based on
the GFS template would increase consistency of GFS data withWorld Bank/IMF/OECD’s public sector debt database and the sectoral accounts.33

Addressing important data gaps in the coverage of the financial sector,
particularly other financial corporations, should also be a priority.

29.

Among other key findings from the consultations were:

Policymakers are not always aware of the availability, benefits, and policy
relevance of data enhancements and new data emerging from theimplementation of the DGI recommendations. Effective communication of
statistics emerging from the DGI to policymakers is important. The PGI website isconsidered as an important source of data, not only for policy needs, but also forcross-country comparability.

Strengthened collaboration among national agencies involved in theimplementation of the DGI recommendations is essential for the continued
success of the initiative. This includes central banks, ministries of finance, andnational statistical agencies. Within the G-20 economies, there is evidence thathigh-level committees are being established, involving the relevant national
compiling agencies, to coordinate the implementation of the DGI recommendations,and this is proving most helpful in moving the ongoing work forward.

33

Full implementation of the compilation of general government debt on a consolidated and gross basis, atmarket and nominal value and on a quarterly frequency, is fully in line with the SDDS Plus requirements.

17

The DGI is seen as a point of reference and benchmark for the development of
economic and financial statistics. The DGI is encouraging the development ofhigh-quality data and a higher recognition for statistical work.

Continuing international cooperation, collaboration, and consultation is seen as
key for the success of the DGI going forward. There is a need for international
agencies to prioritize tasks taking into account the diverse circumstances of the
G-20 economies, and set and coordinate timelines for DGI work that needs
completion.
IV. DGI LINKS TO POLICY WORK AND OTHER INITIATIVES

30.
The DGI is an integral part of the G-20 initiatives that aim at strengthening theinternational financial architecture. Other G-20 initiatives that are supported by the DGIor are linked to it include the work on shadow banking, particularly through the developmentof sectoral accounts (recommendation # 15); the G-20 Action Plan to develop local currency
bonds markets, particularly through the work to improve securities data
(recommendation # 7); and the work on legal entity identifiers developed according to
FSB recommendations under G-20 endorsement.
31.
The DGI is also aligned with the IMF’s policy work of invigorating the global
economy and strengthening its resilience to financial crisis as set forth in the IMF
Managing Director’s Global Policy Agenda presented to the IMFC in April 2013.34
The data gaps being filled under the DGI provide important input for strengthening analyticalwork on global financial systems, addressing high deficits and debt, addressing global
imbalances and spillovers, and supporting growth and job creation.
32.
The DGI is helping to meet the emerging analytical needs arising from anincreased policy focus on the stability of the financial system. As demonstrated in an
IMF working paper,35 the datasets emerging from the DGI can help address such issues as
understanding the interactions between micro-prudential, macro-prudential, andmacro-economic policies, the nature and implications of cross-border linkages and spillovers,
and the implications of the regulatory reform. Further, the new and enhanced datasets are
beginning to stimulate research and analysis, such as on residential real estate prices.36
34

http://www.imf.org/external/pp/longres.aspx?id=4757

35

Why are the G-20 Data Gaps Initiative and the SDDS Plus Relevant for Financial Stability Analysis?
IMF Working Paper 13/6 (http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/cat/longres.aspx?sk=40227.0)
36“House price indices: does measurement matter?” M. Silver, World Economics, 12, 3, July-Sept, 2011.
This work drew on the BIS real estate database (http://www.world-economicsjournal.com/Contents/ArticleOverview.aspx?ID=482)

18
33.
The DGI is closely linked to the IMF’s Data Standards Initiatives. In particular,
the recent enhancements of data dissemination through the SDDS and the establishment of
the SDDS Plus are a part of the implementation of the DGI recommendations. Economies
adhering to the SDDS Plus will be expected to disseminate data in nine categories covering
four macroeconomic sectors—the real sector, the fiscal sector, the financial sector, and theexternal sector.37 Closing data gaps under the DGI helps meet the data needs under the
SDDS Plus. In fact, adhering to the SDDS Plus would contribute to full implementation of
the DGI recommendations.
V. STRATEGY AND PRIORITIES GOING FORWARD
A. Strategy
34.
The G-20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors, in their communiquéin Moscow (July 2013), considered the DGI as a prerequisite for enhanced policy
analysis and strongly encouraged the implementation of its recommendations. There areclear signs of growing policy interest in the DGI as data enhancements resulting from thisinitiative are becoming available and are helping to support the analysis of financial networks
both domestically and across border, and the links between the financial and the real sectors.
35.
It is important to keep the momentum to ensure complete implementation of theremaining recommendations and timely provision of comparable economic andfinancial statistics in line with policy needs. The strategy going forward therefore focuseson completing the ongoing work on the implementation of the 20 recommendations;enhancing collaboration among G-20 economies for exchange of knowledge andinformation; better communicating to policymakers the availability, benefits, and policy
relevance of data emerging from the DGI; and further strengthening national interagency
collaboration in the work of implementing the DGI.
36.

To support these strategic objectives there is a need for:

Continued cooperation, collaboration, and consultation at the international level.
This includes continued high-level policy support for the DGI; strengthened
collaboration among international agencies to reduce the burden on national
authorities, such as through the data cooperation pilot project on sectoral accounts(and GDP and its main aggregates); and enhanced collaboration among
G-20 economies in the exchange of knowledge and information. The consultations
with national authorities revealed a strong interest in sharing knowledge andinformation among national compilers.

37

http://www.imf.org/external/np/pp/eng/2012/013112.pdf.

19

Continued efforts at the national level to complete action plans and timetables.
Strengthened collaboration among national agencies—particularly, central banks,
ministries of finance, and national statistical agencies—involved in theimplementation of the DGI recommendations is a necessary prerequisite.



Effective communication of the policy use of the enhanced and new data
emerging from the DGI. This includes national data compilers and international
agencies promoting the policy use of DGI datasets with senior policy officials; andthe continued enhancement and promotion of the PGI to meet the analytical needs ofboth the public and private sector.

Securing sufficient funding for statistical programs. It is critical, particularly toextend existing datasets and/or to take new data initiatives forward.

37.
The third progress report in 2012 called for an assessment as to whether the
DGI needed fine-tuning going forward to take on board emerging needs and, in thatcase, for a proposal on how it should be modified or expanded. From the consultations
with national authorities there was a clear and broad consensus that the DGI is a wellformulated but ambitious program that captures the key data requirements, and that it ispreferable not to add to the existing 20 DGI recommendations but rather to focus oncompleting their implementation. Nonetheless, some fine tuning of the existing
recommendations to address some emerging data needs could be considered, including, forexample, enhancing information on capital flows, including through the global flow-of-funds
project,38 and private sector debt, and commencing data collection on recommendations
where new conceptual frameworks have been completed as reflected in the “action plans andtimetables” in Annex 1.
38.
A significant portion of the recommendations is expected to be implemented by
end-2015. Notwithstanding some national implementation issues that may arise, according to
the implementation schedule, most of the DGI work is expected to be completed by
end-2015. The next report will discuss the strategy for completing the implementation of the
DGI and fostering the provision of comparable economic and financial statistics in line with
policy needs.
B. Priorities for Action Plans
39.
Significant progress was made over the last year in the implementation of the
DGI. All the priority benchmarks set for the period, as envisaged in the third progress reportin 2012, were fully implemented. Major milestones included:
38

The IMF staff and a group of major central banks have initiated a global flow-of-funds project whose main
purpose is to map, conceptually, financial interlinkages that are reflected in the balance of payments andinternational investment position statistics and in the “rest-of-the-world” account of the national accounts. The
enhancements in CPIS and IBS data under the DGI support this work.

20

The creation of the data hub at the BIS with the purpose of collecting and sharing dataon G-SIBs’ bilateral credit exposures and aggregate exposures to relevant risk factors;

The enhanced communication of statistics with the launch of: (i) the navigation
template on cross-border positions of financial and nonfinancial corporations, and(ii) the GFS common reporting template for use by international agencies;The publication of Part 3 of the Handbook on Securities Statistics, and the
Handbook on Residential Property Price Indices; andThe completion by the two expert groups of the conceptual work on distributional
information on income, consumption, and wealth.

40.
Looking ahead, the priority action plans and milestones for the next year are
shown in Figure 1 and include:

FSB Plenary decisions on the common template for the G-SIBs and timeline forPhase 2 and 3 activities by mid-2014;

Collection of data from the Stage 2 enhancements of BIS IBS;

Release, in early 2014, of CPIS enhancements beginning with the reporting ofsemi-annual data for end-June 2013;

Dissemination of quarterly IIP data by all SDDS subscribers; andEnhancements to sectoral accounts and balance-sheet data.

41.
To ensure that the data gaps are fully filled, all G-20 economies are encouraged
to complete the implementation of the DGI recommendations and to improve theavailability of high-quality data. The datasets being enhanced are critical for bilateral andmultilateral surveillance, particularly in the areas of spillover and risk analysis, and financial
stability assessment. This is consistent with the message received from the broad consultativeand collaborative process undertaken with senior officials of G-20 economies, as well as thestatement of the G-20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors in the communiquéfrom their meeting in Moscow in July 2013.
VI. WAY FORWARD
42.
This report seeks the endorsement of the G-20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank
Governors and their continued support for the proposed actions plans and timetables going
forward set out in Annex 1, including the key milestones presented in Figure 1.

Annex 1. Summary Table: Progress Report, Action Plans, and Timetables
Recommendation

StatusAction Plans and Timetables

1.

As requested in July 2013, the present report, preparedby the FSB Secretariat and IMF staff, will be provided
to the G-20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank
Governors by October 2013.

The FSB Secretariat and IMF staff to provide the fifth
progress report to the G-20 Finance Ministers andCentral Bank Governors by September 2014. This
report will discuss the strategy for completing theimplementation of the DGI and fostering the provisionof comparable economic and financial statistics in linewith policy needs. IMF staff intends to undertake
further consultations, including by conducting a
conference with G-20 senior officials in 2014, tofollow up on progress in implementing the DGI
recommendations. IMF staff will continue to monitor
progress through annual updates of country notes on
the DGI implementation in collaboration with the G-20
economies.

Over the past year the total number of economies
reporting FSIs to the IMF on a regular basis has
increased to 80 (up from 45 in 2009), of which 18 are
G-20 economies (up from 14 in 2009). Thirteen
G-20 economies report on a quarterly or higher
frequency. Dissemination of seven FSIs is encouraged
under the IMF’s Special Data Dissemination Standard(SDDS). Also, the IMF’s Executive Board established a
new higher tier of the IMF’s Data Standards Initiatives,
the SDDS Plus. Economies adhering to the SDDS Plus
are expected to disseminate seven FSIs with quarterly
periodicity and timeliness.

Most of the G-20 economies have plans for further
improvement in reporting and disseminating the coreand encouraged FSIs. An objective is for
G-20 economies to report, by end-2014, the seven FSIs
that economies adhering to the SDDS Plus are
expected to disseminate on a quarterly frequency.

Staff of the FSB and the IMF report back to
G-20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors
by June 2010 on progress, with a concrete plan ofaction, including a timetable, to address each of theoutstanding recommendations. Thereafter, staff ofthe FSB and IMF to provide updates on progress
once a year. Financial stability experts, statisticians,
and supervisors should work together to ensure thatthe program is successfully implemented.

Monitoring Risk in the Financial Sector

3.

The IMF to work on increasing the number of
economies disseminating Financial Soundness
Indicators (FSIs), including expanding country
coverage to encompass all G-20 members, and onother improvements to the FSI website, including
preferably quarterly reporting. FSI list to bereviewed.

In consultation with national authorities, and drawing
on the Financial Soundness Indicators Compilation
Guide, the IMF to investigate, develop, andencourage implementation of standard measures thatcan provide information on tail risks, concentrations,

The IMF has completed the consultation with national
authorities and international agencies on the review ofthe list of FSIs and is to present the revised list to the
IMF’s Executive Board before the end of the 2013.
At the FSI reference group meeting, participants agreed
that concentration and dispersion measures for thewhole population can be meaningful and useful for
financial sector analysis. However, publishingdispersion measures on quartiles could raise

IMF is planning to invite economies for a pilot exercise
on the compilation of concentration and distribution
measures for FSIs on a voluntary basis.

21

2.

variations in distributions, and the volatility ofindicators over time.

4.

Further investigation of the measures of system-wide
macroprudential risk to be undertaken by theinternational community. As a first step, the BIS andthe IMF should complete their work on developing
measures of aggregate leverage and maturity
mismatches in the financial system, drawing on
inputs from the Committee on the Global Financial
System (CGFS) and the Basel Committee on
Banking Supervision (BCBS).

The CGFS and the BIS to undertake further work inclose cooperation with central banks and regulatorson the coverage of statistics on the credit default
swap (CDS) markets for the purpose of improving
understanding of risk transfers within this market.

6.

Securities market regulators working through IOSCO
to further investigate the disclosure requirements forcomplex structured products, including public
disclosure requirements for financial reporting
purposes, and make recommendations for additional
improvements if necessary, taking account of workby supervisors and other relevant bodies.

39

http://www.iosco.org/news.

In 2012/2013, the IMF published three conceptual
papers on (i) a new heuristic measure of fragility and tailrisks, (ii) an operational framework for measuring tailrisks, and (iii) near-coincident indicators.
The BIS has completed its work on thisrecommendation, which has proceeded at two levels.
One level is conceptual, as highlighted by the BIS’s
work on system-level measures of maturity mismatches(“funding gaps”) on banks’ international balance sheets,
based on the BIS IBS. The other is statistical focusing
on enhancements of the BIS IBS that will improve theusefulness of this dataset for the construction of
maturity mismatch and leverage measures.
An FSB task force was established following the request
to the FSB by the G-20 leaders in November 2010 todevelop recommendations to strengthen the oversightand regulation of the shadow banking system.
The BIS and the CGFS have completed their work on
this recommendation, based on expansions of the BIS
CDS statistics decided in September 2009. Reporting
central banks have provided more detailed data on thetype of counterparties from June 2010, and more detailon the geography of counterparties and underlying
instruments from June 2011. In total, 13 economies
report semi-annual CDS data, of which eight are G-20
economies.
In April 2010, IOSCO published a report on Asset
Backed Securities Disclosure Principles providing
guidance to securities regulators who are developing orreviewing their regulatory disclosure regimes for public
offerings and listings of asset backed securities.39 In
April 2011, IOSCO held the first meeting of a newStanding Committee on Risk and Research with theintention of creating a methodology for securities

BIS has completed its work on this recommendation.

The FSB is continuing to work to collect data on
maturity and liquidity mismatches for shadow banking
institutions and markets as part of its remit.
This recommendation is complete.

This recommendation is complete.

22

5.

confidentiality issues in certain circumstances.

7.

Central banks and, where relevant, statistical offices,
particularly those of the G-20 economies, toparticipate in the BIS data collection on securities
and contribute to the further development of the
BIS-ECB-IMF Handbook on Securities Statistics(HSS). The Working Group on Securities Databases(WGSD) to develop and implement a
communications strategy for the HSS.

regulators undertaking research into systemic risk. In
February 2012, IOSCO published a consultation report(Principles for Ongoing Disclosure for Asset Backed
Securities) as a complement to the April 2010
document.
Part 1 of the HSS on debt securities issues was publishedin May 2009; Part 2 on debt securities holdings was
published in August 2010; and Part 3 on equity
securities (issues and holdings) was published in
September 2012. In December 2012 the BIS revised thecompilation of its debt securities statistics to enhancetheir comparability across different markets. The BIS iscollecting available data on securities issues frommember central banks, including fromall G-20 economies. A website has been established topromote the work of the WGSD.40

The consolidated version of HSS (Part 1-3) isscheduled for publication in 2013. Once all the G-20
economies participate in the BIS data collection andstart reporting data according to the Handbook, thisrecommendation will be considered complete.
An objective is for G-20 economies to disseminate
quarterly data on securities on a from-whom to-whombasis, the requirement on securities data for economies
adhering to the SDDS Plus.

23

Data by issuer and holder on a from-whom to-whombasis permit the analysis of relationships between
institutional sectors and subsectors within an economy
and also between these sectors and subsectors andnonresidents. Such an analysis sheds light on sectoralcompositions of assets and liabilities, and on potential
strengths and vulnerabilities in portfolios. Economies
adhering to the SDDS Plus will be expected to provide
data on the stocks of securities by issuer and holder on afrom-whom to-whom basis, as outlined in Part 2 of the
HSS (Section 5, especially the time series presentation in
Table 5.2.) with quarterly periodicity and timeliness.
International Network Connections
8.

The FSB to investigate the possibility of improved
collection and sharing of information on linkages
between individual financial institutions, including
through supervisory college arrangements, and theinformation

40

The FSB Working Group on Data Gaps and Systemic
Linkages was set up to take forward the work on
recommendations # 8 and # 9. It completed its work,
including developing a common draft template, andreported to the FSB Plenary in April 2011. The latter

http://www.imf.org/external/np/sta/wgsd/index.htm.

The project is expected to progress further, following
the FSB Plenary decisions in March 2014 on Phases 2
and 3 of the project that cover the collection of
improved data on bilateral funding dependencies (I-I)
and more granular consolidated balance-sheet dataexchange being considered for crisis management
planning. This work must take due account of theimportant confidentiality and legal issues that areraised, and existing information sharing
arrangements among supervisors.
9.

10.

(I-A), and the broadening of data sharing among theofficial sector to meet legitimate public policy needs.41
Prior to the FSB decision making, the Working Groupwill hold an international workshop in October 2013
with representatives from major banks and nationalbanking associations. The Hub Governance Group
formed by individual G-SIBs’ home supervisory
authorities and central banks will oversee the poolingand sharing of information.

Coverage of significant financial centers and of othereconomies, including G-20 economies, in the BIS IBS
and the IMF CPIS has continued to improve. For the
BIS IBS, there are two G-20 economies that do notreport data on either a locational or consolidated basis.
For the CPIS, there are two G-20 economies and asignificant number of offshore centers that do not reportdata.

Both the BIS and the IMF continue working to increase
country participation in their surveys, including by all
G-20 economies. The BIS and IMF are working with
G-20 economies to implement the enhancements
agreed. The BIS is reviewing the quality of IBS
reported by two new reporters (G-20 economies) and
expects to publish these data in 2014.

For the CPIS, the IMF Committee on Balance ofPayments Statistics (BOPCOM) agreed, from theJune 2013 reference date, to increase the frequency(from annual to semi annual), accelerate the timeliness(a dissemination lag of less than nine months), andenhance the scope by collecting data on the institutional
sector of the foreign debtor and on short negative
positions on an encouraged basis.
The CGFS has completed its work on IBS

41

http://www.financialstabilityboard.org/publications/r_130905c.pdf

The first data from economies reporting CPIS data to
the IMF on a semi-annual periodicity with theJune 2013 reference date is expected in early 2014
(annual data are presently collected). Economies
adhering to the SDDS Plus are expected to participate
in the CPIS.
BIS and CGFS have considered and agreed toenhancements to the IBS that are in the process of
being implemented. Stage 1 enhancements began to bereported by most reporting economies to the BIS in late

24

11.

The FSB, in close consultation with the IMF, toconvene relevant central banks, national supervisors,and other international financial institutions, todevelop by end-2010 a common draft template forsystemically important global financial institutions
for the purpose of better understanding the exposuresof these institutions to different financial sectors andnational markets. This work should be undertaken inconcert with related work on the systemic
importance of financial institutions. Widespread
consultation would be needed, and due account takenof confidentiality rules, before any reporting
framework can be implemented.
All G-20 economies are encouraged to participate in
the IMF’s Coordinated Portfolio Investment Survey(CPIS) and in the BIS’s international banking
statistics (IBS). The IMF and the BIS are encouraged
to continue their work to improve the coverage ofsignificant financial centers in the CPIS and IBS,
respectively.
The BIS and the CGFS to consider, among otherimprovements, the separate identification of nonbank
financial institutions in the consolidated banking
data, as well as information required to track funding
patterns in the international financial system. The
IMF, in consultation with the IMF’s BOPCOM, tostrive to enhance the frequency and timeliness of the
CPIS data, and consider other possible
enhancements, such as the institutional sector of theforeign debtor.

approved the proposals to progress work on a common
data template on Global Systemically Important Banks(G-SIBs) to improve the data collection, and sharing
among relevant authorities. As of March 2013, Phase 1of the implementation process, which involves
launching the data hub at the BIS and initial collectionof consistent information on the institution to institution(I-I) bilateral credit exposures of G-SIBs and on theinstitution to aggregate (I-A) exposures to relevant risk
factors, was successfully implemented. At this stage,
data is shared only with individual G-SIBs’ national
supervisory authorities.

enhancements, which is being implemented in twostages. Stage 1 enhancements will focus on thelocational statistics. Stage 2 enhancements extend boththe locational and the consolidated statistics to close key
data gaps.
The IMF to continue to work with countries toincrease the number of International Investment
Position (IIP) reporting economies, as well as thequarterly reporting of IIP data. The Balance ofPayments and International Investment Position
Manual, sixth edition (BPM6) enhancements to the
IIP should be adopted by G-20 economies as soon as
possible.

13.

The Interagency Group on Economic and Financial
Statistics (IAG) to investigate the issue of monitoringand measuring cross-border, including foreignexchange, derivatives, exposures of nonfinancial andfinancial corporations with the intention ofpromoting reporting guidance and the disseminationof data.

14.

The IAG, consulting with the FSB, to revisit therecommendation of the G-22 to examine thefeasibility of developing a standardized template
covering the international exposures of large
nonbank financial institutions, draws on theexperience with the BIS IBS data, other existing42

All G-20 economies collect and report IIP data to the
IMF’s Statistics Department (STA). In March 2010, the
IMF’s Executive Board decided to prescribe forsubscribers to the IMF’s SDDS, after a four-year
transition period, quarterly reporting (from annual) of
the IIP data, with a maximum lag of one quarter(quarterly timeliness). Among the G-20 economies,
13 economies plus the Euro area disseminate quarterly
IIP data. Four additional G-20 economies have plans to
introduce quarterly reporting. To assist implementation,in March 2011 the IMF produced a pamphlet to advise
compilers on quarterly IIP compilation. 42 It is available
in six languages on the IMF’s website. IMF staff has
introduced the new specific requirements for reporting
data consistent with BPM6 standards in consultation
with the BOPCOM.
To address recommendations # 13 and # 14, a task force
was created under the auspices of the IAG and led by
the BIS. With respect to recommendation # 13, aworkshop was conducted in January 2011, incooperation with the Irving Fisher Committee on
Central Bank Statistics, in order to compare
residence-based data with data on a globallyconsolidated basis by nationality. The background paper
and the proceedings of the workshop were published in
April 2012.
As a first step in the work on improving data availabilityon the international exposures of financial andnonfinancial corporations (recommendation # 14), an

http://www.imf.org/external/np/sta/iip/2011/030111.htm.

25

12.

2012. The new data are currently available on areciprocal basis and will be made available more
widely when quality and completeness improves.
Stage 2 enhancements to the BIS IBS are expected to
be implemented starting with data for the Q4 2013
reporting quarter.
IMF staff is working with economies to implement the
Executive Board’s decision on IIP reporting on the
SDDS by September 2014 and to encourage economies
to report IIP data, including the enhancements, on a
BPM6 basis. The objective is for all G-20 economies tobe able to report quarterly IIP with quarterly timelinessby September 2014.

The background paper presented at the January 2011conference is being revised to take into accountfeedback from secretariats of several internationalgroups working with these concepts. The revised paper
will be turned into a reference document on
consolidation concepts on a nationality basis during thecourse of 2014; this will complete the IAG’sinvestigation work.
Recommendation # 14 is nearly complete. Theinternational agencies will continue to improve thecoverage and presentation of the templates in particularon the basis of feedback provided by national
compilers on the output from Phase 1.

and prospective data sources, and consulting with
relevant stakeholders.

In the medium term, including more sectoral
balance-sheet data in the data categories of the
SDDS could be considered.

Revised navigation templates, incorporating Phase 1
feedback, will be launched by end-2013 (Phase 2).

A working group has been created under the auspices of
the IAG and led by the IMF. The data template on
sectoral accounts was finalized in June 2012 and postedon the IMF/OECD’s conference website hosted by the
IMF and linked to the SNA webpage hosted by the
UNSD.43 Available sectoral accounts data reported to
the OECD are hyperlinked to the PGI website. Goingforward, the focus is on implementation throughoutreach, technical assistance, and training.

The IAG working group will continue outreach,training, and technical assistance activities during
2013/2014, with the objective of encouraging
G-20 economies and other economies to implement theagreed data templates by end-2014. A pilot project
among international agencies to reduce the burden on
national authorities of reporting sectoral accounts data
will be implemented by the same date. As far as
possible the work will be integrated with theimplementation of the 2008 SNA occurring in many
economies at the same time. As the compilation ofquality sectoral data is perceived as one of the priority
areas, all the G-20 economies have plans andtimetables in place to further improve their statistics.

To enhance the source data for the BSA matrix, the IMF
is working to expand the list of the 136 countries
currently reporting monetary data to the IMF using theStandardized Report Forms.
The IMF’s Executive Board endorsed the inclusion of
sectoral balance sheets in the SDDS Plus, and on an
encouraged basis in the SDDS. Countries adhering to
the SDDS Plus are expected to disseminate a minimum
set of internationally comparable sectoral balance
sheets, for financial assets and liabilities with a focus on
the subsector details of the financial corporations, andstandard System of National Accounts 2008 (2008 SNA)
instrument classification.44

43

The agreed templates, which countries are expected to aim at completing in the coming years, are posted at:
http://www.imf.org/external/np/sta/templates/sectacct/index.htm and http://unstats.un.org/unsd/nationalaccount/imp.asp.
44
See Annex III in: http://www.imf.org/external/np/pp/eng/2012/013112.pdf

26

Sectoral and Other Financial and Economic Datasets
15.
The IAG, which includes all agencies represented in
the Inter-Secretariat Working Group on National
Accounts, to develop a strategy to promote thecompilation and dissemination of the balance-sheet
approach (BSA), flow-of-funds, and sectoral data
more generally, starting with the G-20 economies.
Data on nonbank financial institutions should be aparticular priority. The experience of the ECB andEurostat within Europe and the OECD should be
drawn upon.

inventory of existing data on cross-border positions has
been developed by the Task Force. The inventory isavailable on the PGI website. A draft standardized
template was developed for pooling data from various
sources mentioned in the inventory on cross-border
positions, particularly with regard to nonbank financial
institutions. Following a successful pilot project using
data from two G-20 economies, templates were
populated with data from all G-20 economies posted on
the PGI website, maintained by the IMF, in July 2013
(Phase 1).

16.

17.

The World Bank, in coordination with the IMF, andconsulting with the Inter-Agency Task Force on
Finance Statistics (TFFS), to launch the public sector
debt database in 2010.

From May 2011, IMF staff reports adopted astandardized presentation of fiscal data following the
GFSM 2001. Such presentations are now incorporated inover 100 IMF staff reports, including for most
G-20 economies. In addition, the fiscal data of the IMF
World Economic Outlook (WEO) now follows the
GFSM 2001 format. Among the G-20 economies, seveneconomies compile quarterly general government
operations and two compile quarterly general
government cash-flow data. The IAG has developed andagreed on a common reporting template for GFS data
which is available at the PGI website.45
Economies adhering to the SDDS Plus are expected todisseminate general government operations (GGO) data
presented in the GFSM 2001 format. The SDDS Plus
requires quarterly data, disseminated within 12 months
after the end of the reference period.
In December 2010, the World Bank, jointly with the
IMF, launched the quarterly public sector debt databaseinitially for developing and emerging-market
economies.
In March 2012, in collaboration with the OECD, thepublic sector debt database was expanded to the45

http://www.principalglobalindicators.org/default.aspx

The next step is to set up an expert group to refine themethodology for compiling distributional informationconsistent with macro-economic indicators in a timely
manner.

In many economies the underlying reporting systems
do not fully comply with GFMS 2001 standards, andthe presentation consistent with GFSM 2001 is done ona “best effort” basis. The work program for 2013/2014
will focus on encouraging more G-20 economies andother economies to disseminate quarterly general
government data under the GFSM 2001 framework, inparticular the components listed in the GFS template.
Once economies start reporting data consistent withthis template, this recommendation will be considered
completed.

This recommendation is close to completion. The
remaining G-20 economies will be encouraged toparticipate.

27

18.

As the recommended improvements to data sources
and categories are implemented, statistical experts toseek to compile distributional information (such asranges and quartile information) alongside aggregate
figures, wherever this is relevant. The IAG is
encouraged to promote production and disseminationof these data in a frequent and timely manner. The
OECD is encouraged to continue in its efforts to linknational accounts data with distributional
information.
The IMF to promote timely and cross-country
standardized and comparable government financedata based on the accepted international standard, theGovernment Finance Statistics Manual 2001
(GFSM 2001).

Economies adhering to the SDDS Plus are expected todisseminate quarterly data within one quarter after theend of the reference period.
The OECD and Eurostat set up two expert groups inearly 2011 with member country participation. One
group focused on investigating the measurement of
disparities in a national accounts framework(micro-macro); and the other group the joint distributionof income, consumption, and wealth (micro). The initial
work of the two expert groups was completed inJune 2013.

advanced economies. Among the G-20 economies,
17 have agreed to participate of which 13 are reporting
General Government Gross Debt and four are reporting
Central Government Gross Debt. In total around
90 countries have agreed to participate. The TFFS haspublished a Public Sector Debt Statistics Guide thatprovides the methodological guidance for compilingthese data.

19.

The BIS, with the assistance of its member central banks(and, in certain cases, also of statistical offices), started
in 2010 to disseminate real estate price statistics on its
website. Sixteen G-20 economies and the Euro area
currently provide data to the BIS. These data are alsoavailable through the PGI website.

International institutions to encourage countries toharmonize reporting of residential property prices
based on the RPPI. The ISWGPS to continue technicaldiscussion to develop the CPPI Handbook with the aimof publishing it by early 2015. Once this Handbook is
finalized, this recommendation will be considered
completed.
In August 2013, the OECD launched a survey aimed atdeveloping a House Prices database in line with the
RPPI and a set of additional indicators that provide amore complete picture (as possible) of the residential
real estate market.

At the EU level, a regulation on providing data on
residential real estate prices to the European institutions
consistent with the Handbook on RPPI was adopted inearly 2013.

46

See Annex IV in http://www.imf.org/external/np/pp/eng/2012/013112.pdf.

47

http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/product_details/publication?p_product_code=KS-RA-12-022.

28

The Inter-Secretariat Working Group on Price
Statistics to complete the planned Handbook on Real
Estate Price Indices. The BIS and member central
banks to investigate dissemination on the BIS
website of publicly available data on real estate
prices. The IAG to consider including real estate
prices (residential and commercial) on the
PGI website.

Economies adhering to the SDDS Plus would be
expected to disseminate data on general government
total gross debt consistent with the quarterly public
sector debt template46 with dissemination within fourmonths after the end of the reference period.
Under the auspice of the Inter-Secretariat Working
Group on Price Statistics (ISWGPS), and led byEurostat, the work on the Handbook on Residential
Property Price Indices (RPPI) was completed in late2012 and published in April 2013.47 Work is underway
on the preparation of a Handbook on Commercial
Property Price Indices (CPPI) which is expected to becompleted by early 2015.

Communication of Official Statistics
20.

The G-20 economies to support enhancement of the
PGI website, and close the gaps in the availability of
their national data. The IAG should consider making
longer runs of historical data available.

The PGI website includes data for the G-20 economies
and 10 non-G-20 members that have systemicallyimportant financial sectors and are subject to five-year
mandatory Financial Sector Assessment Programs(FSAPs).48 Data on the aggregate G-20 GDP growthrate, as compiled by the OECD, were released for the
first time in March 2012, and the G-20 aggregate
inflation rate is expected to be disseminated in 2013.

Priorities for enhancing the PGI website are to close
gaps in the availability of national data, improve data
timeliness and quality, and establish a new PGI
database infrastructure. Ways of improving theefficiencies in data supply will continue to beinvestigated, including the continued promotion of the
SDMX standards for the dissemination and sharing of
official statistics, and the set up of common Data
Structure Definitions (DSDs) by statistical domain.

29

48

See http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/facts/fsap.htm