The Financial Crisis and Information Gaps

Progress Report on the G-20 Data Gaps Initiative:
Status, Action Plans, and Timetables

Prepared by the Staff of the IMF and the FSB Secretariat
September 2012

2

Contents

Page

Acronyms ...................................................................................................................................3
Executive Summary: The G-20 Data Gaps Initiative ................................................................4
I. Introduction ..........................................................................................................................12
A. Purpose of this Progress Report ...............................................................................12
B. Background ...............................................................................................................12
C. Consultation Process and Feedback..........................................................................13
II. Implementation Status .........................................................................................................15
A. Build Up of Risk in the Financial Sector..................................................................16
B. Cross-Border Financial Linkages .............................................................................19
C. Vulnerability of Domestic Economies to Shocks .....................................................21
D. Improving Communication of Statistics ...................................................................23
III. Links to Other Initiatives ...................................................................................................24
IV. Challenges and Implementation Plans ...............................................................................25
A. Challenges ................................................................................................................25
B. Priorities for Action Plans ........................................................................................27
V. Way Forward.......................................................................................................................28
Box 1. Summary of Points Emerging from the Global Conference in Basel, June 2012 ........14
Tables
1. Summary Table: Progress Report, Action Plans, and Timetables .........................................5
2. Overview of the 20 DGI Recommendations ........................................................................13
3. Implementation Schedule of DGI Recommendations: Key Milestones Ahead...................29
Figure1. Overview of Implementation of the 20 DGI Recommendations .........................................15
Annex I
Table 1. Debt Securities Issues......................................................................................31
Table 2. Debt Securities Holdings .................................................................................32
Table 3. Equity Securities Issues ...................................................................................33
Table 4. Equity Securities Holdings ..............................................................................34
Annex II
Standard Government Finance Statistics (GFS) Template ......................................................35

3
ACRONYMS
2008 SNA
ABS
BCBS
BIS
BOPCOM
BPM6
BSA
CDS
CGFS
CPIS
CPPI
DGI
DSD
ECB
EGDNA
EU
FSIs
FSB
G-20
GDP
GFS
GFSM 2001
GGO
G-SIFIs
HSS
IAG
IBS
I-A
I-I
IIP
IMF
IMFC
IOSCO
ISWGPS
LCBM
LEI
OECD
OTC
PGI
RPPI
SDDS
SDDS Plus
SDMX
STA
TFFS
UNSD
WEO
WGSD

System of National Accounts 2008
Asset Backed Securities
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
Commercial Property Price Indicators
The G-20 Data Gaps Initiative
Data Structure Definition
European Central Bank
Expert Group on Disparities on National Accounts
European Union
Financial Soundness Indicators
Financial Stability Board
The Group of Twenty
Gross Domestic ProductGovernment Finance Statistics
Government Finance Statistics Manual 2001
General Government Operations
Global Systemically Important Financial Institutions
BIS-ECB-IMF Handbook on Securities Statistics
Inter-Agency Group on Economic and Financial Statistics
International Banking Statistics
Institution to Aggregate
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
Local Currency Bonds Markets
Legal Entity Identifiers
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
Over the Counter
Principal Global Indicators
Residential Property Price IndicesSpecial Data Dissemination Standard
Special Data Dissemination Standard Plus
Statistical Data and Metadata Exchange
IMF’s Statistics Department
Task Force on Finance Statistics
United Nations Statistics Division
World Economic Outlook
Working Group on Securities Databases

4
Executive Summary: The G-20 Data Gaps Initiative
Background: The G-20 Data Gaps Initiative (DGI) aims at closing information gaps highlighted by the crisis. It focuses on
the implementation of 20 recommendations contained in the report The Financial Crisis and Information Gaps prepared by
the staffs of the Financial Stability Board (FSB) Secretariat and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and endorsed by theGroup of Twenty (G-20) Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors in November 2009. This is the third progress reporton the implementation of the DGI.
The Objectives: Work under the DGI contributes to improving the identification and monitoring of the buildup of risk in
the financial sectors, the cross-border interlinkages, the vulnerabilities and sectoral interconnections in domestic economies,
and the communication of official statistics. The ultimate goal is to create a global information system suitable to monitor
global financial and nonfinancial flows and positions comprehensively.
Consultation Process: The DGI involves close collaboration among international institutions under the auspices of theInter-Agency Group on Economic and Financial Statistics (IAG). Consultation with the G-20 economies involves FSB/IMF
Senior Officials Conferences, IMF bilateral consultations with national authorities and regional conferences, and FSB/IMF
periodic reporting to the G-20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors. Outreach and communication efforts
included presentations on the DGI at the United Nations Statistical Commission, high-level seminars at the IMF Annual
Meetings, and the establishment of a website (the Principal Global Indicators-PGI website) for the G-20 economies plus
five non-G-20 economies members of the FSB.
Feedback: The consultation process has confirmed strong support for the DGI and broad agreement on the identified data
gaps that need to be addressed. The datasets being enhanced and developed under the DGI are seen as key for analysis andpolicymaking, including on financial stability, external vulnerability, fiscal sustainability, and domestic and global
interconnectedness. The DGI is also seen to have contributed significantly to fostering closer coordination among domestic
statistics-producing agencies. The IAG coordination is very much appreciated.
Progress to Date: In the framework of the DGI, good progress is being made both at the international and national levels in
implementing the recommendations for which statistical frameworks exist. A great deal of work is in progress in
G-20 economies to implement enhancements to existing datasets. Significant enhancements to data availability are coming
on stream and this will continue particularly in the 2012/2013 period. In addition, analytical and developmental work on
new statistical frameworks and datasets is in progress in international institutions and the G-20 economies. Data flows
among international institutions continue to be improved.
Links to Other Initiatives: The DGI proved relevant for other G-20 initiatives and has influenced other policy/institutional
initiatives that were implemented in response to the crisis. These include the FSB work on shadow banking and legal entity
identifiers, and the G-20 Action Plan on Local Currency Bond Markets. The DGI has underpinned the 2011 IMF’s
Triennial Surveillance Review and the strengthening of the IMF’s Data Standards Initiatives, including the broad
endorsement for the establishment of the Special Data Dissemination Standard Plus (SDDS Plus).
Challenges: Maintaining the pace of progress that has been achieved to date, ensuring the countries’ continued
implementation of the enhancements to existing datasets, completing the work on the new conceptual/statistical frameworks
being developed, and maintaining close collaboration and coordination at the national and international levels remain
important challenges ahead. There is a need to ensure adequate resources to continue implementing actions plans andtimetables going forward and to coordinate the efforts to complete the implementation of the 20 recommendations with thestatistical requirements from emerging analytical and regulatory needs.
Seeking Endorsement: This report provides an update of progress on the DGI and seeks endorsement by the G-20 Finance
Ministers and Central Bank Governors of the action plans and timetables going forward as described in Table 1 of thisreport. In particular, the support of the G-20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors is requested to ensure adequate
resources for continued implementation of the DGI, as well as sustained collaboration and coordination at the national andinternational levels.

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

Status*Action Plans and Timetables

1.

As requested in June 2011, the present report, prepared by the FSB
Secretariat and IMF staff, is provided to the G-20 Finance Ministers
and Central Bank Governors by September 2012.

The FSB Secretariat and IMF staff to provide thenext progress report by September 2013. This
report will include an assessment on whether the
DGI needs to be fine-tuned going forward to takeon board emerging data needs and, in that case,provide a proposal on how it should be modified
or expanded. IMF staff intends to undertake
further consultations, including by conducting a
conference with G-20 senior officials in 2013 tofollow up on progress in implementing the DGI
recommendations. The IMF staff set up proceduresto monitor progress through annual updates ofcountry notes on the DGI implementation thathave been prepared in collaboration with the G-20
economies.

Over the past year the total number of countries reporting FSIs to the
IMF has increased to 75 (up from 45 in 2009), of which 18 are
G-20 members (up from 14 in 2009). Twelve G-20 countries reporton a quarterly frequency. Dissemination of seven FSIs is encouraged
under the IMF’s Special Data Dissemination Standard (SDDS). Also,
the IMF Executive Board broadly endorsed a new higher tier of the
IMF’s Data Standards Initiatives, the SDDS Plus.1 Countries adheringto the SDDS Plus will be expected to disseminate seven FSIs withquarterly periodicity and timeliness.

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

In November 2011, STA organized a FSI reference group meetingwith representatives from 32 countries and 10 internationalorganizations to (1) review the current list of core and encouraged
FSIs in the context of the DGI, and (2) jointly develop a work
program on FSIs.

The development of the work program on FSIs
discussed at the November 2011 reference groupmeeting will culminate with the production of arevised list of FSIs and an updated Compilation
Guide in 2013/2014.

Staff of the FSB and the IMF reportback to G-20 Finance Ministers andCentral Bank Governors by June 2010
on progress, with a concrete plan ofaction, including a timetable, to addresseach of the outstanding
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 that the
program is successfully implemented.

Monitoring Risk in the Financial Sector
The IMF to work on increasing thenumber of countries disseminating
Financial Soundness Indicators (FSIs),
including expanding country coverage toencompass all G-20 members, and onother improvements to the FSI website,
including preferably quarterly reporting.
FSI list to be reviewed.

* A more detailed account of progress under the DGI is presented in Section II of this report.

1

http://www.imf.org/external/np/pp/eng/2012/013112.pdf. The IMF Executive Board broadly endorsed the establishment of the SDDS Plus in February 2012.
The official launching of this new tier of the IMF Data Standards Initiatives will take place only after the IMF Executive Board approves the related legal text
which is envisaged for later in the year.

5

2.

3.

4.

In consultation with national authorities, anddrawing on the Financial Soundness Indicators
Compilation Guide, the IMF to investigate,develop, and encourage implementation ofstandard measures that can provide information
on tail risks, concentrations, variations in
distributions, and the volatility of indicators
over time.
Further investigation of the measures ofsystem-wide macroprudential risk to beundertaken by the international community. Asa first step, the BIS and the IMF should
complete their work on developing measures ofaggregate leverage and maturity mismatches in
the financial system, drawing on inputs fromthe Committee on the Global Financial System(CGFS) and the Basel Committee on Banking
Supervision (BCBS).

The CGFS and the BIS to undertake further
work in close cooperation with central banks
and regulators on the coverage of statistics on
the credit default swaps (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 for complex structured products,
including public disclosure requirements forfinancial reporting purposes, and makerecommendations for additional improvements
if necessary, taking account of work by2

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

Measures of concentration and dispersion of FSIs
were discussed and encouraged at the November
2011 FSIs Reference Group meeting.

The IMF is producing a conceptual overview paper on tail risks
that will draw on, among other approaches, new and existing
work in the IMF on stress testing, early warnings, tail risk
complexity, and near-coincident indicators.
The BIS has completed its work on this recommendation, whichhas proceeded at two levels. One level is conceptual, as
highlighted by the BIS’s work on system-level measures ofmaturity mismatches (“funding gaps”) on banks’ internationalbalance sheets, based on the BIS International Banking Statistics(IBS). The other is statistical focusing on enhancements of the
BIS IBS that will improve the usefulness of this dataset for theconstruction of maturity mismatch and leverage measures.

IMF staff to finalize the conceptual paper on tailrisks during the second half of 2012.

The IMF is conducting conceptual work on maturity mismatchand leverage data in conjunction with the FSB. An FSB task
force was established following the request to the FSB by the
G-20 leaders in November 2010 to develop recommendations tostrengthen the oversight and regulation of the shadow banking
system.
The BIS and CGFS have completed their work on thisrecommendation, based on expansions of the BIS CDS statistics
decided in September 2009. Reporting central banks haveprovided more detailed data on the type of counterparties from
June 2010, and more detail on 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 (ABS) Disclosure Principles providing guidance tosecurities regulators who are developing or reviewing theirregulatory disclosure regimes for public offerings and listings of
ABS.2 In April 2011, IOSCO held the first meeting of a newStanding Committee on Risk and Research with the intention ofcreating a methodology for securities regulators undertaking

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

No further BIS work is required on theconceptual framework. Improved data on
maturity mismatches on banks’ internationalbalance sheets will become available with theplanned implementation of enhancements to the
BIS IBS (see recommendations # 10 and # 11
below).

This recommendation is completed.

This recommendation is completed.

6

5.

At the FSI reference group meeting, participants agreed thatconcentration and dispersion measures for the whole population
can be meaningful and useful for financial sector analysis.
However, publishing dispersion measures on quartiles can face
confidentiality problems.

supervisors and other relevant bodies.

7.

Central banks and, where relevant, statistical
offices, particularly those of the G-20
economies, to participate in the BIS datacollection on securities and contribute to thefurther 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.

research into systemic risk. In February 2012, IOSCO publisheda 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 published in May
2009; Part 2 on debt securities holdings was published inAugust 2010; and Part 3 on equity securities is very close to
finalization and is expected to be published in September 2012.
The BIS is collecting available data on securities issues from56 member central banks, including from 17 G-20 economies.
A website has been established to promote the work of the
WGSD.3

Part 3 of the HSS is scheduled for publication in
September 2012. The BIS will publish by
end-2012 revised quarterly securities issuancedata using the presentational concept in the HSS.
The WGSD will issue a communication on theimplementation of the HSS before end-2012.
Once these tasks are finalized, and all the G-20
economies participate in the BIS data collection,
this recommendation will be considered
completed.
An objective is for G-20 economies todisseminate data on quarterly securities on afrom-whom-to-whom basis. The morecomprehensive templates developed incoordination with the work on sectoral accounts,
and consistent with national accounts based dataas presented in the HSS (see Annex I of thisreport), provide a framework to achieve that
objective in the longer term. The noted
requirements on securities data for countries
adhering to the SDDS Plus can be seen as anintermediate objective for G-20 economies.

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, and reported to the FSB Plenary in April 2011.
The latter approved the proposals to progress work on acommon data template on global systemically importantfinancial institutions (G-SIFIs) to improve the data collection,and sharing among relevant authorities. In May 2012, the FSB
Plenary agreed to launch Phase I of the project in March 2013
which involves the creation of the data hub at the BIS and thesharing among supervisors of the bilateral credit exposures data

Implementation of G-SIFIs work is moving in aphased approach. Phase 1 is on schedule to belaunched in March 2013. Early in 2013, key
decisions are expected to be taken by the FSB
Plenary on the establishment of the final form of
the common data template for G-SIFIs, both on a
I-I and an institution to aggregate (I-A) basis, andon broader data sharing among the official sector.
The initial focus of the work on a common
template for G-SIFIs has been banks.

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 the informationexchange being considered for crisis
management planning. This work must takedue account of the important confidentiality
and legal issues that are raised, and existing
information sharing arrangements amongsupervisors.

3

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

7

Data by issuer and holder on a from-whom-to-whom basis
permit the analysis of relationships between institutional sectors
and sub-sectors within an economy and also between these
sectors and sub-sectors and nonresidents. Such an analysis sheds
light on sectoral compositions of assets and liabilities, and on
potential strengths and vulnerabilities in portfolios. Countries
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.

9.

10.

12.

The IMF to continue to work with countries toincrease the number of International
Investment Position (IIP) reporting countries,
as well as the quarterly reporting of IIP data.
The Balance of Payments and International
Investment Position Manual, sixth edition(BPM6) enhancements to the IIP should be
adopted by G-20 economies as soon as
possible.

on an institution to institution (I-I) basis and the existing datareported to the BIS IBS by G-SIFIs.

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
four G-20 economies that do not report data on either alocational or consolidated basis. For the CPIS, there are two
G-20 economies that do not report data; and there are asignificant number of offshore centers that do not report.

Both the BIS and the IMF to continue working toincrease country participation in their surveys,
including by G-20 economies. The BIS and IMF
are working with member countries, particularly
with the G-20 economies, to implement theenhancements agreed.

For the CPIS, the IMF Committee on Balance of Payments
Statistics (BOPCOM) agreed from the June 2013 reference dateto increase the frequency (from annual to semi annual),
accelerate the timeliness (a dissemination lag of less than ninemonths) and enhance the scope by collecting data on theinstitutional sector of the foreign debtor and on short negative
positions, on an encouraged basis.

The IMF will start conducting the CPIS Survey
on a semi-annual periodicity beginning with theJune 2013 reference date (annual data arepresently collected). Countries adhering to the
SDDS Plus will be expected to participate in the
CPIS.

The CGFS has completed its work on IBS enhancements, which
will be implemented in two stages. Stage 1 enhancements will
focus on the locational statistics. Stage 2 enhancements extend
both the locational and the consolidated statistics to close key
data gaps.
All G-20 economies collect and report IIP data to the IMF’s
Statistics Department (STA). In March 2010, the IMF Executive
Board decided to prescribe for subscribers to the IMF SDDS,
after a four-year transition period, quarterly reporting (fromannual) of the IIP data, with a maximum lag of one quarter(quarterly timeliness). Among the G-20 economies, 12
economies plus the Euro area disseminate quarterly IIP data,
increasing from eight a year ago. Five additional G-20
economies have plans to introduce quarterly reporting. To assist

Stage 1 enhancements are currently being
implemented by the BIS and central banks. The
first set of data will be for the Q2 2012 reporting
period. Stage 2 enhancements are expected to be
implemented from Q4 2013 reporting quarter.
IMF staff is working with economies toimplement the Executive Board decision on IIP
reporting in the SDDS by September 2014 and toencourage economies to report IIP data, including
the enhancements, on a BPM6 basis. The
objective is for all G-20 economies to be able toreport quarterly IIP with quarterly timeliness by
September 2014.

8

11.

The FSB, in close consultation with the IMF, toconvene relevant central banks, national
supervisors, and other international financial
institutions, to develop by end-2010 a common
draft template for systemically important global
financial institutions for the purpose of better
understanding the exposures of these
institutions to different financial sectors andnational markets. This work should beundertaken in concert with related work on thesystemic importance of financial institutions.
Widespread consultation would be needed, anddue account taken of confidentiality rules,
before any reporting framework can be
implemented.
All G-20 economies are encouraged toparticipate 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 theirwork to improve the coverage of significant
financial centers in the CPIS and IBS,
respectively.
The BIS and the CGFS to consider, among
other improvements, the separate identificationof 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 timelinessof the CPIS data, and consider other possible
enhancements, such as the institutional sectorof the foreign debtor.

The Interagency Group on Economic andFinancial Statistics (IAG) to investigate theissue of monitoring and measuringcross-border, including foreign exchange,
derivatives, exposures of nonfinancial andfinancial corporations with the intention ofpromoting reporting guidance and thedissemination of data.

14.

The IAG, consulting with the FSB, to revisit
the recommendation of the G-20 to examine
the feasibility of developing a standardized
template covering the international exposuresof large nonbank financial institutions, draws
on the experience with the BIS’s IBS data,
other existing and prospective data sources, andconsulting with relevant stakeholders.

On the basis of the feedback on the reportpublished after the January 2011 workshop, adraft reference document on consolidation
concepts on a nationality basis will be developedby end-2012, and circulated for comments to thevarious groups working with these concepts.

As a first step in the work on improving data availability on theinternational exposures of financial and nonfinancial
corporations (recommendation # 14), an inventory of existingdata on cross-border positions has been developed. The
inventory is available on the PGI website. A draft template has
been developed for pooling data from various sources
mentioned in the inventory on cross-border positions,particularly with regard to nonbank financial institutions. The
template is being piloted using data from two G-20 economies.

The pilot exercise on cross-border position is
expected to be completed by end-2012. If
successful, the template will be populated withdata from other G-20 economies and posted on
the PGI website.

A working group has been created under the auspices of the
IAG and led by the IMF. An IMF/OECD Conference of Sectoral
Accounts Experts was conducted on February 28-March 2, 2011
in Washington D.C., which agreed on the basic outline of areporting template, and the timeframe and priorities for
implementation. The data template on sectoral accounts was
finalized in June 2012 and posted on the IMF/OECD conference
website hosted by the IMF and linked to the SNA webpage
hosted by the UNSD.5 Available sectoral accounts data from theOECD are hyperlinked to the PGI website.

The IAG working group has started and willcontinue outreach, training, and technicalassistance activities during 2012/2013, with theobjective of encouraging G-20 economies andother countries to implement the agreed data
templates by end-2014. As far as possible thework will be integrated with the implementationof the 2008 SNA occurring in many economies atthe same time. The reporting templates forrecommendations # 7 and # 17 (see Annexes I
and II) are consistent with the sectoral accounts
framework.

9

13.

implementation, in March 2011 the IMF produced a pamphlet toadvise compilers on quarterly IIP compilation. 4 It is now
available in six languages on the IMF’s website. IMF staff has
introduced the new specific requirements for reporting dataconsistent with BPM6 standards in consultation with the
BOPCOM.
To address recommendations # 13 and # 14, a task force has
been created under the auspices of the IAG and led by the BIS.
With respect to recommendation # 13, a workshop was
conducted in early 2011, in cooperation with the Irving Fisher
Committee on Central Bank Statistics, in order to compare
residence-based data with data on a globally consolidated basis
by nationality. The proceedings of the workshop were publishedin April 2012.

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 the compilation anddissemination of the balance-sheet approach(BSA), flow-of-funds, and sectoral data moregenerally, starting with the G-20 economies.
Data on nonbank financial institutions should
be a particular priority. The experience of the
ECB and Eurostat within Europe and theOECD should be drawn upon.

45

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

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.

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

16.

18.

The World Bank, in coordination with the IMF,
and consulting with the Inter-Agency Task
Force on Finance Statistics (TFFS), to launch
the public sector debt database in 2010.
6.

From May 2011, IMF staff reports adopted a standardized
presentation of fiscal data following the GFSM 2001. Such
presentations are now incorporated in over 100 IMF staff
reports, including for most G-20 economies. In addition, thefiscal data of the IMF World Economic Outlook (WEO) now
follows the GFSM 2001 format. Among the G-20 economies,
seven economies compile quarterly general government
operations and two quarterly general government cash flow. The
IAG has developed and agreed on a common reporting templatefor GFS data (see Annex II in this report).

The work program for 2013 will focus on
encouraging more G-20 economies and othercountries to disseminate quarterly general
government data under the GFSM 2001
framework, in particular the components listed in
the GFS template (Annex II). Once this templateis implemented and countries start reporting, thisrecommendation will be considered completed.

Countries adhering to the SDDS Plus would be expected todisseminate general government operations (GGO) data
presented in the GFSM 2001 format. The SDDS Plus would
require quarterly data, disseminated within 12 months after theend of the reference period.
In December 2010, the World Bank jointly with the IMF
launched the quarterly public sector debt database initially fordeveloping and emerging-market countries.

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

The micro-macro group defined a common
methodology and is implementing pilot studies
with results expected by the end of 2012. The
micro group is undertaking methodological workon the joint distribution of income, consumption,
and wealth with results expected also by the endof 2012.

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

10

17.

As the recommended improvements to data
sources and categories are implemented,
statistical experts to seek to compile
distributional information (such as ranges andquartile information) alongside aggregate
figures, wherever this is relevant. The IAG is
encouraged to promote production anddissemination of these data in a frequent andtimely manner. The OECD is encouraged tocontinue in its efforts to link national accounts
data with distributional information.
The IMF to promote timely and cross-country
standardized and comparable government
finance data based on the accepted international
standard, the Government Finance Statistics
Manual 2001 (GFSM 2001).

The IMF Executive Board broadly endorsed the inclusion of
sectoral balance sheets in the SDDS Plus and included them in
the SDDS on an encouraged basis. Countries adhering to the
SDDS Plus would be expected to disseminate a minimum set ofinternationally comparable sectoral balance sheets, for financial
assets and liabilities with a focus on the sub-sector details of thefinancial corporations, and standard System of National
Accounts 2008 (2008 SNA) instrument classification.6
Countries adhering to the SDDS Plus would be expected todisseminate quarterly data within one quarter after the end of thereference period.
The OECD and Eurostat set up two expert groups in early 2011
with member country participation. One group focused oninvestigating the measurement of disparities in a national
accounts framework (micro-macro); and the other group thejoint distribution of income, consumption, and wealth (micro).
Work has started and is progressing well.

In March 2012, in collaboration with the OECD, the public
sector debt database was expanded to the advanced economies.
Among the G-20 economies 15 have agreed to participate and
14 are reporting. In total around 85 countries have agreed toparticipate. The TFFS has published a Public Sector Debt
Statistics Guide which provides the methodological guidance forcompiling these data.

19.

The Inter-Secretariat Working Group on Price
Statistics to complete the planned handbook onreal estate price indices. The BIS and member
central banks to investigate dissemination on
the BIS website of publicly available data onreal estate prices. The IAG to consider
including real estate prices (residential andcommercial) in the Principal Global Indicators(PGI) website.

Countries adhering to the SDDS Plus would be expected todisseminate data on general government total gross debt
consistent with the quarterly public sector debt template 7 with
dissemination within four months after the end of the reference
period.
Under the auspice of the Inter-Secretariat Working Group on
Price Statistics (ISWGPS), and led by Eurostat, the work on the
Handbook on Residential Property Price Indices (RPPI) is welladvanced and expected to be completed in late 2012. A
conference to launch a Handbook on Commercial Property
Price Indicators was conducted at the ECB in May 2012.

The ISWGPS to complete its work on the
RPPI Handbook in the second half of 2012. The
technical discussion to develop the
CPPI Handbook has started with the aim of
publishing it at the end of 2014. Once thisHandbook is finalized, this recommendation will
be considered completed.
At the EU level, a draft regulation on providing
data on residential real estate prices to theEuropean institutions has been prepared which
could be enacted by November 2012.

The PGI website was significantly enhanced in March 2011,
when five non-G-20 economies that are FSB members wereadded, along with cross-country comparable government
finance data. Also, the range of ways by which the PGI website
could be accessed was increased with new smart phone
applications, and the release of a Statistical Data and Metadata
eXchange (SDMX) web service to facilitatecomputer-to-computer access. Data on the aggregate G-20 GDP
growth rate, as compiled by the OECD, were released for the
first time in March 2012, and tables on balance sheets andtransactions by economic sector and CPIS data, were madeavailable starting in August 2012. Also, from August 2012balance of payments and IIP data starting in 2005 are presented
in the BPM6 format. The PGI website is now accessible throughthe G-20 official website.8

Priorities for enhancing the PGI website are toclose gaps in the availability of national data,
improve data timeliness and quality, and establish
a new PGI database infrastructure. Ways of
improving the efficiencies in data supply willcontinue to be investigated, including thecontinued promotion of the SDMX standards forthe dissemination and sharing of official
statistics, and the set up of common Data
Structure Definitions (DSDs) by statisticaldomain. Data-sharing arrangements are to bereviewed from both a supplier and a user
perspective.

Communication of Official Statistics
20.

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

7

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

8

See http://www.g20.org/index.php/en/numeralia.

11

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

12
I. INTRODUCTION
A. Purpose of this Progress Report
1.
The present report takes stock of progress to date in implementing therecommendations in the G-20 Data Gaps Initiative (DGI), and elaborates on
implementation issues, challenges, and priority actions going forward. A detailed
description of progress on each recommendation, as well as action plans and timetables, areprovided in Table 1.
B. Background2.
This progress report provides an update on the status of the DGI that aims at closing
information gaps highlighted by the ongoing crisis. It focuses on the implementation of the
20 recommendations in the report The Financial Crisis and Information Gaps1 endorsed by
the G-20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors in November 2009 and by theInternational Monetary and Financial Committee (IMFC).2 The 20 recommendations aim toclose data gaps relevant to identifying and monitoring the buildup of risk in the financial
sectors, the cross-border interlinkages, and the vulnerabilities and sectoral interconnections indomestic economies as well as to improving the communication of official statistics. The
resulting data enhancements and new statistical frameworks are key to improve analysis andpolicymaking to foster financial and macroeconomic stability. The ultimate goal is to create a
global information system suitable to monitor global financial and nonfinancial flows andpositions comprehensively.
3.
Table 2 presents a stylized overview of the 20 recommendations, organized in amatrix form. The rows reflect the four main areas of data gaps highlighted by the global
financial crisis and the columns reflect their broad status in terms of whether
reporting/conceptual frameworks exist or need to be developed.3

1

http://www.imf.org/external/np/g20/pdf/102909.pdf.

2

Following the initial report on the DGI presented for the November 2009 G-20 Finance Ministers and Central
Bank Governors meeting, two progress reports on the implementation of this Initiative were submitted (inMay 2010 and June 2011): http://www.imf.org/external/np/g20/pdf/053110.pdf; andhttp://www.imf.org/external/np/g20/pdf/063011.pdf, respectively.
3

The numbers in the matrix refer to the recommendation numbers in the DGI. Recommendation # 1 is notincluded as it states the need for the FSB Secretariat and IMF staff to report periodically to the G-20 Finance
Ministers and Central Bank Governors.

13
Table 2. Overview of the 20 DGI Recommendations

Build-up of riskin the financial
sectorConceptual/statistical frameworkneeds development

Conceptual/statisticalframeworks exist and ongoingcollection needs enhancement# 3 (Tail risk in the financial system
and variations in distributions of,and concentrations in, activity)# 2 (Financial Soundness Indicators(FSIs))# 4 (Aggregate Leverage andMaturity Mismatches)# 5 (Credit Default Swaps)# 7 (Securities data)# 6 (Structured products)
Cross-borderfinancial linkages

Vulnerability ofdomestic
economies toshocks# 8 and # 9 (Global network
connections and systemicallyimportant global financial
institutions)# 10 and # 11 (International
Banking Statistics (IBS) and the
Coordinated Portfolio 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)

C. Consultation Process and Feedback
4.
The implementation process of the DGI involves broad consultation withnational authorities on their views on action plans, modalities, timelines, and challenges
to enhance existing datasets and implement new ones. The DGI is underpinned bysustained coordination and collaboration efforts among the members of the Inter-Agency
Group on Economic and Financial Statistics (IAG),4 and close consultation with G-20
economies’ officials. This implementation approach has resulted in significant progress,
strong support, and commitment from national authorities and other stakeholders to
implement the action plans and timetables of the DGI in the G-20 economies. Going forward,
4

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

14
addressing remaining challenges requires continuing high-level support, including ensuring
adequate resources for this work.
5.
As part of the continuing consultation process, the IMF’s Statistics Department,in collaboration with the FSB Secretariat and the members of the IAG, organized four
regional conferences and one global conference for G-20 senior officials during the firsthalf of 2012. The regional conferences were hosted by the Bank of Mexico (March 2012),
the Undersecretariat of the Treasury of Turkey (April 2012), the Banque de France(April 2012), and the People’s Bank of China (May 2012), while the global conference washosted by the FSB at the BIS headquarters in Basel, Switzerland (June 2012).
6.
The consultation process has confirmed strong support for the DGI and broad
agreement on the identified data gaps that need to be addressed. The datasets beingenhanced and developed under the DGI are seen as key for analysis and policymaking,including on financial stability, external vulnerability, fiscal sustainability, and domestic
interconnectedness. The DGI is also seen to have contributed significantly to foster closer
coordination among domestic statistical agencies. The IAG coordination is very muchappreciated. The key conclusions from the global conference are presented in Box 1.
BOX 1. SUMMARY OF POINTS EMERGING FROM THE GLOBAL CONFERENCE IN BASEL, JUNE 2012

There is strong support for the DGI.



Comprehensive and high-quality data are essential for good policies.

The sharing of information relevant for early warning and policymaking, both within and across borders, needs
improvement. In some cases, the legal framework needs to be revised to allow improved sharing of data between micro
and macro supervisors (including international organizations).

Complexity of the crisis means addressing data gaps is a global initiative, hence the need for outreach, networking, and acall for the G-20 to support the endeavor with resources.



The datasets being enhanced and developed under the DGI are in high demand for analysis and policymaking, including
for financial stability, external vulnerability, fiscal sustainability, and domestic interconnectedness.

Data needs are increasing due to links with other G-20 initiatives and emerging data demands resulting from ongoingregulatory/supervisory work, including on: legal entity identifiers (LEI), work of the Basel Committee on Risk
Concentration, IOSCO work on derivatives, and FSB work on shadow banking.



The DGI has spurred closer coordination among domestic statistics-producing agencies.

Work on global network connections and G-SIFIs is of high importance. Granular information on exposures and funding
relations of G-SIFIs is essential for assessing financial stability and ensuring proper early warning and global
surveillance.

Sectoral accounts work is of high importance because of its links with several recommendations.



There is demand for greater granularity of data.



Filling some data gaps would take longer and require additional resources, hence the need to set priorities, action plans,
and timelines.



Data requirements for macro-prudential and micro-prudential analysis need to be aligned to reduce the reporting burden.



Private sector disclosure of data should be encouraged.

15
II. IMPLEMENTATION STATUS
7.
Good progress is being made both at the international and national levels in
implementing the 20 DGI recommendations. Drawing on the discussions during the noted
regional and global conferences and related material supplied by G-20 economies, Figure 1
illustrates in a nutshell the level of progress on a scale of 0 to 10, for each of the
20 recommendations. The rankings are based on the level of progress in developing
conceptual frameworks (if not previously available), development of data reporting
templates, the comprehensiveness of reported data (including, requirements regarding
granularity, periodicity, and timeliness), and the number of G-20 economies reporting data.
A rank of 5 implies that the conceptual framework is fully (or almost fully) developed, andthe remaining work is to make progress to the outer shell by improving actual data reportingand dissemination.
Figure 1: Overview of Implementation of the 20 DGI Recommendations
Conceptual /statisticalframeworks exist and ongoing datacollection needs enhancements

Conceptual /Statistical frameworks
need further development

Financial Soundness Indicators #2
10
Credit Default Swaps # 5

Distributional Information # 16

Financial & Nonfinancial Corporations
Cross-border Exposures # 1498Securities Statistics #7

7

Consolidation Concepts # 13

Cordinated Portfolio Investment Survey(CPIS) and IBS # 10

6

5
4
3

Common Template for Global Network
Connections and G-SIFIs # 9

International Banking Statistics (IBS)
# 11

2
1

0

Collection and Sharing of Data on
Global Network Connections and
G-SIFIs #8

International Investment Position (IIP)# 12

Tail Risks in the Financial System # 3

Sectoral Accounts # 15

Leverage & Maturity Mismatches #4

Structured Products # 6
Principal Global Indicators #20

Government Finance Statistics # 17

Public Sector Debt #18
Real Estate Prices # 19

Implementation progress on a scale of 0-10.
Notes on how to read this graph: As explained in this report, the DGI involves two broad objectives: 1) developing new conceptual/statistical frameworks; and 2)
enhancing existing datasets, including improving country coverage and data granularity. In the first broad objective, reflected on the left hand side of Figure 1, a rankof 5 will imply full implementation of the specific DGI recommendation. In the second broad objective, reflected on the right hand side of Figure 1, a rank of 5 will only
imply that needed analytical and developmental work in support of enhancements to existing datasets has been completed, but achieving a rank of 10 will require fullreporting and dissemination of actual data by the G-20 economies.

8.
As evident in Figure 1, substantial progress has been made in implementing
most of the DGI recommendations. In particular, implementation of enhancements to16existing datasets is advancing at a good pace. However, challenging work remains to be doneto achieve full implementation and to complete developmental work and start reporting on
new statistical frameworks.
A. Build Up of Risk in the Financial Sector
9.
Considerable progress has been made in improving information on build up ofrisk in the financial sector. For instance, work is complete or nearing completion for thoserecommendations where a conceptual/statistical framework is in place, in particular, financial
soundness indicators (FSIs, recommendation # 2), and credit default swaps (CDS,
recommendation # 5). Work on improving transparency of structured products(recommendation # 6) is complete, and conceptual work on tail risk (recommendation # 3)
and leverage and maturity mismatches (recommendation # 4) is in progress.
10.
FSIs country coverage and periodicity has improved in the context of the DGI.
FSIs are indicators of the current financial health and soundness of the financial institutions
in a country and of their corporate and household counterparts. The development of FSIs
responds to the need for better tools to assess the strengths and vulnerabilities of the financial
system. Currently, 75 countries are reporting to the IMF core FSIs (up from 45 countries in2009), as defined in the Financial Soundness Indicators: Compilation Guide,5 including 18
G-20 economies (up from 14 G-20 economies in 2009). Of all reporting countries, 62 report
data on a quarterly or more frequent basis (of which 12 are G-20 members).6 Disseminationof seven FSIs is encouraged under the IMF’s Special Data Dissemination Standard (SDDS).
Also, countries adhering to the SDDS Plus7 will be expected to disseminate seven FSIs. In
November 2011, STA organized a FSI reference group meeting with representatives from32 countries and 10 international organizations to review the current list of core andencouraged FSIs and develop a work program on FSIs. Work is underway on assessing theimplication of Basel III on the core and encouraged list of FSIs, reviewing the list of FSIs,
and updating the methodology to achieve greater consistency of data reported.
11.
Significant progress has been made in improving information on CDS. The
opacity of CDS about the location of exposures to failing financial institutions was seen as animportant data gap and a factor which exacerbated the recent financial crisis. There was a
shortage of information about the web of credit risk transfers through over-the-counter(OTC) derivatives. In response, the Committee on the Global Financial System (CGFS)
5

http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fsi/guide/2006/index.htm.

6

See http://fsi.imf.org/.

7

See http://www.imf.org/external/np/pp/eng/2012/013112.pdf. The IMF Executive Board broadly endorsed theestablishment of the SDDS Plus in February 2012. The official launching of this new tier of the IMF Data
Standards Initiatives will take place only after the IMF Executive Board approves the related legal text which isenvisaged for later in the year.

17
adopted two sets of enhancements to the semi-annual CDS statistics compiled by the BIS.8
The first set of enhancements, introduced with the June 2010 data, provides a finerclassification of the counterparties of reporting derivatives dealers. The new data showed net
credit risk transfers from hedge funds to reporting dealers and from reporting dealers to allother sectors. The second set of enhancements, introduced with the June 2011 data,
decomposes total credit risk transfers with each counterparty group according tocharacteristics of the underlying debt (sector, rating, and maturity), and also reveals themarket values of credit risk transfers with counterparties in different sectors after the nettingof any bilateral CDS positions with offsetting market values. This facilitates theidentification of counterparty groups with net claims on dealers and vice versa. In total,
13 economies report semi-annual CDS data of which eight are G-20 economies, including all
major markets for CDS contracts.
12.
The crisis highlighted also that there was room for improving securities
statistics, and work is progressing to improve the related conceptual framework anddata reporting. The Working Group on Securities Databases (WGSD) has developed
conceptual guidance in the Handbook on Securities Statistics (HSS). Part 1 of the HSS was
published in May 2009 and provides a conceptual framework, including presentation tables,
for the compilation and dissemination of statistics on debt securities issues. It is designed toencourage national and international statistics bodies to produce consistent and comparable
securities data.9 Part 2 of the HSS, published in September 2010, provides a conceptual
framework, including presentation tables, for statistics on debt securities holdings. Part 3 of
the HSS covers the issuance and holdings of equity securities. It is scheduled to be publishedin September 2012. The WGSD website10 promotes the communication on the work of the
WGSD and press statements are made to alert the public of the release of new or updated
parts of the HSS. WGSD members regularly make presentations on the HSS and its
implementation at international meetings, seminars, and workshops.
13.
The publication of the HSS is helping to improve the availability and quality ofstatistics on securities issuance and holdings. The BIS has since the late 1980s publishedstatistics on primary markets for debt securities and on issues of international debt securities
by borrowers.11 The statistics cover stocks and flows for money and bond markets
worldwide. Since 2009 the BIS has been working with central banks to collect statistics
8

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

9

The concepts and definitions are based on the System of National Accounts 2008 (2008 SNA) and the IMF
Balance of Payments and International Investment Position Manual, sixth edition (BPM6).

10

See http://www.imf.org/external/np/sta/wgsd/index.htm. Part 1 of the HSS is available at
http://www.imf.org/external/np/sta/wgsd/pdf/051309.pdf and Part 2 at
http://www.imf.org/external/np/sta/wgsd/pdf/090710.pdf.
11

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

18reported according to the guidelines in the HSS. Most of the 56 countries contacted by the
BIS now provide some or all of the requested data, of which 17 are G-20 economies. In
December 2012, the BIS will implement three changes in its securities statistics based on therecommendations in the HSS (in particular, Part 1). The changes include revising thedefinition of an international issue, aligning breakdowns with the definitions in the HSS, andmaking greater use of debt securities statistics reported by central banks. Also, countries
adhering to the SDDS Plus will be expected to provide data on the stocks of securities by
issuer and holder on a from-whom-to-whom basis with quarterly periodicity and timeliness.12
14.
The G-20 DGI called for securities market regulators working through theInternational Organization of Securities Commission (IOSCO) to further investigate
the disclosure requirements for complex structured products (recommendation # 6),
and this work is complete. IOSCO published its report on disclosure principles for public
offerings and listings of asset backed securities (ABS) in April 2010.13 The principles aredesigned to provide guidance to securities regulators who are developing or reviewing theirregulatory disclosure regimes for public offerings and listings of ABS. They are based on thepremise that the issuing entity will prepare a document used for a public offering or listing of
ABS that will contain all material information, clearly presented, that is necessary for fulland fair disclosure of the character of the securities being offered or listed in order to assist
investors in making their investment decision. IOSCO published, in February 2012, a
consultation report (Principles for Ongoing Disclosure for Asset Backed Securities) as acomplement to the April 2010 document.14
15.
Progress has been made on developing a conceptual framework for themeasurement of tail risk in the financial system (recommendation # 3) and particularly
on leverage and maturity mismatches (recommendation # 4). The IMF has worked onstress testing, has undertaken continual refinements to its early warning work, and iscompleting two working papers on standard measures of tail risks that are expected to be
finalized by the third quarter of 2012. A brief conceptual overview paper will draw on thesevarious strands. Once this paper is published, the conceptual part of this work will beconsidered complete. The BIS, drawing on its IBS data and work done by the CGFS and theMarkets Committee on Disruptions in Cross-border Funding Markets During the Crisis, 15
has completed its conceptual work on measures of maturity mismatch and leverage on banks’international balance sheets, which has been documented in a number of publications.16 The
12Consistent with Part 2 of the HSS.

13

See http://www.iosco.org/news/pdf/IOSCONEWS180.pdf.

14

See http://www.iosco.org/news/pdf/IOSCONEWS224.pdf.

15

See http://www.bis.org/publ/cgfs37.pdf.

16

See, for example, http://www.bis.org/publ/work309.htm, http://www.bis.org/publ/work291.htm, andhttp://www.bis.org/publ/qtrpdf/r_qt1006h.pdf.

19
FSB is continuing to work to collect data on maturity and liquidity mismatches for these
institutions and markets as part of its remit.
B. Cross-Border Financial Linkages
16.
Work on cross-border financial linkages is making good progress withsignificant ground covered on enhancements to the BIS IBS, the IMF’s CoordinatedPortfolio Investment Survey (CPIS), and the International Investment Position (IIP)(recommendations # 10, # 11, and # 12). At the same time, conceptual work is progressing
regarding global systemically important financial institutions (G-SIFIs), consolidation
concepts, and cross-border exposures of financial and nonfinancial corporations(recommendations #8 and #9, #13, and #14, respectively).
17.
The BIS is enhancing its IBS.17 The CGFS approved enhancements to the IBS thatwill be implemented in two stages. The first set of expanded data, based on Stage 1enhancements, will be implemented starting with data for Q2 2012. The enhancements will
focus on the locational statistics, with the key extensions being: (1) broadening the statistics
to cover the entire financial claims and liabilities in balance sheets of reporting banks, notjust their international activities. This involves adding banks’ local currency positions
vis-à-vis residents of the host country in the nationality and residency statistics, and refining
the foreign currency breakdown (by adding pound sterling and Swiss franc positions) in thenationality statistics; and (2) adding a vis-à-vis country dimension in the nationality statistics
so as to see a more granular geography of banks’ assets and liabilities. With theseenhancements users will be able to simultaneously see a bank’s location, its nationality, thelocation of its counterparty, and the currency and type of claim.
18.
Stage 2 enhancements to the IBS extend both the locational and the consolidated
statistics to close key data gaps. They are focused around three key banking and financial
stability issues: (1) better understanding banks’ credit exposures to particular countries andcounterparty sectors, including adding nonbank financial institutions as a required
counterpart to be reported, (2) monitoring trends in the supply of bank credit (bothcross-border and domestically sourced) from different types of banking offices to thedifferent nonfinancial sectors of individual countries, and (3) assessing banks’ funding risk,
including monitoring currency (and to a lesser extent maturity) mismatches in the assets andliabilities of major banking systems, and tracking the broad composition of banks’ liabilities
and equity. Stage 2 recommendations are expected to be implemented starting in Q4 2013
reporting quarter.
19.
Enhancements to the IMF’s CPIS aim at increasing economies’ participation;
improving frequency, timeliness, and scope; and facilitating data accessibility.
Currently, 18 G-20 economies participate in the CPIS. The CPIS report forms have been17

http://www.bis.org/statistics/consbankstatsguide.pdf and http://www.bis.org/statistics/locbankstatsguide.pdf.

20revised changing the frequency of reporting from annual to semi-annual and increasing thescope to allow voluntary collection and reporting of data on the institutional sector of foreign
debtor and on short positions. The purpose is to collect information on the stock of
cross-border holdings of securities—equity securities and long- and short-term debt securities
valued at market prices prevailing at the end of June and December, and broken down by the
economy of residence of the issuer of the securities.18 In addition to this core (i.e., required)
set of data, the CPIS also encourages the reporting of supplementary information. The result
is a global database of reported cross-border holdings of securities and derived portfolio
investment liabilities with the capacity for showing bilateral and partner economy data fromthe creditor or debtor perspective.19
20.
The CPIS data are to be reported to the IMF within seven months after the endof the reference period (with a view to IMF dissemination well within 12 months fromthe reference period). The sector of holder data are cross classified by sector of issuer andare initially applicable to the 25 issuer economies that are considered by the IMF to havesystemically important financial centers. These enhancements are to be implemented
beginning with the June 2013 measurement date. Most G-20 countries considered theincreased frequency and timeliness to be a feasible objective in 2013/2014. On data
accessibility, the IMF has focused on utilizing new technologies for presenting andexchanging data through the launch of the IMF e-Library,20 complemented by applications
for handheld devices. Countries adhering to the SDDS Plus will be expected to participate in
the CPIS by providing at least the core (required) set of data on the semi-annual frequency
beginning in 2015.
21.
Reporting of IIP data is improving in terms of country coverage and increased
periodicity. All G-20 economies disseminate IIP data, of which 12 economies (plus theEuro area) disseminate quarterly IIP data. Five additional G-20 economies have plans to
introduce quarterly reporting. The total number of reporters of IIP data continues to increase
and is now 132 (up from 116 in mid-2009), with 76 quarterly reporters. For SDDS
subscribers, dissemination of IIP data is prescribed on a quarterly frequency from 2014.21
Improving further the country coverage and quality of quarterly IIP remains a key objective
going forward.

18

See Notes and Definitions http://www.imf.org/external/np/sta/pi/notes.htm.

19

http://cpis.imf.org/.

20

http://www.elibrary.org.

21

For IMF member countries, the provision of IIP data to the IMF for surveillance purposes is also required
under Article VIII. Section 5 of the IMF’s Articles of Agreement.

21
22.
Progress is being made on recommendation # 14 by the development of atemplate that will allow users to navigate existing data on cross-border positions offinancial and nonfinancial corporations. The template is broadly an extension of thesectoral accounts framework and follows the same classification of assets and liabilities. The
goal is to make available existing data on cross-border exposures of financial andnonfinancial corporations in a user friendly manner, targeting particularly the nonbank
financial corporations sector. The navigation tool will be available on the PGI website by
end-2012 (where the inventory of existing data from international organizations on which thenavigation tool will be based is already available).
23.
Progress is being made on further developing conceptual/statistical frameworks(recommendations # 8, # 9, and # 13). Going forward, work remains to be done to movefrom conceptual/statistical frameworks to actual data collection, reporting, anddissemination. Regarding the G-SIFIs (recommendations # 8 and # 9), agreement on Phase I
activities has been approved by the FSB Plenary. These involve the pooling of data of
individual G-SIFIs banks currently collected in the context of varied international initiatives
to a centralized stand-alone BIS hub by March 2013. These data cover institution to
institution (I-I) consolidated credit exposures and institutions to aggregate (I-A) international
claims from the IBS consolidated balance sheet. In the initial phase starting in March 2013,
information will be shared only with individual prudential supervisors (including central
banks as appropriate) in the form of reports. Finalization of the reporting templates for theI-I and I-A data, and wider data sharing among the official sector, are expected to be decided
by the FSB Plenary in early 2013.
24.
The BIS published a working paper22 in early 2012 on cross-border exposures offinancial and nonfinancial corporations based on the concept of nationality and global
consolidation (recommendation # 13). Nationality and consolidation concepts are relevantin providing methodological guidance for the work on FSIs (recommendation # 2) andG-SIFIs (recommendations # 8 and # 9). The paper will be used to prepare a draft reference
document by end-2012, which will be circulated for comments to the various groups working
with these concepts.
C. Vulnerability of Domestic Economies to Shocks
25.
Progress has been made over the last year in improving availability of data tobetter understand and monitor vulnerability of domestic economies to shocks(recommendations # 15, # 17, # 18, and # 19). This work covers key datasets on sectoral
accounts, government finance statistics (GFS), public sector debt, and real estate prices.
While considerable progress has been made, the work ahead involves implementing fully22

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

22
harmonized data reporting templates, especially for GFS, real estate prices, and sectoral
accounts (Figure 1).
26.
Recommendation # 15 calls for developing a strategy to promote the compilationand dissemination of the balance-sheet approach, flow of funds, and sectoral data,
starting with G-20 economies. An important milestone is the development of templates fora minimum and encouraged set of internationally comparable sectoral accounts and balance
sheets. The templates were finalized in June 2012 through a global consultative process led
by the IMF.23 Consistent with the templates developed, countries adhering to the SDDS Plus
will be expected to disseminate a minimum set of internationally comparable sectoral balance
sheets, for financial assets and liabilities with a focus on the sub-sector details of the financial
corporations, and standard 2008 SNA instrument classification.24 Countries adhering to the
SDDS Plus would be expected to disseminate quarterly data within one quarter after the endof the reference period.
27.
Similarly a reporting template for GFS (recommendation # 17) has beendeveloped by the IAG (Annex II), and it is expected to become operational by
October 2012. The reporting template involves General Government Operations (GGO) data
presented in the GFSM 2001 format and reported on a quarterly basis. In March 2010, theIMF Executive Board approved that, from May 2011, IMF staff reports should present
government finance statistics based on the GFSM 2001 framework. Countries adhering to the
SDDS Plus will be expected to disseminate quarterly GGO data presented in the GFSM 2001
format.
28.
The advanced economies have been invited to participate in the World Bank
debt database, following its successful launch for emerging and developing economies in2010 (recommendation # 18). As of July 2012, 15 G-20 economies had agreed toparticipate, and 14 are reporting data. The minimum data to be reported cover central
government gross debt at nominal value. The data are reported on a quarterly basis withinfour months after the end of the reference period. Consistent with the public sector debt
template, countries adhering to the SDDS Plus will be expected to disseminate data on
general government total gross debt at nominal value, classified by debt instrument, currencyof denomination, and residence of the creditor; and for memorandum items, general
government debt securities and loans classified by remaining maturity, and total debt
securities at market value25 with dissemination within four months after the end of thereference period.

23

See http://www.imf.org/external/np/sta/templates/sectacct/index.htm andhttp://unstats.un.org/unsd/nationalaccount/imp.asp.
24

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

25

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

23
29.
Recommendation # 19 calls for completion of a Handbook on Residential
Property Price Indices (RPPI) and for the BIS and member central banks to investigate
dissemination of these statistics on its website. Real estate prices played a major role in thefinancial crisis bubble, but harmonized statistics on real estate properties were not available.
The BIS, with the assistance of its member central banks (and, in certain cases, also ofstatistical offices), has started to disseminate real estate price statistics on its website. Fifteen
G-20 economies and the Euro area provide data to the BIS. These data are also available
through the PGI website. However, these data remain on a heterogeneous basis. To foster thedevelopment of homogeneous real estate statistics, the Handbook on RPPI has beendeveloped and is very close to official publication. For the longer-term development of their
RPPI, G-20 countries could consider as necessary and feasible developmental plans toimprove coverage (geographical, type, vintage, source of finance), timeliness, variables
available for quality-mix method adjustment, and basis for pricing. Work commenced in
May 2012 on the development of a Handbook on Commercial Property Price Indicators(CPPI) with a conference hosted by the ECB.26 This was in response to a call from G-20
senior officials’ conference in Washington (March 2011) to address commercial estate prices.
The CPPI Handbook is scheduled for publication by end 2014.
30.
Work is also progressing on developing a conceptual/statistical framework on
distributional information on household income, consumption, and wealth acrosssocial-economic classes of households (recommendation # 16). The OECD and Eurostat set
up two expert groups in early 2011 with member country participation. One group
investigated the measurement of disparities in a national accounts framework (micro-macro);and the other the joint distribution of income, consumption, and wealth (micro). Their work
is making good progress. The OECD-Eurostat Expert group on disparities on national
accounts (EGDNA) is examining the breakdown of household income and final consumption
by household subgroups with the aim of producing distributional information consistent withmacro-totals. However, a significant amount of work remains to be covered before therelevant data are collected, reported, and disseminated. The discussion of the first national
results, based on a common template developed by the first group, took place inAugust 2012, and the final report is expected by end-2012. The micro-group is undertaking
methodological work on the joint distribution of income, consumption, and wealth withresults expected also by the end of 2012.
D. Improving Communication of Statistics
31.
Considerable progress has been made in improving the communication of
statistics through the Principal Global Indicators website (recommendation # 20).27
Over the last year, key enhancements included the release of the G-20 GDP aggregate growthrate (as compiled by the OECD) for the first time in March 2012; sectoral accounts
26

See http://www.ecb.europa.eu/events/conference/html/20120511_cppi.en.html.

27

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

24transactions and balance-sheet data of the G-20 which are available from the OECD; postingof the inventory of available data at international agencies on cross-border exposures offinancial and nonfinancial corporations; cross-country government finance data; CPIS data;
and balance of payments and IIP data in a BPM6 format. The PGI includes the CPIS data for
the G-20 economies plus the five non-G-20 members of the FSB. The official website of the
G-20 economies provides a link to the PGI.28
III. LINKS TO OTHER INITIATIVES
32.
The DGI has a high value added in advancing and monitoring other initiatives,
including G-20 initiatives, aimed at strengthening the international financial
architecture, and reforming the financial sector. With its comprehensive coverage of key
datasets, the DGI is improving the tools for enhancing surveillance and supporting otherpolicy/institutional initiatives which are being implemented in response to the global crisis.
For instance, the DGI underpins the IMF measures put forward for strengthening surveillance
under the 2011 Triennial Surveillance Review; namely, measures to better understandlinkages and spillovers across sectors and economies; buildup of vulnerabilities; financial
stability, and external stability.
33.
Enhancing surveillance is part of the IMF Managing Director’s Action Plan29 to
the International Monetary and Financial Committee on April 2012, and focuses on theneed to improve risk assessments and better integration of financial andmacroeconomic issues. The G-20 leaders at their meeting at Los Cabos (June, 2012)30
supported this effort by calling for better integration of bilateral and multilateral surveillance,with a focus on global, domestic and financial stability, including spillovers from countries’
policies.
34.
The DGI is an integral part of these initiatives and plugs key data gaps toprovide a solid information foundation for policy analysis and decision making.
Accelerating the implementation of the DGI recommendations by the G-20 economies,
therefore, has far reaching benefits to the global community.
35.

The main links of the DGI with other initiatives can be summarized as follows:Strengthening international financial architecture: The DGI underpins the work of
the G-2031 on strengthening IMF surveillance by improving data collection. The
IMF’s 2011 Triennial Surveillance Review focuses on four broad themes—

28

See http://www.g20.org/index.php/en/numeralia.

29

http://www.imf.org/external/pp/longres.aspx?id=4640.

30

http://g20.org/images/stories/docs/g20/conclu/G20_Leaders_Declaration_2012_1.pdf.

31

G-20 International Financial Architecture Working Group.

25
interconnectedness, risk assessment, financial stability, and external stability. The
DGI supports this work by enhancing data on (1) interconnectedness, through the
G-SIFIs data stream work covering I-A data (recommendations # 8 and # 9);(2) cross-border exposures of financial and nonfinancial corporations(recommendation # 14); portfolio investment through the CPIS data and cross-borderbanking through the BIS IBS (recommendations # 10 and # 11), and international
investment positions through the IIP (recommendation # 12); and (3) sectoralinterconnections through sectoral accounts (recommendation # 15).


The DGI work underpins the IMF work on the IMF’s Data Standards Initiatives
by enhancing data dissemination to the public through the SDDS and SDDS
Plus. The latter covers important enhancements which were developed with a close
link to the DGI including sectoral balance sheets; general government operations;general government gross debt; other financial corporation’s survey; debt securities;
financial soundness indicators; CPIS; Coordinated Direct Investment Survey; andCurrency Composition of Foreign Exchange Reserves.32



The DGI supports the work of the G-20 initiatives on shadow banking and islinked to the FSB work on legal entity identifiers (LEI). In particular, theexpansion in the dissemination and reporting of internationally comparable anddetailed sectoral accounts, including developing financial stocks and flows on afrom-whom-to-whom basis, is relevant for the work on shadow banking. LEI will be
helpful in the context of several recommendations, for example, the work on global
network connections would benefit from a harmonized identification ofcounterparties.



The DGI supports the G-20 Action Plan to develop local currency bonds markets(LCBM).33 The DGI work on securities statistics supports the G-20 Action Plan on
LCBM by providing statistical guidance for the collection of securities statistics
through the HSS. This helps enhance harmonization and dissemination of quantitativeand qualitative data on local currency bonds.
IV. CHALLENGES AND IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
A. Challenges

36.
Substantial progress is being made in enhancing existing datasets anddeveloping new conceptual/statistical frameworks to address data gaps.
32

Countries 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 the external sector. See
http://www.imf.org/external/np/pp/eng/2012/013112.pdf.
33

http://www.g8-g20.com/g8-g20/root/bank_objects/0000005999-G20-AP_PostCannes.pdf.

26
Notwithstanding the substantial progress fostered by the DGI, significant challenges remain
to move the DGI forward.
37.
A key area that remains to be addressed is the sharing of information onconnections from G-SIFIs to different countries and sectors, the so-called I-A
information. Financial stress in G-SIFIs had global implications and timely information on
the interconnections of these institutions to countries and sectors is key to ensure proper early
warning and global surveillance. In this connection, the extension of data sharing to central
banks, macroprudential authorities, and international financial institutions is very importantbut some legal hurdles remain. It is expected to be decided in early 2013.
38.
Other areas that remain challenging are the implementation of dataenhancements to GFS and sectoral accounts. Further efforts are ongoing to achieve
quarterly reporting and dissemination of general government positions and flows withquarterly timeliness. It is expected that most G-20 economies will be in a position to achieve
this objective by 2014. The reporting and dissemination of full datasets of sectoral accounts,
balance sheets, and flow of funds remains confined to a few economies. The expectation is,particularly for G-20 economies, that work in this area will accelerate fostered by the recent
agreement on a minimum set of internationally comparable sectoral balance sheets forfinancial assets and liabilities with a focus on the subsector details of the financial
corporations, and standard 2008 SNA instrument classification.
39.
Ensuring adequate resources for statistical programs is critical for making
tangible progress in plugging data gaps. Resource availability is seen as the main
impediment to keep enhancing existing datasets and to address new data requirements. In
certain economies statistical programs have been scaled back as part of austerity measures at
a time when new data are critical for monitoring the recovery programs. While the issue ofresource allocation is a preserve of national authorities, as noted in previous reports, there isa strong case to fortify statistical programs to ensure availability of data to identify andmonitor vulnerabilities of economies more effectively. Continuing support of the G-20 in thisregard is essential for the success of the DGI.
40.
Further strengthening of coordination of statistical activities is needed. Closing
the data gaps identified under the DGI requires effective coordination of the several agencies
in an economy involved in and with responsibilities on statistical work; including national
statistical offices, central banks, financial regulatory/supervisory agencies, and ministries offinance and planning. While, in some cases, the availability of data is constrained by legal
frameworks, there is ample evidence that in other cases flow of data between agencies islimited due to disparate arrangements.
41.
Lack of harmonized data reporting standards continue to hamper comparabilityof information across countries. There is a degree of diversity in the quality and coverageof data disseminated by the G-20 economies. Globally harmonized data-reporting templates
for the main domains, with agreed timelines of reporting and frequency, would therefore
enhance data comparability. The IAG is propagating this approach by fostering data

27
reporting templates for specific domains. Annexes I and II are data reporting templates forsecurities and government finance statistics. Links to the templates that have been agreed on
sectoral accounts were noted above.34 Notwithstanding the diversity in the starting point ondata availability, the G-20 economies are invited to develop concrete action plans andtimetables reflecting their self-commitments to report data for the specific reporting
templates that are part of this and previous progress reports. Besides improving thecomparability of data among the G-20 economies, harmonized templates are expected to
streamline data collection by international organizations, eliminate duplication of efforts, andreduce multiplicity of reporting demands received by countries for the same set of data.
42.
Meeting and monitoring new data demands is another challenge going forward.
At its inception four years ago, the DGI broadly identified the key data gaps that were seen as
major impediments in detecting vulnerabilities of economies to shocks and financial risks.
The identified gaps continue to be relevant and have been factored in by countries in theirplans for statistical development. As described above, implementation of several of therecommendations has already been completed or is nearing completion. At the same time,with the persistence of the global crisis and new measures taken to address it, new datarequirements are emerging raising the question whether the DGI recommendations should be
expanded or modified going forward. Senior officials at the Basel conference in June 2012weighed on the feasible way forward and concluded that the emphasis should generally be togive priority to existing recommendations before embarking on new ones. Moreover, it wasconsidered prudent to wait until the emerging requirements become clearer following further
progress in financial regulatory/supervisory work, such as the implementation of Basel III.
An effort should be made to maintain consistency between ongoing and upcoming or planned
statistical requirements. The next progress report on the DGI to be delivered to the G-20
Finance Ministers and Central Bank governors in late 2013 will consider whether the G-20
DGI needs to be fine-tuned to take on board emerging data needs and, if so, will makeproposals on how it should be modified/expanded.
B. Priorities for Action Plans
43.
The implementation of the DGI recommendations is a multi-year process, with thedifferent recommendations proceeding at different speeds. To keep track of the process, inlast year’s progress report, Table 3 provided a schedule of key milestones ahead in theenhancement of statistical frameworks under the DGI. With just a few exceptions, the DGI
has met or is very close to meeting all the milestones set for the period between the tworeports. The schedule of milestones has been updated in Table 3. Key milestones include:34

Phase 1 of the work on the G-SIFI templates is to be implemented from March 2013.
This will involve the creation of the data hub at the BIS and the sharing amongsupervisors of the bilateral credit exposures data (I-I) and the existing data reported to
the BIS IBS by G-SIFIs.
See footnote 23.

28


Launching the agreed GFS reporting template.

The enhancements to the BIS’s IBS approved by the CGFS are being implemented
starting with Q2 2012 for the first stage (expansion of locational statistics bynationality) and for Q4 2013 data at the earliest for the second stage (more detailed
locational and consolidated banking statistics in terms of sector, instrument, and otherbreakdowns). All G-20 countries that participate in the IBS have indicated that they
are working to meet the new enhancements.



Most G-20 economies participating in the CPIS considered the increased frequency
and timeliness of semi-annual reporting to be a feasible objective within 2013/2014.
Some countries suggested that quarterly frequency may be feasible.

Outreach, training, and technical assistance activities on implementation of thetemplate for sectoral accounts will be undertaken with the aim of encouraging
countries to implement it by around end 2014.

44.
Understandably, the speed of implementation of action plans to improve datasets
depends on individual country circumstances and priorities as well as the nature of therecommendation. G-20 economies have provided information to the staff on the IMF and
the FSB Secretariat both in the country notes and at the regional and Basel conferences on
their plans for improvement. The objective is for these plans for improvement to include
concrete actions and milestones in the form of self-commitments to report data for the agreed
reporting templates. It is evident that there is a strong demand for the datasets beingenhanced and developed under the DGI for analysis and decision making (Box 1). Further
detailed analysis of the feedback received from country notes, as well as in the G-20
conferences, suggests that countries are designing realistic implementation timetables thatlead to actual data enhancement. These timetables are reflected in the objectives for the
implementation of data enhancements in G-20 economies included in Table 1. The staff ofthe IMF and the FSB Secretariat will continue to monitor the action plans provided by, andmaintain close consultation with, G-20 members.
V. WAY FORWARD
45.
This report asks the G-20 Ministers and Central Bank Governors to take note of
the significant progress made so far in closing data gaps, the remaining challenges, andthe need to ensure adequate resources for statistical work. The report seeks
endorsement of the G-20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors and support
for the proposed action plans and timetables going forward.

29

Table 3. Implementation Schedule of DGI Recommendations: Key Milestones Ahead
Year
2012
Second half

2013
First half

Action to be taken

Lead Agency

Publish IMF Working papers on tail risks (recommendation # 3).

IMF

Second annual monitoring exercise on shadow banking system by the FSB(recommendation # 4).

FSB

Complete Part 3 of the HSS (issues and holdings of equity securities) and publish
revised data on debt securities issues for G-20 economies; (recommendation # 7). The
WGSD will issue a communication on the implementation of the HSS.

BIS, ECB, IMF

Collection of data from the Stage 1 enhancements of IBS BIS data (recommendations# 10 and # 11).

BIS

Develop a navigation template from existing data on cross-border positions offinancial and nonfinancial corporations.

BIS, ECB,
IMF, OECD

Prepare a reference document on consolidation concepts on a nationality basis(recommendation # 13).

BIS

Populate pilot template on cross-border exposures on financial and nonfinancial
corporations (recommendation # 14).

BIS

Start outreach, training, and technical assistance activities on implementation of thedata-reporting templates for sectoral accounts (recommendation # 15).

IMF/OECD

Final report of the Expert group on disparities in the national accounts framework(recommendation # 16).

OECD

Launch agreed GFS common reporting template for use by international agencies(recommendation # 17).

IMF

Publication of the Handbook on Residential Property Price Index (RPPI)(recommendation # 19).

EurostatStart detailed work on the Handbook on Commercial Property Price Indicators(CPPI); expected release at the end of 2014 (recommendation # 19).

EurostatPublish additional indicators of the G-20 aggregates (recommendation # 20).

IAG

FSB Plenary decisions on the common data template for G-SIFIs and Phase 2 andPhase 3 activities (recommendations # 8 and # 9).

FSB

Launch of Phase 1 of the G-SIFIs project, with data centralized in a stand-alone BIS
hub (recommendations # 8 and # 9).

FSB

30

Table 3. Implementation Schedule of DGI Recommendations: Key Milestones Ahead
Year

Action to be taken

Lead Agency

2013
Second half

Report progress to the G-20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors, including FSB/IMF
an assessment on whether the DGI needs to be fine-tuned going forward to take on
board emerging data needs and, in that case, providing proposals on how it should be
modified or expanded.

2014
First half

Collection of data from the Stage 2 enhancements of BIS IBS (recommendation # 10
and # 11).

BIS

Release of CPIS enhancements with reporting of data for end-June 2013 measurement
date (recommendations # 11).

IMF

Dissemination of quarterly IIP data by all SDDS subscribers (recommendation# 12).

IMF

September
2014

Annex I; Table 1. Debt Securities Issues
IssuerFinancial
instruments
2008 SNA code

Item

Residents
Non-financial
corporations(S.11)

Financialcorporations(S.12)

Centralbank(S.121)Other depositMoneytaking
market funds
corporations(S.123)*(S.122)

Insurance
corporations
and pension
funds(S.128+S.129)

Other financial
corporationsof which:(S.124+…+S.127) Securitisation
corporations

Generalgovernment(S.13)of which:Centralgovernment(S.1311)

Households
and NPISH(S.14+S.15)

Transactions (F) and positions (AF) at market value, positions also at nominal value
F/AF.3
F/AF.31
F/AF.32

Total issues of debt securitiesof which: Issues in international markets
Short-term at original maturityof which: denominated in foreign currencies
Long-term at original maturityof which: denominated in foreign currenciesof which: with variable interest rate
Memo item: Long-term at orginal maturity, with aremaining maturity up to and including one year
Memo item: Securitisation debt securities

Recommended reporting dates are indicated in the cells of the table
Periodicity:
Quarterly
Timeliness:
T+3 months
Type of account:Non-consolidated
Basis or recording:Accrual accounting
Maturity breakdown:
Original and remaining maturity
Currency breakdown:
Domestic currency and foreign currencies
Interest rate breakdown:
Fixed interest rate and variable interest rate
Market value and (for positions) nominal value
Valuation:
breakdown may be provided at a later stage

31

Flows (F) and positions (AF) at market value
AF.3
Position at end of previous period
F.3+ Net issues(= Gross issues- Redemptions)+ Revaluations+ Other changes in volume
AF.3= Position at end of current period* Money-market funds do usually not issue debt and inany case debt issuance is subject to regulatory limits.

Annex I, Table 2. Debt Securities Holdings
Holder2008
Issuer
SNA code

Item

Non-financial
Financialcorporations corporations Central Other deposit- Money(S.11)(S.12)
banktakingmarket(S.121) corporations
funds(S.122)(S.123)

Residents
Insurance
corporations
and pension
funds(S.128+S.129)

Other financial
corporationsof which:(S.124+…+S.127) Securitisation
corporations

Generalgovernment(S.13)

Households
and NPISH(S.14+S.15)

NonresidentsAllholders

Transactions (F) and positions (AF) at market value
F/AF.3
F/AF.31

Recommended reporting dates are indicated in the cells of the table
Periodicity:
Quarterly
Timeliness:
T+3 months
Type of account:Non-consolidated
Basis or recording:Accrual accounting
Maturity breakdown:
Original and remaining maturity
Currency breakdown:
Domestic currency and foreign currencies
Interest rate breakdown:
Fixed interest rate and variable interest rate
Flows and positions:
Net acquisitions, revaluations, other volume changes and positions
Valuation:
Market value
breakdown may be provided at a later stage

32

Debt securities
Short-term at original maturityof which: denominated in foreign currencies
F/AF.32
Long-term at original maturity
Residentsof which: denominated in foreign currenciesof which: with variable interest rate
Memo item: Long-term at orginal maturity,with a remaining maturity up to andMemo item: Securitisation debt securities
F/AF.3
Debt securities
F/AF.31
Short-term at original maturityof which: denominated in foreign currencies
F/AF.32
Long-term at original maturity
Nonof which: denominated in foreign currencies
residentsof which: with variable interest rate
Memo item: Long-term at orginal maturity,with a remaining maturity up to andMemo item: Securitisation debt securities
F/AF.3
Debt securities
F/AF.31
Short-term at original maturityof which: denominated in foreign currencies
F/AF.32
Long-term at original maturity
All issuersof which: denominated in foreign currenciesof which: with variable interest rate
Memo item: Long-term at orginal maturity,with a remaining maturity up to andMemo item: Securitisation debt securities
Flows (F) and positions (AF) at market value
AF.3
Position at end of previous period
F.3+ Net acquisitions
Residents + Revaluations+ Other changes in volume
AF.3= Position at end of current period
AF.3
Position at end of previous period
F.3+ Net acquisitions
Non+ Revaluations
residents+ Other changes in volume
AF.3= Position at end of current period
AF.3
Position at end of previous period
F.3+ Net acquisitions
All issuers + Revaluations+ Other changes in volume
AF.3= Position at end of current period

Annex I; Table 3. Equity Securities Issues
IssuerFinancial
instruments
2008 SNA
code

Residents
Nonfinancial
Financialcorporations corporations(S.11)(S.12)

Central bank(S.121)

Item

Recommended reporting dates are indicated in the cells of the table
Periodicity:
Quarterly
Timeliness:
T+3 months
Type of account:Non-consolidated
Basis or recording:Accrual accounting
Valuation:
Market value
breakdown may be provided at a later stage

33

Transactions (F) and positions (AF) at market value
F/AF.51 Total issues of equity securities
F/AF.511
Listed shares
F/AF.512
Unlisted shares
Flows (F) and positions (AF) at market value
AF.51
Position at end of previous period
F.51+ Net issues(= Gross issues- Redemptions)+ Revaluations+ Other changes in volume
AF.51= Position at end of current period*Equity securities issued by public companies classified in the general government sector.
**Pension funds do not in general issue equity securities.

GeneralOther
Non-MMF
Insurance
Other
government of which:depositinvestment corporations
financial(S.13)*
Centraltakingfunds
and pension corporations
government
corporations(S.124)funds(S.125+S.126(S.1311)(S.122)(S.128+S.129)**+S.127)

Annex I; Table 4. Equity Securities Holdings
Holder2008 SNA
code

Item

Residents
Nonfinancial
Financial
Generalcorporations corporations Central bank Other deposit- Non-MMF
government
Insurance
Other(S.11)(S.12)(S.13)(S.121)takinginvestment corporations
financialcorporations
funds
and pension corporations(S.122)(S.124)funds(S.125+S.126+(S.128+S.129)
S.127)

Nonresidents

34

IssuerTransactions (F) and positions (AF) at market value
F/AF.51
Equity securities
F/AF.511 Residents Listed shares
F/AF.512
Unlisted shares
F/AF.51
Equity securities
NonF/AF.511
Listed shares
residents
F/AF.512
Unlisted shares
F/AF.51
Equity securities
All
F/AF.511
Listed sharesissuers
F/AF.512
Unlisted shares
Flows (F) and positions (AF) at market value
AF.51
Position at end of previous period
F.51+ Net acquisitions
Residents + Revaluations+ Other changes in volume
AF.51= Position at end of current period
AF.51
Position at end of previous period
F.51+ Net acquisitions
Non+ Revaluations
residents+ Other changes in volume
AF.51= Position at end of current period
AF.51
Position at end of previous period
F.51+ Net acquisitions
All+ Revaluations
issuers+ Other changes in volume
AF.51= Position at end of current period
Recommended reporting dates are indicated in the cells of the table
Periodicity:
Quarterly
Timeliness:
T+3 months
Type of account:Non-consolidated
Basis or recording:Accrual accounting
Flows and positions:
Net acquisitions, revaluations, other volume changes and positions
Valuation:
Market value
breakdown may be provided at a later stage

Households
and NPISH(S.14+S.15)

35

ANNEX II. STANDARD GOVERNMENT FINANCE STATISTICS (GFS) TEMPLATE
Indicative key aggregates for GFS reporting

Best

Second best

Institutional coverage

General Government (consolidated), of which:Central Government incl. Social Security Funds

Central Government incl. Social Security Funds;
andBudgetary Central Government

Basis of recording

Accrual based

Cash based

Periodicity

Quarterly

Asset/liability valuation

1

Annual (indicating period start and end)

Market + nominal/face for debt securities

Other breakdowns for debt to follow WorldBank / IMF Public Sector Debt database1

Nominal/face1

By original maturity
Short termLong termWith payment due in one year or lessWith payment due in more than one year
Currency of denomination
Domestic
Foreign
Residence of creditor

1

Debt instruments should be valued on the reference date at
nominal value, and for traded debt securities at market value
as well. Substitution of face value for nominal value is
acceptable, but should be specified, if so.

Indicative key General Government debt and otherbalance sheet aggregates
IMF
code2
61
62
63
6301
6302
6303
6304
6305
6306
6307
6308
6M2
6M3
6M36

Description
Nonfinancial assets (if available)
Financial assets
Liabilities
Total by Instrument
SDRs
Currency and deposits
Debt securities
Loans
Equity and investment fund shares
Insurance, pension and standardized guarantee
schemes
Financial derivatives and employee stock options
Other accounts payableNet financial worth (62-63, if available)“Debt”
3
Gross debt (6301+6302+6303+6304+6306+6308)
Net Debt (Gross debt - Financial assets corresponding
to Debt instruments)

Other regional/national debt concepts e.g. WAEMU,

Maastricht debt (aka EDP Debt,4 equivalent to 6302+6303+6304 at facevalue)

2

IMF codes shown can be derived from the relevant SNA/ESA
categories..
3
Consistent with Public Sector (and General Government) Debt
template for the World Bank / IMF database.
4
Excessive deficit procedure debt

Indicative key fiscal deficit

IMF
code2
1
11
111
112
113
114
115
116

12
13
14
141
2M
2
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
31
311
GOB
NOB
NLB

Description
REVENUE
Taxes
Taxes on income, profits, and capital gains
Taxes on payroll and workforce
Taxes on property
Taxes on goods and services
Taxes on international trade and transactions
Other taxes
Memorandum items:
Direct taxes (111+ 1131+1132+1136)
Indirect taxes 112+ 1134+114+115+116)
Capital taxes (1133+1135)
Social contributions
GrantsOther revenue
Property Income
EXPENDITURE (2+31)
EXPENSE
Compensation of employees
Use of goods and services
Consumption of fixed capital (if available)
Interest
Subsidies
GrantsSocial benefits
Other expense
NET ACQUISITION OF NONFINANCIAL ASSETS
Fixed assets
Gross operating balance (1-2+23)
Net operating balance (1-2, optional)
Net lending (+) / net borrowing (-) (1-2-31) “Deficit”