WRITTEN QUESTION E-2121/01 by Johannes Voggenhuber (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. The influence of certain consolidation measures by the Republic of Austria on the financial balance of the State sector in accordance with the European System of Integrated Economic Accounts (ESA) 95.
Date: 2001-07-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Austria, European accounting system, medical institution, public administration, real estate business, statistical nomenclature

C 364 E/246

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

20.12.2001

At Community level, the implementation and development of the economic reform programme laid down
in the conclusions of the Lisbon European Council
to
undertake the necessary reforms to eliminate regulatory and structural barriers which not only are
obstacles to price convergence but also and more importantly hinder Community(cid:146)s market performance.

is the best instrument

(23/24 March 2001)

(2001/C 364 E/271)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2121/01

by Johannes Voggenhuber (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(13 July 2001)

Subject: The influence of certain consolidation measures by the Republic of Austria on the financial
balance of the State sector in accordance with the European System of Integrated Economic
Accounts (ESA) 95

As part of measures to consolidate the budget in order to achieve a balanced State budget in Austria, some
L(cid:228)nder are planning to alter the financing of clinics, set up property companies to deal in land, and sell off
loans which have been granted to encourage the building of housing. Hitherto the L(cid:228)nder were required to
finance their clinics(cid:146) losses by means of grants. However, in Carinthia, for example, it is intended that as
from 2001 the Clinics Operating Company, which has been a market enterprise since 1997, should take
out a loan to meet all losses. At the same time the Land of Carinthia will grant it an interest-free loan
equivalent to the annual loss and will subsequently assume the resulting annuity service and ancillary
expenses. In the context of achieving the joint consolidation objective, the Federal Ministry of Finance is
explicitly in favour of this change in the method of financing clinics because the clinics are market
enterprises and the loans which they take out are not attributed to the Land. How should the interest-free
loans from the L(cid:228)nder to the clinics actually be treated under ESA 95?

By means of an amendment to the Federal Real Estate Act, the Federal Government has transferred
property valued at ATS 33 billion to the Federal Real Estate Company (BIG). The BIG is wholly owned by
the Federation. The purpose of setting up the BIG is to bring into line with private-sector conditions the
management of buildings and land belonging to the Federation and the use and realisation of property
transferred or acquired by the Federation. How does this revenue from the transfer of property affect the
Federation(cid:146)s financial balance (pursuant to ESA 95)? Many L(cid:228)nder, including Carinthia, are planning to set
up property companies of their own to deal in land in a similar way, which would be wholly owned by
the Land. Property belonging to the Land would be sold to these companies. How will this revenue affect
the financial balances of the respective L(cid:228)nder (pursuant to ESA 95)?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(18 September 2001)

The issues raised should be examined in the light of the European System of Integrated Economic accounts
(ESA 95).

Austria notifies the Commission of its deficit and debt data twice a year. In this context, regular follow-up
missions to Member States are organised by Eurostat. The Austrian authorities will most likely inform
Eurostat about the issues raised in the course of the next mission, which is supposed to take place before
the end of the year. A detailed discussion between Eurostat and the Austrian Central Statistical Office will
then take place.

As regards the arrangements relating to public clinics and the arrangements relating to the Federal Real
Estate Company (BIG), the ESA 95 principles should be recalled.

In ESA 95, public clinics are classified in the non-financial corporations sector (outside the general
government) only if they are institutional units and if they are providing market services.

20.12.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 364 E/247

they must be mainly financed by households and/or private insurance
To provide market services,
companies, or mainly financed by general government if they provide services for the general government
at economically significant prices.

It they are non-market, on the contrary, they must be classified in the general government sector.

As regards the interest-free loans from the L(cid:228)nder to the clinics, if Austrian public clinics are institutional
units providing market services, this should be treated as follows:

(cid:129) If the provision of funds is an unrequited transaction, that is if loans are made with no likelihood of

repayment, it should be treated as a capital transfer;

(cid:129) If the provision of funds implies a repayment to the government under contractual conditions (the
date of repayment is explicit) and there is a clear likelihood of repayment, it should be treated as
interest on the loan which is being waived might be considered
a loan. However, the potential
a subsidy to the provision of services.

Concerning the transfer of property to the Federal Real Estate Company (BIG) it should be recalled that
according to the ESA 95 principles:

(cid:129) If most BIG activity is devoted to providing services to general government units, then it should be

classified in the general government sector;

(cid:129) If BIG is renting/leasing mostly outside general government, it should be treated as a non-financial

corporation.

A final decision on BIG classification, however, will be taken by Eurostat following the forthcoming visit to
the Austrian Central Statistical Office.

(2001/C 364 E/272)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2123/01

by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(13 July 2001)

Subject: Transposition of Community legislation into the law of the Member States

According to the biannual scoreboard published by the Commission, there are significant delays in the
In particular, 11 % of Community
transposition of Community legislation into the Member States.
legislation enacted is not transposed into the national
law of the Member States within the specified
deadlines, and only three Member States (Sweden, Denmark and Finland) seem to be honouring the
commitment made at the Lisbon Summit to transpose 98,5 % of Community legislation into their national
law by 2002. According to Commissioner Bolkestein, the following countries, in declining order, are in
danger of not attaining the target of transposing Community legislation by March 2002: Greece, France,
Ireland, the United Kingdom, Austria and Germany.

Given the above data, will the Commission say whether it considers that Portugal(cid:146)s decision to appoint
a person with exclusive responsibility for transposing Community legislation into its national law is an
effective measure and whether it intends to propose that other Member States adopt a similar approach to
ensure that they attain the goal set at the Lisbon Summit?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(17 September 2001)

It is for Member States to decide how they wish to organise themselves with a view to transposing
Community legislation into national law. Some Member States, such as Portugal, Sweden and Luxembourg,
have appointed national transposition co-ordinators who are responsible for ensuring that steps are taken
to transpose Community legislation on time. The results from the May 2001 Internal Market Scoreboard
reveal that these Member States have reduced their transposition deficits successfully. Sweden(cid:146)s deficit of