Data on tax expenditures, off-budget spending, and shifting of risk burdens are difficult to obtain in many developing countries. In this regard, the OECD’s _Inventory_ publications contain many useful references for government sources that enable tracking in its member countries. While information on subsidies on fossil fuels or even energy generally is not consolidated in one place, a great deal of information is available in many OECD countries “if you know where to look.” For example, the U.S. government’s “Analytical Perspectives,” which is a budget document, outlines various forms of tax expenditures for fossil fuels in some detail (U.S. Government Printing Office 2015). Some of the documents cited by the OECD can serve as useful guides for developing countries considering more robust subsidy tracking. The Open Budget Survey, coordinated by the International Budget Partnership (www.internationalbudget.org/), reviews budget transparency and accountability in 100 countries based on 125 factual questions answered by independent researchers. The results of the most recent survey in 2012 suggested considerable room for improvement, with only 23 countries deemed to have provided significant information (IBP undated).

In terms of prioritizing limited resources, the first area to focus may be those needed to estimate price gaps, given the repercussions in the rest of the economy from the distortions caused by underpricing energy. For liquid fuels, that means collecting data at each point in the supply chain, and preferably making them available as time-series data as spreadsheets. Showing all taxes and levies, positive or negative, would be especially useful, and such information is entirely under the control of the government. Consolidating such information may require coordination across two or more ministries and government entities—such as finance and petroleum ministries and the national oil company— where the challenge is often more political than funding. For the transmission and distribution of natural gas, electricity, and district heating, strengthening the information collected in revising tariffs may be one way of facilitating subsidy tracking.

# **Toward a common framework**

An eventual goal in subsidy tracking is the application of a comprehensive TSE framework using a common definition of subsidies and standardized accounting methods. In the meantime, an inventory’s coverage of subsidies in a given country depends both on its objectives and related activities in other policy areas. For example, a large tax administration program may be tackling transfer pricing (or, more accurately, mispricing), in which case transfer pricing in the energy sector may already be captured in that overall program, although disaggregation by sector may not be straightforward. Multi-country studies face limitations, both in terms of data availability and the need to ensure cross-country comparability. Single-country studies may be tempted to tailor definitions, scope, and approaches to the specific country circumstances and needs. Doing so, however, risks incompatible methodologies clouding the ability to generalize from the results. What is possible and helpful in single-country studies is collection of market-specific data, narrowing errors arising from assumptions made to compensate for missing data.

In agriculture, countries have largely adopted common approaches, making individual studies comparable. This is unfortunately not yet the case in the energy sector. Multi-country calculations on fossil-fuel subsidies carried out in recent years have helped illuminate the strengths and limitations of 39