HomeSNAISWGNAKnowledge BaseDataTechnical CooperationPublications
You are here:   ISWGNA >> Updating the SNA >> Towards the 2008 SNA >> 1993 SNA Update Information >> List of Issues

1993 SNA Update Information - Country comments for issue:
Taxes on holding gains

Issue description
Issue description in [English] | [French] | [Russian] | [Spanish]
Taxes on capital gains are treated as taxes on income and deducted from income while the tax base (the realized holding gains) is not included in the SNA definition of income. Is this a contradiction that should suggest alternative treatments or should the SNA treatment remain the same?
Country comments
Number of country comments for selected issue:42
  Date postedSourceComment
 10/10/2006SwedenAgreement with proposal
 15/09/2006United KingdomWe agree with all the recommendations made by the AEG.
 15/09/2006LatviaAfter deep discussions and expert consultations we basically support the 1993 SNA Update Issues.
 31/07/2006IsraelWe agree with the solution for practical reasons. However, the conceptual and analytical problems should in our view be mentioned in the SNA, and possible alternative presentations outside the core accounts could be mentioned.
 27/07/2006EgyptWe agree with the treatment of the taxes on holding gains as taxes on income and wealth.
 06/01/2006State Bank of PakistanWe agree with the AEG's recommendation to treat taxes on holding gains as current taxes on income and wealth, but its implementation would be difficult due to problems in acquiring necessary data at the desired level.
 19/05/2005Bank of IndonesiaBI has no objection to the concept of separating taxes on holding gains from other taxes, however the tax system remains not reported separately.
 09/05/2005Central Bank of IranWith respect to the issue of “Taxes on holing gains” we are in favor of the AEG recommendations to continue to treat them as current taxes on income and wealth. Although, distinguishing taxes on holding gains from other taxes on income might be useful, but due to missing sufficient data in Iran, it is not possible to record them as a special sub-category.
 16/11/2004Central Bank of ChileAnte todo es irrebatible que los impuestos a las ganancias de capital no son impuestos a los ingresos y en rigor no deberian presentarse en forma conjunta.
Sin embargo esa contradicción del SCN 1993 no es tan evidente si se considera que todo impuesto es una transferencia. En todos estos casos constituye un pago obligado unilateralmente sin contraprestación de servicios por parte del Estado. Desde ese punto de vista seria legitimo que forme parte de las cuentas de ingresos y gastos y que por ende afecte al ahorro de la unidades institucionales involucradas. Mirando el impuesto bajo esta perspectiva no pareciera ser distinto el impuesto at ingreso corriente que al ingreso extraordinario. En ambos casos a titulo de fmanciar la producción de bienes y servicios publicos de no rnercado del gobiemo, se recurre a deducir obligatoriamente de la capacidad de ahorro de las unidades institucionales una parte de sus ingresos corrientes o de capital .
Con todo, el ideal seria extraer el impuesto a las ganancias de capital de cuenta coniente y Ilevarla a la cuenta de capital, estableciendo nitidamente la diferencia entre irnpuesto al ingreso proveniente principalmente de la producción del periodo del impuesto por ganancias en transacciones de activos. Sin embargo, como la propuesta lo plantea, esta medida es aun prematura por la dificultad de obtener información separada para ambos tipos de ingreso. De tal forma se apoya la propuesta de mantener el tratamiento del SNA 1993 y de abrir D51 separando el impuesto al ingreso de los impuestos a ganancias de capital.
En el caso de Chile, se dispone solo de informacion parcial sobre esta clase de ingresos en la declaración anual de renta informada al Servicio de Impuestos Internos. En esa declaracion se incluyen preguntas sobre "ingresos no rentas" en general y mayor valor de "rescate de cuotas fondos mutuos" en un caso especifico de instrumento financiero.
 03/11/2004Bank of Tanzania/National Bureau of StatisticsWe agree with the AEGs recommendation that countries should continue to treat taxes on holding gains as current taxes on income and wealth. However, we should like to point out that the exercise of recording taxes on holding gains as a special subcategory within D.51 may be difficult due to problems emanating from collection of relevant data and information.
 18/10/2004National Bank of Tajikistan The National Bank of Tajikistan agrees with the recommendations of the AEG.
 14/10/2004National Bank of PolandWe favor the decision not to change SNA regarding the classification of taxes on holding gains.
 13/10/2004European Central BankThe ECB supports the provisional AEG decision on this issue, i.e. to continue recording taxes on holding gains as current taxes on income and wealth (D51), as far as possible under a specific sub-category within D5l.
 13/10/2004AustriaStatistics Austria supports the recommendation not to change the present SNA mainly for practical reasons. Decomposition is in practice not easy to implement due to the lack of information.
 12/10/2004Bank of FranceLa Banque de France approuve également les recommandations du Groupe consultatif concernant le traitement des impôts sur les gains de détention (7), consistant à maintenir les dispositions actuelles du SCN93, et dans la mesure du possible à adopter une comptabilisation plus détaillée des impôts. Cette solution préserve les principes du SCN93, à savoir le traitement des gains et perte de détention dans un compte de réévaluation distinct des comptes de revenu.
 12/10/2004Bank of PortugalIn respect with “Taxes on holding gains” we fully agree with the recommendations. Particularly, we consider the breakdown of taxes on households to identify those on holding gains as an important further step to have a more clear perception of the determinants of households’ disposable income evolution.
 12/10/2004Bank of ColombiaDe acuerdo con lo expresado por el grupo AEG.
 12/10/2004Reserve Bank of AustraliaWe support the AEG recommendations.
 06/10/2004National Bank of MoldovaWe agree with the AEGs recommendation that one should continue to treat taxes on holding gains as current taxes on income and wealth. These taxes should be shown as a special sub-category within D51.
 05/10/2004Bank of KoreaWe agree with the recommendation of the AEG in principle. Due to insufficient data, however, it is not easily practicable to separate taxes on holding gains from current taxes on income and wealth in Korea.
 05/10/2004National Bank of BelgiumThe current SNA in regard to the treatment of taxes on holding gains should not be changed, and these taxes should continue to be classified as taxes on current income (D51). Although, from a conceptual point of view, a breakdown of D51 between taxes on holding gains and the other income taxes might be useful.
 04/10/2004South African Reserve BankWe agree with the recommendations of the AEG.
 30/09/2004Central Bank of MadagascarLa mise en œuvre de la recommandation (classer les taxes sur les gains de détention dans une sous-catégorie de D51) ne pose aucun problème pour Madagascar, étant donné que cela ne modifierait pas trop la structure actuelle de sa comptabilité nationale. Cela lui permettra d`être conforme à l`objectif d`uniformisation des statistiques internationales et lui apporte l`avantage d`une meilleure lisibilité des comptes nationaux.
 30/09/2004Bank of LatviaLatvia is in agreement with the recommendations of the AEG and we do not have any particular comment at this stage.
 30/09/2004Central Bank of The NetherlandsWe endorse the recommendations made by the AEG with respect to the recording of taxes on holding gains. However, we should like to point out that for many countries it is not possible to record taxes on holding gains as a special subcategory within D.51. Therefore, this item cannot be made mandatory. Furthermore, we should like to stress the importance we attach to investigations into alternative concepts of household income.
 30/09/2004Bank of GuyanaAn alternative treatment should be considered to removed any contradiction.
 30/09/2004Lesotho - Central BankTaxes on capital gains are treated as taxes on income and deducted from income while the tax base (the realized holding gains) is not included in the SNA definition of income. Is this a contradiction that should suggest alternative treatments or should the SNA treatment remain the same? Comment: The gain may be due to time value or inflation.
 20/09/2004IndiaThe SNA treatment should remain the same in this case, although there appears to be apparent contradiction, as there will be several instances where taxes are charged without corresponding account of income as per the SNA definition. We agree with the recommendation of the AEG to show taxes on holding gains as a special sub-category within D51.
 24/08/2004United KingdomWe agree that this should continue to be treated as current taxes on income and wealth (D51). And, that as far as possible, taxes on holding gains should be shown as a special sub-category within D51.
 12/08/2004AustraliaAustralia supports the AEG recommendations on the basis that an alternative treatment would be difficult to implement practically.
 11/08/2004Germany m1(c)de7;
 11/08/2004CanadaCanada agrees that the treatment of taxes on holding gains as current taxes on income and wealth due to practical difficulties in separating taxes on holding gains from taxes on labour and property income.
 11/08/2004Slovak RepublicSlovakia agrees that this issue should not be a priority for the present SNA revision. Furthermore, in conditions of the Slovak Republic we have some problems with separating of taxes on holding gains as a special item.
 11/08/2004BotswanaAgree with decision taken on the treatment of taxes on holding gains in the SNA 1993; but the issue on the definition of household income need to be resolved as it appears it is not only affecting household incomes only. One here is convinced that part of the problem is being resolved leaving out the other. Even though this may not be in the mandate of the AEG our view is that this matter should also be resolved; because in terms of the households such is very critical particularly when household budget surveys are conducted because households will report on these aspects definitely wherever there are cash transactions of whatever form. The questions that also arise are that how then should compilers make for such adjustments? As Statisticians it is the view that the issue of household income in such cases is critical and needs further clarity.
 11/08/2004South AfricaWe agree with the recommendations of the AEG.
 11/08/2004USAThe United States supports this recommendation of the Advisory Expert Group and encourages maintaining consistency with the ongoing revisions of the Balance of Payments manual and the public sector accounting framework.
 11/08/2004NorwayWe agree with the AEGs recommendation that one should continue to treat taxes on holding gains as current taxes on income and wealth. It may, however, be difficult in practice to separate taxes on holding gains from other taxes on income, but if possible, these taxes should be shown as a special sub-category within D51.
 11/08/2004DenmarkStatistics Denmark agrees that SNA should not be changed regarding the classification of taxes on holding gains which should remain part of D51, current taxes on income. A breakdown of D51 between taxes on ordinary income and taxes on holding gains could be useful, however, Denmark will not in practice be able to make the split. Moreover the analytically value of such a partial correction is not sufficiently obvious. If an alternative measure of household disposable income is decided excluding taxes on holding gains, it should be on a voluntary basis as supplementary information e.g. as a memorandum item leaving the core measure of disposable income unaffected.
 11/08/2004JordanAgree with the AEG recommendations.
 11/08/2004The NetherlandsWe agree with the recommendations of the AEG. Two additional remarks, how-ever: • In the recommendations, it is stated that “taxes on holding gains should be shown as a special sub-category within D51”. It should be noted, however, that the relevant information often is not available; see the responses of the national statistical institutes on the relevant OECD-questionnaire. • Secondly, holding gains and losses are becoming increasingly more impor-tant. At the same time, the boundaries with pure income items become less and less strict. As a consequence, it may be worthwhile to investigate the possibilities to change the 1993 SNA in such a way that alternative income measures can be derived from the system of national accounts more easily.
 11/08/2004New Zealand• Continue to classify taxes on holding gains as current taxes (D51). Agreed. Statistics NZ supports the reasons given in the issues paper, viz: (i) The nature of the tax-base does not necessarily determine the classification of the tax, i.e. it is quite consistent to classify as a current payment a tax that has been assessed on levels of wealth. The classification is determined by the nature of the tax transaction itself. (ii) Taxes on holding gains are regular, current receipts from the perspective of government, and symmetry requires a current classification; (iii) In practice, taxes on holding gains are unlikely to be distinguishable from total income taxes. • Show taxes on holding gains as a sub-category within current taxes (D51). Agreed in principle although, in practice, this split will not be possible. In NZ, in those (restricted) cases where capital gains are taxed, the tax is assessed across all income sources plus capital gains, and separate identification is not possible. Note: Although agreeing with the recommendation, there appears to be good grounds for the revised SNA to (a) clearly outline the conceptual basis of the current definition, setting out the reasons for not adopting the Hicksian income definition, and (b) support alternative income concepts – in this case income including realised capital gains – to improve analyses.
 11/08/2004Macao, SAR ChinaWe are pleased to express our agreement with the proposal.
Navigation Options
*Back to Issues
*See all issues/subissues with country comments
*See all AEG recommendations for this issue
*See all expert comments for this issue

About  |  Sitemap  |  Contact Us
Copyright © United Nations, 2014