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:
Treatment of multi-territory enterprises

Subissue description
Issue description in [English] | [French] | [Russian] | [Spanish]
The 1993 SNA follows the Balance of Payments Manual in allowing for a single enterprise run as a seamless entity with substantial operations in two or more economic territories to be regarded as having a centre of economic interest in each of the countries where it is recognized by the tax and licensing authorities, but only when the activity is operating mobile equipment such as ships, aircraft and railways. In these cases, the possibility is for all the enterprise’s transactions to be allocated to the countries of registry in proportion to the financial capital that the countries have contributed or their share of equity in the enterprise. Should this treatment be extended to other activities, for example hydro-electric schemes on border rivers and pipelines? Should reference be made to joint sovereignty zones and zones of joint jurisdiction?
Country comments
Number of country comments for selected issue:57
  Date postedSourceComment
 10/10/2006SwedenAgreement with proposal
 29/09/2006Bank of KoreaWe think that the contents of the paper are appropriate and that it is better to deal with goods for processing and multiterritory enterprises to illustrate the accounting challenges stemming from globalization.
 28/09/2006New ZealandWe agree with the recommendations made by the AEG
 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.
 14/09/2006Bank of LithuaniaWe agree with the AEG recomendations.
 28/07/2006VietnamWe thought that Associates, subsidiaries and parent corporations are separate institutional units, however, there is a exception that is the ancillary corporation, which is a subsidiary corporation that is controlled and owned by a parent corporation, or a group of corporation under common ownership. Their productive activities are strictly confined to providing services to the owner.
 27/07/2006EgyptWe agree with the recommendation concerning the treatment of such enterprises. The method of prorating should only be used when direct methods are not possible.
 03/01/2006SingaporeWe support the pro-rating of multi-territory enterprises and enterprises in joint sovereignty zones. A range of possible criteria for pro-rating is preferred, as it renders more flexibility for countries in their allocation.
 22/12/2005Serbia and MontenegroWe agree with the suggested changes.
 19/12/2005KenyaAgreed
 14/12/2005FranceL'INSEE soutient la recommandation consistant à éclater les entreprises exercent leur activité sur plusieurs territoires. Il note toutefois que le groupe ne se prononce pas sur le critère à retenir pour procéder à cet éclatement.
 13/12/2005CanadaCanada agrees with the recommendation of pro-rating multi-territory enterprises which operate as one legal entity in more than one jurisdiction. While this is not an issue for Canada at the national level, a big feature of the Canadian SNA is its regional accounting system. This issue arises frequently in regional accounting and allocation variables such as sales, wages, and employment are used.
 12/12/2005Bank of KoreaWe are in agreement with the recommendations of AEG.
We agree with the prorating of multi-territory enterprises and enterprises in joint sovereignty zones. We agree that any single criterion for allocation, such as equity, sovereignty, or tonnages can not cover all of the cases.
 09/12/2005RussiaRosstat largely supports the recommendations on the updating 1993 SNA, made at the July 2005 meeting of the Advisory Expert Group on National Accounts.
 06/12/2005Central Bank of NorwayThe Central Bank of Norway agrees with the AEG recommendation (a)
 05/12/2005DenmarkAgree
The method of prorating should only be used when more direct methods are not possible.
 02/12/2005NetherlandsWe generally support the recommendations of the AEG.
 02/12/2005AustraliaAustralia does not support the inclusion of multi-territory enterprises in the international standards as there is no evidence of their existence. While many companies coordinate activities and even more enter into complex arrangements such as dual listings and the issue of stapled securities in order to appear highly integrated, in every case it has been possible to follow the normal SNA/BPM process of identifying institutional units, determining their residence and allocating them to institutional sectors and industries. These companies are incorporated in a particular country and have branches and subsidiaries in other countries in the same way as many other companies.
Australia agrees with the AEG recommendation to pro-rate the activity of enterprises operating in joint jurisdiction zones such as the Joint Petroleum Development Area between Australia and East Timor, effectively creating separate units in the economic territories of each country sharing the zone.
 02/12/2005TurkeyWe agree with the recommendations made at the July 2005 meeting of the Advisory Expert Group on National Accounts.
 01/12/2005Germany• We support the recommendation especially that units operating in zones of joint sovereignty or jurisdiction should be split between the different countries.
• More guidelines are necessary in the question of splitting these multi-territory enterprises. Therefore we fully agree that it is necessary to have a task force concerning this topic.
• Note: Is the treatment of cross border building activities concerned?
 01/12/2005NorwayWe agree with the AEG's recommendations
 01/12/2005BrazilWe agree with the prorating procedure.
In the Brazilian SNA we adopt this option. Brazil and Paraguay has a common hydroelectric power in the Parana river and the treatment is prorating fifty/fifty all the variables in same proportion of each country share.
 01/12/2005MozambiqueWe are pleased to express our agreement on the AEG recommendations.
 01/12/2005IsraelWe agree with the recommendations of the AEG on this issue, but think that clarifications on the basis for pro-rating should be given.
 01/12/2005United KingdomWe agree with the AEG decision on the prorating of multi-territory enterprises and enterprises in joint sovereignty and joint jurisdiction zones. We recognise that identifying the criteria for prorating is very difficult and perhaps no single set of criteria could cover all cases. We would though like to see the SNA recommending that the agreed prorating criteria were set out in each case.
 30/11/2005Slovak RepublicSO SR give support to AEG recommendation related to ongoing effort for clarification of issue.
 30/11/2005FinlandWe strongly support further research into the broader question of treatment of multi-territory and also multinational enterprises in SNA and BOP. In general there should be more explicit guidelines on treatment of global enterprises (e.g. so called European companies - Societas Europaea) not only in Balance of Payments manual but in SNA as well.
 30/11/2005ItalyIstat fully agrees with the recommendations made at the July 2005 meeting of the Advisory Expert Group on National Accounts.
 30/11/2005National Bank of the Republic of MacedoniaWe agree with the recommendations made at the December 2004 meeting of the AEG.
 30/11/2005State Bank of PakistanWe have gone through recommendations made by Advisory Expert Group (AEG) and fully agree with them.
 30/11/2005State Bank of VietnamWe agree with recommendation as the following:
For these entities, principles should be formulated to treat them as separate institutional units.
Similarly, with the appearance of multi- territory enterprises that operate as a single legal entity in more than one territory should be allocated by using prorate splitting.
Principles of recognizing these ancillary units as separator institutional units and these units should be taken into account different residency and the institutional sector.
 29/11/2005TadjikistanМы согласны с тем. что вспомогательные корпорации и ЕСН можно рассматривать как отдельные институциональные единицы, если их резидентство и отнесение к институциональному сектору иные, чем у компании-владельца. На самом деле, подобная ситуация предусмотрена в СНС в отношении зарубежных отделений корпораций, банков или подразделений предприятий, предоставляющих нерыночные услуги своим работникам.
 29/11/2005National Bank of KazakhstanOn our view a range of possible criteria of prorating of multiterritory enterprises should be adopted covering their different cases. In the case of joint sovereignty zones they should be described in the new guide. In the both cases the manuals should indicate on necessity of collaboration of statisticians of country partners.
 29/11/2005People's Bank of ChinaI agree with your improvements and have no other suggestions.
 25/11/2005VietnamWe agree with recommendation as the following:
For these entities, principles should be formulated to treat them as separate institutional units.
Similarly, with the appearance of multi- territory enterprises that operate as a single legal entity in more than one territory should be allocated by using prorate splitting.
Principles of recognizing these ancillary units as separator institutional units and these units should be taken into account different residency and the institutional sector.
 21/11/2005USAWe agree with the AEG’s recommendation to pro-rate multi-territory enterprises.
 30/06/2005Slovak RepublicWe agree with AEG recommendations in issues of treatment of multi-territory enterprises, holding companies and special purpose entities as well as with criteria for recognition of branches.
 30/06/2005Serbia and MontenegroWe agree with the recommendations made at the December 2004 meeting of the AEG.
 03/06/2005Central Bank of VenezuelaWhen multi-territory enterprises carry on substantial operations in two or more territories and no branches can be identified, we agree with applying the BOPM principles, but this should extend to all economic activity (rather than limiting it to enterprises that operate with a mobile team). We also agree that the manual should explicitly indicate the practical complexities of implementing this recommendation.
For joint sovereignty zones, we agree with the idea of making reference [to them] in the statistical manuals.
We support the idea that the manuals indicate the need for cooperation among the compilers in the territories involved.
 19/05/2005Bank of IndonesiaBI agrees to harmonize the treatment of multi-territory enterprises will be stated in the SNA and in the BOPM 5th edition.
 19/05/2005Swiss National BankFor the treatment of multiterritory enterprises for which no branches are identified the proposal to apply general principles of BPM5 to allocate transactions and stocks seems plausible. Considering the lack of experience with multiterritory enterprises, more experience and research is needed to be able to give practical guidance for the implementation of general principles.
 18/05/2005Central Bank of ChileWe agree that the treatment of multi-territory enterprises should be extended to all economic activities, to the extent possible making explicit the distribution indicator for production aggregates.
 16/05/2005Croatian National BankThe Croatian National Bank agrees with the AEG recommendations and strongly supports further efforts related to the proper treatment of multi-territory enterprises in SNA and BOP. Speaking of the treatment of those enterprises, we agree with the first BPM5 option, which states that "all of the corporation's transactions may be allocated to the countries of registry in proportion to the amounts of financial capital that the countries have contributed or in proportion to their shares in the equity of the corporation".
 16/05/2005JordanDOS agree with all AEG recommendations related to this issue that the treatment of multi-territory enterprises in BPM5 should be extended to all kinds of activities, when formal separation is not possible. In addition DOS agree with the AEG that the units operating in zones of joint sovereignty or jurisdiction should be split between the different counties. This splitting necessitate more detailed guidelines which can be established through a committee or a taskforce.
 16/05/2005Eastern Caribbean Central BankWe agree with the recommendation that the treatment of multi-territory enterprises in BPM5 should be extended to all kinds of activities, when formal separation is not possible.
Units operating in zones of joint sovereignty or jurisdiction should be split between these in ways that still need to be specified.
And that, the broader question of multinational enterprises should be addressed by a task force, taking account of IASB recommendations and work in hand for the next ISI meeting.
 13/05/2005State Bank of PakistanWorked examples for splitting of units should be included to ensure the data consistency among territories and to avoid gaps.
 13/05/2005National Bank of KazakhstanIn our opinion the treatment of multi-territory enterprises can be extended to all kinds of economic activities, when formal separation is not possible. Units operating in zones of joint sovereignty or jurisdiction require recommendations on identification of such units and examples.
 12/05/2005European Central BankECB supports the conclusions.
 10/05/2005USAThe U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis endorses the recommendations made by the AEG.
 10/05/2005National Bank of MoldovaThe proposed treatment of multi-territory enterprises is consistent with balance of payments concepts. The further studies on the treatment of multi-territorial enterprise are required due to growing globalization.
 09/05/2005AustraliaAustralia agrees with the AEG recommendations.
However, the ABS notes that most groups that appear to be multi-territory enterprises are in fact made up of discrete corporations or quasi-corporations resident in single economic territories. The ABS believes that genuine multi-territory enterprises, if they exist at all, are extremely rare.
 09/05/2005MaldivesMulti-territory enterprise has become widespread with globalization and liberalization of investments. Many big enterprise sets up business in a country under one legal entity and the operation is generally managed by the parent enterprise. In many cases the enterprise in the second country does not have the complete books as much financial information is not available in the enterprise in the second country. This is very much the practice in the Maldives. We wish to agree with the agreement that further study should be made, particularly in treatment and recording of their transactions.
 09/05/2005United KingdomWe agree with the recommendation that the treatment of multi-territory enterprises in BPM5 should be extended to all kinds of activities, when formal separation is not possible. Units operating in zones of joint sovereignty or jurisdiction should be split between these in ways that still need to be specified. And that, the broader question of multinational enterprises should be addressed by a task force, taking account of IASB recommendations and work in hand for the next ISI meeting.
 09/05/2005Central Bank of IranWe agree with the recommendations made by the AEG.
 06/05/2005TurkeyWe agree with the recommendations made by the Advisory Expert Group on National Accounts at its second meeting in December 2004.
 06/05/2005Commonwealth of Independent States We agree that ancillary corporations and SPE can be treated as a separate institutional unit when it has different residency and institutional sector than the owner. In fact, similar situation is envisaged in the SNA in respect of foreign divisions of corporations, banks or divisions of enterprises providing non-market services to employees.
 06/05/2005FinlandStatistics Finland strongly supports further research into the broader question of treatment of multinational enterprises in SNA and BOP.
Recommendations of the AEG are a good starting point. In general there should be more guidelines on treatment of global enterprises (e.g. so called European companies) not only in Balance of Payments manual but in SNA as well.
 06/05/2005Macao, SAR ChinaWe agree with the recommendations.
 05/05/2005SwedenStatistics Sweden supports the recommendations of the AEG. With the appearance of multi-territory enterprises that operate as a single legal entity in more than one territory, principles have to be adopted whether to allocate the unit to the predominant territory or use pro rata splitting. We would also like to add the possible impact on FISIM calculations (and thus on GDP) in the special case of multi-territorial enterprise being a (monetary) financial institution.
 04/05/2005DenmarkStatistics Denmark agrees, that in certain cases it should be possible to allocate the transactions of a multi-territory enterprise to the participating countries according to a simple rule e.g. in proportion to the share of each country in the equity. However, as the Scandinavian experiences in connection with the airline company Scandinavian Airline Systems shows, this approach is not uncomplicated, so the method should only be used when more direct methods are not possible.
 29/04/2005NorwayStatistics Norway supports the views of the AEG.
 29/04/2005Central Bank of ColombiaRespecto al tema de empresas multiterritoriales, el Banco de la República de Colombia esta de acuerdo con la adopción de los conceptos sugeridos y consideramos que junto con la cooperación bilateral permitan mejorar las estadísticas y facilitar la comparación entre países.
 28/04/2005Trinidad and TobagoWe agree with the recommendations of the AEG.
 25/04/2005Bank of Sierra LeoneWith reference to the above subject we agree with the recommendations of the Expert Group on National Accounts (AEG) especially where there is harmonization of definitions and other concepts between the Balance of Payments (BOP) and system of National Accounts (SNA).
 13/04/2005Bank of KoreaWe have no objection to the recommendations of Advisory Export Group (AEG).
 12/04/2005GreeceWe agree with the recommendations of the AEG on the issues for which a decision has been taken, at the December 2004 meeting of the group.
 12/04/2005Central Bank of HondurasEl tratamiento actual de las empresas multiterritoriales es objeto de inquietud por ciertas limitaciones, como por ejemplo que son empresas únicas que tienen operaciones importantes en más de un territorio, pero para las cuales resulta difícil identificar sucursales. En razón de lo anterior, el Grupo Técnico de Expertos en Balanza de pagos emitió recomendaciones, donde las complejidades prácticas de la implementación de las mismas deben ser examinadas en el nuevo manual.
 12/04/2005Central Bank of Cote d`IvoireLa proposition de scinder les unités qui exercent des activités sur plus d`un territoire paraît conforme aux principes de confection de la balance des paiements. A cet égard, les travaux supplémentaires visant à définir la façon de scinder ces unités devraient être poursuivis.
 11/04/2005Central Bank of KuwaitKuwait agreed that:
(a) When formal separation is not possible then the treatment of multi-territory enterprises in BPMs should be extended to all kinds of activities.
(b) Units operating in zones of joint sovereignty should be split between these in ways that still need to be specified.
(c) Multinational enterprises should be taking account of IASB recommendations.
 11/04/2005Bank of Tanzania/National Bureau of StatisticsWe don`t have comment at the moment but we may have comments after the issue is firmed up by ISI meeting.
 11/04/2005Hong Kong, ChinaWe agree that the treatment of multi-territory enterprises in BPM5 should be extended to all kinds of activities, when formal separation is not possible. For cases where splitting is suggested, the parameters and factors for doing the splitting should be clearly specified.
 11/04/2005The NetherlandsIn relation to multi-territory enterprises and recognition of branches, we strongly support further research into the broader question of the treatment of multina-tional enterprises. As a consequence of the ever growing globalisation, the need for a better, internationally co-ordinated, approach becomes more and more rele-vant. In our opinion, the new updated SNA should contain more explicit interna-tional guidelines on the treatment of these enterprises. Otherwise, we will end up with national accoutants data which become less and less comparable. To give a better understanding of the problems involved, we have enclosed a paper on this issue that we have presented at the IARIW-conference in Cork (August 2004).
m2(c)ne15;
 11/04/2005Germany m2(c)de25b2;
 11/04/2005MalawiI fully endorse the recommendations of the Expert Group on National Accounts.
 11/04/2005Central Bank of The NetherlandsWe support the decisions made by the AEG. We should, however, like to stress that some flexibility in the implementation of the recommendations is needed.
 11/04/2005Philippines -There should be specific guidelines on identifying multi-territory enterprises. Do these include foreign operated satellite communication enterprises, foreign insurance companies providing insurance services to Philippine importers, call center services, foreign investment companies transacting business in the Philippines?
-Multi-territory enterprises are of complex nature but nonetheless the concept of residence should be applied. In this case, allocation of transactions/output should be clearly defined. For joint territories, some guidelines are needed here. If there are treaties involved between countries, these should serve as the reference. However, if there are no existing treaties/agreements (or the treaty does not explicitly state the treatment of economic activities in these areas) what will be the guidance on the treatment of these territories (i.e Spratley Islands are being claimed by various Asian countires and there have been some activities on these islands)
 11/04/2005Central Bank of the Republic of TurkeyCentral Bank of the Republic of Turkey agrees with all the recommendations.
 11/04/2005Russian FederationWe agree with the recommendations made by the AEG on National Accounts.
 11/04/2005South African Reserve BankWe accept the recommendations of the AEG.
 11/04/2005South AfricaSouth Africa agrees with the recommendations.
 18/03/2005Palestinian Central Bureau of StatisticsPCBS supports the decision of the committee in this regard.
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