1993 SNA Update Information - AEG recommendations for issue:
|Issue description in [English] | [French] | [Russian] | [Spanish]|
|The 1993 SNA records improvements to land as gross fixed capital formation, but in the balance sheet such
improvements are included with land itself – a non-produced asset. Should land be split into two, with one
part recorded as a fixed asset and the other part recorded as a non-produced asset? If so, how should the
separation be made? One option is to distinguish between land that is in, or nearly in, its natural state as a
non-produced asset and the remainder as a fixed asset. Another option is to separate land from the
improvements made to it, and record the former as a non-produced asset and the latter as a fixed asset.|
|Number of AEG recommendations for selected issue:||2|
| Corresponding meeting||Date posted||Recommendation|
| July 2005||9/12/2005||The proposals in question 1 of the e-discussion were overwhelmingly supported.|
| December 2004||1/11/2005||The AEG agreed unanimously that: |
i. GFCF of land improvements should be treated like other GFCF and result in a produced asset appearing separately in the balance sheet;
ii. The non-produced component of land should be valued at its present unimproved value;
iii. Where the value of land cannot be partitioned into an improved and unimproved part, adopt recommendations for land and associated structures as in Para 13.57 for balance sheets and Para 7.131 for rent and rentals;
iv. Costs of ownership transfer on land should be recorded as fixed assets and included with land improvements.
The boundary between land improvements and structures should be re-examined with a view to moving some items such as major dykes, seawalls, etc. to structures.
The terms “Land Improvements” and “Unimproved Land” are to be reconsidered by the Canberra Group II.