1993 SNA Update Information - AEG recommendations for issue:
Delimitación del sector privado/público/gobierno | | Issue description | | Issue description in [English] | [French] | [Russian] | [Spanish] | | Según el SCN 1993, dos factores determinan si una sociedad o una institución sin fines de lucro están controladas por el gobierno y, por ende, si forman parte del sector público. Uno de los factores es el grado de control que ejerce el gobierno. Se han manifestado inquietudes con respecto a la expresión “principalmente financiado” que se cita en relación con las instituciones sin fines de lucro. No siempre es sencillo determinar el control de los medios con propósito especial (MPE), creados en el contexto de las sociedades público-privadas (SPP), o la titularización. El segundo factor se refiere a la expresión “precios económicamente significativos”. También se han manifestado inquietudes acerca de la posible ambigüedad de este concepto. ¿Sería posible ahondar en la descripción sin llegar a prescribir que las ventas deban cubrir una cierta proporción de los costos? |
|
| | AEG recommendations | | Number of AEG recommendations for selected issue: | 2 | | Corresponding meeting | Date posted | Recommendation |  | | Jan-Feb 2006 | 4/7/2006 | (a) The AEG agreed. The description of the decision tree, which relates to units and not production, should be set out in the chapter on government and the public sector. Further elaboration is required for quasi-corporations.
(b) The AEG agreed that the list of indicators is useful, but emphasised that they should be used in conjunction with each other in reaching a decision on control, rather than any one of them necessarily being definitive in its own right. The AEG felt that the text set out in the TFHPSA paper was too long to be incorporated directly into the SNA.
(c) The AEG agreed with the guidance set out to determine what constitutes “economically significant prices”. The AEG felt the SNA should avoid being prescriptive in relation to the use of a specific threshold (such as the ESA95 50% rule). | | July 2005 | 9/12/2005 | Following detailed discussions on the above recommendations and a broad level of support, the AEG decided that there are still a number of questions requiring further clarification before final decisions can be made. Therefore, the AEG chair requested members to send detailed comments to Lucie Laliberté and to Jean-Pierre Dupuis by the end of August. The authors should take into account these comments in conjunction with the comments made during the meeting to produce a revised version of the paper for e-discussion with the aim of finalising this question at the next AEG meeting. |
|
|
|
| |
|
