| 9/15/2006||United Kingdom||We agree with the recommendations made by the AEG, including keeping the issue on the research agenda. We support the extension of the text to cover related transactions on gold etc.|
| 9/15/2006||Latvia||After deep discussions and expert consultations we basically support the
1993 SNA Update Issues.|
| 9/14/2006||Bank of Lithuania||We agree with the AEG recomendations.|
| 7/28/2006||Lithuania||In general we support the recommendations.|
| 7/27/2006||Egypt||We agree with the suggested treatment in the July meeting.|
| 2/23/2006||South African Reserve Bank ||We agree with the AEG recommendations.|
| 1/27/2006||Central Bank of El Salvador||Ya que no se establece una conclusión definitiva, el tema debería mantenerse en agenda y continuar dando el tratamiento que sugiere el SCN 1993 hasta que se establezcan criterios claros para una nueva clasificación.|
| 12/22/2005||Serbia and Montenegro||We agree with the suggested changes.|
| 12/14/2005||France||L'INSEE soutient la recommandation consistant à maintenir le traitement actuel de ces opérations sous forme de prêt avec collatéral. Il note toutefois que la solution actuelle est une solution d'attente, le sujet n'ayant pas fait l'objet d'un accord général au sein des experts.|
| 12/13/2005||Canada||Canada agrees to continue the treatment of repurchase agreements transactions as collateralized loans.|
| 12/12/2005||Bank of Korea||We agree with the recommendations made by the AEG in respect that the research about systematic classification of financial assets is a matter of our priority, owing to financial transactions' continuous changes. |
| 12/9/2005||Russia||Rosstat largely supports the recommendations on the updating 1993 SNA, made at the July 2005 meeting of the Advisory Expert Group on National Accounts.|
| 12/6/2005||Central Bank of Norway||The Central Bank of Norway supports the AEG view that the 1993 SNA recommendation on reverse transactions should be changed since it is based on the premise that in most cases, the securities do not change hands and the buyer does not have the right to on-sell them. Securities subject to repos are now often on-sold. The present SNA recommendation applied on a situation where repos are on-sold to a third party may give double counting. Treating the cash provider’s short position from on-selling as a negative asset is an improvement compared to the recommendation in the 1993 SNA, but it is not the ideal solution. Since the “four-ways approach” is the most accurate approach when on-selling is permitted and the business community seems to be moving towards this approach, the approach could replace the “collateralized loan approach” as the preferred approach when on-selling is permitted. |
With the disagreement about the treatment of repos in the statistical communities we support the proposal that the issue should remain on the research agenda.
| 12/5/2005||Central Bank of Colombia||El criterio utilizado por las cuentas financieras de Colombia para clasificar las operaciones REPO es el plazo y se clasifican como préstamos a corto plazo en moneda legal y/o moneda extranjera y no se tiene en cuenta para su clasificación la existencia de colaterales. Por otra parte, los Títulos que respaldan las operaciones REPO no se pueden negociar de ninguna manera en el mercado. Su clasificación bajo estas condiciones no presenta mayores inconvenientes para las estadísticas financieras y monetarias de Colombia. |
| 12/2/2005||Netherlands||We generally support the recommendations of the AEG.|
| 12/2/2005||Australia||Australia agrees with the decision to keep reverse transactions on the research agenda as a satisfactory resolution could not be reached. However, we do not support the proposed clarification to treat short positions as negative assets as this presupposes an outcome on this issue. There are logical arguments on both sides of the debate which need to be reconciled before any decisions on the treatment of these transactions can be made.|
| 12/2/2005||Turkey||We agree with the recommendations made at the July 2005 meeting of the Advisory Expert Group on National Accounts.|
| 12/1/2005||Israel||We agree with the recommendations of the AEG to add updated clarifications on the issue at this stage.|
| 12/1/2005||United Kingdom||We agree with the AEG decisions.|
| 11/30/2005||Slovak Republic||SO SR give support to AEG recommendation related to ongoing effort for clarification of issue.|
| 11/30/2005||Italy||Istat fully agrees with the recommendations made at the July 2005 meeting of the Advisory Expert Group on National Accounts.
| 11/30/2005||National Bank of the Republic of Macedonia||We agree with the recommendations of the AEG i.e. for the continuation of collateralized loan approach for reverse transactions.|
| 11/30/2005||State Bank of Pakistan||We have gone through recommendations made by Advisory Expert Group (AEG) and fully agree with them.
| 11/29/2005||Central Bank of Turkey||We agree with the continuation of collateralized loan approach for reverse transactions. However, clarifications are needed.|
| 11/29/2005||People's Bank of China||I agree with your improvements and have no other suggestions.|
| 11/21/2005||USA||We agree with the recommendations of the AEG.|
| 5/6/2005||Vietnam||We agree with the recommendations of the AEG.|
Because: the right to on- selling has become almost universal. The sale of securities or other assets with a commitment to repurchase equivalent assets at price are suitable.
| 9/30/2004||Lesotho - Central Bank||"The 1993 SNA and the BPMS treat the repos similar to that of a collateralized loan or as other deposits if repos involve liabilities classified under national measures of broad money"
Comment: This should be revised; the collateralized loan should not incorporate sterilized and blocked loans. |