1993 SNA Update Information - AEG recommendations for issue:
Productores gubernamentales y productores dedicados a la producción no de mercado: costo del capital y activos propios
|Issue description in [English] | [French] | [Russian] | [Spanish]|
|Al sumarse los costos en la cuantificación de la producción no de mercado, el SCN 1993 recomienda medir el valor de los servicios que proporcionan los activos no financieros del productor como consumo de capital fijo. Eso significa que no se reconoce ni el rendimiento de capital de estos activos ni el costo de oportunidad del capital. Ello crea una incoherencia con respecto al alquiler que se pagaría de arrendarse los activos. ¿Debe cambiarse la recomendación del SCN remplazando el costo de consumo del capital fijo por servicios de capital (consumo de capital fijo, ganancias o pérdidas previstas por tenencia y los costos de capital o intereses)?|
|Number of AEG recommendations for selected issue:||3|
| Corresponding meeting||Date posted||Recommendation|
| Jan-Feb 2006||4/7/2006||(a) The AEG agreed that the expected real rate of return on government bonds is an appropriate indicator. If necessary, it should be supplemented by other indicators of the cost of capital to government, particularly if a country has a thin bond market or a negative real rate of interest.|
(b)-(d) The AEG did not consider this breakdown of assets was helpful and preferred to say that by convention a return to capital should appear for all fixed assets and only fixed assets. This means that a rate of return should be calculated for computers, vehicles, etc used by employees and for roads and infrastructure and for city parks and historical monuments to the extent that they are included in fixed assets. By convention, no return to capital would be applied to other classes of assets.
(e) The AEG did not favour including a rate of return on “open land”. On balance, the AEG agreed that a rate of return should not be estimated on land under buildings. However, the AEG acknowledged that it may be difficult for some countries to exclude it, given their estimation methods. Therefore the AEG recommended that, by convention, it should be excluded but, in practice, it may be impossible to do so.
The AEG agreed that since land improvements should be included in fixed assets, a rate of return was appropriate for them.
| July 2005||9/12/2005||The AEG reaffirmed the principle to include a return to capital on non-financial assets used in non-market production.|
It was agreed to follow-up on a one-on-one basis the comments from the global and country consultations, including those comments on the scope, and report back to the next AEG Meeting in early 2006.
| December 2004||1/11/2005||There was strong support in principle for including a return to capital, viewed as an opportunity cost, in the measurement of non-market output. However, concerns were expressed about the rate of return to be chosen and availability of data for capital stock.|
In terms of the range of assets which could be covered, most participants favored including those assets in the generation of government output similar to those assets used in market production. A smaller number favored including roads and other infrastructure assets. Progressively fewer favored including assets such as city parks serving the community at large and land.