2011年-世界发展银行全球_Ukraine___System_of_Financial_Oversight_and_Governance_of_State-Owned_Enterprises_108页_664kb

Summary of the Report on Ukraine's System of Financial Oversight and Governance of State-Owned Enterprises

Core Content

This report evaluates Ukraine's system of financial oversight and governance of state-owned enterprises (SOEs), identifying key weaknesses and proposing measures to align the system with international standards. It outlines the need for structural reforms in SOE management, transparency, and accountability to improve economic performance and ensure efficient use of public resources.

Main Points

1. Role and Significance of SOEs in Ukraine

• SOEs play a dominant role in critical sectors such as rail, transport, utilities, energy, and telecommunications.
• They contribute to the national treasury through dividend payments, which support Ukraine's development agenda.
• SOEs also receive significant fiscal support from the government, including budgetary transfers, guarantees, and lines of credit.
• Despite their importance, SOEs are not always profitable and require reform to improve performance.

2. Fiscal Challenges

• Ukraine's large structural fiscal deficits were masked by growth between 2004 and 2008.
• Public and publicly guaranteed debt levels are rising, necessitating fiscal stabilization and reduction.
• The weak fiscal position and tightening budget constraints highlight the need for improved SOE performance to support economic recovery.

3. Corporate Governance and Reform

• The financial crisis has slowed privatization and led to state reassertion through takeovers and nationalizations.
• SOE corporate governance has become a central reform priority.
• Poor governance structures, including weak legal frameworks, unclear objectives, and lack of transparency, contribute to inefficiencies and corruption.

4. Current Oversight System

• Oversight responsibilities are distributed across multiple ministries and agencies, leading to overlapping roles and gaps in monitoring.
• Line ministries primarily review SOEs' financial plans, but the process is often superficial and lacks effectiveness.
• There is no requirement for annual external audits, and performance data is not reliable or validated.

5. Need for Improvement

• A comprehensive database of all SOEs in Ukraine is essential to improve oversight and management.
• Segmentation of SOEs based on size and economic importance is needed to focus reform efforts.
• Large SOEs should adopt corporatization principles, including independent boards and modern risk management systems.

Key Recommendations

Legal Framework

• Modernize and unify the legal framework for SOEs.
• Eliminate differences between regulations for joint-stock companies and unitary/kazenni enterprises.
• Clarify the role and responsibilities of government agencies.
• Establish an arms-length relationship between the government and SOEs.
• Integrate modern corporate governance practices, such as independent and professional boards of directors.

State Ownership Policy

• Develop a clear ownership policy that separates regulatory and management functions.
• Define the government's role as an owner, including limits on financial influence.
• Establish clear criteria for SOEs to access financial instruments.

Transparency and Disclosure

• Strengthen transparency requirements for SOEs.
• Mandate the public disclosure of operating objectives and financial plans.
• Require annual reports and audited financial statements to be published.
• Ensure compliance with the Law on Information to guarantee public access to non-sensitive company data.

International Benchmarks

• Ukraine should align its SOE governance practices with OECD guidelines and IFRS standards.
• The introduction of IFRS should be a medium to long-term goal.
• All large SOEs should be subject to statutory audits in accordance with International Standards on Auditing (ISA).

Conclusion

• The report emphasizes that reform of SOE governance is critical to Ukraine's economic and social development.
• It outlines a three-pronged approach: improving the legal framework, strengthening state ownership policy, and enhancing transparency and accountability.
• These reforms will help ensure that SOEs are managed efficiently, contribute positively to the economy, and are insulated from political interference.

Key Information

• Currency Equivalent (February 2011): 1 USD = 7.95 UAH.
• Fiscal Year: January 1 to December 31.
• Main Sectors of SOEs: Rail, transport, utilities, energy, telecommunications.
• SOE Types: Unitary, Kazenni, Joint-Stock Companies (JSC).
• Key Institutions Involved:
  • Ministry of Economy (MOE)
  • Ministry of Finance (MOF)
  • State Property Fund (SPF)
  • State Control and Revision Service (KRU)
  • Supreme Audit Institution (SAI)

Tables and Figures

• Table 1: Macroeconomic indicators for Ukraine, 2001–2008.
• Table 2: Common reform areas in government programs, 2000–2008.
• Table 3: Basic data on the SOE sector in Ukraine.
• Table 4: Responsibilities of the Cabinet of Ministers in SOE oversight.
• Table 5: Oversight roles of line ministries and agencies.
• Table 6: Responsibilities of the State Property Fund in SOE oversight.
• Table 7: Main financial indicators of SOEs, 2007–2008.

Acknowledgements

• The report acknowledges the cooperation of Ukrainian government officials and SOE managers.
• It was prepared by a team led by Rajeev Swami, Oleksiy Balabushko, and Konstantin Shkurupiy.
• Guidance was provided by Martin Raiser and Ahmadou Moustapha Ndiaye.
• Input was received from World Bank and IFC colleagues, including Alexandre Arrobbio, Henri Fortin, Pablo Saavedra, Roman Zyla, and Marius Vismantas.