2007年-IMF国际货币组织全球_Financial_Soundness_Indicators_80页_727kb

Summary of the Background Paper on Financial Soundness Indicators: Experience with the Coordinated Compilation Exercise and Next Steps

I. Introduction

This background paper accompanies the staff report on Financial Soundness Indicators (FSIs): Experience with the Coordinated Compilation Exercise (CCE) and Next Steps. It provides detailed information on the modalities of the CCE, the experience gained during the exercise, and the methodological challenges faced in compiling FSIs. The paper also outlines the considerations for specific amendments to the Compilation Guide (Guide) and the implications of varying consolidation practices.

II. Modalities of the CCE

• Participating Countries: 62 countries participated in the CCE, with 57 submitting their final FSI data and metadata by the end of the exercise.
• Data Requirements: Countries were required to compile 12 core FSIs and were encouraged to compile 28 additional encouraged FSIs.
• Technical Assistance: The Statistics Department (STA) provided support through headquarters advice, regional meetings, bilateral consultations, and a training mission.
• Standard Forms: STA, in consultation with the Monetary and Capital Markets Department (MCM), developed standard data and metadata report forms, including a Data Report Form (DRF), Metadata Template (MT), and Metadata Questionnaire (MQ).
• Dissemination: A set of web pages was created on the IMF website to disseminate FSI data and metadata, enhancing transparency and comparability.
• Internal Access: FSI data and metadata were also made available internally through the Economic Data Sharing System (EDSS), allowing sorting by nine analytical dimensions such as consolidation basis and accounting practices.

III. Experience with the CCE

A. Compilation of FSIs

• Most Commonly Compiled Sector: Financial Soundness Indicators for deposit takers (DTs) were the most commonly compiled, with all countries compiling the core set of FSIs.
• Encouraged FSIs: DTs were the sector for which encouraged FSIs were most frequently compiled (84% of countries).
• Other Sectors: FSIs for other financial corporations (OFCs), households, and non-financial corporations (NFCs) were also compiled, though with less consistency and fewer submissions.
• Data Sources: Supervisory sources dominated the compilation of FSIs for DTs (over 80% of FSIs), while other sectors had more diverse data sources.
• Methodological Diversity: A wide range of methodologies were used, influenced by:
  • Differences in supervisory and accounting practices
  • Data availability
  • Costs of data collection
  • Country-specific views on FSI compilation

B. Consolidation Bases

• DCCB (Domestically Controlled, Cross-Border Basis): Recommended by the Guide for DTs, but only 9% of core FSIs were compiled using this basis.
• Commonly Used Bases:
  • Domestic Consolidation (DC) – 39%
  • DCCBS (Domestically Controlled, Cross-Border and Cross-Sector) – 26%
  • CBCSDI (Cross-Border, Cross-Sector for All Domestic Entities) – 15%
  • Other bases – 11%
• Variation Within Countries: Some countries used multiple consolidation bases for compiling the same core FSIs, reflecting internal diversity in approach.

C. Consolidation Adjustments

• Intra-Group Adjustments: Widely applied, with 71% of core FSIs fully adjusted and 17% partially adjusted.
• Inter-Group Adjustments: Less common, with only 34% of core FSIs using full or partial inter-group adjustments.
• Reasons for Adjustments:
  • Supervisory deductions from FSI-underlying data series for regulatory capital, Tier 1 capital, and risk-weighted assets
  • Partial application of adjustments across different FSIs
• Scope of Adjustments:
  • Income and Expense Statements: Seven types of inter-group adjustments, including accrued interest, fees, dividends, and equity-related gains and losses.
  • Balance Sheets: Three types of inter-group adjustments, such as capital and reserves, market value of equity investments, and specific loan provisions.

D. Relationship with IFRS and BCBS

• Convergence to IFRS: The ongoing adoption of IFRS improved consistency between national accounting practices and the Guide.
• Divergences from IFRS:
  • Consolidation Basis: IFRS requires consolidation of all subsidiaries regardless of sector, while the Guide recommends a DCCB basis.
  • Asset and Liability Recognition: IFRS uses control and reliability of future benefits, while the Guide uses ownership.
  • Effective Yield and Fees: The Guide records fees under fees and commissions, while IFRS adjusts effective yield.
  • Gains and Losses on Hedging Instruments: IFRS records ineffective portions in the income statement and effective portions in equity, while the Guide recommends all gains and losses be included in the income statement.
  • Valuation of Instruments: IFRS values held-to-maturity instruments at amortized cost, while the Guide recommends market or fair value for tradable instruments.
  • Loans and Receivables: IFRS values them at amortized cost, while the Guide recommends nominal value for non-tradables.

E. Country Views and Recommendations

• Survey and Feedback: A survey of CCE countries was conducted to collect views on the CCE experience and future FSI work (Box 13).
• Consolidation Basis Combinations: Countries suggested various combinations of consolidation bases, reflecting the complexity of FSI compilation.
• Amendments to the Guide: Based on the feedback, some amendments were considered to improve consistency and data quality.

IV. Methodological Issues in Compiling FSIs

• Consolidation Basis: A critical factor in defining the population of institutions for which FSIs are compiled.
• Inter-Group Adjustments: These adjustments are important for accurate risk monitoring and contagion assessment.
• IFRS vs. Guide: While IFRS is widely adopted, the Guide maintains specific methodological differences to suit financial stability analysis.
• Challenges:
  • Inconsistent data collection across countries
  • Diverse accounting practices
  • Limited data availability for non-financial sectors
  • Variability in the application of consolidation adjustments

Key Takeaways

• The CCE aimed to standardize FSI compilation and improve data transparency and comparability.
• While the Guide provided a framework, countries used different consolidation bases and made varied adjustments, affecting data consistency.
• Supervisory data played a central role in FSI compilation, particularly for DTs.
• The Guide diverges from IFRS in several key areas, reflecting the unique needs of financial stability analysis.
• The CCE provided a platform for international collaboration and feedback, leading to potential amendments and improvements in FSI methodology.