2013年-IMF国际货币组织全球_Costa_Rica_Fiscal_Transparency_Assessment_66页_1mb

Costa Rica: Fiscal Transparency Assessment Summary

Core Content

This document presents the results of a Fiscal Transparency Assessment (FTA) conducted by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in October 2013 for Costa Rica. The assessment is based on the 2013 FTA Code, which replaces the 1988 ROSC Code and focuses on three pillars: Presentation of Fiscal Reports, Fiscal Forecasting and Budgeting, and Fiscal Risk Analysis and Management. The report evaluates the current fiscal transparency practices of Costa Rica and provides recommendations to improve them.

Main Views and Key Information

Fiscal Transparency Assessment

• The assessment evaluates 38 dimensions of fiscal transparency, rating practices as Advanced, Good, Basic, Less than Basic, or Not Applicable.
• Costa Rica's performance is mixed, with 10 Advanced (27%), 7 Good (18%), 13 Basic (34%), 7 Less than Basic (18%), and 1 Not Applicable (3%) practices.
• The assessment highlights the importance of transparency in fiscal management, especially in light of recent international crises that have shown the need for better risk identification and management.

Fiscal Reporting

• Coverage of Institutions (Advanced): Fiscal statistics cover 99.7% of total public sector expenditure, with most entities included in consolidated reports. Only four superintendencies (0.3% of expenditure) are excluded.
• Coverage of Flows (Basic): Fiscal reports are based on cash accounting, which limits the comprehensiveness of the data.
• Coverage of Stocks (Good): All financial assets and liabilities of the nonfinancial public sector are reported.
• Internal Consistency (Less than Basic): There is a lack of internal consistency in the fiscal data, particularly in reconciling budgetary, accounting, and statistical information.
• Historical Consistency (Advanced): Historical data is consistent and updated regularly.
• Classification (Basic): The classification of fiscal data does not fully align with international standards.
• Statistical Independence (Basic): The statistical framework is not fully independent from the budgetary process.
• Reliability (Basic): The reliability of fiscal data is considered basic, with room for improvement in audit practices.

Fiscal Forecasting and Budgeting

• Unity (Less than Basic): The budgetary process lacks a unified approach, with 41% of expenditures approved by the Legislative Assembly and 59% by the Office of the Comptroller General of the Republic (CGR).
• Gross Budgeting (Advanced): The central government budget is submitted and approved on a timely basis.
• Macroeconomic Forecasts (Good): There are good macroeconomic forecasts, but they lack a comprehensive description of fiscal risks.
• Fiscal Strategy Report (Basic): The fiscal strategy report is not detailed enough to fully reflect the government's fiscal approach.
• Performance Information (Advanced): Performance data is widely disclosed.
• Distributional Analysis (Basic): There is limited analysis of how fiscal resources are distributed across different groups.
• Fiscal Sustainability Analysis (Less than Basic): The analysis of fiscal sustainability is insufficient, particularly in covering multiple scenarios and long-term planning.
• Independent Evaluation (Advanced): Independent evaluations of fiscal performance are conducted.

Fiscal Risk Analysis and Management

• Macroeconomic Risks (Basic): The government provides basic information on macroeconomic risks but lacks detailed analysis.
• Asset and Liability Management (Advanced): Asset and liability management is advanced, with comprehensive financial statements.
• Financial Sector Exposure (Advanced): Financial sector exposure is well reported.
• Long-Term Contracts (Basic): There is limited coverage of long-term contracts in fiscal reports.
• Public Corporations (Advanced): Public corporations are well integrated into the fiscal reporting system.
• Sub-National Governments (Basic): Sub-national governments are not fully covered in fiscal reports.
• Fiscal Risk Reports (Less than Basic): There is no comprehensive fiscal risk report, and specific risks like contingent liabilities and concession contracts are not well analyzed.

Recommendations

The assessment recommends several actions to improve fiscal transparency and risk analysis:

1. Implement International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS) and harmonize accounting and budgetary classifications.
2. Reconcile fiscal reports and produce timely audit reports to ensure reliability.
3. Prepare budget reports with analysis of situation and outlooks by the end of the year, with specific periodicity.
4. Amend the Constitution to make the Legislative Assembly responsible for approving the entire public sector budget.
5. Expand the analysis of debt trends in the report on the situation of the debt, including multiple scenarios and long-term planning.
6. Prepare an annual fiscal risk report that includes macroeconomic risks, public debt, public corporations, debt guarantees, contingent liabilities, concession contracts, natural disasters, financial institutions, municipal governments, and social security and health.
7. Establish direct linkage between National Development Plan (PND) programs and the budget with standardized concepts, programmatic structures, and performance indicators.

Conclusion

Costa Rica has several advanced and good fiscal transparency practices, including comprehensive fiscal reporting, an independent Comptroller General (CGR), and a medium-term budgetary framework. However, there are notable weaknesses, particularly in the areas of budgetary unity, fiscal risk analysis, and comparability of fiscal data. The assessment emphasizes the need for greater consistency, reliability, and comprehensiveness in fiscal reporting and forecasting to enhance transparency and manage fiscal risks more effectively.