1 / 9

OECD WORKING PARTY ON FINANCIAL STATISTICS 6-7 October 2003

OECD WORKING PARTY ON FINANCIAL STATISTICS 6-7 October 2003. Towards a more precise classification of household financial assets. Towards a more precise classification of household financial assets ?.

deiondre
Télécharger la présentation

OECD WORKING PARTY ON FINANCIAL STATISTICS 6-7 October 2003

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. OECD WORKING PARTY ON FINANCIAL STATISTICS6-7 October 2003 Towards a more precise classification of household financial assets September 2003

  2. Towards a more precise classification of household financial assets ? • the current classification of financial assets is primarily based on the degree of liquidity and the legal characteristics of financial assets • but what about the degree of risk of the assets borne by the saver ? • more generally, who bears the risks in the economy and what is the precise nature of these risks : a centre stage question for the coming decades   September 2003

  3. The proposals • they “slot in” to the headings of SCN 1993/ESA 1995 and do not require to change them anyway • they concern only F5 (Shares and other equity) and F6 (Insurance technical reserves) September 2003

  4. Proposed extension of the classificationF.52 Mutual funds shares September 2003

  5. Some comments on the proposal • F.52 Mutual funds shares • Money market funds are already often separately identified in the national accounts • the borderline between Equity Funds and Bond funds is mostly very clear in the professional statistics • but what about, for instance, guaranteed funds ? • concerning property funds a separate heading should probably be identified September 2003

  6. Proposed extension of the classificationF.61 Net equity of households in life insurance reserves and in pension funds reserves September 2003

  7. Some comments on the proposal • F.611 Life insurance reserves • regarding insurance vehicles with a guaranteed rate, the risk is clearly borne by the company • regarding unit linked insurance vehicles, the risk is clearly borne by the subscriber • the question is more complicated concerning unit linked vehicles invested in guaranteed funds September 2003

  8. Some comments on the proposal • F.612 Pension funds reserves • for DB funds the risk is clearly borne by the corporation or by the insurance company, if any • for DC funds the risk is mainly borne by the individual (with however, for instance, the exception of Danish funds which are insured) • a separate heading should probably be created for “Hybrid pension funds” September 2003

  9. Some final remarks • not an easy task : some important questions should be answered • for instance, does this new classification make sense for sectors other than Households (S 14) ? • the detailed information is sometimes already available, sometimes more difficult to obtain • a worthwhile step forward : the new classification would contribute significantly to the analysis of the distribution of risk between the different sectors of our economies September 2003

More Related