Rechnungslegungsänderungsgesetz 2014

In document Gnan | Kr onberger (Hg.) Schwerpunkt Außenwirtschaft 2016/2017 44pt (Page 151-156)

4 Aktive Direktinvestitionen

5.2 Rechnungslegungsänderungsgesetz 2014

Die Berechnung der Direktinvestitionserträge wird in naher Zukunft8 eine Änderung in der Kompilierung erfahren. Die größte Reform der österrei-chischen Rechnungslegungsvorschriften seit den 1990er-Jahren, das Rech-nungslegungs-Änderungsgesetz 2014, ist bereits in Kraft getreten. Eine der wesentlichen Neuerungen betrifft wichtige Positionen der Gewinn- und Ver-lustrechnung. Das „außerordentliche Ergebnis“ ist nicht mehr in der bisherigen Form anzugeben. Stattdessen sind im Anhang „Betrag und Wesensart der ein-zelnen Ertrags- oder Aufwandsposten von außerordentlicher Größenordnung oder von außerordentlicher Bedeutung“ auszuweisen. Es bestehen berechtigte Zweifel, ob der Inhalt dieser im Anhang angegebenen Werte im Wesen den bisherigen Angaben im „außerordentlichen Ergebnis“ entsprechen wird, da die bisherige Definition auf „Erträge und Aufwendungen außerhalb des gewöhnlichen Geschäfts-verkehrs“ abzielte.

8 Betroffen sind bereits Jahresabschlüsse zum 31.12.2016.

6 Literatur

IMF 2009: Balance of Payments and International Investment Position Manu-al; Sixth Edition (BPM6); Washington.

LINSI, Lukas 2016: Less compelling than it seems: rethinking the relationship between aggregate FDI inflows and national competitiveness; Columbia FDI Perspectives No. 184 October 10, Columbia Center on Sustainable In-vestment.

OECD 2008: Benchmark Definition of Foreign Direct Investment; Fourth Edi-tion (BD4); OECD.

OECD 2017: Global Forum on International Investment – Is investment pro-tectionism on the rise?; OECD.

OeNB 2016: Direktinvestitionen 2014 – Österreichische Direktinvestitionen im Ausland und ausländische Direktinvestitionen in Österreich – Stand per Ende 2014; Statistiken Sonderheft; Wien Dezember 2016.

UNCTAD 2016; World Investment Report 2016; Reforming International In-vestment Governance; New York and Geneva.

UNCTAD 2016a: World Investment Trends Monitor No. 24; October 2016; New York and Geneva.

UNCTAD 2017; Global Investment Trends Monitor No.25 February 2017; New York and Geneva.

Austrian foreign direct investment – recent developments

In a fragile international environment in terms of modest trade and growth 2016 global FDI flows grew by 1.52 trillion USD, 13% less compared to 2015. Develo-ped economies were the centre of attraction again, especially Australia, Japan and Northern America. The Austrian FDI-statistics were dominated by restructuring activities of UniCredit Bank Austria: the CEE-business unit worth 10 billion EUR was transferred to Italy. Outward FDI hit a record level nevertheless reaching 190 billion EUR. Reasons were a stronger investment activity and significant positive exchange-rate- und price-effects. Ten years ago Inward FDI and Outward FDI were about even, 2016-end Outward FDI surpassed Inward FDI by already 48 billion EUR.

JEL code: F2



Trends, Erklärungsfaktoren,


structures to the ultimate source of FDI

Maria Borga1

This paper presents new Foreign direct investment (FDI) data being published by OECD countries to address some of the measurement issues raised by the com-plex ownership structures of multinational enterprises (MNEs), which reduce the usefulness of FDI statistics for analysing globalisation. FDI statistics excluding re-sident Special Purpose Entities (SPEs) reveal the important role that SPEs play in inward FDI for some OECD economies, the differences in behaviour between SPEs and operating affiliates, and the complexity of ownership structures of some MNEs. Inward FDI positions by the ultimate investing country indicate that some countries, including the United Kingdom, United States, and Germany, are more important sources of FDI than the standard statistics by the immediate investing country indicate while other countries, including the Netherlands, Switzerland, and Luxembourg, are less important. They also indicate that roundtripping was present in each country examined and was large enough to make investors from the home country among the top ten sources of FDI in each of the countries. The paper ends with a brief discussion of additional research to further improve the useful-ness of FDI statistics for analysing globalisation.

1 Introduction

Foreign direct investment (FDI) is a form of investment through which host countries can receive a variety of benefits from foreign investors, including finance, knowledge and technology transfers, and access to the foreign inves-tors’ distribution networks. As such, it is important to have statistics that can provide information on the impact of FDI on home and host economies. How-ever, FDI statistics as measured in the Balance of Payments and International Investment Position accounts often do not provide that information. The 4th edition of the OECD’s Benchmark Definition of Foreign Direct Investment (BMD4) made recommendations for compiling FDI statistics that could overcome some of these difficulties.

The financing structures of multinational enterprises (MNEs) have grown more complex over time in response to several factors, including the need to manage global production networks and the desire to reduce tax and regula-tory burdens. These complex structures often involve the use of Special

Pur-1 Senior Statistician and Head of FDI Statistics at the Organisation for Economic Cooperati-on and Development. The opiniCooperati-ons expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of OECD member countries.

pose Entities (SPEs) to channel investments through intermediate countries before reaching their final destinations. The use of SPEs is one important factor that can distort FDI statistics. First, transactions by SPEs inflate the FDI flows into and out of the country where they are located as the investment passes through. It appears the country is receiving investment from countries whose investors are just passing capital through SPEs. Likewise, it appears that inves-tors from this country are investing abroad when that investment is from funds that have been passed through. Second, these complex chains of ownership obscure the ultimate source of FDI because the statistics are collected on an immediate partner country basis.

To address these issues, BMD4 recommended that countries compile FDI statistics separately for SPEs so that data excluding SPEs can be derived, result-ing in more meanresult-ingful measures of FDI. BMD4 also recommended that coun-tries compile inward FDI positions according to the Ultimate Investing Country (UIC) to identify the country of the investor that ultimately controls the invest-ments in their country.

With the widespread implementation of the BMD4 guidelines in 2014 by OECD economies, detailed information on FDI of SPEs is available for a large number of OECD countries for the first time. Also, about a dozen countries now compile inward FDI positions by UIC. This paper will examine these new statistics to better understand how MNEs channel funds through different economies and to identify the ultimate origin of the investment. It will also briefly discuss the current research to develop FDI statistics to better analyse globalisation.

In document Gnan | Kr onberger (Hg.) Schwerpunkt Außenwirtschaft 2016/2017 44pt (Page 151-156)