2015 Fiscal Transparency Report, 36580-36591 [2015-15677]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 122 (Thursday, June 25, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36580-36591]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-15677]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 9175]


2015 Fiscal Transparency Report

AGENCY: Department of State.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Department of State (``the Department'') hereby presents 
the findings from the FY 2015 fiscal transparency review process in its 
Fiscal Transparency Report. This report describes the minimum 
requirements of fiscal transparency developed, updated, and 
strengthened by the Department in consultation with other relevant 
federal agencies, reviews those governments that were identified as 
anticipated recipients of foreign assistance funds in the FY 2014 
Fiscal Transparency Report, assesses those that did not meet the 
minimum fiscal transparency requirements, and indicates whether 
governments that did not meet the minimum fiscal transparency 
requirements made significant progress towards meeting the requirements 
during the review period of January 17-December 31, 2014. The report 
also provides a brief description of the use of the Fiscal Transparency 
Innovation Fund.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher Ellis, Financial 
Economist, 202-647-9497.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This report is submitted pursuant to section 
7031(b)(3) of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related 
Programs Appropriations Act, 2015 (Div. J, Pub. L. 113-235) (``the 
Act'').

Fiscal Transparency

    For the purpose of this report, the minimum requirements of fiscal 
transparency include having budget documents that are publicly 
available, substantially complete, and generally reliable. The review 
includes an assessment of the transparency of processes for awarding 
government contracts and licenses for natural resource extraction. 
Fiscal transparency is a critical element of effective public financial 
management, helps in building market confidence, and underpins economic 
sustainability. Fiscal transparency fosters greater government 
accountability by providing a window into government budgets for 
citizens, helping them to hold their leadership accountable, and 
facilitating better-informed public debates. The Department's fiscal 
transparency review process assesses whether governments meet minimum 
requirements of fiscal transparency.
    Annual reviews of the fiscal transparency of governments that 
receive U.S. assistance helps ensure U.S. taxpayer money is used 
appropriately and provides opportunities to dialogue with governments 
on the importance of fiscal transparency.
    Section 7031(b) of the Act requires the Secretary to develop, 
update, and strengthen minimum requirements of fiscal transparency for 
each government receiving assistance appropriated by the Act, as 
identified in the FY 2014 Fiscal Transparency Report, in consultation 
with other relevant federal agencies, and to make or update any 
determination of ``significant'' or ``no significant progress'' in 
meeting the minimum requirements of fiscal transparency for each 
government that did not meet the minimum requirements. Through 
authority delegated from the Secretary, the Deputy Secretary of State 
for Management and Resources made those determinations for FY 2015.
    As a result of the Department updating and strengthening the 
minimum requirements of fiscal transparency, more governments fell 
short of these requirements than in the FY 2014 assessments, despite in 
some cases maintaining or even improving their level of fiscal 
transparency. The report includes a description as to how those 
governments fell short of the minimum requirements, outlines any 
significant progress being made toward meeting the minimum 
requirements, and provides specific recommendations of steps such 
governments should take to improve fiscal transparency. The report also 
outlines the process followed by the Department in completing the 
assessments and describes how funds appropriated by the FY 2015 and 
earlier appropriations acts are being used to support fiscal 
transparency.
    While a lack of fiscal transparency can be an enabling factor for 
corruption, the report does not assess corruption. A finding that a 
government ``does not meet the minimum requirements of fiscal 
transparency'' does not necessarily mean there is significant 
corruption in the government; a finding

[[Page 36581]]

that a government ``meets the minimum requirements of fiscal 
transparency'' does not necessarily reflect a low level of corruption.

Fiscal Transparency Review Process and Criteria

    The Department reviewed its minimum requirements of fiscal 
transparency in consultation with other relevant federal agencies, and 
updated and strengthened those requirements. The Department then 
assessed the fiscal transparency of the 140 governments identified, 
determined whether the minimum requirements were met, and identified 
any measures those governments had implemented to make significant 
progress towards meeting the requirements.
    In conducting the FY 2015 review, the Department assessed the 
fiscal transparency of governments during the period January 17--
December 31, 2014. In reaching a determination, the Department 
considered information from U.S. embassies and consulates, other U.S. 
government agencies, international organizations, and civil society 
organizations. U.S. diplomatic missions consulted with foreign 
government officials, international organizations, and civil society to 
obtain information for these assessments.
    The Department recognizes the specific circumstances and practices 
of fiscal transparency differ among governments. The review process 
takes a tailored approach in evaluating governments while ensuring 
minimum fiscal transparency requirements are met in order to enable 
meaningful participation of the public in the budgeting process.

Minimum Requirements of Fiscal Transparency

    Subsection 7031(b)(2) of the Act provides that the minimum 
requirements of fiscal transparency developed by the Department are 
requirements ``consistent with those in subsection [7031](a)(1)'' and 
the public disclosure of:
     National budget documentation (to include receipts and 
expenditures by ministry), and
     government contracts and licenses for natural resource 
extraction (to include bidding and concession allocation practices).
    The FY 2015 fiscal transparency review process evaluated whether 
the identified governments publicly discloses budget documents 
including expenditures broken down by ministry and revenues broken down 
by source and type. The review process also evaluated whether the 
government has an independent supreme audit institution or similar 
institution that audits the government's annual financial statements 
and whether such audits are made publicly available. The review further 
assessed whether the process for awarding licenses and contracts for 
natural resource extraction is outlined in law or regulation and 
followed in practice, and whether basic information on such awards is 
publicly available. The Department applied the following criteria in 
assessing whether governments met the minimum requirements of fiscal 
transparency.
    Budget information should be:
     Publicly Available: Budget documents should be broadly 
available online, at government offices or libraries, upon request from 
the ministry, or for purchase at a nominal fee at a government office. 
Publicly available budgets should include expenditures broken down by 
ministry and revenues broken down by source and type. Information on 
government debt obligations should be publicly available.
     Substantially Complete: Budget documents, which should 
include the proposed budget, the enacted budget, and the end-of-year 
report, should provide a substantially full picture of a government's 
planned expenditures and revenue streams, including natural resource 
revenues. Budgets should include at least one level of detail beyond 
the administrative unit (ministry, agency, or department). Budget 
documents should detail allocations to and earnings from state-owned 
enterprises and, if not, significant state-owned enterprises should 
have publicly available, audited financial statements. A published 
budget that does not include significant cash or non-cash resources, 
including foreign aid, would not be considered substantially complete. 
Budget documents should incorporate all special accounts and off-budget 
accounts, or if they have a legitimate purpose, they should be audited, 
the results made public, and the accounts subjected to oversight. 
Budget documents should also include expenditures to support executive 
offices or royal families where such expenditures represent a 
significant budgetary outlay. The review process recognizes military 
and/or intelligence budgets are often not publicly available for 
national security reasons. However, military and intelligence 
expenditures should be approved by parliament and subject to civilian 
oversight.
     Reliable: Budget documents and related data are considered 
reliable if they are disseminated within a reasonable amount of time 
and the information contained therein is credible. ``Reasonable time'' 
generally corresponds to within one month of the start of the fiscal 
year for the budget proposal, within three months of enactment for the 
enacted budget, and within 18 months of the end of the fiscal year for 
the year-end reports. Significant departures from planned receipts and 
expenditures should be explained in supplementary budget documents and 
publicly disclosed in a timely manner. Financial statements should use 
accounting principles that result in consistent and comparable 
statements. The executed budget should be audited by an independent 
supreme audit institution, and the results of such audits should be 
made public within a reasonable period of time (within 12 months of the 
dissemination of the year-end reports).
    Natural resource extraction contracting and licensing procedures 
should be:
     Transparent: The criteria and procedures for the 
contracting and licensing of natural resource extraction should be 
publicly available and codified in law or regulation. Procedures used 
to award contracts and licenses in practice should be consistent with 
the government's legal requirements. The basic parameters of 
concessions and contracts should be made publicly available after the 
decision. Such information should include the geographic area covered 
by the contract or license, the resource being developed, the duration 
of the contract, and the company to which the contract or license is 
awarded.

Significant Progress or No Significant Progress

    A determination of ``significant progress'' indicates that during 
the review period, a government has addressed deficiencies in meeting 
the Department's minimum requirements.

Fiscal Transparency Innovation Fund

    Section 7031(b)(4) of the Act requires funds appropriated under 
Title III of the Act be made available for programs and activities to 
improve budget transparency and to support civil society organizations 
that promote fiscal transparency. Since FY 2012, Congress has called 
for such funds to be made available for that purpose. The Department 
and USAID created the Fiscal Transparency Innovation Fund (FTIF) in FY 
2012. FTIF supports programs and activities that assist governments to 
improve their public financial management and fiscal transparency 
standards, and civil

[[Page 36582]]

society organizations that promote budget transparency. The 
Department's Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs and USAID's Bureau 
for Economic Growth, Education, and the Environment solicit proposals 
and award funds in accordance with established guidelines. In FY 2015, 
the Department and USAID intend to provide $5 million for FTIF.
    The Department and USAID are using $7 million in FY 2014 funds to 
support 10 projects in the following countries: Burma, Cambodia, Chad, 
the Republic of Congo, Guinea, Madagascar, Malawi, Nicaragua, Senegal, 
and Ukraine. The projects furthered efforts by government and civil 
society to improve fiscal transparency and public financial management 
practices and to improve public awareness and involvement in the 
expenditure of public resources. Examples of projects include $100,000 
to increase citizen awareness of and participation in the budget 
process in Chad, and $800,000 to improve the fiscal transparency of the 
energy sector in Ukraine.
    The Department intends to use FY 2015 FTIF funds to support 
projects to enhance: (1) Governments' capacity to develop and execute 
comprehensive, reliable, and transparent budgets; (2) citizens' 
visibility into state expenditure and revenue programs; and (3) 
citizens' ability to advocate for specific issues related to government 
budgets and budget processes.

Conclusions of Review Process

    The Department concluded, of the 140 governments evaluated pursuant 
to the Act, 60 did not meet the minimum requirements of fiscal 
transparency. However, of these, nine governments made significant 
progress toward meeting the minimum requirements of fiscal 
transparency.
    The Department assessed the following governments as meeting the 
minimum requirements of fiscal transparency for FY 2015: Albania, 
Armenia, Argentina, The Bahamas, Belize, Bosnia and Herzegovina, 
Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Cabo Verde, Chile, Colombia, 
Costa Rica, Cote d'Ivoire, Croatia, Czech Republic, Ecuador, El 
Salvador, Estonia, Fiji, Georgia, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guyana, 
Honduras, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Israel, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, 
Kosovo, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lesotho, Lithuania, Macedonia, Malaysia, 
Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritius, Mexico, Micronesia, Moldova, 
Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Namibia, Nepal, Panama, Papua New 
Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Rwanda, 
Samoa, Senegal, Serbia, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, 
South Africa, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tonga, Trinidad 
and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uruguay, Vietnam, and Zambia.
    The following table lists those governments that were found not to 
meet the minimum requirements of fiscal transparency and identifies 
whether the governments made significant progress toward meeting those 
requirements:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Governments assessed pursuant to the
      Act as not meeting minimum          Significant     No significant
  requirements of fiscal transparency       progress         progress
              for FY 2015
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afghanistan...........................  ...............               X
Algeria...............................  ...............               X
Angola................................               X   ...............
Azerbaijan............................  ...............               X
Bahrain...............................  ...............               X
Bangladesh............................  ...............               X
Benin.................................  ...............               X
Burma.................................  ...............               X
Burundi...............................  ...............               X
Cambodia..............................  ...............               X
Cameroon..............................  ...............               X
Central African Republic..............  ...............               X
Chad..................................               X   ...............
China.................................  ...............               X
Comoros...............................               X   ...............
Congo, Democratic Republic of the.....               X   ...............
Congo, Republic of the................  ...............               X
Djibouti..............................  ...............               X
Dominican Republic....................  ...............               X
Egypt.................................  ...............               X
Ethiopia..............................  ...............               X
Gabon.................................  ...............               X
Gambia, The...........................  ...............               X
Guinea................................  ...............               X
Guinea-Bissau.........................  ...............               X
Haiti.................................  ...............               X
Iraq..................................  ...............               X
Kazakhstan............................               X   ...............
Laos..................................  ...............               X
Lebanon...............................  ...............               X
Liberia...............................               X   ...............
Libya.................................  ...............               X
Madagascar............................  ...............               X
Malawi................................  ...............               X
Maldives..............................  ...............               X
Mali..................................  ...............               X
Mauritania............................  ...............               X
Mozambique............................  ...............               X
Nicaragua.............................  ...............               X
Niger.................................               X   ...............
Nigeria...............................  ...............               X

[[Page 36583]]

 
Oman..................................  ...............               X
Pakistan..............................  ...............               X
Palestinian Authority.................  ...............               X
Sao Tome and Principe.................  ...............               X
Saudi Arabia..........................  ...............               X
Seychelles............................  ...............               X
Somalia...............................  ...............               X
South Sudan...........................  ...............               X
Sudan.................................  ...............               X
Suriname..............................  ...............               X
Swaziland.............................  ...............               X
Tajikistan............................  ...............               X
Tanzania..............................               X   ...............
Turkmenistan..........................  ...............               X
Uganda................................  ...............               X
Ukraine...............................               X   ...............
Uzbekistan............................  ...............               X
Yemen.................................  ...............               X
Zimbabwe..............................  ...............               X
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Government-by-Government Assessments

    This section describes areas where governments fell short of the 
Department's minimum requirements of fiscal transparency and includes 
specific recommendations of steps such governments should take to 
improve fiscal transparency. For those governments found to have made 
significant progress toward meeting the minimum requirements, the 
section also includes a brief description of such progress.
    Afghanistan: While the budget is publicly available, it does not 
include allocations to and earnings from state-owned enterprises and 
state-owned enterprises do not have audited accounts. Despite 
improvements in recent years, revenue and expenditure data is 
unreliable. The supreme audit institution does not carry out a 
verification of the government's annual financial statements. The 
process for awarding natural resource extraction licenses and contracts 
is outlined in law or regulations and basic information on the awards 
is publicly available. Afghanistan's fiscal transparency would be 
improved by including all revenue and expenditure data in the budget, 
identifying financial transfers to and from state-owned enterprises in 
the budget, and carrying out and publishing an audit of the 
government's financial statements by the supreme audit institution 
within a reasonable period of time.
    Algeria: The budget is publicly available but does not include 
adequate detail on expenditures and revenues. The government also 
maintains off-budget accounts not subject to audit or oversight. The 
government's year-end report is not made publicly available within a 
reasonable period of time. The supreme audit institution audits the 
government's financial statements but its audit reports are not made 
publicly available within a reasonable period of time. The process for 
awarding natural resource extraction licenses and contracts is outlined 
in law or regulation and basic information on the awards is publicly 
available. Algeria's fiscal transparency would be improved by providing 
additional detail in its budget, subjecting off-budget accounts to 
audit and oversight, and making budget documents, such as the year-end 
report and the supreme audit institution's audit of the government's 
financial statements, publicly available within a reasonable period of 
time.
    Angola: The budget is publicly available and details expenditures 
and revenues; it includes allocations to and earnings from state-owned 
enterprises, and debt obligations. State-owned enterprises submit 
annual financial statements and the oil and gas state-owned enterprise, 
Sonangol, publishes independently audited annual financial statements. 
The information in budget documents is considered generally credible. 
Although there is a supreme audit institution, its reports are not 
publicly available. The process for awarding natural resource 
extraction licenses and contracts is outlined in law or regulation and 
basic information on such awards is publicly available. Angola made 
significant progress by completing financial reconciliation for 
government accounts and publishing year-end budget reports; improving 
the transparency of information about transfers from the national oil 
company, Sonangol, to the Ministry of Finance; and including Sonangol's 
quasi-fiscal activities in the budget. Angola's fiscal transparency 
would be improved by ensuring its supreme audit institution audits the 
government's annual financial accounts and makes public its findings 
within a reasonable period of time.
    Azerbaijan: Budget documents are publicly available and provide a 
substantially complete picture of the government's revenues, including 
natural resources. However, budget documents do not contain sufficient 
detail for expenditures and do not identify allocations to or earnings 
from state-owned enterprises. Many state-owned enterprises also do not 
have publicly available audited accounts. It is unclear whether the 
supreme audit institution verifies government financial statements, and 
its reports are not publicly available. The process by which the 
government awards natural resource contracts or licenses is generally 
opaque and only partially specified in law, regulation, or public 
documents. However, once a contract or license is awarded, the 
government makes basic information on awards publicly available. 
Azerbaijan's fiscal transparency would be improved by including more 
detail in publicly available budget documents including allocations to 
and earnings from state-owned enterprises; making supreme audit 
institution audit reports publicly available; and fully specifying in 
law or regulation the process for awarding natural resource extraction 
contracts or licenses and following that process in practice.
    Bahrain: The budget is publicly available but does not include 
expenditures for the royal family or allocations to state-owned 
enterprises. The information in the budget is considered credible. The 
supreme audit

[[Page 36584]]

institution audits the year-end report annually and the report is 
published once in newspapers. The process for awarding natural resource 
extraction licenses and contracts is outlined in law or regulation and 
basic information on such awards is publicly available. Bahrain's 
fiscal transparency would be improved by publicly disclosing royal 
family expenditures in its budget, detailing allocations to state-owned 
enterprises, and publishing supreme audit institution audits online.
    Benin: The budget is publicly available and includes, but does not 
identify, revenue from natural resources or allocations to and earnings 
from state-owned enterprises. State-owned enterprises have audited 
financial statements but such statements are not made publicly 
available. The supreme audit institution has completed audits of the 
government's annual financial statements but the reports were not made 
publicly available within a reasonable period of time. The process for 
awarding natural resource extraction licenses and contracts is outlined 
in law or regulation and basic information on the awards is publicly 
available. Benin's fiscal transparency would be improved by providing a 
comprehensive public accounting of all revenues and expenditures, 
including from state-owned enterprises and the relatively nominal 
revenues from natural resources, and ensuring its supreme audit 
institution audits are made publicly available within a reasonable 
period of time.
    Bangladesh: While the budget is publicly available and breaks down 
expenditures and revenues, financial allocations to and earnings from 
state-owned enterprises are included only in the aggregate. Information 
on earnings from state-owned enterprises is included in supplementary 
budget documents; however, information on allocations to state-owned 
enterprises is not available. The budget does not include expenditures 
to support executive offices; it is unclear whether these represent a 
significant outlay. Further, the supreme audit institution has not 
produced and made publicly available verifications of the government's 
annual financial statements within a reasonable period of time. The 
process for awarding natural resource extraction licenses and contracts 
is outlined in law or regulation and basic information on the awards is 
publicly available. Bangladesh's fiscal transparency would be improved 
by including in the budget more detail on allocations to and earnings 
from state-owned enterprises and expenditures to support executive 
offices and publishing an audit of the government's financial 
statements by the supreme audit institution within a reasonable period 
of time.
    Burma: The enacted budget is publicly available, but the budget 
proposal, year-end report, and debt obligations are not. The enacted 
budget does not include details such as earnings from state-owned 
enterprises. While state-owned enterprises are subject to audit, audits 
are not done regularly or made publicly available. The government 
maintains off-budget accounts that do not appear to be subject to audit 
and oversight. There was no widely available information as to whether 
there was civilian oversight of the military and intelligence budgets. 
The supreme audit institution reportedly produces an audit of the 
government's financial statements, but its reports are not publicly 
available. The process for awarding natural resource extraction 
licenses and contracts is not outlined in law or regulation, nor is 
basic information on the awards publicly available. Burma's fiscal 
transparency would be improved by producing and making public detailed, 
comprehensive budget documents; making state-owned enterprise audited 
accounts and supreme audit institution reports publicly available; 
subjecting off-budget accounts and military/intelligence budgets to 
audit and oversight; and specifying in law or regulation the processes 
for awarding natural resource extraction contracts and licenses and 
making basic information on such awards publicly available.
    Burundi: While the budget is publicly available, it is not 
substantially complete. The government appears to maintain some off-
budget accounts. Budget documents are made publicly available within a 
reasonable period of time. The process for awarding natural resource 
extraction licenses and contracts is outlined in law or regulation and 
basic information on the awards is publicly available. Burundi's fiscal 
transparency would be improved by ensuring all revenues and 
expenditures are included in the budget and by including accurate 
reporting of mining revenues.
    Cambodia: While the government publishes enacted and year-end 
budget documents, proposed budgets are not publicly available. Budget 
documents are substantially complete. The supreme audit institution is 
authorized to audit government accounts but it does not make its 
reports (with the exception of 2006 and 2007 reports) publicly 
available. The government began implementing a new budget 
classification that complies with international accounting standards. 
The process for awarding natural resource extraction licenses and 
contracts is not outlined in law or regulation and basic information on 
such awards is not publicly available. Cambodia's fiscal transparency 
would be improved by making publicly available proposed budgets and 
supreme audit institution reports, and specifying in law or regulation 
the processes by which the government awards natural resource contracts 
or licenses and making basic information on such awards publicly 
available.
    Cameroon: The budget is publicly available but does not include all 
expenditures and revenues, including allocations to and earnings from 
state-owned enterprises. Less than a third of state-owned enterprises 
produce financial statements. The supreme audit institution does not 
audit the entire budget annually, nor are its reports publicly 
available. The process for awarding natural resource extraction 
licenses and contracts is outlined in law or regulation and basic 
information on the awards is publicly available. Cameroon's fiscal 
transparency would be improved by including all revenues and 
expenditures in the budget, auditing all significant state-owned 
enterprises, and carrying out and making publicly available within a 
reasonable period of time an audit of the government's annual financial 
statements by the supreme audit institution.
    Central African Republic: In a period of significant political 
unrest, the government budget process did not function according to 
established procedures. The process by which the government awards 
natural resource contracts or licenses is not specified in law, 
regulation, or other public document nor is basic information about 
such awards made publicly available. The Central Africa Republic's 
fiscal transparency would be improved by resuming normal budgeting 
procedures, specifying in law or regulation the process for awarding 
natural resource extraction contracts or licenses, and making basic 
information about such awards publicly available.
    Chad: The budget is publicly available but does not include all 
revenues and expenditures. The budget does not include foreign aid or 
earnings from state-owned enterprises and significant state-owned 
enterprises do not have audited accounts. The government maintains off-
budget accounts not subject to audit or oversight. The new supreme 
audit institution has yet to produce publicly

[[Page 36585]]

available reports. The process used to award natural resource 
extraction contracts is not always consistent with the procedural 
requirements set by law or regulation. Chad made significant progress 
by producing timely, publicly available quarterly budget execution 
reports and establishing a supreme audit institution. Chad's fiscal 
transparency would be improved by including all revenues and 
expenditures in the budget, auditing significant state-owned 
enterprises' accounts, making supreme audit institution reports 
publicly available, eliminating off-budget accounts or subjecting them 
to audit and oversight, and adhering to the process for awarding 
natural resource extraction contracts and licenses as set out in 
applicable laws.
    China: While the government publishes annual budget documents, it 
does not make budget documents available within a reasonable period of 
time. For example, the budget proposal is not made publicly available 
before the budget is enacted. Budget documents do not identify 
financial allocations to state-owned enterprises. The supreme audit 
institution audits all national government entities, including 
ministries and state-owned enterprises. The process for awarding 
natural resource extraction licenses and contracts is outlined in law 
or regulation and basic information on the awards is publicly 
available. China's fiscal transparency would be improved by detailing 
financial allocations to and earnings from state-owned enterprises in 
the budget by company type, and publishing the proposed budget ahead of 
the budget's enactment.
    Comoros: While the enacted budget and year-end report are publicly 
available, the executive's budget proposal is not. The budget is 
considered substantially complete. The supreme audit institution does 
not make its yearly audit publicly available. The process for awarding 
natural resource extraction licenses and contracts is outlined in law 
or regulation and basic information on the awards is publicly 
available. Comoros made significant progress during the review period 
by providing some budget documents on the ministry of finance's Web 
site. Comoros' fiscal transparency would be improved by making the 
proposed budget publicly available, and ensuring the supreme audit 
institution conducts audits of the government's annual financial 
statements and makes its reports publicly available within a reasonable 
period of time.
    Congo, Democratic Republic of the: The budget is publicly available 
and includes, but does not specifically identify allocations to state-
owned enterprises. All state-owned enterprises, including the state-
owned mining company, are required to have publicly available audited 
financial statements, but not all are published within a reasonable 
period of time. The government reportedly maintains accounts not 
subject to audit or oversight. Military and intelligence budgets do not 
appear to be subject to civilian oversight. Budget execution varies 
considerably from the enacted budget. The supreme audit institution 
audits the government's annual financial statements and made 
significant progress by making these audit reports publicly available 
within a reasonable time period. The process for awarding natural 
resource contracts and licenses is specified in law; no awards were 
made during the reporting period. The Democratic Republic of the 
Congo's fiscal transparency would be improved by including all revenues 
and expenditures in the budget at an appropriate level of detail; 
specifically identifying allocations to state-owned enterprises and 
making state-owned enterprises' audited financial statements publicly 
available within a reasonable period of time; making information public 
on any off-budget accounts and subjecting off-budget accounts and 
military/intelligence budgets to audit and oversight; and making public 
within a reasonable period of time all budget documents including 
revised estimates.
    Congo, Republic of the: The budget is publicly available but does 
not include details on expenditures, revenues, and debt obligations. 
The government has off-budget accounts not subject to audit and 
oversight. There are discrepancies between the enacted budget and 
budget execution with no explanation of the discrepancies. The 
government does not make available year-end or executed budget 
information to the supreme audit institution. The process for awarding 
natural resource extraction licenses and contracts is outlined in law 
or regulation; but there are reports of inconsistent application of 
applicable regulations. The Republic of the Congo's fiscal transparency 
would be improved by enhancing the completeness of its budget 
reporting; producing and making public year-end and executed budget 
information; disclosing details of debt obligations; subjecting off-
budget accounts to audit and oversight; producing and publishing 
supreme audit institution audits of the annual executed budget within a 
reasonable period of time; and increasing transparency in natural 
resource extraction awards.
    Djibouti: While some budget documents are publicly available, the 
government does not make publicly available its year-end budget report, 
or information on all debt obligations. The government maintains off-
budget accounts that are not audited. Budget data is not considered 
credible, and although the supreme audit institution audits the budget 
annually, its reports are not publicly available. The government is in 
the process of revising the applicable laws governing the process for 
awarding natural resource extraction contracts or licenses; basic 
information on natural resource extraction awards is publicly 
available. Djibouti's fiscal transparency would be improved by 
including all revenues and expenditures in the budget, producing 
credible, and reasonably accurate budget data, and making its year-end 
budget and supreme audit institution audit reports publicly available 
within a reasonable period of time.
    Dominican Republic: Although the budget is publicly available, it 
lacks detail in certain areas such as the large budget allocation for 
the presidency, which represents nine percent of the total budget. It 
appears the intelligence budget is not subject to civilian oversight in 
practice. The supreme audit institution conducts an audit of the 
government's annual financial statements made publicly available within 
a reasonable period of time. The process for awarding natural resource 
extraction licenses and contracts is outlined in law and basic 
information on the awards is publicly available. Overall budget 
reliability has improved with new systems and better forecasting, and 
the government has a five-year plan to adopt international accounting 
standards. The Dominican Republic's fiscal transparency would be 
improved by increasing the transparency of the budget of the presidency 
and establishing civilian oversight over the intelligence budget.
    Egypt: Budget documents are publicly available and generally 
complete, but lack detail in some areas. For example, the budget does 
not include allocations to or earnings from military state-owned 
enterprises. While the government has eliminated a substantial number 
of off-budget accounts, there are still accounts not publicly disclosed 
or subject to audit. Also, the government did not release its budget 
proposal within a reasonable period of time. The supreme audit 
institution reviews the government's accounts but its reports are not 
publicly available. The process for awarding natural resource 
extraction

[[Page 36586]]

licenses and contracts is outlined in law, but basic information on 
awards is not publicly available. The government made progress by 
publishing for the first time a citizens' budget that met international 
standards and a mid-year review. Egypt's fiscal transparency would be 
improved by making publicly available a proposed budget within a 
reasonable period of time; including all revenues and expenditures in 
the budget, including allocations to and earnings from military state-
owned enterprises; subjecting off-budget accounts to audit and 
oversight, and making supreme audit institution reports and the basic 
terms of natural resource extraction licenses and contracts publicly 
available.
    Ethiopia: While the government makes enacted budgets publicly 
available, budget proposals and execution reports are not available and 
year-end reports are not published within a reasonable period of time. 
Budget documents do not identify allocations to or earnings from state-
owned enterprises and not all significant state-owned enterprises have 
publicly available, audited financial statements. The process for 
awarding natural resource extraction licenses and contracts is outlined 
in law or regulation, but basic information on such awards is not 
always publicly available. Ethiopia's fiscal transparency would be 
improved by making proposed budgets, budget execution reports, and 
year-end reports publicly available within a reasonable period of time; 
identifying allocations to and earnings from state-owned enterprises in 
the budget; and making basic information about natural resource 
licenses and contracts awards publicly available.
    Gabon: The government did not publicly release budgets or budget 
reports. There is no supreme audit institution. The process of awarding 
natural resource extraction licenses and contracts is opaque and basic 
terms of contracts for natural resource exploitation are not generally 
publicly available. Gabon's fiscal transparency would be improved by 
making publicly available a substantially complete proposed budget, 
enacted budget, and year-end report; establishing a functioning 
independent supreme audit institution; conducting and making public an 
audit of the government's annual financial statements; and specifying 
in law or regulation the processes by which the government awards 
natural resource contracts or licenses, and subsequently making the 
basic terms of awarded licenses and contracts publicly available.
    The Gambia: The budget is publicly available, but does not break 
down revenues. Earnings from and allocations to state-owned 
enterprises, revenues from natural resource extraction, and military 
and intelligence expenditures are not included in the budget. The 
supreme audit institution is responsible for auditing the government's 
annual executed budget, but it does not produce timely audits of the 
budget. The process by which the government awards natural resource 
contracts or licenses is not specified in law nor is basic information 
about awards publicly available. The Gambia's fiscal transparency would 
be improved by including all revenues and expenditures in the budget, 
subjecting off-budget accounts to audit and oversight, and increasing 
the capacity of its supreme audit institution to produce timely, 
publicly available audits. Transparency would also be improved by 
establishing laws or regulations governing the award of natural 
resource extraction contracts and licenses, following the law in 
practice, and making publicly available information about such awards.
    Guinea: The budget is not broadly available and, with the exception 
of revenues from the extractive industry, the budget is not 
substantially complete. There is no supreme audit institution. The 
process for awarding natural resource extraction licenses and contracts 
is outlined in law or regulation and basic information on the awards is 
publicly available. The seating of the first-ever National Assembly, 
which began initial oversight of the budget, may provide a basis for 
future progress in fiscal transparency. Guinea's fiscal transparency 
would be improved by making its budget publicly available; providing 
more detail on revenues and expenditures, including revenues from 
state-owned enterprises; and establishing a supreme audit institution 
to audit the budget.
    Guinea-Bissau: The budget is ostensibly publicly available, but can 
be difficult to obtain in practice. The budget breaks down expenditures 
by ministry and revenues by type and source, but does not include 
revenues from state-owned enterprises. The supreme audit institution 
does not audit the budget. The process by which the government awards 
natural resource contracts or licenses is specified in law, but not 
always followed in practice, and basic information on awarded contracts 
is not made publicly available. Guinea-Bissau's fiscal transparency 
would be improved by including all sources of expenditures and revenues 
in the budget, including state-owned enterprises; having the supreme 
audit institution audit the budget, and make publicly available its 
findings within a reasonable period of time; and increasing 
transparency in natural resource extraction contract and licensing.
    Haiti: The budget is publicly available. Natural resource revenues 
are included in the budget, but are not identified by origin, source, 
or type. Allocations to and earnings from state-owned enterprises are 
not clearly identified in the budget. Significant state-owned 
enterprises do not have audited accounts that are either provided to an 
oversight body or made publicly available. The supreme audit 
institution submits annual budget audits to the parliament, but it does 
not regularly make these budget audits publicly available. The process 
by which the government awards natural resource contracts or licenses 
is specified in law, but basic information on natural resources 
contracts, once awarded, is not publicly available. Haiti's fiscal 
transparency would be improved by clearly identifying natural resource 
revenues and allocations to and earnings from state-owned enterprise in 
the budget, making supreme audit institution annual audits publicly 
available, regularly auditing state-owned enterprise accounts, and 
making publicly available basic information on natural resource 
contracts and licenses.
    Iraq: The government did not pass a national budget and information 
on off-budget expenditures was not publicly available. The process for 
awarding natural resource extraction licenses and contracts is outlined 
in law or regulation; basic information on awards is publicly available 
with the exception of contracts between the Kurdistan regional 
government and international companies. Iraq's fiscal transparency 
would be improved by publishing timely, accurate budgets and making 
publicly available budget proposals, year-end reports, supreme audit 
institution audit reports and basic information on all natural resource 
extraction awards.
    Kazakhstan: The budget is publicly available and includes detail on 
expenditures and revenues, including transfers to the National Oil 
Fund. Kazakhstan made significant progress by including allocations to 
and earnings from state-owned enterprises in the budget. The supreme 
audit institution reviews the budget, but does not make its full report 
publicly available. The process for awarding natural resource 
extraction licenses and contracts is outlined in law and basic 
information on the awards is publicly available.

[[Page 36587]]

Kazakhstan's fiscal transparency would be improved by having the 
supreme audit institution conduct a verification of the government's 
annual financial statements and make its report publicly available 
within a reasonable period of time.
    Laos: Publicly available budget documents do not provide 
substantial detail of the government's revenues and expenditures. Areas 
lacking detail include allocations to and earnings from state-owned 
enterprises; revenues from natural resources; military, intelligence, 
and executive office budgets; and any unauthorized provincial 
expenditures. The government does not make public its proposed budget, 
enacted budget, and year-end reports within a reasonable period of 
time. The supreme audit institution does not audit annual budget 
execution nor are its reports publicly available. The process by which 
the government awards natural resource contracts or licenses is 
specified in law or regulation; the government did not make any awards 
during the review period. Laos' fiscal transparency would be improved 
by detailing revenues and expenditures, and making budget documents and 
supreme audit institution audits publicly available within a reasonable 
period of time.
    Lebanon: The government does not make its budget publicly available 
within a reasonable period of time. Budget documents do not provide a 
substantially complete view of expenditures and revenues. Details 
regarding military and intelligence expenditures are limited and these 
accounts are not subject to civilian oversight. The government also 
maintains off-budget accounts not subject to scrutiny. The supreme 
audit institution does not produce an audit of the government's annual 
financial statements. The process by which the national government 
expects to award natural resource contracts or licenses is specified in 
regulations awaiting approval by the cabinet. Lebanon's fiscal 
transparency would be improved by regularly publishing its enacted 
budget and year-end reports; including sufficient detail on 
expenditures and revenues by ministry and agency; eliminating off-
budget accounts; and producing and publishing a supreme audit 
institution audit.
    Liberia: Budget documents are publicly available; however, during 
the review period, there were significant deficiencies in ensuring all 
expenditures or contracts were on budget. The supreme audit institution 
audits the government's annual financial statements, but its reports 
are not made publicly available within a reasonable period of time. The 
process for awarding natural resource extraction licenses and contracts 
is outlined in law and basic information on the awards is publicly 
available. During the review period, the government made significant 
progress by conducting a procurement review with relevant ministries 
and beginning to implement reforms concerning contracting and budgeting 
procedures. Liberia's fiscal transparency would be improved by ensuring 
the budget is substantially complete, eliminating extra-budgetary 
expenditures, and making supreme audit institution audit reports 
publicly available within a reasonable period of time.
    Libya: During a period of significant internal political conflict, 
the government did not implement its budget processes. The budget and 
information on debt obligations and its sovereign wealth fund, the 
Libyan Investment Authority, are not publicly available. Revenues from 
state-owned enterprises are not included in the budget. Significant 
state-owned enterprises have audited accounts, but audit reports are 
not publicly available and it is unclear if audits were conducted. The 
supreme audit institution is required by law to audit the budget, but 
its reports are not consistently made publicly available and it is 
unclear if audits were conducted. The process for awarding natural 
resource extraction licenses and contracts is outlined in law or 
regulation, but basic information on the awards is not publicly 
available. Libya's fiscal transparency would be improved by making 
publicly available its budget, information on its sovereign wealth 
fund, state-owned enterprise audit reports, budget execution reports, 
government financial audit reports, and basic information on natural 
resource extraction awards; subjecting military and intelligence 
budgets to civilian oversight; and ensuring the supreme audit 
institution audits are carried out.
    Madagascar: Budget documents are publicly available, but contain 
gaps, including some natural resource revenues and transfers to and 
from state-owned enterprises. The government did not publish year-end 
reports within a reasonable period of time. The government indicates 
the annual executed budget is audited, but audit reports are not 
publicly available. The process for awarding natural resource 
extraction licenses and contracts is outlined in law. However, the 
government is revising the laws that govern the awards of petroleum and 
mining licenses and there is currently a freeze on new mining licenses. 
The government makes the basic terms of awards publicly available. 
Madagascar's fiscal transparency would be improved by increasing budget 
completeness and reliability; including allocations to and revenues 
from state-owned enterprises and revenues from natural resources in the 
budget; ensuring an independent supreme audit agency carries out audits 
of the government's annual financial statements and makes its reports 
publicly available within a reasonable period of time. Fiscal 
transparency would be further improved by completing a review of the 
laws specifying the process by which the government awards natural 
resource contracts or licenses.
    Malawi: Budget documents are publicly available and substantially 
complete. The government does not provide financial statements to the 
supreme audit institution within a reasonable period of time and, as a 
result, the supreme audit institution's audit of the government's 
annual financial accounts is delayed. While the process by which the 
national government awards natural resource contracts is specified in 
law, the process actually used to award contracts does not always 
appear to be consistent with law or regulation nor is basic information 
about such awards made publicly available. Malawi's fiscal transparency 
would be improved by providing government year-end financial statements 
to the supreme audit institution within a reasonable period of time; 
making supreme audit institution reports publicly available within a 
reasonable period of time; adhering to the process for awarding natural 
resource extraction contracts and licenses as set out in applicable 
laws, and by making public basic information on natural resource 
extraction awards.
    Maldives: While the budget is publicly available and breaks down 
expenditures by ministry or government agency and revenues by source 
and type, only limited data on debt obligations is available. 
Information in the budget documents is not always reliable. The supreme 
audit institution does not conduct and make public an audit of the 
government's annual financial statements. Maldives' fiscal transparency 
would be improved by making publicly available substantially complete 
and reliable budget documents, including debt obligations. Fiscal 
transparency would also be improved by having the supreme audit 
institution conduct and make publicly available in a timely manner 
audits of the government's annual financial

[[Page 36588]]

statements. Maldives does not have a natural resource extraction 
sector.
    Mali: The budget is publicly available and contains information on 
debt obligations. The budget includes, but does not break down, natural 
resource revenues and allocations to and earnings from state-owned 
enterprises. The government also had off-budget accounts not subject to 
audit or oversight. The supreme audit institution audits the annual 
executed budget, but public release of its most recent report has been 
delayed. The process for awarding natural resource extraction licenses 
and contracts is outlined in law or regulation and basic information on 
the awards is publicly available. Mali's fiscal transparency would be 
improved by including more detail on revenues and expenditures in 
budget documents, ensuring the timely public release of supreme audit 
institution reports, and subjecting all off-budget accounts to audit 
and oversight.
    Mauritania: The budget is publicly available and substantially 
complete, including natural resource revenues and allocations to and 
earnings from state-owned enterprises. The supreme audit institution 
audits the financial statements of significant state-owned enterprises 
and the government's entire executed budget annually; its reports are 
made publicly available within a reasonable period of time. The process 
by which the government awards natural resource contracts or licenses 
is specified in law or regulations, but there are reports of 
inconsistent application of applicable regulations. Once awarded, basic 
information on such contracts or licenses is publicly available. 
Mauritania's fiscal transparency would be improved by making the 
process used to award natural resource extraction contracts and 
licenses consistent with the procedural requirements set by law or 
regulation.
    Mozambique: While budget documents are publicly available, the 
government does not publish sufficient data about debt obligations and 
enterprises partially or wholly owned by the government. The government 
maintains an off-budget account for revenues obtained from large 
capital gain taxes, and this account is not subject to the same 
auditing and oversight as the rest of the budget. Additionally, the 
supreme audit institution does not audit the annual executed budget. 
The process for awarding natural resource extraction licenses and 
contracts is outlined in law and basic information on the awards is 
publicly available. Mozambique's fiscal transparency would be improved 
by reporting on debt obligations and enterprises which have government 
ownership, subjecting off-budget accounts to auditing and oversight, 
and publicly issuing a supreme audit institution audit of the 
government's annual financial statements.
    Nicaragua: While the budget is publicly available and information 
on budgeted expenditures and revenues is considered credible, budget 
documents do not provide a substantially complete picture of revenues 
and expenditures. The government does not publicly account for the 
expenditure of significant off-budget assistance from Venezuela and 
this assistance is not subject to audit or legislative oversight. 
Allocations to and earnings from state-owned enterprises are included 
in the budget, but most state-owned enterprises are not audited. The 
supreme audit institution also does not audit the government's full 
financial statements. The process for allocating licenses and contracts 
for natural resource extraction is outlined in law and basic 
information on awards is publicly available. Nicaragua's fiscal 
transparency would be improved by including all off-budget revenue and 
expenditure in the budget, auditing state-owned enterprises, and 
conducting a full audit of the government's annual financial statements 
and making audit reports publicly available within a reasonable period 
of time.
    Niger: Budget documents are publicly available, but do not detail 
all revenues and expenditures, such as allocations to and earnings from 
state-owned enterprises, revenues from natural resources, or debt 
associated with natural resources. While the process for awarding 
natural resource contracts or licenses is specified in law, in 
practice, the process used to award contracts and licenses is not 
always consistent with those procedural requirements. Once awarded, 
basic information on such contracts or licenses is publicly available. 
Niger made significant progress by publishing the annual budget online 
for the first time and eliminating delays in releasing budget execution 
reports. Niger's fiscal transparency would be improved by including all 
revenues and expenditures in the budget and adhering to the process for 
awarding natural resource extraction contracts and licenses as set out 
in applicable laws.
    Nigeria: The budget and information on debt obligations are 
publicly available. However, significant expenditures related to 
refined fuel subsidies were funded off-budget. The supreme audit 
institution did not produce a comprehensive audit of the annual 
executed budget. The government also did not publish comprehensive 
audited financial statements of systemically important state-owned 
enterprises, including the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation. 
Finally, the procedures surrounding the awarding of oil and gas 
licenses often are opaque, and basic information on awarded government 
exploration licenses in the oil sector is not publicly available. 
Nigeria's fiscal transparency would be improved by bringing all 
spending on budget, publishing comprehensive audits of systemically 
important state-owned enterprises, making the process for awarding oil 
and gas licenses more transparent, and making basic information on 
natural resource extraction awards publicly available.
    Oman: The government makes publicly available its enacted budget 
and its year-end report, but does not publish a budget proposal. 
Publicly available budget documents lack sufficient detail and do not 
include allocations to the royal family. The government also maintains 
several off-budget accounts not subject to audit or oversight. The 
supreme audit institution does not audit the government's annual 
financial statements. The process for awarding natural resource 
extraction licenses and contracts is outlined in law and basic 
information on the awards is publicly available. Oman's fiscal 
transparency would be improved by publishing a proposed budget; adding 
more detail to the budget, such as detailing allocations to and 
earnings from state-owned enterprises; including expenditures for the 
royal family in the budget; subjecting off-budget accounts to audit and 
oversight and making information on such accounts publicly available; 
and having the supreme audit institution audit the budget annually and 
make public audit reports.
    Pakistan: While budget documents are publicly available and provide 
a substantially complete picture of most revenues and expenditures, the 
budget of the intelligence agencies is not subject to parliamentary or 
other civilian oversight. The supreme audit institution is 
constitutionally mandated to audit expenditures, but not revenues, and 
does not produce audits of the government's annual financial 
statements. The process for awarding natural resource extraction 
licenses and contracts is outlined in law and basic information on the 
awards is publicly available. Pakistan's fiscal transparency would be 
improved by subjecting the intelligence agencies' budget to 
parliamentary or other civilian oversight. Pakistan's fiscal 
transparency would also be improved by expanding

[[Page 36589]]

the constitutional mandate of the supreme audit institution to include 
revenues, and to produce and make publicly available the supreme audit 
institution's audit of the government's annual financial statements 
within a reasonable period of time.
    Palestinian Authority: While information in the annual and monthly 
budget data is considered substantially complete, the budget 
preparation process is often delayed. The supreme audit institution's 
audits of the government's annual financial statements are not 
completed or made publicly available within a reasonable period of 
time. The Palestinian Authority's fiscal transparency would be improved 
by providing annual fiscal data to the supreme audit institution within 
a reasonable period of time and increasing its independence.
    Sao Tome and Principe: The enacted budget, quarterly budget 
execution reports, and information on debt obligations are publicly 
available. However, the government does not make publicly available the 
proposed budget or an annual year-end budget report. The information in 
the budget is considered generally credible and the supreme audit 
institution audits the annual executed budget, but its reports are not 
published within a reasonable period of time. The process for awarding 
natural resource extraction licenses and contracts is outlined in law 
or regulation and basic information on the awards is publicly 
available. Sao Tome and Principe's fiscal transparency would be 
improved by making the proposed budget, year-end budget report, and 
supreme audit institution audits publicly available within a reasonable 
period of time.
    Saudi Arabia: The government does not make a detailed budget 
publicly available. The limited data available in its annual budget 
statement do not break down expenditures by ministry or agency. 
Available budget documents do not include allocations to the Council of 
Ministers or to the royal family. In addition, there are often 
significant departures from planned budget receipts and expenditures 
that are not disclosed until the year-end statement. Saudi Arabia's 
supreme audit institution reports are not publicly available. Rules and 
regulations for up-stream oil are not publicly available. However, once 
awarded, basic information on such contracts or licenses is publicly 
available. Saudi Arabia's fiscal transparency would be improved by 
making publicly available detailed budgets that include all 
expenditures, supreme audit institution audit reports, and rules and 
regulations for upstream oil extraction contracting and licensing.
    Seychelles: The government's budget summary in the form of a budget 
speech is publicly available, but the enacted and executed budgets are 
not. Some information on debt obligations is publicly available. 
Significant state-owned enterprises have audited accounts provided to 
an oversight body and are publicly available. Seychelles' supreme audit 
institution audits the government's annual financial statements and its 
report is made publicly available. The process for awarding natural 
resource extraction licenses and contracts is outlined in law or 
regulation and basic information on the awards is publicly available. 
Seychelles' fiscal transparency would be improved by providing more 
complete and detailed information on expenditures and debt obligations 
and making the proposed budget, enacted budget, and year-end report 
publicly available within a reasonable period of time.
    Somalia: The budget and full information on debt obligations are 
not publicly available. The government published a mid-year budget 
execution report. The government does not produce revised budget 
estimates. The new supreme audit institution conducted an audit for 
2012, which was not made public. The government does not follow 
consistent procedures in awarding natural resource extraction contracts 
and licenses. Somalia's fiscal transparency would be improved by 
resuming publication of budget documents, improving budget reliability, 
and producing and making publicly available audit reports. Fiscal 
transparency would also be improved by making natural resource 
extraction awards consistent with law or regulation, and making basic 
information on such awards publicly available.
    South Sudan: While budget documents are publicly available and 
detailed, they do not include all natural resource revenues or security 
expenditures and the government reportedly maintains off-budget 
accounts not subject to audit or oversight. Budget execution also 
deviated significantly from plan and the government did not issue a 
revised budget. The supreme audit institution audits the budget 
annually, but its reports are not made publicly available within a 
reasonable period of time. The process for awarding natural resource 
extraction licenses and contracts is not outlined in law or regulation. 
South Sudan's fiscal transparency would be improved by including all 
revenues and expenditures in the budget; subjecting any off-budget 
accounts to audit and oversight; issuing revised budget estimates when 
execution deviates significantly from plan; making supreme audit 
institution audit reports publicly available in a reasonable timeframe; 
and establishing laws or regulations governing the award of natural 
resource extraction contracts and licenses.
    Sudan: While the budget is publicly available, there are reports 
the budget significantly underreports expenditures and revenues, 
including the military and intelligence budgets. Also, several state-
owned enterprises do not have audited financial statements and are not 
subject to oversight. There is no supreme audit institution. The 
process by which the government awards natural resource contracts and 
licenses is specified in law. However, the process actually used to 
award contracts is not always consistent with the procedural 
requirements set by law or regulation nor is basic information on 
awards publicly available. Sudan's fiscal transparency would be 
improved by including all expenditures and revenues in its budget, 
eliminating off-budget accounts or subjecting them to full audit and 
oversight, auditing all significant state-owned enterprises, developing 
a supreme audit institution that audits the budget annually and makes 
public its reports, adhering to the process for awarding natural 
resource extraction contracts and licenses as set out in applicable 
laws, and making publicly available basic information on natural 
resource extraction awards.
    Suriname: The budget is publicly available and substantially 
complete with the exception of state-owned enterprises. Not all 
allocations to and earnings from state-owned enterprises are included 
in the budget, nor are all state-owned enterprise financial results 
audited, publicly available, or provided to an oversight body. Interim 
reports on budget execution and revised budget projections are not 
publicly available. The budget is considered generally credible, but 
the supreme audit institution has not audited government financial 
statements in recent years. While concession practices for petroleum 
production are outlined in law, the government does not have an 
established system specified in law or regulation for awarding mining 
contracts or licenses. The government does not regularly make basic 
information on mining awards publicly available. Suriname's fiscal 
transparency would be improved by detailing allocations to and earnings 
from state-owned enterprises in the budget, completing audits of the

[[Page 36590]]

government's annual financial statements and publishing these audits 
within a reasonable period of time, improving the public availability 
of budget information, establishing and following a system for granting 
mining contracts, and making publicly available basic information on 
all awarded natural resource licenses and contracts.
    Swaziland: The budget and related documents are publicly available 
and provide a general picture of government revenues and expenditures. 
However, revenues and expenditures related to natural resources are not 
included in the budget. Expenditures to support the royal family, 
military, police, and correctional services are included in the budget, 
but are not subject to the same oversight as the rest of the budget. 
The supreme audit institution audits yearly government financial 
accounts and produces publicly available reports. While the process for 
awarding natural resource extraction licenses and contracts is outlined 
in law, there is inconsistent application of applicable regulations and 
basic information on such awards is not publicly available. Fiscal 
transparency in Swaziland would be improved by including all 
expenditures and revenues in the budget; subjecting the entire budget 
to audit and oversight; consistently applying legal procedures in the 
awarding of natural resource extraction contracts and licenses; and 
making basic information on natural resource awards publicly available.
    Tajikistan: Publicly available budget documents do not provide a 
full picture of the government's expenditures and revenues. Financial 
allocations to and revenues from state-owned enterprises are not 
included in the budget. The supreme audit institution does not make 
publicly available its audit of the government's annual financial 
statements. The process by which the national government awards natural 
resource contracts or licenses is specified in law, regulation, or 
other public document, but the process actually used to award contracts 
is not always consistent with the procedural requirements set by law or 
regulation. Once a contract or license is awarded, the basic terms of 
the contracts are not publicly available. Tajikistan's fiscal 
transparency would be improved by detailing expenditures by ministry or 
government agency, revenues by source and type, and producing yearly 
and publicly available audits of the budget by the supreme audit 
institution. Fiscal transparency would further be improved by adhering 
to the process for awarding natural resource extraction contracts and 
licenses, as set out in applicable laws or regulations, and making 
publicly available basic information on such awards.
    Tanzania: While an abridged version of the budget is available 
online, the complete budget is only available in the Parliamentary 
Library in Dodoma, which is not easily accessible by most Tanzanians. 
The abridged budget does not clearly break down expenditures by 
ministry or government agency or revenues by source and type. The 
budget does not clearly identify allocations to and earnings from 
state-owned enterprises. The process for awarding natural resource 
extraction licenses and contracts is outlined in law or regulation and 
basic information on the awards is made public. Tanzania made 
significant progress by publishing online basic information on mining 
awards. Tanzania's fiscal transparency would be improved by making 
budget documents accessible to the public; providing more detail on 
revenues and expenditures in the budget including allocations to and 
earnings from state-owned enterprises; and increasing transparency in 
the hydrocarbon extraction award process.
    Turkmenistan: The government makes only aggregate information on 
expenditures and revenues publicly available. Allocations to and 
revenues from state-owned enterprises are not disclosed, and the 
supreme audit institution does not make its audits publicly available. 
The process by which the national government awards natural resource 
concessions is specified in law or regulation and basic information on 
the awards is publicly available. Turkmenistan's fiscal transparency 
would be improved by making publicly available a budget that breaks 
down expenditures by ministry and revenues by source and type with a 
significant level of detail, and includes allocations to and revenues 
from state-owned enterprises. Turkmenistan's fiscal transparency would 
be further improved by producing and publishing audits of the 
government's financial statements by the supreme audit institution, and 
disclosing proceeds from the sale of oil and natural gas, which 
constitute the majority of the government's revenues.
    Uganda: While the budget is publicly available, including online, 
it does not break down expenditures beyond sector line items. There is 
no public information on reported off-budget accounts. The supreme 
audit institution reviews the annual executed budget and makes its 
reports publicly available. The process for awarding natural resource 
extraction licenses and contracts is outlined in law or regulation. 
Once a contract or license is awarded, the government announces the 
basic terms of the contracts at press conferences, but does not 
otherwise make information publicly available. Uganda's fiscal 
transparency would be improved by including more detail in the budget, 
making information on off-budget accounts available to the public, 
subjecting these accounts to audit and oversight, limiting the 
classification or similar restrictions on the availability of the 
budget, subjecting classified budgets to audit and oversight, and 
making basic information on natural resource extraction awards publicly 
available.
    Ukraine: The budget and information on debt obligations is publicly 
available and generally complete. However, four large social insurance 
funds are not included in the budget; revenue from state-owned natural 
resource producers is underreported; and increases in allocations to 
state-owned enterprises such as Naftogaz are common and substantial, 
affecting the reliability of the adopted budget. Naftogaz and several 
other significant state-owned enterprises, including UkrEximBank and 
Oschadbank, have publicly available audited financial statements but 
this is not the case for all state-owned enterprises. The supreme audit 
institution audits government expenditures annually but not revenues. 
The process for awarding natural resource extraction licenses and 
contracts is outlined in law. The government made significant progress 
by making public the criteria for awarding natural resource tenders and 
basic information on such awards. Ukraine's fiscal transparency would 
be improved by including all expenditures and revenues in the budget, 
increasing the reliability of budget data, making publicly available 
more state-owned enterprise audit reports, and expanding supreme audit 
institution audits to cover revenues.
    Uzbekistan: Only a general overview of the budget is publicly 
available, and a supreme audit institution does not exist. The process 
by which the government awards natural resource contracts or licenses 
is not specified in law or regulation and basic information about 
contracts is not publicly available. Uzbekistan's fiscal transparency 
would be improved by including in the budget a breakdown of 
expenditures by ministry or government agency and revenues by source 
and type; information on debt obligations; and financial allocations to 
and earnings from state-owned enterprises. Uzbekistan's fiscal 
transparency would be further improved by establishing an independent 
supreme audit institution

[[Page 36591]]

to produce and make publicly available audits of the government's 
financial statements; and establishing laws or regulations governing 
the award of natural resource extraction contracts and licenses, 
following the law in practice, and making publicly available 
information about such awards and contracts.
    Yemen: During a period of significant internal political conflict, 
the government did not fully implement its budget processes. The budget 
was publicly available, including online, and contained sufficient 
detail. The supreme audit institution conducted an audit of the 
government's annual financial statements but its report was not 
publicly available. The process by which the government awards natural 
resource contracts or licenses is specified in law, but there are 
reports of inconsistent application of applicable regulations; basic 
information on such awards is publicly available. Yemen's fiscal 
transparency would be improved making publicly available supreme audit 
institution audits and making the process used to award natural 
resource extraction contracts and licenses consistent with the 
procedural requirements set by law or regulation.
    Zimbabwe: The budget is publicly available but does not clearly 
detail natural resource revenues or the large allocation to the office 
of the president and cabinet. The budget does not include earnings from 
state-owned enterprises. The supreme audit institution audits the 
budget but its reports are not publicly available within a reasonable 
period of time. The process by which the government awards natural 
resource contracts or licenses is not specified in law or regulation 
nor is basic information about mining concessions publicly available. 
Zimbabwe's fiscal transparency would be improved by detailing revenues 
and expenditures including allocations to the office of the president 
and cabinet, and revenues from state-owned enterprises and natural 
resources; and making supreme audit institution reports publicly 
available within a reasonable period of time. Zimbabwe's fiscal 
transparency would also be improved by establishing laws and 
regulations governing natural resource extraction contracts and 
licensing, following the law in practice, and making basic information 
about such awards and contracts publicly available.

    Dated: June 17, 2015.
Heather Higginbottom,
Deputy Secretary for Management and Resources, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2015-15677 Filed 6-24-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-07-P