HOUSEHOLD BUDGET SURVEYS: Summary of DSS conclusions Item IV of the agenda

1. Household Budget Surveys Working Group - 5-6 May 2003 HOUSEHOLD BUDGET SURVEYS: Summary of DSS conclusions Item IV of the agenda

2. Household Budget Surveys Working Group - 5-6 May 2003 • Household Budget Surveys 1. Historical background 2. Uses at EU level 3. Current situation, options for the future and DSS opinion 4. Conclusion

3. 1. Historical background • Creation of the HBS Working Group in December 1989 • Three rounds of data collected by Eurostat: • Tables for 1988 (10 MS) • Micro-data for 1994 (15MS+3 EFTA) • Micro-data for 1999 (15MS+1 EFTA) • Gentlemen’s agreement • National surveys harmonized ex-post by Eurostat (big progress in harmonization but room for improvement) • 10 new members will join the EU in 2004

4. 2. Uses and users at EU level • Consumer protection: support to the political management of the area for DG SANCO (request to improve frequency (every two years)) • Poverty and social exclusion: complementary information to elaborate indicators and carry out analysis for DG EMPL (but ECHP/SILC now used; no longitudinal information; no access to micro-data by researchers; poverty rates not reliable due to seasonal behavior of consumption) • Control information for other statistics • Raw data for research studies (economic, nutritional, social) • Other uses (general analyses on consumers, consumption patterns, nutritional studies)

5. 3. Current situation, options for the future and DSS opinion 3.1. HBS frequency Current situation: • Seven Member States with annual or continuous surveys, eight others perform their HBS every five years (non-annual surveys reasonably well synchronized • Eurostat: collects information every five years Options for the future: • Keep HBS frequency at five years • Reduce HBS frequency to two years • Reduce HBS frequency to one year

6. 3. Current situation, options for the future and DSS opinion 3.1. HBS frequency Eurostat recommendation: • Keep HBS frequency at five years (although DG SANCO would prefer the second option) DSS opinion: • DSS agreed with the Eurostat recommendation

7. 3. Current situation, options for the future and DSS opinion 3.2. COICOP-HBS classification Current situation: • COICOP-HBS 1999 was used for the 1999 round (compatible with COICOP-OECD with an additional level of detail) • A Task Force met in June 2002 to make proposals for changes in food, housing, financial services and insurance categories Options for the future: • Use COICOP-HBS 1999 for the 2005 round • Develop a COICOP-HBS 2005 introducing changes proposed by the Task Force

8. 3. Current situation, options for the future and DSS opinion 3.2. COICOP-HBS classification Eurostat recommendation: • Develop a COICOP-HBS 2005 DSS opinion: • The development of a COICOP 2005 classification was agreed by all except Cyprus

9. 3. Current situation, options for the future and DSS opinion 3.3. Type of data to be transmitted to Eurostat and variables list Current situation: • Transmission of micro-data to Eurostat • Format of the files delivered are very different • Individual and household files (with many variables) are sent Options for the future: • Transmission of aggregated tables (would reduce Eurostat capacity to perform ex-post harmonization) • Transmission of simplified micro-data files (only household files with a limited number of variables) • Keep current situation (transmission of detailed household and individual files)

10. 3. Current situation, options for the future and DSS opinion 3.3. Type of data to be transmitted to Eurostat and variables list Eurostat recommendation: • Transmission of simplified micro-data files DSS opinion: • Agreement on the transmission of simplified micro-data files by all countries (EU and CC) except NL and Lithuania • Bilateral contacts between Eurostat and these two countries should take place

11. 3. Current situation, options for the future and DSS opinion 3.4. Format of the micro-data files (if transmission of micro-data decided) Current situation: • Format of transmission to Eurostat varies from one country to another Options for the future: • Country-specific formats of transmission • Single standardized format agreed by the HBS Working Group

12. 3. Current situation, options for the future and DSS opinion 3.4. Format of the micro-data files (if transmission of micro-data decided) Eurostat recommendation: • Single standardized format agreed by the HBS Working Group DSS opinion: • All countries that accepted to transmit simplified micro-data files agreed on the data transmission in a standardized format

13. 3. Current situation, options for the future and DSS opinion 3.5. Responsibility for imputed consumption expenditure/rent calculation Current situation: • Some Member States compute imputed expenditure/rent while Eurostat carry out this work for other countries Options for the future: • Eurostat responsibility • Member States’ responsibility • Continuation of current situation (both Eurostat and Member States)

14. 3. Current situation, options for the future and DSS opinion 3.5. Responsibility for imputed consumption expenditure/rent calculation Eurostat recommendation: • Member States’ responsibility DSS opinion: • All countries except the UK accepted to take responsibility for the calculation of imputed consumption expenditure / rent

15. 3. Current situation, options for the future and DSS opinion 3.6. Methodological improvements Current situation: • HBSs remain national surveys harmonized a posteriori by Eurostat • Frequency differs • Basic concepts remain different (household, reference person; actual final consumption/household final consumption expenditure) • Treatment of goods and services retained for own final consumption, of salaries in kind, of imputation of rentals for housing … differs • National classifications of expenditure or modified versions of COICOP classification are used

16. 3. Current situation, option for the future and DSS opinion 3.6. Methodological improvements Options for the future: • Keep the current situation in terms of harmonization (stop making any further improvements) • Go a step forward in the harmonization process focussing on the easiest possible improvements (basic concept remains household final consumption expenditure; harmonize as many concepts as possible with EU-SILC; separate monetary and non-monetary consumption expenditure) • Carry out an in-depth harmonization process (move to actual final consumption as a basic concept; health, education to be included)

17. 3. Current situation, option for the future and DSS opinion 3.6. Methodological improvements Eurostat recommendation: • Go a step forward in the harmonization process focussing on the easiest possible improvements (basic concept remains household final consumption expenditure; harmonize as many concepts as possible with EU-SILC; separate monetary and non-monetary consumption expenditure) DSS opinion: • Several countries asked Eurostat and the HBS Working Group to be cautious with the proposed changes, particularly in relation to income • No changes for Spain before 2006

18. 4. Conclusion The Working Group is invited to give its opinion on the six options for the future of the HBSs: • HBS frequency • COICOP-HBS classification • Type of data to be transmitted and variables list • Format of the micro-data files • Responsibility for imputed expenditures/rent computations • Methodological improvements