This chapter discusses the key feature of the micro-data used internationally to study business dynamics. It then assesses the quality of available Egyptian data, including both surveys and administrative data, discussing their strengths and limitations for business dynamics analysis. The chapter concludes with recommendations and specific actions to enhance Egyptian data, including creating a statistical business register, improving the quality of administrative data and enhancing safe micro-data sharing with external experts.
Business Dynamics Review of Egypt
Abstract
Business dynamics – the process of firms’ entry, exit, and job creation and destruction – are crucial for the process of creative destruction and for ensuring growth, innovation and sustaining wages in market economies (Bravo-Biosca, Criscuolo and Menon, 2016[1]; Baptista and Preto, 2011[2]). New firms are also key for ensuring a dynamic economy, as firm entry contributes to structural shifts in the sectoral distribution of economic activities.
Examining trends in business dynamics requires longitudinal data, which cover the business population of a specific country. Many developed and developing countries have established (administrative and statistical) business registers to monitor business dynamics and to regularly track business demography statistics over time (such as the number of active enterprises and their birth and survival rates).1
This chapter assesses Egypt’s micro-data capacity for studying business dynamics and offers recommendations to align its data infrastructure with international best practices. It begins by identifying the types of data needed to effectively analyse business dynamics, followed by a presentation of widely used indicators that meet international standards. The chapter also evaluates the suitability of Egyptian data sources for constructing these indicators and highlights relevant examples from peer and developed economies. It concludes with targeted recommendations to strengthen Egypt’s data systems and improve its ability to monitor and support business dynamics.
This section presents the main data and indicators used internationally to examine business dynamics. It then assesses current data available in Egypt for studying business dynamics, examining the data’s strengths and limitations compared to international standards.
A business register is necessary to meet international best practice for studying business dynamics
Key data for monitoring business dynamics: The business register
Examining trends in business dynamics requires a comprehensive longitudinal database that covers the whole business population and allows one to accurately measure a firm’s birth, death and employment dynamics.
Most countries use (statistical or administrative) business registers for such purposes. A well-maintained business register provides a centralised repository of accurate and up-to-date information on the universe of registered businesses. This register serves as a reliable source for tracking the demographic characteristics of businesses, including their size, age/date of entry, date of exit/period of inactivity, sector, location and ownership structure. By continuously updating and refining the register, analysts and policy makers can monitor changes in the business landscape, identify emerging trends and assess business demography indicators.
As opposed to an administrative business register that serves administrative purposes, the SBR is created by the NSO for statistical purposes. In particular, the SBR serves as a frame for conducting business surveys, is used to produce annual business statistics and is the backbone of data linkages. It is thus widely used to study business dynamics. SBRs are usually primarily based on administrative sources (such as administrative business registers, social security data and tax records). This has the advantage of minimising the data collection burden on businesses, since administrative data are already collected for administrative purposes and are thus timelier, quicker and cheaper to collect than conducting business surveys (OECD/Eurostat, 2008[3]).
A key variable required to examine business dynamics is the unique longitudinal identifier (id) for units, which must be constant over time and must not reappear again if the unit exits the data source. The registrer can be at the firm level and/or at the establishment level. Variables required, as a minimum, also include the date of establishment, the number of employees (or persons engaged) and the industry (ideally at a three-digit level following the international ISIC classification).2 Employment can either refer to the number of employees or the number of persons engaged, or be expressed in full-time equivalents.3
Key indicators to examine business dynamics: Entry, exit, and job creation and destruction
Several key indicators are used internationally to track business dynamics. These include entry and exit rates, share of employment of young firms, job creation and destruction, and job reallocation rate. The methodology to calculate each indicator is detailed in Annex A, using the methodology presented in Calvino, Criscuolo and Verlhac (2020[4]).
The entry rate measures the rate at which new businesses are established within a specific market or industry over a defined period. A higher entry rate suggests a dynamic economy where entrepreneurs are willing to invest in new ventures. Conversely, a low entry rate may suggest the presence of barriers to entry, as well as entrepreneurship constraints.
The exit rate measures the rate at which businesses cease operations or leave a particular market or industry over a period of time. Industries with high exit rates may be undergoing significant restructuring or consolidation. A low exit rate alone can indicate a healthy competitive environment where firms are able to survive and thrive; but it can also suggest a lack of competition or inefficient policies preventing non‑productive firms from exiting the market. For this reason, the indicator should be examined with other indicators of business dynamics. For example, business exits can be a positive aspect of business dynamism when accompanied by high rates of new business creation, signalling business dynamism. However, if exits significantly outpace new entries, it results in a decline in the overall number of enterprises and can lead to a reduction in employment.
The share of employment in young firms measures the extent to which young businesses contribute to total employment. Young firms are typically more dynamic and innovative, contributing significantly to job creation (Calvino, Criscuolo and Menon, 2016[5]). Industries with higher shares of employment in young firms may indicate a vibrant entrepreneurial ecosystem. Governments and policy makers can use the share of employment in young firms to assess the impact of policies aimed at supporting start-ups and small businesses.
Gross job creation refers to the total number of new jobs created within an economy or an industry. It thus accounts for all positive employment changes from one year to another (excluding job destruction). High levels of gross job creation indicate that businesses are expanding their operations, and they are usually linked to economic expansions. Start-ups and new businesses have been found to play a significant role in gross job creation (Calvino, Criscuolo and Menon, 2016[5]).
Gross job destruction refers to the total number of jobs lost within an economy or an industry over a specific period. High levels of gross job destruction often indicate economic contractions or downturns. It suggests that businesses are reducing their workforce, for example due to factors such as declining demand, technological changes or financial difficulties. While job destruction can be seen negatively, it also reflects the economy’s ability to reallocate resources towards more productive uses and can serve as long-term economic growth and competitiveness.
The gross job reallocation rate measures the total movement of jobs within an economy over a specific period, including both job creations (expansions) and job destructions (contractions). A high gross job reallocation rate indicates a dynamic economy where businesses actively adjust their workforce to respond to changing market conditions, technological advancements and shifts in consumer demand. The reallocation of jobs reflects an economy’s ability to efficiently allocate resources, including labour, across different sectors and firms.
Current data available in Egypt: Strengths and limitations for business dynamics analysis compared to international standards
This section gives an overview of the strengths and limitations of the available data to study business dynamics in Egypt. The discussion is guided by the indicators and data discussed in the previous section. The section mainly focuses on Egyptian administrative data on businesses; the Egyptian Economic Census; the ERF/CAPMAS Labour Market Panel Survey (ELMPS); and the World Bank Enterprise Surveys. Table 2.1 summarises the main takeaways.
Note: GAFI: General Authority for Investment and Free Zones; ISIC: International Standard Industrial Classification; IDA: Industrial Development Authority; CAPMAS: Central Agency for Public Mobilization and Statistics; ERF: Economic Research Forum.
Egyptian administrative data
Several administrative datasets on businesses exist in Egypt and are collected by public entities during their daily operations.
First, the entities responsible for establishing a company – namely GAFI, the Financial Regulatory Authority (FRA) and the Suez Canal Economic Zone (SCZone) – collect a list of businesses that register at their offices (see Chapter 3 for details).
Second, after establishing themselves at the relevant authorities (GAFI, the FRA, the SCZone or the courts), firms register at the commercial register (administered by the Commercial Registry Authority, affiliated with the Internal Trade Development Authority within the Ministry of Supply and Internal Trade) and at the tax register (Egyptian Tax Authority).
Third, other registers also collect a list of businesses which can complement the above sources, including the registers of firms receiving operating licences and industrial licences (overseen by the Industrial Development Authority, IDA), and the export/import registers (collected by GOEIC; see OECD (2026[6]) for a discussion on the export/import registers).
Currently, administrative data sources are dispersed across institutions, which presents challenges for integrated analysis and policy development. Moreover, none of them are suitable per se to properly examine the full list of indicators of business dynamics presented above over the universe of the business population. For example, some data sources (including GAFI data and Commercial Registry Authority records) require employment information to be integrated, which is necessary for computing job creation and destruction. Many countries retrieve information on employment at the firm-level from social security data. Consequently, the Egyptian National Authority for Social Insurance could play a future role. Moreover, administrative data currently do not follow consistent classifications for industries and governorates.
While combining some of these data could enhance the available information and allow for the creation of business dynamics statistics, integration is currently limited. One reason is that a unique business identification system in Egypt has yet to be developed. Firms apply for a commercial register number, and a tax registration code after they register with the relevant authorities (GAFI, the FRA, the SCZone or the courts). The registration number is thus given at the end of registration process (both for the tax registration and the commercial registration numbers), while firms start their activity with names. A unique business identifier across entities would enhance data integration. The tax registration number, which has been chosen to be the unique identifier for companies, can be used to enhance data integration. However, the tax identifier is still not widely used across other public entities in collecting data on businesses.
The government is aware of current data limitations and is committed to enhancing data quality. Despite persistent challenges, they are undertaking several initiatives, which are discussed below. A recent reform, backed by Presidential directives, empower MIFT and GAFI to lead the construction of an Economic Entities Platform (with technical co-leadership from the Ministry of Communication and Information Technology (MCIT)). It aims to complete the platform by the end of 2026. Its goal is to introduce a unified, digital-first government interface to collect information on business establishment, licensing, operation, expansion and exit procedures under a single integrated system (following the “only-once” principle for data collection). The platform is expected to reduce administrative burdens and avoid duplication of information collected. At the heart of this transformation is another reform related to the introduction of a unique identifier for businesses (UBI) that will be issued at the time of establishment. It will be mandatory for commercial registration, tax registration, social insurance, custom activities and financial services.4 Additionally, the recent Egyptian government to government (G2G) initiative could serve as a foundation to facilitate data sharing across public institutions by bilateral agreement. The implementation of such reforms is crucial to move from a fragmented system of business data to a unified, digital model aligned with OECD and global best practices.
The following subsections provide a more detailed discussion of the available administrative data (including GAFI data, the commercial register, the IDA register, the tax register and the social security records) and recent improvements.
GAFI datasets
GAFI’s data contain information on more than 318 000 firms at the main branch level (firm-level data), including information on the characteristics of the firms (e.g. date of establishment, legal form, location, industry, capital, activity), their ownership structure and the events that occur to companies over time (including liquidations, mergers and acquisitions).5
The characteristics of GAFI’s data – presented above – make them suitable for examining the entry rate and ownership structure of firms registered at GAFI. While their use for analysis has not yet been maximised, it is expanding (see also Chapter 3). Further linkages with other registries will allow the production of a broader set of business dynamics indicators.
First, GAFI data contain only the expected number of employees in the establishment, but not employment information over time. This limitation prevents an analysis of job creation and destruction over time.
Second, the GAFI data are not representative of all businesses in Egypt, as they contain only the subsample of businesses that registered at GAFI.6
Third, integration with other data sources is limited due to the use of different id numbers. While all firms are identified by a longitudinal id (GAFI number), only a fraction also has the commercial and tax number, which allows integration with other sources. GAFI is undertaking a project to update its database with tax and commercial registration numbers. To date, around 70-80% of firms recorded in the GAFI database contain both the tax and commercial registration number.7
Fourth, a significant limitation for cross-country comparison is that GAFI data currently do not conform to the international sectoral classification system (ISIC Rev.4). However, GAFI is currently working on aligning its sectoral classification to international standards, but challenges persist.
Finally, some GAFI firms also report financial statements data, which can complement business dynamics analysis and allow, for example, an examination of post-entry growth in term of firms’ financial performance. However, financial statements information only covers 30% of the sample of GAFI firms. Compliance varies by firm type: larger firms, including listed companies and direct investment enterprises, submit financial statements more consistently, while smaller firms comply at lower rates. This variation reflects challenges in ensuring compliance with financial statement submission requirements. GAFI is working to improve compliance through ongoing digital filing automation and strengthened enforcement measures. Financial statements contain some general information about the company and an income statement covering, among others, revenues, profits and labour costs.8
GAFI has recently planned to automate the financial statement filing process. GAFI initially planned on launching its electronic portal by the fourth quarter of 2024. However, the launch has been rescheduled to the first quarter of 2026 due to final system integration requirements and necessary testing to ensure data security and user accessibility. Under this initiative, all companies will be obliged to submit and deposit their financial statements within specific periods stated in the Investment Law. Companies that fail to file their financial statements will have to pay a fine of up to EGP 50 000 and will not have access to other services provided by GAFI. In this regard, GAFI should ensure it effectively implements the automated portal, ensuring that enforcement of the filing process is in place. Such a portal can significantly enhance data collection.
Financial Regulatory Authority register
The Financial Regulatory Authority (FRA) of Egypt manages a register of non-banking financial companies. It is responsible for regulating the supervision of non-banking financial markets and instruments. The FRA is an independent public authority established under Article 221 of the Egyptian Constitution and Law No. 10 of 2009. It serves as the unified regulator of Egypt’s non-banking financial sector, overseeing capital markets, insurance, mortgage finance, financial leasing, factoring, securitisation, consumer finance, MSME finance, movable collateral, and financial technology activities in non-banking financial services.
The FRA was created through the consolidation of several former supervisory bodies, with a mandate to ensure the soundness and stability of non-banking financial markets, safeguard the rights of market participants, and support the development and efficiency of the sector. In carrying out its mandate, the FRA exercises powers relating to licensing, supervision, inspection, regulation, investor and consumer protection, and market development, pursuant to the relevant legislative framework governing the activities subject to its oversight.
General Authority for Suez Canal Economic Zone register
The General Authority for Suez Canal Economic Zone (SCZone) establishes a register of firm operating in the Suez Canal Economic Zone. The SCZone is a special economic zone of a special nature established under Law No. 83 of 2002 and further organised through Presidential Decree No. 330 of 2015. It operates through the General Authority for the Suez Canal Economic Zone, a public authority with legal personality, responsible for the development, regulation and promotion of investment within the Zone.
The SCZone was created to serve as an integrated industrial, logistics and trade hub leveraging Egypt’s strategic location along the Suez Canal and its connectivity to global shipping routes. Its mandate covers the development and management of industrial zones and affiliated ports, the attraction of domestic and foreign investment, and the provision of a competitive business environment supported by streamlined administrative procedures and investor services. In this capacity, the SCZone plays a central role in advancing export-oriented industrial development, logistics services and international trade, while contributing to Egypt’s broader economic diversification and investment objectives.
Financial Regulatory Authority (FRA) register
The Financial Regulatory Authority (FRA) of Egypt is responsible for regulating all non-banking financial market and instruments in Egypt, including establishing companies and licensing, and it thus manages the register on businesses operating in this area.9 FRA serves as the unified regulator of Egypt’s non-banking financial sector, overseeing capital markets, insurance, mortgage finance, financial leasing, factoring, securitization, consumer finance, MSME finance, movable collateral, and financial technology activities in non-banking financial services. It was created through the consolidation of several former supervisory bodies, with a mandate to ensure the soundness and stability of non-banking financial markets, safeguard the rights of market participants, and support the development and efficiency of the sector. In carrying out its mandate, the FRA exercises powers relating to licensing, supervision, inspection, regulation, investor and consumer protection, and market development, pursuant to the relevant legislative framework governing the activities subject to its oversight
General Authority for the Suez Canal Economic Zone register
The General Authority for the Suez Canal Economic Zone is responsible for registering firms in the Suez Canal Economic Zone (SCZone) and administer this register. SCZone is a special economic zone of a special nature established under Law No. 83 of 2002 and further organized through Presidential Decree No. 330 of 2015. It operates through the General Authority for the Suez Canal Economic Zone, a public authority with legal personality, responsible for the development, regulation, and promotion of investment within the Zone. The SCZone was created to serve as an integrated industrial, logistics, and trade hub leveraging Egypt’s strategic location along the Suez Canal and its connectivity to global shipping routes. Its mandate covers the development and management of industrial zones and affiliated ports, the attraction of domestic and foreign investment, and the provision of a competitive business environment supported by streamlined administrative procedures and investor services. In this capacity, the SCZone plays a central role in advancing export-oriented industrial development, logistics services, and international trade, while contributing to Egypt’s broader economic diversification and investment objectives.
Commercial register – Commercial Registry Authority within the Internal Trade Development Authority and Ministry of Supply and Internal Trade
All registered firms in Egypt, of any economic activity, must register at the commercial register (based on the Commercial Register Law No. 34 of 1976 and its amendments [No. 98 of 1996]). The register is administered by the Commercial Registry Authority, affiliated with the Internal Trade Development Authority and the Ministry of Supply and Internal Trade. The Commercial Register Law provides that registration be renewed every five years.
The commercial register should contain data on the date of establishment, legal form, economic activity (that does not follow the ISIC international classification), board members or managers (including their nationality and date of birth), the firm’s mortgage and loans, and issued capital.
The register is at the firm level, meaning that each firm has a commercial registration number. The data also contain the branch address of the activity sites. The Commercial Registry Authority has recently developed a unique identifier for establishments alongside the commercial identifier for firms to identify branches located in different governorates.
The commercial register should be the key data source for studying business dynamics, as it covers the universe of registered firms in Egypt. However, like the GAFI data, it requires integration with employment information from other data sources to examine job creation and destruction.
Tax register – General Tax Authority
Taxpayers are required to register with the Egyptian Tax Authority before they commence their work in Egypt. According to the VAT Law, all individuals or entities with annual revenue exceeding EGP 500 000 (the “Registration Threshold”) during the 12 months preceding the enforcement of the law are required to register with the Egyptian Tax Authority within 30 days from reaching the Registration Threshold.
The TIN is a unique number assigned to individuals and businesses by the Egyptian Tax Authority for tax purposes. It is used to identify taxpayers and facilitate the collection and administration of taxes. The TIN is also necessary to open a bank account and access certain government services (such as obtaining a national identification card or registering a vehicle).
The tax register contains the company’s TIN, legal form, economic activity (following the ISIC classification), address of the activity sites and branches, issued capital, activity start date, and activity status (temporarily closed, operating, etc.).
The use of tax records (including value-added tax [VAT] and income tax records) for statistical or analytical purposes can be fostered in Egypt. In several developed and developing countries, these data are key sources to not only build statistical business registers (see the section “Create a Statistical Business Register within CAPMAS”), but also to compile national accounts (Rivas and Crowley, 2018[7]) and study firms’ performance.
A recent improvement in data collection in Egypt is the implementation of an electronic invoice system. The electronic invoice will be applied to everyone selling or providing a product or service. The electronic system will record all their purchases and sales of services and goods. Its purpose is to facilitate the continuous tracking of sales movements for the benefit of the tax authorities, instead of relying on paper invoices.10 The authorities aim to set up a comprehensive database (“Data Warehouse”), including both past and new data, which would help to expand the tax base and improve tax compliance (OECD, 2024[8]).
Industrial register – Industrial Development Authority
With the 2017 Industrial Permits Act, the IDA became the sole entity responsible for providing industrial licenses in Egypt, except for in special economic zones.11
As such, the IDA collects two registries: an operating licence form and an industrial registry form. These registries are key for regulating and monitoring business, ensuring compliance with law and regulations. Importantly, the registration is crucial for the legal recognition of a business, allowing them to operate and engage in trade activities.
The two registers can be used to complement business dynamics analysis. Given the presence of a tax id in the data, IDA registries could be integrated with other data (such as the GAFI datasets and the tax registers) to enhance the coverage of a business register and monitor firm dynamics.
The two registries contain the following information:
The operating licence form: This form is necessary for businesses to obtain a license to operate legally in Egypt. It includes details such as the type of business, ownership information and compliance with local regulations. The purpose of this form is to authorise businesses to commence operations after ensuring that they meet all the legal and regulatory requirements. The operating licence form contains the firm’s activity name and industry code (following ISIC classification), type of legal entity, and address of the establishment.
Industrial registry form: The industrial registry form is specific to industrial enterprises. It records information about the establishment, including its production capacity, type of industry and compliance with industrial regulations. The purpose of the form is to maintain a comprehensive record of all industrial entities in the country, ensuring they adhere to industrial standards and regulations. The data contain, among others, the industry code (ISIC), the six-digit product code Harmonized System (HS), the number of workers, capital (i.e. total investments), machines and equipment, and energy needs. The register contains quantity and unit of product (but not the numbers of the products) for the firm’s annual production capacity (not actual production).
While the operating licence is renewed every year, the industrial register is updated every five years. This time gap affects data quality and the timeliness of information provided in the industrial register. Egypt can consider reviewing its legislation to update the industrial register more often than every five years, for example on an annual basis, to ensure high frequency of data collection.
Social security records – The National Organisation for Social Insurance
The National Organisation for Social Insurance oversees the social insurance system in Egypt, providing all social insurance services to the insured. According to Law No. 148 of 2019 and its executive regulations, employers are mandated to request social security insurance for within two weeks for any worker joining their workforce. This application, Form 1, must be submitted manually (with accurate signatures) or electronically, with one original and two copies, to the relevant insurance office where the activity is located.
Social security employment data are a valuable resource for studying business dynamics and retrieving employment information. Many countries complement administrative business registers with social security data on employment, which are often missing in standard administrative business registers (see examples in the section “Create a Statistical Business Register within CAPMAS”). As discussed above, information on employment is crucial for business dynamics analysis, as it allows calculating job creation and destruction.
The Economic Census – Central Agency for Public Mobilization and Statistics
While administrative data remain largely underutilised for business dynamics analysis, most of the research for Egypt on businesses and employment have exploited the Economic Census.12
The Economic Census is a large representative survey of Egyptian establishments which measures their economic performance and characteristics. CAPMAS has been conducting the survey every five years since 1991/92. The latest available wave is for 2022/23.
The Economic Census is designed to provide a comprehensive picture of establishments operating in Egypt thanks to detailed micro-level information on businesses’ outputs and inputs for establishments operating in different economic activities and in different geographic areas of the country. The Economic Census represents an important source of information for building and adjusting National Accounts and for studying the informal sector in Egypt. For example, the 2022/23, as well as the 2017/18 survey collected information on whether the establishment had an administrative registration, or carried out its activities without a licence from official authorities.13
The sample included in the Economic Census covers active public and private establishments in all Egyptian governorates and mostly all economic activities (classified according to the international classification of economic activity ISIC Rev.4).14,15 The data contain only fixed establishments, defined as a fixed location where an economic activity is being carried out and is held by a natural or legal person. This means that the census excludes establishments that operate in movable locations, such as most activities engaged in agriculture (A), construction (F) and transportation (H) (Krafft et al., 2020[9]; Assaad et al., 2019[10]). Indeed, these sectors seem to not be well-represented in the Economic Census compared to National Accounts in terms of value added and employment (Annex Figure B.1). Yet, employment outside fixed establishments represents almost half of total employment in Egypt, at 46% (Assaad et al., 2019[10]). Additionally, informal establishments might be underrepresented in the Economic Census, as informality is usually more present among workers that work outside of establishments.
The Economic Census 2022/23 was developed using the CAPMAS “Population, housing and establishment census” of 2017 framework.16 The Economic Census contains a wide set of variables measuring establishments’ activity and their characteristics (e.g. industry at the two-digit ISIC Rev.4. code; governorates; activity starting date; public/private ownership; and legal form), labour and human capital variables (e.g. number of workers, number of employees, including workers by gender, type of occupation [temporary/permanent] and workers’ skills), and detailed financial and performance variables (e.g. value-added, revenue, production, intermediates [commodities and services], wages, fixed assets). The 2017/18 and 2022/23 waves contain additional information that was not present in the 2012/13 census, including the registration status of the establishment, the number of employees by education and future needs in terms of employees’ qualifications.17
The main limitations of the Economic Census for business dynamics analysis are the low frequency of its data collection (every five years) and the lack of a common establishment-identifier between waves, which prevents creating a panel dimension from the different waves at the establishment level. The 2022/23 wave tracks some establishments also monitored in 2017/18, but it represents a low share of the full sample.18 The data can thus only be used in a cross-sectional nature without being able to exploit the potential panel structure of the Economic Census.19 Finally, the Economic Census could be further enriched by combining it with additional information, for example related to trade activity (from GOEIC’s export/import register). However, the absence of a common establishment-id across different data sources and agencies prevents integrating the Economic Census (in which only a census-specific identifier is available) with other CAPMAS surveys or other administrative data.20
The Economic Census 2022/2023 was used to include Egypt in the OECD DynEmp project to examine business dynamics across countries, sectors and time (see Chapter 3).21 A cross-sectional code has been used due to the lack of a full panel dimension, preventing a proper business dynamics analysis. Nevertheless, the inclusion of Egypt in DynEmp still allows examining the characteristics of start-ups; distribution of firms; and employment by size class, age group and industry, as well as the role of female ownership, by comparing Egypt’s performance with OECD and non-OECD countries. These results provide novel cross-sectional evidence that can support policy making (see Chapter 3) and have been used to formulate policy recommendations (see Chapter 1).
The Labour Market Panel Survey – ERF/CAPMAS
In addition to the Economic Census, CAPMAS also conducts the ELMPS.22 While the survey is at the individual household level, it can still be an important complementary resource to the Economic Census in studying the characteristics of the labour market in Egypt from the supply side, and in analysing dynamics of household enterprises. The survey is crucial for complementing labour market analysis on the demand-side derived from firm-level data. Indeed, some studies have exploited the ELMPS for such purposes.23
The ELMPS provides longitudinal data that track both households and individuals for the years 1998, 2006, 2012, 2018 and 2023.24 Part of the sample provides a panel structure that allows tracking individuals and households over time.25 There were 15 746 households fielded in 2018, of those, 13 565 (86.1%) were successfully recontacted in 2023 (Assaad and Krafft, 2024[11]).26
The survey contains information on individuals’ characteristics such as age, gender and education and workers’ current employment status (self-employed, employer, waged employee, unpaid family worker), the job’s economic sector, formality of the firm, skills level, percentage of female employees in the firm, number of working hours/days/weeks, and wages. The survey also asked whether the household has a non‑agricultural family enterprise, allowing to track the entry of new family enterprises over time (which is used in the analysis in Chapter 3).
World Bank Enterprise Survey
Finally, the World Bank Enterprise Survey is particularly useful to perform cross-country analyses on business performance and constraints to firms’ operation.
The World Bank Enterprise Survey is not suitable for examining standard business dynamics indicators (entry, exit, and job creation and destruction), as the data do not cover the universe of firms in Egypt, and are collected with low frequency. However, the data can be considered as a secondary data source for business dynamics analysis, as they allow identifying constraints to business creation, selection and growth. They also help in designing policies to sustain a favourable business environment and business dynamics.
For Egypt, the data were collected for 2013, 2016 and 2020, adhering to the Global Methodology implemented by the Enterprise Analysis Unit.27 The questionnaires followed the Global Methodology, which relies on a standardised format that allows cross-country comparisons.
The World Bank Enterprise Survey is conducted only on formally registered private establishments, covering establishments with more than five employees. Thus, publicly owned, informal and small firms were not included. The survey is based on a representative sample of the non-agricultural private economy, covering all manufacturing and most services sectors.28 The unit of analysis is the establishment.29
The World Bank Enterprise Surveys rely on a stratified random sampling methodology. There are three main strata: size, business sector and geographic region within a country. In terms of size, establishments are classified into small (5-19), medium (20-99) and large (100+ employees). Large establishments are oversampled in the survey since they usually are lower in number compared to small and medium-sized ones but at the same time tend to be the engines of job creation.30
The survey collects information on establishments’ characteristics and performance (e.g. age, ownership, sales, number of workers, innovation, management practices) and the main constraints to an establishment’s operations (e.g. taxes and regulations, corruption, crime, informality, finance, lack of adequate infrastructure). The main constraints to an establishment’s operations are useful in studying the main constraints faced by businesses and their evolution over time, which are key to understanding factors limiting business dynamics (see Chapter 3).
To better monitor business dynamics, Egypt could concentrate its efforts around three key areas:
1. Create a Statistical Business Register (SBR) within CAPMAS, which can significantly enhance the examination of business dynamics indicators in Egypt.
2. Improve the quality of administrative data and facilitate data sharing across institutions, and with CAPMAS, which are key preconditions to developing an SBR and more generally to fostering the use of data for statistical and analytical purposes.
3. Enhance micro-data sharing with external experts, which can improve the supply of evidence on business dynamics.
Each of these points is articulated among a set of specific action points that Egypt could follow to achieve the recommendation. While building an SBR is a complex and longer-term objective, other improvements could be achieved in the shorter term.
Create a Statistical Business Register within CAPMAS
Developing an SBR is crucial to producing business dynamics indicators. SBRs are up-to-date and comprehensive databases that contain information on all registered businesses in a country. They are maintained by NSOs, but their creation and updating processes involve co-ordination and regular interactions with relevant public institutions collecting data on businesses.
Egypt should initiate this reform process following a phased approach, building on ongoing national efforts to enhance administrative business data. This gradual process would allow for effective planning and implementation while ensuring successful long-term outcomes. The creation of the Economic Entities Platform, the rollout of a UBI, and enhanced interoperability and secure data exchange across public institutions – discussed in previous sections - will be instrumental for the development of the SBR. Moreover, Egypt could benefit from international guidelines (United Nations, 2024[12]; UNECE, 2018[13]; Eurostat, 2021[14]) and could also request help and advice from NSOs in developed and peer countries that have already established an SBR.31
The process of establishing an SBR will also require substantial investments in information and communication technology (ICT) infrastructure, as well as in data privacy and security, to ensure the successful implementation and maintenance of the SBR. Understanding the human resource requirements for the development of an SBR is also crucial, ensuring alignment with available skills while identifying potential gaps within CAPMAS. Digital, security, ICT and data-handling training needs to be provided to public officials if such skills shortages are identified. Additionally, assessing the current ICT capacity is vital to determine if it has the required infrastructure to support the register. If necessary, Egypt should prioritise improvements in ICT capabilities to facilitate the successful implementation of the register and enhance the NSO’s statistical capabilities.
Egypt could entrust the creation of the SBR with CAPMAS, Egypt’s statistical agency, following international best practice. This may necessitate the passage of new legislation such as in Tunisia (Box 2.1). The law(s) or decree could entrust CAPMAS with the creation of an SBR, oversee its updating and management, and produce regular business statistics (see below). Legislation could additionally facilitate data sharing across public institutions, the establishment of a unique business identifier and improved administrative data (see section “Improve the quality of administrative data and facilitate data sharing across institutions to foster the use of data for statistical and analytical purposes”).
In Tunisia, the Statistical Business Register (SBR; Répertoire national des entreprises) was created in accordance with Decree No. 94‑780 of 4 April 1994, which entrusted the National Institute of Statistics with the creation, update, management, utilisation and dissemination of the SBR (United Nations, 2024[12]).
The National Institute of Statistics’ main partners in the management of the SBR are the Ministry of Finance and the Social Security Fund. Indeed, the SBR is constructed by linking files from the tax authorities with those from the social security institution.
Tunisia’s SBR is updated annually. The administrative data must therefore be obtained in a regular and continuous manner (United Nations, 2024[12]). Agreements with the partner administrations are based on the Statistical Law and the decree establishing the SBR, which grant the National Institute of Statistics access to the various administrative sources containing useful information. Article 6 of the decree obliges the public administrations (notably the Ministry of Finance and the Social Security Fund) to regularly transfer their firm-related data to the national statistical office (NSO). Moreover, the law relating to the national statistical system (1999) stipulates that personal data cannot be used for purposes related to fiscal, economic or social control (Article 5) and public administrations must submit data to the NSO only for statistical purposes (Article 7).
The decree also mandates the inclusion of the company's national identifier in all correspondence between public authorities and other bodies and vice versa.
Source: Divay et al. (2014[15]), "Evaluation globale adaptée du Système Statistique National de la Tunisie", https://www.efta.int/sites/default/files/publications/statistics-eso/reports/2014-05-tunisia.pdf; Statistics Tunisia (n.d.[16]; n.d.[17]), “Using administrative data for the maintenance of SBR in Tunisia”, https://www.unescwa.org/sites/default/files/event/materials/Session_3_Pres_F_Tunisia_Using_Administrative_Data.pdf; and United Nations (2024[12]), “Statistical Business Register”, https://www.ins.tn/en/methode/statistical-business-register.
Combine several datasets to enhance the coverage of businesses in the SBR
SBRs worldwide are primarily based on administrative data and may be complemented with surveys. The primary source for an SBR should be the one that provides complete, up-to-date, full coverage of all enterprises. Egypt can, for example, rely on the commercial register since it contains data on all registered businesses. Tax records are also used in some countries as a primary source for the SBR.
In practice, a single source might not cover the full population of businesses. Linking several datasets, therefore, allows one to improve coverage. When units are identified by a unique identifier across public institutions, data can be easily integrated. Business registries thus typically merge data from various administrative sources including, for example, tax registers (e.g. for VAT, corporation tax or income tax), compulsory registration systems (e.g. commercial registration requirements, limited liability businesses or those quoted on stock markets), the social security register (containing employment information) and various surveys. In this regard, subpopulations of different units might be covered by different sources. For example, Costa Rica uses the social security registry, the tax records and the register of exporting enterprises to expand the coverage of its business register (the “Register of Enterprises and Establishments”) by adding new records that do not match with the business register (United Nations, 2024[12]). Administrative business registers are maintained by administrative authorities for administrative, legal or taxation purposes (UNCITRAL, 2019[18]) while statistical business registers are used for statistical purposes and are maintained by the NSO.32
CAPMAS could thus combine data from GAFI, the FRA, the SCZone and the tax register, as well as other additional data sources that might help improve the coverage and characteristics of registered firms, such as the GOEIC and IDA registers. Egypt’s Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Agency (MSMEDA) also collects information on micro, small and medium firms, making it a valuable source to complement the information outlined above. Once the Economic Entities Platform is created, it can serve as the backbone of the SBR.
Employment information can be retrieved from social security records
The proposed SBR could incorporate employment data from the National Organisation for Social Insurance or the Ministry of Labour. As discussed, most of the above-mentioned Egyptian data sources do not have information on employment. Integrating employment data into the SBR would allow examining the (formal) employment dynamics.
Several developed and developing economies follow this practice. Tunisia, for example, constructs its SBR by merging tax records with social security data on employment (see Box 2.1).
Assigning a unique identifier for each statistical unit in the SBR is crucial
For the purpose of the SBR, administrative units (which are covered in one or more administrative sources) must be transformed into statistical units, which are used for statistical purposes. Following the African Development Bank’s (2014[19]) recommendations, the statistical units that should be recorded in the SBR are – at a minimum – enterprises, establishments and business groups.33 Statistical units should be defined using an appropriate method and must be defined accurately through the metadata. This is often done from “legal units” to which both administrative and statistical units are linked to. Legal units are units that are recognised by law or society, independent of the persons or institutions that own them (United Nations, 2024[12]). They serve as a basic element to create enterprises and enterprise groups (Eurostat, 2021[14]). The legal unit is usually monitored in one or more administrative sources.
CAPMAS needs to define statistical units following international recommendations, e.g. from African Development Bank (2014[19]), Eurostat (2021[14]) and United Nations (2024[12]) . The ideal approach involves identifying the complex distinctions between legal, administrative and statistical units, determining how to link them, and ensuring that both legal and statistical units are recorded in the SBR. Most of the enterprises have a one-to-one relationship with the corresponding legal units, which make it easier to identify enterprises. In other cases, however, enterprises correspond to more than one legal unit (in the case of large businesses). Statistical units may be derived by splitting or grouping data from legal units using statistical estimation methods, or in some cases, information may be provided directly by the respondent (United Nations, 2024[12]).34
Combining several administrative sources could help better derive statistical units in the SBR from administrative units. For example, Statistics Netherlands uses tax or social security data to complement information from the primary source of the SBR (the trade register) in deriving correct statistical units. Alternatively, following the African Development Bank guidelines, CAPMAS can first establish a one-to-one correspondence between enterprises and legal units, which can significantly ease operations. In the future, CAPMAS can distinguish cases where enterprises within large groups do not align with legal units, enabling better identification of enterprises. For larger enterprise, profiling activities (see next sub-section) can then be performed to identify all establishments belonging to the same enterprise.
Note: VAT: value-added tax.
Source: OECD elaboration based on African Development Bank (2014[19]).
Once statistical units are identified from administrative units (see Figure 2.1), CAPMAS should assign a specific business identifier in the SBR. The identification numbering system for units in an administrative source often does not correspond to, or is not aligned with, that used in the SBR. It is thus necessary to establish a link between the two (United Nations, 2024[12]).
Identifiers should be assigned for each level of aggregation of statistical units: local unit (establishment-id), enterprise (firm-id) and business group (group-id) as shown in Figure 2.2.35
1. Each establishment should have a unique identifier (establishment-id).
2. Establishments belonging to the same enterprise should have the same identifier (firm-id).
3. Enterprises belonging to the same business group should have the same identifier (group-id).
Enterprises belonging to the same business group are connected by control and ownership links. This entails the sorting of complex inter-corporate ownership and control situations. Administrative data usually contain information on ownership but not on controls, and clusters of controls need to be created to define the enterprise groups, and the unit “enterprise group” needs to be incorporated into the SBR. Additionally, if possible, control hierarchies should be recorded in the SBR to identify the group head of business groups (Eurostat, 2021[14]). Box 2.2 provides some clarification on the identification of business groups and the distinction between ownership, control and control head.
The definition of a business is of crucial importance since it directly impacts business dynamics measures (entry, exit and growth rates). To understand why it is important, consider an enterprise which initially consists of a single local activity unit or establishment that subsequently expands by creating another local activity unit of equal size while retaining effective operational control at the enterprise level. If businesses are defined as local activity units, this expansion constitutes an entry (without growth in the original business establishment). Conversely, if businesses are defined as enterprises, no new entries would occur, but the original business unit would double in size (OECD/Eurostat, 2008[3]). At the same time, having information on employment at both the establishment and firm level can enhance the analysis of job creation. While job growth at the establishment level entails effective job creation at the establishment, job growth observed at the firm level can simply reflect changes in firm structure (Haltiwanger, Jarmin and Miranda, 2010[20]).
Different levels of aggregation may be useful for various objectives. For example, establishment-based data can play a role in investigating regional differences while enterprise-based data may be useful to measure innovation, decision making, etc., as those are related to the organisational and management structures that exist at the enterprise level. Examining the enterprise group allows looking at ownership structures and more strategic visions, as well as inward and outward foreign affiliates statistics and foreign direct investment statistics.
The concept of control and ownership are different. Control refers to the ability to direct the activities or decisions of another entity, whether directly or indirectly. It can be exercised through ownership of voting shares, contractual arrangements or other means. In business groups, one legal entity (e.g. a parent company) typically exercises control over another (e.g. a subsidiary). Control can be direct, where one entity holds most voting shares in another, or indirect, where influence is exerted through intermediate entities or complex ownership structures (e.g. enterprise M in Figure 2.3 has direct control on X and J, and indirect on Y). Additionally, a government can secure control over a legal unit because of a special legislation decree or regulation that empowers the government to determine corporate policy or to appoint the directors.
The ownership of a unit, or a group of units, relates to the right to possess its assets and determines the distribution of financial flows and income. Thus, an entity can own a significant portion of shares in another company without having controlling influence if its ownership stake is non-controlling (i.e. less than 50% of voting shares, e.g. enterprise H on enterprise Y).
Figure 2.3 shows an example of how to derive business group and group head from businesses’ ownership structure by identifying a cluster of controls.
Ownership and control structure
Record business groups and group head from ownership structure
Notes: In the example above, enterprise M has direct control on enterprise X and J and indirect control on Y. M owns 36% of enterprise Y (60%*30%)+(60%*30%), but M controls Y through its subsidiaries X and J from which it has 60% (30%+30%) of voting right in enterprise Y. On the contrary, enterprise H owns 52% of enterprise Y (100%*40%)+(40%*30%), but it does not have control over it as voting right is only 40%. Green arrows indicate ownership but not control.
Source: Eurostat (2021[14]).
The EU regulation defines an enterprise group as “enterprises that are bounded together by legal and/or financial links”.* However, the most updated Eurostat Manual suggests that a better definition should be based on “legal units” instead of enterprises, as enterprises may be a combination of one or more legal units (Eurostat, 2021[14]). Thus, both views of the enterprise group, composed of legal units and enterprises, must be documented in the statistical business register.
Eurostat also highlights that “the perimeter of the group is defined by the criterion of controlled legal units, not by the criterion of owned legal units and that it is necessary to record minority intermediate shareholdings in the business register, in case there is indirect control, of which the links can only be derived from the complete ownership structure” (Eurostat, 2021[14]).
Note: * This pertains to the Council Regulation (EEC) No. 696/1993 of 15 March 1993 on the statistical units for the observation and analysis of the production system in the Community.
Source: Eurostat (2021[14]), "European Business Statistics Methodological Manual for Statistical Business Registers: 2021 Edition”, https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/3859598/12433023/KS-GQ-20-006-EN-N.pdf/0c31c77a-5d20-9954-9223-2b856fdb93c9?t=1613481618625.
Regularly updating the statistical business register can ensure timely and quality information
CAPMAS should ensure it regularly updates the SBR. In addition to being automatically linked to updated information using administrative sources, the SBR can be updated using other means (Figure 2.4):
Feedback from business surveys. Such surveys can be used, for example, to update the name, address, activity status or other variables for units that are part of the survey frame. Relevant units are usually larger firms that are mainly sampled in surveys’ statistics.
SBR improvement surveys. Such surveys are collected in some countries to get information that is not available in other data sources. Some surveys may improve the accuracy of certain variables.
Profiling. A method to analyse the legal, operational and accounting structures of very large and complex business groups. Such a method allows the establishment of statistical units and their links. This involves establishing contact with the business group, visiting the company, etc.
Note: The table shows the best ways of updating the register’s information depending on the firm size.
Source: African Development Bank Group (2014[19]), “Guidelines for Building Statistical Business Registers in Africa”, https://www.afdb.org/fileadmin/uploads/afdb/Documents/Project-and-Operations/Guidelines_for_Building_Statistical_Business_Registers_in_Africa.pdf.
Note: SBR: statistical business register; NSO: national statistical office.
Source: OECD elaboration based on African Development Bank Group (2014[19]), “Guidelines for Building Statistical Business Registers in Africa”, https://www.afdb.org/fileadmin/uploads/afdb/Documents/Project-and-Operations/Guidelines_for_Building_Statistical_Business_Registers_in_Africa.pdf.
The SBR covers only registered enterprises, but this could be complemented with regular surveys of the informal sector
The SBR should include all registered enterprises.36 Table 2.3 summarises the recommended coverage for the SBR from international institutions (Eurostat, 2021[14]; African Development Bank Group, 2014[19]; UNECE, 2018[13]). For example, international recommendations envisage that government enterprises be included in the SBR. When possible, data should be collected from a single source rather than from individual government units to allow a smooth, centralised data collection process. International recommendations also envisage including the self-employed in the SBR (Eurostat, 2021[14]). Some countries have such information in social security sources, tax files on persons, files of chambers of crafts or lists of doctors. The informal sector (as well as illegal and underground activities) is excluded from the SBR as, by definition, informal firms are not registered with administrative institutions.37
For countries like Egypt that have a large share of firms operating in the informal sector, surveys on informal sectors can complement business register information.38 Egypt’s Economic Census 2017/2018 provides information on informal firms that serves as an estimate of the informal sector (inside establishments). Such information may be complemented with data on informal workers from CAPMAS’ Labour Force Surveys, as well as data on informal workers outside the establishment.
Note: SBR: statistical business register.
Source: African Development Bank Group (2014[19]), “Guidelines for Building Statistical Business Registers in Africa”, https://www.afdb.org/fileadmin/uploads/afdb/Documents/Project-and-Operations/Guidelines_for_Building_Statistical_Business_Registers_in_Africa.pdf; Eurostat (2021[14]), "European Business Statistics Methodological Manual for Statistical Business Registers: 2021 Edition”, https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/3859598/12433023/KS-GQ-20-006-EN-N.pdf/0c31c77a-5d20-9954-9223-2b856fdb93c9?t=1613481618625; and UNECE (2018[13]), “Guidelines on the Use of Statistical Business Registers for Business Demography and Entrepreneurship Statistics”, https://doi.org/10.18356/c10a8ce3-en.
Collecting a core set of information over time in the SBR ensures consistency and a proper examination of business dynamics indicators
The SBR should collect some key information over time. This would ensure consistency and a proper examination of business dynamics indicators. Key information includes:
Type of unit (establishment, enterprise, etc.)
Type of enterprise group (domestic, multinational domestically controlled, multinational foreign controlled)
Role of enterprise within a group (group head, management/control unit, etc.)
Unit identification code
Business name
Address
Contact details (telephone, email, etc.)
Geographic location
Activity status (active, inactive)
Legal form
Institutional sector (public, private)
Economic activity following international classification (at least three-digit sector)
Birth date (date of incorporation or date of official recognition as an economic operator for units that are natural persons)
Date of death, merger, acquisition, split or break
Number of employees/persons employed.
Other additional information may also be included:
Ownership (independent, domestic or foreign group)
Turnover
Trade status (no trade, importer, exporter or both).
The business register should be able to distinguish between true entry and entry associated with mergers and acquisitions, indicate the reason for the firm’s exit (bankruptcy, insolvency, etc.), and monitor changes in the ownership structure.
Producing regular business demography statistics and indicators can enhance transparency and information on business dynamics
The creation of an SBR, or more generally a single database on businesses, could also serve to produce annual business demography statistics.
Once a single database of businesses is created, Egypt could follow practices from other countries and publish regular business statistics. Statistics could include the number of enterprises by industry and location; the number of new enterprises and their characteristics (e.g. size, age, ownership, etc.); and birth, death and survival rates.
Both developed and developing countries publish regular business demography statistics and analysis on dedicated websites or through annual reports. The Turkish Statistical Institute, for example, regularly publishes official business demography statistics (including birth, death and survival rates) and small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) on its website, making the underlying data available for free download.39 Morocco, on the other hand, established an SME’s Observatory to examine key indicators on SMEs and publish it in annual reports (Box 2.3). Most of the time, NSOs produce such statistics, but other entities could also produce relevant statistics on SMEs (in Morocco, for example, the responsible entity is a non-profit institution created for this specific purpose). GAFI, for example, has already started publishing information on businesses registered at GAFI on its own website, and it is planning to do so regularly.
The Moroccan SME’s Observatory (OMTPME) was established in 2013 to examine key demographic and economic performance indicators of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). The OMTPME created the first centralised database on formal businesses in the country by collaborating and exchanging data with several institutions.
The process began when the Bank Al-Maghrib initiated discussions on establishing the OMTPME. It actively engaged and raised awareness among key stakeholders – namely ministerial departments, public institutions, business representatives and the banking sector – about the importance of supporting this innovative national project. The initiative aims to create a single, unified source of harmonised information on companies. In November 2013, the OMTPME was established as a non‑profit organisation.
Since then it has extensively collaborated with numerous partners, which gained momentum in 2017 through data exchange agreements with the Bank Al-Maghrib, the General Directorate of Taxes, the National Social Security Fund, and the Moroccan Office of Industrial and Commercial Property.
This centralised database has been used to produce regular annual reports since 2018, alongside thematic and sectoral reports. The most recent annual report provided detailed insights into company demographics by industry and region, including the number of enterprises, the number of newly created legal entities (categorised by legal form), dissolution by firm age, and characteristics of self-employees (OMTPME, 2022[21]). Additionally, the report examined a set of economic indicators including turnover, exports and value added, while also studying the role of female entrepreneurship.
Source: OMTPME (n.d.[22]), “Why a Moroccan SME’s Observatory? “, https://omtpme.ma/en/qui-sommes-nous/.
Improve the quality of administrative data and facilitate data sharing across institutions to foster the use of data for statistical and analytical purposes
To ensure effective implementation of the SBR and its quality, several preconditions are essential, including enhancing the quality of Egypt’s administrative data.
First, Egyptian public agencies need to harmonise their business identification systems across administrative sources. Second, administrative data need to be harmonised. This entails having a unified standard, format and definition (including the industry and governorates classifications). Developing a legal framework can help achieve such goals. Finally, administrative data need to be shared with CAPMAS for statistical purposes.
Developing a national business identification system (for companies and their branches) that can be used across all public institutions can enhance data linkages
Having a unified national business identification system is key to attain an integrated system of administrative data that can be used to construct an SBR and support government operations. Regarding government operations, government agencies can streamline their administrative processes, reduce duplication of efforts, and improve the delivery of services to businesses and the public. In addition, a single business identifier can also increase the number of registered firms and tax compliance and reduce administrative burdens on business (Davis and Brown, 2016[23]).
Currently, each business data source in Egypt has its own identification system. For example, GAFI assigns its specific identification number to firms, although there are ongoing efforts to associate these ids with commercial and tax numbers.40 A unified national number at the establishment level is currently missing in Egypt, limiting data integration.41 At most, these sources provide detailed information on establishments’ locations (e.g. address). Moreover, firms register themselves with names and receive a commercial register number and a tax number once they register respectively at the Commercial Registry Authority and the Tax Authority.
To address this challenge, the Egyptian government has recently decided to define a UBI, to be used across all administrations. Because the tax number does not cover the universe of businesses, the UBI will be created ex-novo to ensure full applicability among all businesses (as in the case of Morocco in Box 2.4). Egypt should develop this national identification system for both companies (legal units) and their branches (local units or establishments) and ensure all administrations collecting information on businesses follow this identification system (tracking both identifiers when collecting information at both the legal and local unit level). International best practice suggests that identification numbers should be assigned directly at the time of registration and, ideally, should automatically link with the tax registration number.42 Following the example of France, Morocco and other countries (see Box 2.4), the establishment number can be based on the company number adding a specific digit code for each establishment.
The development of a national identification system is not a simple process and involves active co‑ordination among several stakeholders. Following the case of Denmark, Egypt can establish a group of relevant ministries and other organisations to overcome challenges related to developing a unique national identification number (United Nations, 2024[12]). The creation of a dedicated committee bringing all relevant stakeholders together could also enforce the use across all public administrations. Key stakeholders that could be involved in such a preparatory process include GAFI; the Commercial Registry Authority; the Egyptian Tax Authority; MSMEDA; the FRA; the SCZone; the National Organisation for Social Insurance; IDA; GOEIC; CAPMAS; and other relevant agencies.
A unique and longitudinal identifier for businesses should also be provided in the Economic Census. This would ensure that the data contain a panel component across census waves, allowing the computation of within-firm employment growth over time. Egypt should ensure that external researchers have access to this longitudinal identifier. If there are confidentiality concerns, the data can be shared with an anonymised identifier, which prevents the disclosure of confidential information.43 For current waves of the census, if a unique identifier is already available, this should be made accessible for research and policy analysis. If, instead, each wave has a different identifier that cannot be linked over time, other techniques can be exploited to match businesses at different points in time.44 For the collection of future waves of the Economic Census, a unique identifier should be provided to each unit at the beginning of the data collection process. Ideally, this identifier would be matchable with the identifier that would be used in the SBR, if created. CAPMAS has already collected tax and commercial identifiers in the next wave of the census for some (larger) firms and should ensure it collects them for all businesses in the future. Each establishment may also provide information on the enterprise (firm-id) and the business group (group-id) they belong to.
Morocco
Morocco completed a project to establish the national system of business identification. In 2011, a Common Enterprise Identifier (ICE) was established. Morocco adopted the decree instituting this identifier and applied the identifier to all enterprises from July 2016 (Feddouli, 2019[24]). This identification system, which includes a number that identifies companies and their branches, is used by all administrations and businesses to facilitate the inter-administrative exchange of micro-data on companies and to simplify the administrative procedures applied to enterprises. The identification number is generated in the early stages of the creation of the company. The ICE is a 15‑digit identifier composed of: 9 digits for the company, 4 for its establishments and 2 for control characters. The resulting file, which contains the essential information about the company, is called the ICE Central Database and is hosted by the tax administration.
The construction of such an identifier also facilitated the creation of a single database on all businesses which is used by the SME’s Observatory to publish annual reports on the number and characteristics of small and medium-sized enterprises in Morocco (see Box 2.3).
Netherlands
When registering a business in the Trade Business Register at the Chamber of Commerce KVK, each unit (except for sole proprietorship) is given an 8-digit KVK number that proves the business’ registration and RSIN number that is an identification number for legal entities and partnerships. The RSIN is the business equivalent of the Citizen Service Number and is used by government to link data between basic Dutch government registrations. The Netherlands’ Tax Administration provides units with a number for value-added tax purposes. Such an identifier is provided automatically when units register a business with the KVK. The Trade Register – which is the primary source of the statistical business register in the Netherlands – contains a unique identifier for: business owners, either natural or legal persons (Citizen Service Number for a natural person and an RSIN for a legal person); a legal business identified by its national identification number (KVK number); the legal establishment numbers and addressable property id; and the LEI number that identifies legal entities to trace global transactions.
France
Articles R123-220 to R123-234 of the Commercial Code establish a national identification system for natural and legal persons and their establishments based on the business and establishment register, known as Sirene (Computer system for the business and establishment register).
Sirene is maintained by the National Institute of Statistics and Economic Studies (INSEE). Once a company is created and is registered in the Sirene directory, INSEE assigns unique identifiers called SIREN and SIRET, respectively for enterprises and for establishments. The SIREN number is a nine-digit code used to identify enterprises. The SIRET code, instead, allows identifying the geographic location of any French establishment and is a 14-digit number composed of the SIREN plus additional codes (the SIREN code + 5 digits specific to each establishment and an internal classification number of INSEE). These unique identifiers are used by all public bodies and administrative institutions for different administrative, legal and statistical purposes.
Source: Feddouli (2019[24]) (2019[24]), “Enhancement the cooperation with administrative data holders”, https://unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/stats/documents/ece/ces/ge.42/2019/mtg1/5.pdf; INSEE (2025[25]), “Business register identification system”, https://www.insee.fr/en/metadonnees/source/serie/s1020; Konen (2016[26]), “Dutch System of Basic Registrations”, https://www.stat.go.jp/english/info/meetings/wiesbaden2016/pdf/3-06_nld_abs.pdf; OMTPME (n.d.[22]), “Why a Moroccan SME’s Observatory?”, https://omtpme.ma/en/qui-sommes-nous; and Républiques Française (2025[27]), “How obtain a Siren or Siret number?”, https://entreprendre.service-public.fr/vosdroits/F32135.
Providing consistent classifications and common standards can enhance the quality of administrative data and their integration
Egypt should ensure that administrative data are of high quality. This not only means that the data should contain relevant information for the purpose of constructing an SBR with good coverage of the business population, but also that data share a common standard, definition and format.
Egypt should ensure all administrative sources follow a consistent classification for industries and governorates. Ideally, the industry classification should align with the most updated international classification (currently the ISIC Rev.4) to facilitate cross-country comparisons. For governorates, Egypt should define a unified classification for governorates to be followed by all public administrations. This harmonisation concerns all public entities collecting data on businesses, including GAFI, the Egyptian Tax Authority, the FRA, the SCZone, the Commercial Registry Authority, the National Organisation for Social Insurance, MSMEDA and CAPMAS.
The national nomenclatures of economic activities and the governorates’ code could be explicitly detailed in the legislation. Drawing from international practices (e.g. Tunisia), the law could define a clear time frame within which all public administrations must adopt these classifications. Additionally, it could designate a responsible entity, such as CAPMAS, to monitor and evaluate the extent to which these common classifications are used over time (Box 2.5).
Article 9 of Decree 2017-390 of 9 March 2017 establishes Tunisia’s nomenclature of economic activities. Public administrations were instructed to adopt the Tunisian activity nomenclature as the sole standard for their activities and to revise their data accordingly within a maximum of two years from the decree’s publication. The decree designated the National Institute of Statistics as the entity responsible for monitoring and evaluating the extent of the nomenclature’s adoption by the relevant public bodies.
Source: Journal Officiel de la République Tunisienne (2017[28]), “Décret gouvernemental n° 2017-390 du 9 mars 2017”, https://www.finances.gov.tn/sites/default/files/reglementaire_fr/decret_2017_390francais.pdf.
More generally, Egypt could reach agreements on common data standards (data interoperability) as well as on common definitions and terminologies (semantic interoperability). Egypt needs to harmonise data across different sources so that they can be effectively integrated and shared. Shared standards, consistent structure across data and the use of uniform technical formats allow better interoperability across data sources. For example, data have a consistent structure when information about data (metadata) are shared. Uniform semantic conceptions make the combined use of data possible and effective. Semantic interoperability means avoiding collecting data following different semantic conceptions for the same information/variables and having shared standards that ensure the unambiguous meaning of information. For example, Estonia was one of the first countries to achieve effective interoperability. In 2000, the Public Information Act prohibited the establishment of separate databases for collecting the same data and enhanced the consistent use of available information (the “once-only” principle). The once‑only principle has been implemented across agencies and ministries to achieve more efficient data systematisation, primarily within relevant levels of the public sector (OECD, 2023[29]).
Egypt can establish data standards and protocols that ensure consistency in data formats, structures and definitions across different systems. Moreover, to ensure the smooth implementation of unique identifiers, there needs to be interoperability between the technological infrastructure of the business register and other public authorities sharing the information associated with the identifier (UNCITRAL, 2019[18]). This could be achieved by adopting integrated electronic interfaces, interconnection services, data integration services, data presentation and exchange, and secure communication protocols among the authorities involved in business registration process (European Union, 2017[30]).
To improve the quality of administrative data for statistical purposes, the NSO can also directly influence administrative data collection. In France, for example, INSEE is involved in the design of administrative data. In Denmark, the General Director of Statistics Denmark is a member of the board of Datacentralen, a publicly owned data processing centre which operates Denmark’s administrative registers (United Nations, 2024[12]). This provides Statistics Denmark with an important opportunity to influence the development and maintenance of administrative registers, which is of great value for the SBR.
Each available data source relevant to constructing an Egyptian SBR should be assessed for quality, with necessary enhancements implemented as needed. This is particularly important for social security data, the commercial register and tax records, which have notable gaps in information (as highlighted in the section “Current data available in Egypt: Strengths and limitations for business dynamics analysis”). The following paragraphs focus specifically on proposed improvements to the quality of GAFI data.
Improve the quality of GAFI data
GAFI data contain useful information, but the data currently fall short in terms of comparability with OECD countries. One significant limitation is the lack of employment information over time, which hinders the study of job creation and destruction as well as the examination of employment dynamics. As discussed, only the “expected employment at the time of establishment” is recorded in the GAFI register, without a precise timespan within which firms are expected to reach that employment size.
To address these shortcomings and ensure that business dynamics can be adequately analysed, it is necessary to implement/complete the following data enhancements:
Collect employment information over time. This can be achieved either by collecting employment directly in the GAFI database or by integrating GAFI data with other sources that collect such information (e.g. social security data or Ministry of Labour data). Integrating GAFI data with other sources would reduce the data collection burden on firms and GAFI officials; however, it requires an assessment of the data quality of such external sources regarding employment information (e.g. missing data).
Align the industry classification to the most updated international classification. GAFI is currently in the process of aligning its industry classification system with the latest international standard, ISIC Rev.4. However, challenges persist. GAFI can continuously work with other Egyptian stakeholders which have already carried out a similar process and have updated their industry classification to match the international classification (such as the Egyptian Tax Authority and the Decision Support Center) and with entities which have not yet aligned to it (i.e. the Commercial Registry Authority). Common standards should be defined to ensure that firms are assigned to the same industry following the ISIC classification across different datasets. Sharing the firms’ ISIC industry information via the G2G initiative would be key to ensure such alignment across entities.
Improve the coverage of financial statements. Currently only around 30% of GAFI-registered firms submit financial statements, primarily larger firms and those receiving foreign direct investment. Expanding their systematic and consistent collection over time would strengthen data quality and support comprehensive analysis. There is also scope to enhance enforcement mechanisms to ensure compliance with existing legal requirements. By the first half of 2026, GAFI plans to launch the fully automated financial statement filing process to improve coverage. Such a process can help firms report their financial statements. There is a need to ensure that such process will be fully in place and information is consistently and systematically provided by all firms registered at GAFI. In this accord, GAFI recently approved a proposal to encourage companies to submit financial statements by offering various incentives.45
Finalise the matching with commercial and tax numbers. GAFI is currently in the process of updating its database to match the GAFI firm-identifier with the commercial and tax numbers. This ongoing process is nearing completion and marks a significant milestone in enhancing the efficiency of GAFI data. This progress may also become the basis for data linkages. Additionally, the transition to a fully digitalised registration system represents a pivotal advancement. This new system not only streamlines the registration process but also facilitates the automatic registration of firms with the tax and commercial registers. This automation ensures that the linkage between GAFI identifiers and commercial/tax numbers is established directly and accurately. It is crucial to complete this process and ensure it operates smoothly in the future.
Enhance the use of administrative data by improving data sharing across institutions and with CAPMAS
As discussed, the use of administrative business information in the statistical system has not yet been fully exploited in Egypt. Consequently, Egypt can benefit from enhancing data integration and constructing a longitudinal business framework to conduct business statistics.46
In this regard, Egypt needs to strengthen procedures to share and integrate administrative data between public entities and CAPMAS. While CAPMAS already has access to some of the necessary data for the construction of the SBR, some are still not accessed (including tax records). Additionally, CAPMAS could benefit from more systematic and regular access (and use) of these data in the construction of an SBR.
However, accessing sensitive data, such as tax records, might not be easy in practice, as it may pose confidentiality concerns. Several countries are thus changing their statistical law to include a mandate for the statistical office to use administrative data for statistical purposes (United Nations, 2024[12]). “Use for statistical purposes” is a key justification for engaging in data exchange. For example, France adheres to confidentiality rules by means of law, which stipulates that statistical authorities can access administrative data promptly and free of charge for statistical purposes (Statistical Law No 51-711 of 7 June 1951). The government of Georgia also adopted a resolution for which administrative authorities are obliged to regularly provide information to the National Statistics Office (United Nations, 2024[12]). Consequently, the National Statistical Office of Georgia has now access to administrative records. Moreover, in Tunisia, Article 6 of Decree No. 94-780 of 4 April 1994, which establishes the SBR, obliges public administrations to regularly transfer their firm data to the NSO (see Box 2.1).
A law could thus allow CAPMAS to access administrative data for statistical purposes while still following data confidentiality rules (see the case of Statistics Canada in Box 2.6). However, establishing the legal framework may not suffice, hence, a relational framework with partners needs to be implemented, too. Bilateral agreements (i.e. memorandum of understanding) could be signed between CAPMAS and relevant administrations, detailing the confidentiality rules to be applied, also potentially leveraging on the G2G initiative.
To improve data sharing between public agencies, the Egyptian government has begun building the G2G to have a central means to link government agencies through which data and information exchange is carried out. The exchange of data between concerned entitles is organised through the signing of a joint co‑operation protocol that specifies the data that will be exchanged, including rules for data confidentiality and circulation. Then, following the agreed stipulations, the two concerned entities exchange data accordingly.47 By early 2025, around 100 government entities had been fully integrated into G2G digital services, with approximately 25 000 buildings connected via fibre-optic networks. This creates a robust foundation for a fully interconnected and efficient e-government ecosystem.
The recent G2G initiative may be the building block to further enhance data sharing among public institutions. Such an initiative should be enhanced by improving the G2G search functionality in the first step (i.e. searching firms by governorates or industries rather than by their identifiers) and by allowing access to the entire database in a second step.48 For instance, ensuring data sharing across institutions is important in collecting information on employment from the National Organisation for Social Insurance.
The Statistical Act grants Statistics Canada the authority to obtain administrative data and to influence the information collected by government departments. Through this mandate, Statistics Canada ensures maintaining the security and confidentiality of the data collected as well as transparency throughout the process. Importantly, Statistics Canada only accesses the information it needs to produce statistics and research.
Administrative data are used for many different statistical purposes: replacing or complementing direct data collection to reduce costs and respondent burden; achieving efficiencies in statistical operations, such as the creation of survey frames, the design of survey samples, imputation, estimation and the measurement of the quality of other data; and developing and providing access to new data products (tabular or analytical), such as by integrating administrative data with other data. In 2022, a new policy on the use of administrative data was released with the aim to use administrative data responsibly, to improve data quality and to reduce duplication of information collected from citizens. The main goals are to:
Establish a robust governance framework where data and insights already present in the data ecosystem are leveraged to respond to the information needs of Canadians
Facilitate the use of administrative data in Statistics Canada’s statistical programmes
Increase transparency and maintain public trust while producing relevant, high-quality information for the benefit of all Canadians.
Source: Statistics Canada (2023[31]), “Administrative data”, https://www.statcan.gc.ca/en/our-data/where/administrative-data; and Statistics Canada (2023[32]), “Statistics Canada Policy on the Use of Administrative Data Obtained under the Statistics Act”, https://www.statcan.gc.ca/en/about/policy/admin_data.
Enhance micro-data sharing with external experts to improve the supply of evidence on business dynamics
Sharing micro-data with external experts to conduct policy analysis can support evidence-based policy making. This can attract interest by evaluators inside and outside Egypt, thus improving the quality and the availability of evidence, and prompting impartial research that can be used to inform decision makers. Currently, external experts can only use the Economic Census (as well as the ELMPS and the World Bank Enterprise Survey) to study businesses’ characteristics, limiting the scope of the analysis due to limitations in the data, as discussed above.
The non-governmental Economic Research Forum’s Open Access Micro Data Initiative in Egypt represents a good practice in providing experts with free access to micro-data (including the Economic Census, the ELMPS and the GOEIC data). Yet, some accessible data (e.g. GOEIC register), have a short time series and are not up-to-date (the time series ends at 2016). The Egyptian institutions and CAPMAS should ensure that the data provided through the initiative are available up to the most recent time series.
Moreover, Egypt can consider expanding access to more data through the ERF portal, allowing currently inaccessible datasets (e.g. the GAFI register, the commercial register, IDA registers) to be shared for research purposes. Following international practices, Egypt could increase the number of accessible data to include both survey and administrative data from various ministries (e.g. the French CASD group).49
CAPMAS, along with other institutions, could also establish physical locations at its offices (and/or offer remote access solutions) to grant experts access to micro-data, ensuring proper anonymisation when necessary. Several developed and developing countries have dedicated rooms within their NSOs equipped with secured computers, where experts can access micro-data in a controlled, secure environment. To further enhance security, these rooms are typically under video surveillance, and computers are disconnected from the Internet.
In the longer term, CAPMAS can also establish remote access solutions. More recently, indeed, countries have set up remote access solutions to allow experts to access data without needing to travel. Remote access solutions may entail, for example, VPN connections – or other end-to-end access mechanisms – enabling experts to safely access the data on their own computers. Alternatively, some countries provide remote execution solutions, where experts do not directly see the data, they just write the codes, which are then executed by NSO officials, who return only the aggregate results.
Both physical and remote external access can be done in a way that ensures confidentiality, which is of the utmost importance to maintain trust and the integrity of the statistical system. Box 2.7 presents the case of the Secure Data Facility established at the South Africa Treasury to provide anonymised access to tax data. The facility has been used to study entry/exit rates and the job creation rate, and to evaluate tax policies. Relevant results have been used by policy makers to formulate and adapt national policies.
Southern Africa – Towards Inclusive Economic Development (SA-TIED) is a programme designed to boost evidence-based policy making in the Southern African region. The programme provides researchers with access to comprehensive anonymised tax data from the National Treasury of South Africa, backed by support from the United Nations University World Institute for Development Economics Research and various governmental organisations in South Africa and its sub-region.
Through the data facility at the Treasury, researchers can access a broad range of data. The lab consists of 12 terminals, which allows secure micro-data access. The data are mainly built from merged tax records from individuals and firms to build a linked employer-employee dataset with a long time horizon. The core datasets in the data lab come from corporate income tax, payroll tax certificates and value-added tax data. These datasets are merged with customs data (import and export), personal income tax records, dividend data and several other sources. The future goal is to be able to merge them with data on education, health, social development and other areas. Using tax data allows capturing the entire population of formal business and workers in South Africa, making it a valuable resource for analysing entry and exit rates and job creation, and evaluating tax policy, among others. Such evidence has been instrumental in helping policy makers formulate and refine national policies.
Source: SA-TIED (n.d.[33]), "South Africa: SA-TIED", https://sa-tied.wider.unu.edu/about.
References
[19] African Development Bank Group (2014), Guidelines for Building Statistical Business Registers in Africa, African Development Bank, https://www.afdb.org/fileadmin/uploads/afdb/Documents/Project-and-Operations/Guidelines_for_Building_Statistical_Business_Registers_in_Africa.pdf.
[11] Assaad, R. and C. Krafft (2024), “Introducing the Egypt Labour Market Panel Survey 2023”, Economic Research Forum Working Paper, No. 1748, Economic Research Forum, Giza, Egypt, https://erf.org.eg/publications/introducing-the-egypt-labor-market-panel-survey-2023.
[10] Assaad, R. et al. (2019), “Job creation in Egypt: A sectoral and geographical analysis focusing on private establishments 1996-2017”, Economic Research Forum Policy Paper, https://erf.org.eg/publications/job-creation-in-egypt-a-sectoral-and-geographical-analysis-focusing-on-private-establishments-1996-2017-2.
[36] Badr, K., R. Rizk and C. Zaki (2019), “Firm productivity and agglomeration economies: Evidence from Egyptian data”, Applied Economics, Vol. 51/51, pp. 5528-5544, https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2019.1613506.
[2] Baptista, R. and M. Preto (2011), “New firm formation and employment growth: Regional and business dynamics”, Small Business Economics, Vol. 36, pp. 419-442, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-009-9254-y.
[1] Bravo-Biosca, A., C. Criscuolo and C. Menon (2016), “What drives the dynamics of business growth?”, Economic Policy, Vol. 31/88, pp. 703-742, https://doi.org/10.1093/epolic/eiw013.
[5] Calvino, F., C. Criscuolo and C. Menon (2016), “No Country for Young Firms?: Start-up Dynamics and National Policies”, OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers, No. 29, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/5jm22p40c8mw-en.
[4] Calvino, F., C. Criscuolo and R. Verlhac (2020), “Declining business dynamism: Structural and policy determinants”, OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers, Vol. 94, https://doi.org/10.1787/77b92072-en.
[37] CASD (2021), “The Secure Data Access Centre (CASD), a service for datascience and scientific research”, Courrier des statistiques, No. 03, National Institute of Statistics and Economic Studies, Paris, https://www.insee.fr/en/information/5014754?sommaire=5014796.
[23] Davis, M. and J. Brown (2016), Implementing a Unique Business Identifier in Government: Guidance Note for Practitioners and Nine Country Case Studies, World Bank, Washington, DC, http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/471531468196759403.
[15] Divay, J. et al. (2014), Evaluation globale adaptée du Système Statistique National de la Tunisie, https://www.efta.int/sites/default/files/publications/statistics-eso/reports/2014-05-tunisia.pdf.
[38] El-Haddad, A. and C. Zaki (2025), “Household micro and small enterprises in Egypt: Overview and developments through 2023”, Economic Research Forum Working Paper Series, No. 1772, Economic Research Forum, Giza, Egypt, https://erf.org.eg/publications/household-micro-and-small-enterprises-in-egypt-overview-and-developments-through-2023.
[34] Elshennawy, A. and M. Bouaddi (2021), “Sources of firm-level heterogeneity in labour productivity in Egypt’s manufacturing sector”, Empirical Economics, Vol. 60/5, pp. 2589-2612, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-020-01847-x.
[30] European Union (2017), New European Interoperability Framework, Publications Office of the European Union, https://ec.europa.eu/isa2/sites/default/files/eif_brochure_final.pdf.
[14] Eurostat (2021), European Business Statistics Methodological Manual for Statistical Business Registers: 2021 Edition, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/3859598/12433023/KS-GQ-20-006-EN-N.pdf/0c31c77a-5d20-9954-9223-2b856fdb93c9?t=1613481618625.
[20] Haltiwanger, J., R. Jarmin and J. Miranda (2010), “Who creates jobs? Small vs. large vs. young”, NBER Working Papers, No. 16300, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA, https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w16300/revisions/w16300.rev2.pdf.
[25] INSEE (2025), “Business register identification system”, web page, https://www.insee.fr/en/metadonnees/source/serie/s1020.
[28] Journal Officiel de la République Tunisienne (2017), Décret gouvernemental n° 2017-390 du 9 mars 2017, https://www.finances.gov.tn/sites/default/files/reglementaire_fr/decret_2017_390francais.pdf.
[26] Konen, R. (2016), Dutch System of Basic Registrations, 25th Meeting of the Wiesbaden Group on Business Registers – International Roundtable on Business Survey Frames, https://www.stat.go.jp/english/info/meetings/wiesbaden2016/pdf/3-06_nld_abs.pdf.
[42] Krafft, C. (2016), “Understanding the dynamics of household enterprises in Egypt: Birth, death, growth, and transformation”, Economic Research Forum Working Paper Series, No. 983, Economic Research Forum, Giza, Egypt, https://erf.org.eg/publications/understanding-the-dynamics-of-household-enterprises-in-egypt-birth-death-growth-and-transformation.
[41] Krafft, C. and R. Assaad (2018), “Do more productive firms pay workers more? Evidence from Egypt”, Economic Research Forum Working Paper Series, No. 1222, Economic Research Forum, Giza, Egypt, https://erf.org.eg/publications/do-more-productive-firms-pay-workers-more-evidence-from-egypt.
[9] Krafft, C. et al. (2020), “How do small formal and informal firms in the Arab Republic of Egypt compare?”, Policy Research Working Paper, No. 9423, World Bank, Washington, DC, https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/324411601923707684/pdf/How-Do-Small-Formal-and-Informal-Firms-in-the-Arab-Republic-of-Egypt-Compare.pdf.
[39] Martinez-Zarzoso, I., M. Said and C. Zaki (2018), “Trade policy and input liberalization: The effect on Egyptian firms’ productivity”, Economic Research Forum Working Paper Series, No. 1238, Economic Research Forum, Giza, Egypt, https://erf.org.eg/publications/trade-policy-and-input-liberalization-the-effect-on-egyptian-firms-productivity.
[6] OECD (2026), Productivity Review of Egypt: Focusing on the Manufacturing Sector, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/6b428e23-en.
[8] OECD (2024), OECD Economic Surveys: Egypt 2024, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/af900de2-en.
[29] OECD (2023), Boosting Evidence-based Policy Making for Economic Development Policies in Italy, OECD, Paris, https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/topics/policy-sub-issues/structural-reforms/country-tailored-policy-reforms/italy-boosting-evidence-based-policy-making-for-economic-development-report-2023.pdf.
[3] OECD/Eurostat (2008), Eurostat-OECD Manual on Business Demography Statistics, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264041882-en.
[21] OMTPME (2022), Annual Report 2020-2021, Moroccan SME’s Observatory, https://omtpme.ma/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/RA-OMTPME-2020-2021-English-09.12.2022-VF-1-1_compressed.pdf.
[22] OMTPME (n.d.), “Why a Moroccan SME’s Observatory?”, web page, https://omtpme.ma/en/qui-sommes-nous.
[24] Registers, O. (ed.) (2019), Enhancement the cooperation with administrative data holders, UNECE, Geneva, Switzerland, https://unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/stats/documents/ece/ces/ge.42/2019/mtg1/5.pdf.
[27] République Françaises (2025), “How to obtain a Siren or a Siret number?”, Web Page, https://entreprendre.service-public.fr/vosdroits/F32135.
[7] Rivas, L. and J. Crowley (2018), “Using administrative data to enhance policymaking in developing countries: Tax data and the national accounts”, IMF Working Papers, No. 2018/175, International Monetary Fund, Washington, DC, https://doi.org/10.5089/9781484371701.001.
[40] Rizk, R. and A. Rashed (2019), “Trends and patterns of women’s entrepreneurship in Egypt”, Economic Research Forum Working Paper Series, No. 1369, Economic Research Forum, Giza, Egypt, https://www.afd.fr/en/ressources/trends-and-patterns-womens-entrepreneurship-egypt.
[33] SA-TIED (n.d.), “About”, web page, https://sa-tied.wider.unu.edu/about.
[31] Statistics Canada (2023), “Administrative data”, web page, https://www.statcan.gc.ca/en/our-data/where/administrative-data.
[32] Statistics Canada (2023), “Statistics Canada policy on the use of administrative data obtained under the Statistics Act”, web page, https://www.statcan.gc.ca/en/about/policy/admin_data.
[16] Statistics Tunisia (n.d.), “Statistical Business Register”, https://www.ins.tn/en/methode/statistical-business-register.
[17] Statistics Tunisia (n.d.), Using Administrative Data for the Maintenance of SBR in Tunisia, presentation, Statistics Tunisia, Tunis, https://www.unescwa.org/sites/default/files/event/materials/Session_3_Pres_F_Tunisia_Using_Administrative_Data.pdf.
[18] UNCITRAL (2019), UNCITRAL Legislative Guide on Key Principles of a Business Registry, United Nations Commission on International Trade Law, Vienna, https://uncitral.un.org/sites/uncitral.un.org/files/media-documents/uncitral/en/lg_business_registry-e.pdf.
[13] UNECE (2018), Guidelines on the Use of Statistical Business Registers for Business Demography and Entrepreneurship Statistics, United Nations, New York, NY, https://doi.org/10.18356/c10a8ce3-en.
[12] United Nations (2024), Guidelines on Statistical Business Registers, United Nations, New York, NY, https://unstats.un.org/unsd/business-stat/SBR/Documents/UN_Guidelines_on_SBR.pdf.
[35] Zaki, C. (2022), Estimating Total Factor Productivity in Egypt: Evidence from Firm-level Data, International Labour Organization and Egyptian Ministry of Planning and Economic Development, https://www.ilo.org/sites/default/files/wcmsp5/groups/public/%40africa/%40ro-abidjan/%40sro-cairo/documents/publication/wcms_838228.pdf.
← 1. Business demography statistics allow one to capture how the composition of the enterprise population changes over time, and the contribution to employment by different types of enterprises (i.e. by their size, age, etc.).
← 2. Note that business registers often have a threshold for inclusion in a database. For example, many business registers exclude businesses without employees.
← 3. The “number of persons engaged” refers to the total count of individuals working in a firm, regardless of whether they are full-time, part-time or temporary. Full-time equivalents is a measure that standardises all work contributions to the equivalent of full-time positions. For example, two part-time workers each working half-time would together equal one full-time equivalent. This measure provides a clearer picture of the total workload in terms of full-time capacity.
← 4. Moreover, recent improvements to the GAFI database have harmonised business identifies by matching GAFI identifiers with commercial registration and tax registration numbers.
← 5. Information was extracted at the end of May 2024. Data contain firms registered at GAFI under the Companies Law No. 159 of 1981 (shareholder companies: joint stocks, partnerships limited by shares, limited liability companies, one-person companies) and Investment Law No. 72 of 2017 (individual firms, partnerships, shareholder companies). Among other information, the GAFI data contain the GAFI identification number for firms, their name and legal form, the firm’s activities (including sectors and subsectors, but currently not following the international ISIC Rev.4 classification), location, capital, shareholders (company, bank, person, nationality, id number [or VAT code], gender, share of equity), management members (board of directors), accounts auditors and legal advisors (shareholder companies), company polices (beginning and end of fiscal year). For the side branches, only the address is collected. Since GAFI is responsible for approving the general assemblies of mergers and liquidations, GAFI’s database records company liquidations as well as the cancellation of licenses issued for free zone projects.
← 6. Companies can be registered at GAFI, the FRA, the SCZone and the courts. See Chapter 3 for more details.
← 7. The process of updating the GAFI database is carried out by a combination criterion through linking firms’ name, legal form, law of establishment, date of establishment and address.
← 8. Financial statements also contain the shareholders’ structure (including information on the number of shares owned by each shareholder, the shareholder’s nationality, residency [in case of individual shareholders], voting power and ultimate controlling parent [in case of legal persons]), assets [including items of short- and long-term assets as listed in the financial statements, with additional details on some items in case the company has foreign investments], liabilities and owner’s equity [including items of short- and long-term liabilities with additional details on some items in case the company has foreign investments]). In addition to items of owner’s equity, which includes the company’s capital and retained earnings, financial statements also include a cash flow statement (covering cash in and cash out) and a changes in equity statement highlighting the changes that took place on the owner’s equity such as capital, reserves, retained earnings and dividends. Moreover, they may also include some unpublished data, which include data on employment (number of employees and their wages), trade (imports and exports), expenses on R&D.
← 9. FRA is an independent public authority established under Article 221 of the Egyptian Constitution and Law No. 10 of 2009.
← 10. To participate in this system, the company must obtain a tax registration number. All companies have been obliged to work on this system only.
← 11. The 2017 act has significantly contributed to reducing the time for issuing licences, centralising the responsibility within the IDA (see Chapter 3 for more details).
← 12. Seveal studies exploited the Economic Census 2012/13 and 2017/18, while this is the first known use of the Economic Census 2022/23. Assaad et al. (2019[10]) studied job creation in Egypt examining the three latest waves of the Economic Census (1998, 2006 and 2017). They show that the major source of job creation was SMEs over the period 2006‑17. They identified the top 10 industries in terms of job creation and showed that those industries were smaller in size, more likely informal and had lower productivity. A relatively higher number of existing studies have exploited the Economic Census to examine productivity in the Egyptian economy (Elshennawy and Bouaddi, 2021[34]; Zaki, 2022[35]; Badr, Rizk and Zaki, 2019[36]; Martinez-Zarzoso, Said and Zaki, 2018[39]; Krafft and Assaad, 2018[41]).
← 13. Recently, the output estimated in the Ministry of Planning and Economic Development (MPED)’s National Accounts has been re-estimated based on the Economic Census 2017/2018 to better reflect the size of the Egyptian economy and the different sectors.
← 14. The Economic Census excludes sectors Public administration and defence, compulsory social security [ISIC Rev.4 Section O], Activities of households as employers, undifferentiated goods- and services-producing activities of households for own use [T] and Activities of extra-territorial organisation [U].
← 15. For private establishments, the year of reference is the calendar year (January to December 2022). For public establishments, the reference period is the fiscal year (July 2022 to June 2023).
← 16. The sample design of the Census 2022/23 is drown from five samples from the Population, Housing and Establishments’ Census 2017: the enumeration area sample (over 245 thousand establishments); the ten or more outside enumeration area sample (full coverage, over 54 thousand establishments) ; the industrial zones (full coverage, over 36 thousand); the new urban areas (full coverage, 111 establishments); and other frames (over 58 thousand establishments).
← 17. The education status of workers has been added based on the needs of data users.
← 18. For the 2022/23 wave, there will be about 39 000 establishments included in the Economic Census whose data have already been completed in the previous census and can be tracked with the same identifier.
← 19. While it contains information on whether the establishment is part of a business group or is a single branch, there is no available information to link the establishments that are part of the same enterprise.
← 20. Other matching solutions, such as string-matching techniques, cannot be performed with the version of the Economic Census data available to the OECD because confidential information (such as the establishment’s name, address, etc.) that could allow such matching was not shared with the OECD.
← 21. See Chapter 3 and https://www.oecd.org/sti/dynemp.htm for more details on the DynEmp project.
← 22. The ELMPS is a wide-ranging, nationally representative micro-data source on labour market and human development in Egypt, which is carried out by the ERF in co-operation with CAPMAS.
← 23. For example, Rizk and Rashed (2019[40]) use all waves of the ELMPS to show that women are less likely to engage in or own non-agricultural enterprises than men. In addition, they found that women-owned enterprises are more likely to be informal, have less capital and be home-based. Krafft (2016[42]) studied the dynamics of non-agricultural household enterprises (patterns of creation, survival and growth). She shows that the economic downturns triggered by the global financial crisis and the 2011 revolution had a deterrent impact on enterprise survival as well as on employment growth within surviving enterprises. Recently, El-Haddad and Zaki (2025[38]) examined trends in the status of household enterprises from 1998 to 2023, examining their sector, location, size and age dynamics.
← 24. A refresher sample ranging between 2 000 and 3 000 households is added in every wave to maintain the representativeness of the overall sample and at the same time allows examining the selected phenomenon. Each wave focuses on a particular phenomenon. For instance, the 2012 wave examined the patterns and effects of international migration from Egypt. For the 2018 wave, the focus was towards economic vulnerability among Egypt’s poorest communities. In each case, a refresher sample was added respectively to reflect areas with high migration rates and the 1 000 poorest villages of rural areas in Egypt. Each wave of the survey attempts to maintain consistency with the previous waves in terms of the measured indicators while adding new modules and questions for a more in-depth examination of a certain phenomenon of interest at the time of the survey.
← 25. The survey also tracks information on individuals who have separated from the sampled households between waves to interview them along with other individuals found in the new households they formed or joined. The ELMPS relies on face-to-face interviews for data collection and considers both urban and rural areas. The survey covers all of Egypt, except for the Frontier governorates (i.e. the Red Sea, El-Wadi El‑Gedid, Matrouh, North Sinai and South Sinai, which accounted for 1.7% of Egypt’s population in the 2017 Census).
← 26. The first round of the ELMPS in 1998 relied on a sample of 4 816 households containing 23 997 individuals. The original sample of this wave was selected from a master sample created by CAPMAS in 1995 based on a stratified sampling technique. Relying on the 1998 sample and after adding a refresher sample, the ELMPS 2006 had an overall sample of 8 351 households containing 37 140 individuals; the 2012 wave contained 12 060 households and 49 186 individuals. The 2018 wave relied on a sample of 15 746 households and 61 231 individuals. A total of 10 145 (42.3% of total) of the 23 997 individuals included in the 1998 wave were successfully tracked over the four waves of the survey. First, the country was divided into two strata: urban and rural. Then each stratum was divided into sub-strata representing each governorate. All villages (rural areas) or shiyakhas (urban areas) in each substratum were assigned a weight based on their population. The villages and shiyakhas represented in the sample were selected based on the principal of probability proportional to size. The selected shiyakhas and villages were then divided into primary sampling units, then one or more primary sampling units were selected from each shiyakha or village. The 1998 sample was selected from 200 primary sampling units across Egypt.
← 27. Two other waves, 2007 and 2008, were conducted for Egypt but did not follow the global methodology. Apart from the Enterprise Survey, the Informality Survey in 2008 and the Innovation Survey in 2013 included Egypt as well.
← 28. For 2016, data include: all manufacturing sectors according to the section classification of ISIC Rev.3.1: Manufacturing (Section D); Construction (Section F), Wholesale and retail trade, repair of motor vehicles, motorcycles and personal and household goods (Section G); Hotels and restaurants (Section H); and Transport, storage and communications (Section I). Note that this definition excludes the following sectors: Financial intermediation (Section J); Real estate, renting and business activities (Section K, except subsector 72, IT, which was added to the population under study); and all public or utilities sectors.
← 29. The establishment is defined as “a business entity associated with a physical location with its own set of financial statements, including a balance sheet and income statement”. There is no firm-id that can be used to connect an establishment to its firm.
← 30. For Egypt, seven regions were selected: Greater Cairo, West Delta, Suez Region, Middle and East Delta, Northern Upper Egypt, Southern Upper Egypt, and Frontier.
← 31. For example, Georgia has benefited from the advice of Statistics Sweden, while Indonesia has been receiving advice from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (United Nations, 2024[12]).
← 32. Administrative business registers also empower firms to participate in formal economy, which in the end allow them to access financial and legal services, as well as policy support. UNCITRAL (2019[18]) discussed the legal framework for setting up the administrative business register.
← 33. However, note that other statistical units exist, such as Local units and Kind-of-activity unit. See United Nations (2024[12]) and Eurostat (2021[14]) for definitions.
← 34. Deriving the characteristics of statistical units involves creating and applying algorithms or lookup tables to convert classifications and other attributes from administrative units into forms suitable for statistical units (United Nations, 2024[12]).
← 35. The 2008 European Union Business Register Regulation (Law No. 177 of 2008) requires that four units – namely, the legal unit, the enterprise, the local unit and the enterprise group – need to be maintained in the national SBRs of the EU member states.
← 36. This excludes enterprises engaged in household production for own consumption and letting of own property. Instead, international standards recommend including households as employers of domestic personnel and extraterritorial organisations and bodies.
← 37. The informal sector usually includes units that are not registered with administrative sources. It excludes households producing exclusively for own final use.
← 38. Additionally, the SBR is not expected to cover small-scale (informal) agricultural production, for which an area-based agricultural survey should be developed. Optionally, enterprises engaged in agriculture, hunting and forestry and/or fishing, and/or public administration may be excluded from the SBR, except those that have significant activities in another division.
← 39. Business demography indicators can be found at: https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Entrepreneurship-and-Business-Demography-2022-49391; SME statistics can be found at: https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=49438&dil=2. The statistics on SMEs were prepared using the annual industry and service statistics and foreign trade statistics, entrepreneurship and business demographics statistics, the R&D activities survey, patent application and registration data of the Turkish Patent and Trademark Office, of the enterprises within the scope of the annual industry and service statistics research carried out by the Turkish Statistical Institute.
← 40. Currently, Egypt only has the national identification for companies (the TIN).
← 41. The Commercial Registry Authority has recently developed a unique identifier for establishments alongside the commercial identifier for firms to identify branches located in different governorates. Its use is currently limited to the Commercial Registry Authority only, however.
← 42. As discussed, Egyptian firms register themselves with names and receive the identification number (commercial or tax number) at the end of the registration process, when registering at the commercial register and tax register. This process affects data quality and use, making matching across different data sources more difficult and expensive.
← 43. De-identifiying data is often unnecessary to protect business identities. Instead, removing key variables – such as location or name – can effectively prevent identification.
← 44. String matching techniques use firm-level information, such as name, location and address to identify and link the same units across different databases. This methodology enables the assignment of a unique longitudinal identifier to each unit in the Economic Census ex-post. Given confidentiality concerns, CAPMAS would need to carry out the matching process and use it to connect the Economic Census with other administrative and survey-based databases. Moreover, manual checks should be conducted for the largest companies in each sector.
← 45. These include moral incentives such as providing some free services through ISCs, showcasing companies as success stories on GAFI’s website, and recognising them through commendations from GAFI leadership. Additionally, companies will receive analytical data about their sector and related industries drawn from relevant economic reports.
← 46. The survey frame for the Economic Census 2017/2018 was the “Population, housing and establishment census” of 2017. It seems that a comprehensive, longitudinal, regularly updated framework for business statistics is not available. Indeed, some surveys recently conducted by the ERF have used the yellow pages as the business frame.
← 47. GAFI has already exchanged data with the Commercial Registry Authority, the Egyptian Tax Authority, the National Authority for Social Insurance and the Real Estate Registry. An electronic mechanism that allows GAFI to inquire about commercial register data, tax data or insurance data, as well as power of attorney data issued by the Real Estate Registry is in place. At the level of GAFI’s company incorporation system, the electronic link via the government digital switch (G2G) is being completed with the Commercial Registry Authority, the Real Estate Registry and the Egyptian Tax Authority to ensure real-time transmission of the established companies’ data and the speedy completion of the establishment procedures.
← 48. Note that to achieve the first step, harmonisation of administrative sources in terms of industry and governorate codes is mandatory.
← 49. See https://www.casd.eu/en and CASD (2021[37]).