All revenues and expenditures, assets and liabilities should be reported in a comprehensive, timely, routine and reliable manner. To do this, financial reports should be produced in accordance with generally accepted accounting practices. The annual financial statements of government should be audited in accordance with international standards. The presentation of budget information should take account of the needs of the users and be presented in an accessible format.
Quality Budget Institutions
Developments in OECD Countries
Abstract
Budget transparency refers to the disclosure of fiscal information in a timely and systematic manner. It has many dimensions that address the clarity, comprehensiveness, reliability, timeliness, accessibility and usability of public reporting on public finances (OECD, 2019[1]). As a basic principle it means that the government should be open about how public money is raised and used (OECD, 2017[2]).
The benefits of budget transparency come from providing the government, parliament, financial markets and the public an accurate view and understanding of public finances. This helps government to make better decisions, allows parliament to hold the government to account and fosters trust that the government is making decisions that will benefit its citizens (OECD, 2024[3]). In short, transparent budgeting contributes to better fiscal outcomes and more responsive and impactful public policies.
Efforts to strengthen fiscal transparency in OECD countries have generally been guided by three principles:
Publishing budget documents and financial statements in a timely and systematic manner.
Providing comprehensive and reliable budget and financial information.
Improving the accessibility and relevance of budget and financial information.
Over the past decade, the availability of budget reports has improved considerably (Figure 9.1). Governments increasingly supplement budget reports with data and analysis that provide a view on the health of public finances and the results from public spending. These are complemented by reports from IFIs and SAIs which further enrich the debate over public spending. In addition, the G20 has sought to draw upon the OECD’s work on budget and fiscal transparency to support important pillars of good governance, including anti-corruption (G20, 2017[4]).
Governments in OECD countries are not just producing more documents on public finance, but are also expanding the coverage of financial reporting, for example by including information on tax expenditures. They are also supplementing reporting on revenues and expenditures with information on assets and liabilities. International accounting standards help governments to do this in a consistent, reliable way.
The progress in budget transparency is generally well recognised by parliamentarians, but there continues to be a concern that budgets and financial reports are complex and inaccessible. Responses to this concern have focused on empowering public understanding of budgets with efforts to harmonise reporting, expand digital content, and strengthen communications (Moretti, 2018[5]).
Share of countries disclosing each budget document, 2023
Note: Percentage of OECD countries with available data (out of 34 in 2018, 34 in 2022 and 35 in 2023).
2023 data for Colombia, Lithuania and Mexico are not available; 2022 data for Colombia, Mexico, Israel and Slovenia are not available; 2018 data for the United States are not available.
Source: OECD (2023), Senior Budget Officials Survey on Budget Frameworks, Question 35; OECD (2022) Financial Management and Reporting Survey, Question 6; OECD (2018), Budget Practices and Procedures Survey, Question 5.
All OECD countries publish budget reports that cover each stage of the budget cycle, including: the budget proposal, the approved budget, reports on budget execution and end-year financial statements. Over 80% publish either a pre-budget report or mid-term review. The minimum standards on what needs to be published in each country are specified in legislation, with requirements covering the content and timelines for disclosure. The information is both forward looking and backward looking, is often prepared at an aggregate level and for individual budget entities (Moretti, 2018[5]).
The content of budget reports has broadened as a result of changes to national fiscal frameworks and efforts to improve budget transparency. Information on fiscal objectives, medium-term spending plans and the performance of public spending are now routinely published by a significant number of OECD countries, often in the budget documents themselves. Surveys show that in 2023 long-term fiscal sustainability assessments are published in 83% of OECD countries, up from 68% in 2018. These changes provide more information to explain the budget outlook, commitments and the intended results for parliament, which helps it review the budget proposal and year-end report and hold the government to account.
Many OECD countries also publish information about the budget process as well as procedural guidance, such as the methodologies that are required for policy analysis and costing. This demonstrates the requirements for decision-making and supports effective co-ordination across government and with external stakeholders.
Note: Data for Colombia and Mexico are not available; 2022 data for Israel and Slovenia are not available (n/a); 2023 data for Lithuania are not available (n/a).
Source: OECD (2023), Senior Budget Officials Survey on Budget Frameworks, Question 35; OECD (2022), Financial Management and Reporting Survey, Question 6, OECD, Paris.
9.2.1. Pre-budget reports
The majority of OECD countries begin reporting in the budget process with a pre-budget report. This was the practice in 20 out of 35 countries reported in the 2023 OECD SBO Survey on Budget Frameworks. The main purpose of the pre-budget report is to announce the fiscal strategy that will guide preparation for the next budget. Some OECD countries use the pre-budget report to announce:
Medium-term expenditure ceilings that will constrain the budget allocations.
Major tax and spending priorities which will be included in the next budget.
Key assumptions and parameters that will be used during the formulation of the budget.
The timing of the pre-budget report is co-ordinated with the preparation of economic and fiscal forecasts, and the decision-making processes on the composition of the budget. That usually means the government will issue the pre-budget report 4-6 months before the start of the next financial year.
Parliaments in OECD countries increasingly have the opportunity to debate the contents of the pre-budget report. Though the debate does not usually involve a vote by the members of parliament, it provides important feedback to the government on its fiscal strategy and the report helps to raise awareness of the state of the public finances ahead of the budget.
Examples of pre-budget reporting include the Budget Policy Statement in New Zealand, which is submitted to parliament early in the budget cycle to support public and parliamentary debate on fiscal priorities. Sweden’s Spring Fiscal Policy Bill (Finanspolitisk vårproposition) serves a similar function, setting out the government’s economic outlook and fiscal strategy which is debated in parliament ahead of the Budget Bill that is tabled in the autumn.
9.2.2. The budget
For most OECD countries, the budget is the government’s primary document to show its policy priorities for the coming year. It sets-out the government’s tax and spending plans and is used to make announcements on policy priorities. All 35 OECD countries with available data in 2023 published both, the budget proposal and the approved budget.
The budget is prepared as a proposal from the government to the parliament, where it is debated. Once approved by parliament and passed into law, the budget provides the legal basis for the government to incur public spending. Any significant changes to the budget typically need to be authorised again by parliament through a “supplementary” budget during the year.
Budget proposal
The budget proposal is either a single document, or set of documents that specify the government’s spending plans for the forthcoming year. It is usually accompanied by a speech from the minister of finance to parliament and generally comprises three elements:
A narrative describing the economic assumptions on which the budget is based, the government’s fiscal objectives and new tax and spending policies.
Estimates of revenue and expenditure showing the aggregate fiscal balance and financing plans, and detailed spending allocations for each budget entity.
Legal provisions (appropriations) to authorise or limit expenditure for the next fiscal year, and to implement the policy measures proposed by the government.
In France, these three elements are combined in a single document (the “Budget Bill”) which forecasts revenue and appropriates money for public policies. In Australia, the three elements are prepared in separate documents: the Budget Papers contain the narrative and budget estimates; and the Budget Appropriation Bill provides the legal basis for spending. Separate laws authorise changes to tax policy.
The two approaches have different advantages. A combined budget proposal integrates tax and spending decisions and aligns the coverage of the budget proposal with approvals. In other words, parliament authorises the policies in the budget through one process. Once approved, changes to the budget must also be authorised by parliament and are reflected in an update to the full proposal. On the other hand, a separate narrative can include discussions of spending which are not included in the legal provisions, and in doing so can provide a fuller picture of the public finances, even if these need to be approved through other laws.
Countries are increasingly finding ways to integrate the strengths of these two approaches, alongside changes to the content of budget documents. Budget proposals typically include analysis of all revenues and expenditures, even if these are authorised through other laws. Most have introduced a multi-year perspective that extends beyond the next budget year. They also present analyses of the estimated impact of the budget on cross-sector policy goals, such as child poverty or the economic transition.
A few countries, such as France and the Netherlands, include performance information in the budget proposal. In France, performance targets and indicators are assigned to high-level “missions” and more detailed programmes. In the Netherlands, performance targets are annexed to the budget bills approved by parliament for each entity. However, other countries publish performance information in separate plans for each budget entity, as is the case in Australia and Canada.
Approved budget
The approved budget is the budget formally adopted by parliament. It usually takes the form of a budget act or appropriation act that grants the government authority to spend within approved rules and limits. In countries such as France and Spain, the budget act covers the full budget proposal. In Australia and the United Kingdom, the appropriations act is a separate document from the budget proposal and it sets spending limits for each budget entity.
The budget act typically grants spending for the next financial year. In a few countries, such as Slovenia, the approved budget covers multiple fiscal years. However, for most OECD countries parliament authorises spending only for the year ahead, even if the budget proposal has a medium-term outlook.
Approval is granted to a ministerial portfolio and the relevant ministry, department or agency. This ensures a minister and a government official are responsible for the spending in the approved budget. Each ministry’s budget is then disaggregated into units, programmes and types of spending. The detailed information supports budget transparency, but can complicate ministries’ responses to changes in circumstances during budget execution.
The budget act will generally not cover all government expenditure. In Canada, statutory expenditure is voted through other legislation, not the appropriation act. In France, the government presents to parliament the Budget Bill together with a separate Social Security Financing Bill, which covers public funding of compulsory contributory social security schemes (including health insurance and pensions) that are controlled separately from the state budget.
Supplementary budgets
Supplementary budgets make amendments to the approved budget requiring parliament approval. They are used to authorise additions or changes to budget allocations that were not foreseen at the time when the original budget and appropriations were approved.
The format of the supplementary budget usually follows that of the approved budget. In countries with a budget act, it will require an update of the full budget proposal. In countries that use appropriations acts, the supplementary budget (presented as estimates) is not usually accompanied by the same set of documents as the initial budget.
The timing and number of supplementary budgets varies across OECD countries. Most countries issue a supplementary budget at least once per year for the executive to seek approval on policy decisions with spending implications that were taken during the year. Many OECD countries issue supplementary budgets more frequently in response to significant changes in circumstances and or policies, as was the case to seek approval for budgetary responses to the COVID-19 pandemic between 2020 to 2022.
9.2.3. Budget execution reports
Governments prepare a range of reports that allow the government and parliament to track budget implementation. In-year execution reports provide information to monitor the implementation of the budget. A mid-year report provides information on executing the approved budget. An end-year report and audit report close the annual budget cycle and form the basis for accountability to parliament.
In-year execution reports
In-year budget execution reports document the budget’s implementation throughout the financial year. They help signal to the government if spending limits are on track or at risk of being breached, or where projects and programmes face challenges with budget execution. Publishing execution reports helps demonstrate the government is implementing its policy priorities and supports the case for corrective action, where it is needed. The data is also used for national accounts and to inform economic and fiscal forecasting.
The in-year execution reports are more useful for budget management when they have certain features (Moretti, 2018[5]), including when they are:
Timely and frequent: For countries such as Australia, Canada, France and the United Kingdom, execution reports are published monthly covering aggregate budget information with an overview of revenue, expenditure and the budget deficit.
Comparable to the annual budget: Monthly reports in Australia and France compare actual spending to the budget appropriations. Canada publishes this on a quarterly basis for individual budget entities.
Accompanied by a monthly forecast of expenditure: Finance ministries track actual spending against a projection of in-year spending or a cash-flow forecast. Nineteen OECD countries prepare pre-execution budget profiles for each month of the financial year, while a further four countries use a quarterly profile (OECD, 2023[6]).
Share OECD countries publishing in-year budget execution reports, 2022
Note: Data for Colombia, Israel, Mexico and Slovenia are not available. Luxembourg and Switzerland do not publish in-year budget execution reports.
Source: OECD (2022), Survey of Financial Management and Reporting, Question 6.1.
Mid-year and end-year reports
Governments publish a more complete assessment of budget execution through mid-year and end-year reports relative to the monthly or quarterly budget execution reports.
More than two-thirds of OECD countries publish a mid-year implementation report. The publication date of this report is often around the same time as the pre-budget statement. Together, the two documents contribute to the formulation of the coming year’s budget proposal.
All OECD countries prepare a year-end report, which is an essential document for parliamentary accountability. Year-end reporting typically comprises two main elements:
An assessment of budget execution: This summarises budget implementation for parliament. It compares actual revenue and expenditure to the forecasts and spending authorisations from the approved budget and subsequent supplementary budgets.
The government’s annual financial statements: These show the financial position and performance of the government and include detailed statements of the government’s actual revenue and expenditure (cash flow) as well as financial assets and liabilities (balance sheet). Over 80% of OECD countries (28 out of 34) publish audited financial statements, and half of OECD countries with published audited financial statements do so within six months after the end of the fiscal year (OECD, 2022[7]).
Nearly all OECD countries publish both elements, an assessment of budget execution and annual financial statements, either as a single document or in separate report (33 out of 34 countries, (OECD, 2022[7]). Countries may also publish a year-end summary of non-financial performance, summarising progress against the government’s performance objectives. In 15 out of 31 countries this formed part of a consolidated report on financial and non-financial performance (OECD, 2023[8]).
The year-end report in Australia and Canada combines the assessment of budget execution and the financial statements. In both countries the full audited consolidated financial statements are also published separately as a standalone report. Non-financial performance is reported in the annual reports published by each ministry or entity, together with the detailed financial statements for that entity.
France publishes a combined year-end report that also includes information on non-financial performance. The Budget Execution Law reports final budget outturns by mission and programme against parliamentary authorisations. Appendices for the Budget Execution Law include performance reports and audited financial statements (which are not aligned with missions and programmes). The Law is voted by parliament before 1 May and closes the accountability for the budget for the last financial year.
Number of countries publishing each report, 2022 and 2023
Note: For 2022: responses for 34 countries. Data for Colombia, Israel, Mexico and Slovenia are not available. For 2023: responses for 33 countries. Data for Colombia, Ireland, Israel, Italy and Japan are not available.
Source: OECD (2022), Survey of Financial Management and Reporting, Question 6; OECD (2023) Performance Budgeting Survey, Question 15.
9.2.4. Entity level budget plans and reports
As a result of public sector reforms, ministries and other budget entities in many OECD countries have direct responsibility for managing public funds. As ministries gain responsibility, governments set planning and reporting requirements to strengthen line ministry accountability to parliament and to the public generally. The result is that ministries publish their own entity-level plans and reports providing information about their governance, budget and performance.
In the Netherlands, there is a budget act for each ministry. The budget act approves the policy agenda, the ministry budget, and the budgets for its agencies. Annexes summarise evaluation findings, changes to the baseline and provide a list of performance indicators, among other information. In Australia and Canada, similar information is published in the annual plan for each ministry. They serve as the primary planning document for the ministry and provide a focus for oversight by the sectoral committees in parliament. An annual report is prepared at the end of the financial year with audited individual financial statements and the results achieved against performance objectives.
9.2.5. Long-term fiscal sustainability reports
These budget reports are increasingly complemented by other documents, though these vary between countries. This can reflect decisions to separate analysis from the main budget documents, including through different timing and institutional responsibilities. Reports assessing the long-term sustainability of the public finances are a good example.
2023 survey data finds that 29 OECD countries publish a long-term fiscal sustainability report, with most providing analysis for a period of between 30 and 50 years (OECD, 2023[6]). These reports help raise awareness of fiscal challenges and intergenerational changes. A few OECD countries also publish specialised reports analysing pensions financing or social security with a long-term perspective:
Australia publishes an Intergenerational Report and a Superannuation Defined Benefit Scheme Long Term Cost Report.
Canada publishes sustainability assessments for the Federal government, provincial and territorial governments, and local governments.
United Kingdom publishes a Fiscal Sustainability Report and a Welfare Trends Report.
The challenges identified in long-term fiscal sustainability reports can rarely be addressed within a single budget, and budget implications tend to accrue over several years. As a result, governments prepare the reports on a periodic basis, usually every three to five years, as is the case in Australia and New Zealand. Some OECD countries also include special focus topics to explore different issues in depth.
9.2.6. Budget guidance
OECD countries increasingly publish guidance materials on budget planning, formulation and execution. These materials support government ministries, parliament, stakeholders and the public to better understand budget processes and the basis for budget decisions. The budget guidance broadly covers two areas:
Rules and procedures for budgeting and expenditure management.
Methodological guidance for the analysis that is required for budget proposals.
Examples of both types of guidance are provided for selected OECD countries in Box 9.1, below. In many cases, publication has been accompanied by efforts to consolidate guidance into a single document or webpage.
Publishing budget guidance improves the accessibility of the material for a mobile public sector workforce and for contractors and other third-party contributors. The access to budget guidance contributes to a better understanding of the basis for budget decisions.
Governments are publishing more and more information online on how the budget process is organised. This includes procedural rules and guidance for budgeting and expenditure management, but also analytical tools that support costing and impact analysis.
Australia
Australia’s Department of Finance publishes on its website general and detailed information on the budget process. This includes documents that are used within government to guide the budget process. Procedural guidance is summarised in the Budget Process Operational Rules that are endorsed by the Cabinet and outline the major administrative and operational arrangements for budgeting. The website also publishes the analytical guidance for costing and resource management that support entities to follow the requirements of the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act.
Canada
Procedural and analytical guidance for budgeting are issued by both the Department of Finance and the Treasury Board Secretariat. The Department of Finance shares and templates for preparing budget proposals and costings and for following the Gender Budget Analysis Plus framework for assessing budget impact. The Treasury Board Secretariat publishes guidance for Treasury Board Submissions and information on the authorities and approvals that are usually sought through submissions.
Ireland
The Government Accounting Unit in the Department of Public Expenditure, NDP Delivery and Reform publishes the Public Financial Procedures guidebook (or 'Blue Book'), which is a comprehensive guide to public financial management. It sets out the main principles of government accounting and the primary ways they are applied in the day-to-day operations of government departments and offices. The Unit also maintains The Public Spending Code, which sets out the rules for ensuring public funds are spent with care.
United Kingdom
HM Treasury publishes procedural guidance on how the budget process works (consolidated budget guidance); fiduciary duties for public spending (managing public money); and how projects are approved (treasury approvals process for projects and programmes). It also publishes analytical guidance for policy appraisal (green book); forecasting; evaluation (magenta took); and analysis (aqua book). The Green Book is accompanied by supplementary guidance notes, including adaptations for specific sectors, which are available on a single webpage on the government website.
Sources: Australian Government; Government of Canada; Government of Ireland; Government of the United Kingdom.
All revenue and expenditure, assets and liabilities should be reported in a detailed, timely, routine and reliable manner. To do this, financial reports should be produced in accordance with generally accepted accounting practices. The annual financial statements of the government should be audited in accordance with international standards.
9.3.1. Improving the coverage of financial reporting
Improvements in the coverage of budget proposals has been matched by improvements in the financial reporting of expenditure outturns. This has included greater institutional coverage, enhanced tax expenditure reporting and improved information on the stock of assets and liabilities.
Institutional coverage
Budget appropriations rarely include spending in all government institutions. Expenditures may be made through social security schemes manged under different legislation. Spending by subnational government can be financed through statutory transfers or locally collected revenue. Aside from direct subsidies, most of the activity of state-owned enterprises is also outside the scope of budget appropriation.
OECD countries have found ways to present a more complete picture of the public finances, through both the budget documents and the annual financial statements. Some governments publish information separately, but in comparable formats. In Australia, the federal, state and territory governments publish separate consolidated accounts for spending under their authority using shared accounting principles.
Other countries produce a consolidated summary of revenues and expenditures from all ministries, agencies and subnational governments. In Slovenia, for example, parliament authorises spending separately for the State Budget, Municipal Budgets, Pensions Fund and Health Fund. The government publishes historical data on all four documents on the government website along with “consolidated public finance budgetary accounts”.
Tax expenditure
Nearly all OECD countries publish information on tax expenditure (Table 9.2). Canada and France are countries with a long tradition of disclosing estimates of tax expenditure alongside the budget. In Canada tax expenditure information is published in a separate Report on Federal Tax Expenditure. In contrast, France publishes the information in the budget proposal document.
Note: Data for Colombia, Israel, Mexico and Slovenia are not available.
Source: OECD (2022), Survey on Financial Management and Reporting, Question 3.
Assets and liabilities
Revenues and expenditures are cash flows that show the taxes and other revenues the government receives each year, as well as how much it spends. These cash flows also determine how much the government must borrow. To gain a fuller understanding of the health of the public finances and the financial impact of budget measures, it is necessary to track changes to government liabilities (e.g. public debt), assets (e.g. lands and buildings), provisions (e.g. claims) and contingent liabilities (e.g. guarantees).
Governments in OECD countries are publishing more information on their assets and liabilities. This has been helped by the adoption of accrual-based accounting standards for financial reporting (Box 9.2), which are now the norm in OECD countries. The 2022 OECD Survey on Financial Management and Reporting found that 68% of OECD countries have adopted accrual accounting standards, with a further 20% in the process of changing from cash to accrual accounting (Figure 9.4). This is up from around 25% of OECD countries that were using accrual accounting prior to 2008 (OECD/IFAC, 2017[9]).
Share of OECD countries, 2022
Note: Data for Colombia, Israel, Mexico and Slovenia are not available.
Source: OECD (2022), Survey on Financial Management and Reporting, Question 1.
Financial accounts and statements can be prepared on a cash-basis, on an accrual-basis or on a modified accrual basis, which incorporates some accrual information, but not all.
Accrual accounting differs from cash-based accounting in two important ways:
The time transactions are recorded. Accruals reflect financial transactions when they occur, while cash-based accounting captures a transaction at the time a payment is made. When entering into a procurement contract, the government creates an obligation to pay. In an accrual accounting framework the contract is captured as a liability when that obligation is created, and as a cash transaction when the liability is cleared (when it is paid). Cash-based accounting records the transaction when the payment is made.
The inclusion of assets and liabilities. Accrual accounting recognises all assets (financial and non-financial) and all liabilities (debts and other liabilities such as public service pension obligations). These are recorded as stocks, that are regularly revalued to maintain an up-to-date balance sheet. Pure cash accounting systems typically only include cash holdings on the asset side and debt on the liability side of their balance sheets.
Both approaches, cash and accruals, have complementary strengths. For most OECD countries, spending limits in a budget are set using a cash basis, while financial reporting is completed on an accrual basis. An exception is New Zealand which prepares both its budget and financial statements on an accrual basis.
Source: Moretti and Youngberry (2018[10]).
9.3.2. Applying international accounting and auditing standards
The adoption of international accounting and auditing standards is one way to ensure that governments prepare financial statements in a consistent way. In doing so, it provides parliament, financial markets and the public assurance that the government’s financial operations are reported and audited to recognised standards.
International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS) aim to provide a comprehensive framework for public sector accounting. The standards cover various accounting topics, including financial statement presentation, revenue recognition, and asset valuation. IPSAS resources are available for both a cash-basis and accrual basis, though the IPSAS Board expects most countries will adopt accrual accounting standards, if they have not already.
Most countries apply international accounting standards through their own national accounting frameworks guided by an independent body. In Portugal, for example, the Public Sector Accounting Standards Committee (Conselho de Normalização Contabilística da Administração Pública) was created in 2012 and has a responsibility for proposing standards for both private and public sector accounting.
International auditing standards, such as those issued by the International Organization of Supreme Audit Institutions (INTOSAI), provide a framework for conducting high-quality audits in the public sector. They aim to strengthen the credibility of the audit reports and the transparency of the audit process. INTOSAI guidance is available for all three main types of audit: financial, compliance and performance audits.
Financial audits assess whether financial statements are accurate, complete, and prepared in accordance with relevant accounting standards. Compliance audits verify that government activities comply with laws, regulations, and policies. Performance audits consider whether resources are being used optimally and are the achieving intended outcomes relative to the relevant policies and standards.
9.3.3. Using accrual accounting reforms to improve transparency
Implementing accrual-based accounting practices following international standards is a complex budget reform. Even once the new routines are established, government and parliament must learn how to extract value from the rich financial data accruals financial reporting can provide (Moretti and Youngberry, 2018[10]).
For most countries, accrual accounting saw relatively quick gains in transparency. These gains were not just because of new practices, but because of the investments made in professionalising the finance function and using new, more advanced technology. Together this allowed governments to monitor a range of financial transactions, in a more systematic and reliable way. Some of the gains included:
Identifying weaknesses in spending controls and accounting that had previously been overlooked. The implementation of accrual accounting in many countries led to a rise in audit qualifications and findings that were subsequently addressed.
Generating and publishing information that was hard to find from other sources. Examples include public service pension liabilities, provisions and commitments for finance leases and certain contingent liabilities.
Identifying and costing fiscal risks that were not previously acknowledged or measured reliably, as was observed in Austria, Estonia and France.
More generally, most countries conclude that accrual financial statements help them to provide a “true and fair view” of public finances to the general public. Accrual reforms have also usually been well received by those working directly to oversee government spending, including auditors, parliamentary budget offices, specialised NGOs, and credit rating agencies.
Finance ministries are observing important changes in the issues that parliamentary committees are raising from their scrutiny of financial statements. These include reinforcing the findings of SAIs, but also making links between financial data and service quality – for example by monitoring provisions for costs of clinical negligence in the health sector and how this is changing over time.
While promising, governments also recognise that accrual accounting creates challenges from adding complexity to financial information. Accrual-based financial data is more complex than cash-based reports. The complexity increases the importance of guidance notes and related materials to explain the purpose and key features of accruals-based financial information to support public understanding of financial statements.
Budget transparency is not a static concept. Developments in budget transparency are both demand-led by users of the information and supply-led through improvements in standards, analysis and technology. As part of these changes, governments continue to strengthen the presentation of budget information to parliament and to stakeholders and the general public. Box 9.3 summarises some of the key considerations that have guided these efforts, including:
Harmonising reporting to allow parliament to compare what was planned with what was done, at different levels of detail.
Making the most of digital technology to improve availability and allow users to ask the questions that they want answered from budget information.
Communicating information on the budget more effectively so that it is generally understandable and reaches different audiences each with their own interests and level of financial literacy.
1. Ensuring consistency
Presentation of fiscal forecasts, budgets and financial reports should be comparable, either through using consistent standards or bridging tables.
Financial and non-financial data should be presented together in unified fiscal reports that show how budget information links to government policy.
2. Increasing availability
Budget information should be timely and available to the public at different levels of detail (e.g. for budget aggregates, public entities and programmes).
Data should be disclosed digitally through channels that allow parliament and citizens to access comprehensive data and structure their own queries.
3. Communicating effectively
Analysis and reporting should aid the interpretation of technical government financial information and be understandable for a general audience.
Communication of budget information should be tailored to reach different users using different forms (e.g. infographics) and channels (e.g. social media).
4. Building trust
Forecasts, budget plans, performance information and accounts should be subject to independent review, audit or scrutiny to ensure their integrity
Government should make available a mix of in-year provisional fiscal data for timeliness and year-end externally reviewed data for reliability
5. Being responsive while remaining proportionate
Regular and formal dialogue about fiscal reporting should be held among governments, parliaments and other key groups of users to ascertain whether their needs are met, how it could be improved.
Governments should measure the benefits and full costs associated with reporting requirements to inform reviews of fiscal reporting requirements.
Sources: Moretti (2018[5]); OECD (2025[11])
9.4.1. Harmonising reporting
Budgets and financial reports should be comparable to support accountability. Where the budget shows one set of information and financial reports present another, it can be difficult to answer basic questions: How does actual spending compare to what was planned? Is the level of expenditure changing from last year?
The basic principle of harmonisation is relatively simple. Fiscal objectives should be comparable to the aggregate revenue and expenditure in the budget. Medium-term expenditure ceilings for line ministries should match spending limits set through annual appropriations. The actual expenditure reported in the year-end report should be comparable to all of these limits.
In practice harmonisation is more complex. Reporting differences usually arise from legitimate choices, or even legal requirements, governing:
Coverage: Fiscal rules may cover general government expenditure, while the budget reflects spending by central government. The budget narrative may include social security spending while the legal appropriations do not.
Reporting principles: Budgets may be prepared on a cash-basis, while annual accounts are reported on an accrual basis. The budget may reflect net expenditures, while appropriations include spending that ministries fund through fees which are retained for service delivery.
International standards: Fiscal forecasts need to be consistent with projections of the government’s macroeconomic assumptions, which have their own international reporting standards that can be different from the accounting principles used to prepare the annual financial statements.
To allow readers to easily navigate fiscal reports, some OECD countries (e.g. Australia and New Zealand) have aligned the accounting basis of budget forecasts, spending limits (or appropriations) and financial reports. In other OECD countries, (e.g. France) bridging tables reconcile the main budget aggregates between cash-based budgets and accrual based financial reports.
9.4.2. Using technology
As well as being easily available, the presentation of budget information should take account of the needs of different users. For this, the advance of digital tools has been transformative. Machine-readable and open-source formats combined with more sophisticated tools, such as interactive fiscal platforms, facilitate access and analysis. They enable users to delve into the details of fiscal reports, structure their own queries, and generate their own reports and infographics. The growing capabilities of AI are also influencing how the public engages with budget information – a trend that CBAs are keen to embrace along with other benefits of digital reporting (OECD, 2025[11]).
Machine-readable documents and open-source data
In many OECD countries, budget information is published in machine-readable formats by default. For example, budget documents are increasingly available online in HTML format, with the option to download a PDF. Budget data is downloaded in CSV formats, which can be used by a wide range of applications. Open-source data allows users to access, use, modify, and share it freely for different purposes.
The move to open data standards has benefits for users:
Data is easier to find with online search engines.
Information is easier to read on screens of different sizes.
It helps make use of new techniques (e.g. data science) and technology (e.g. generative AI).
There are also advantages for the government:
Providing information about how content is being used, so that content can be improved
Simplifying reports by allowing more detailed data to be disclosed through well-structured databases
Giving officials access to data from different parts of government, supporting more informed decisions
The widespread adoption of open data and investments in digital capabilities have brought other advantages. Data is more secure, better organised and easier to compare. Websites are easier to navigate and communicate in plain language. These advances are benefiting from stronger digital teams and “user-centred” design.
Interactive digital platforms
The shift to machine-readable data has helped build more interactive platforms for budget information. Responses to the 2023 OECD SBO Survey on Budget Frameworks show that at least three-quarters of OECD countries (27 out of 26) use interactive online digital platforms for financial data. These combine opensource data and business intelligence tools so that users can customise queries and visualise information on financial data to suit their interests. They are one of the most common tools finance ministries are using to empower public understanding of the budget and public finances more broadly.
Effective digital platforms perform three functions:
Centralisation: Providing a “go to” source of trusted budget information. Websites bring together information on the budget process with a repository of budget documents and databases of financial data and economic statistics covering all revenues and expenditures. These are presented in a politically neutral way with clear sources to build trust.
Understanding: Educating users on budget information and the budget process. Platforms assume that users have limited knowledge of the public finances and how they are managed. They unpack budget jargon and explain the basic routines of budgeting and financial reporting.
Personalisation: Allowing users to explore the questions they want answered, in ways that are more easily understandable. Strong search features help find the right documents. Interactive dashboards help organise and visualise data, and download the results. A few countries also provide simulation tools, showing a user how tax and spending changes will affect them.
While most platforms are limited to fiscal data some include performance information. Canada’s InfoBase includes a “results” section that allows users to explore granular financial and results data (e.g. the expenditures and performance of programmes within the Departmental of Health). Similarly, most countries include only national data, but Italy’s OpenBDAP portal includes subnational comparisons while Korea’s Open Fiscal Data portal supports international comparisons of spending data (Box 9.4).
Italy
Italy's Open Banca Dati Amministrazioni Pubbliche (OpenBDAP) portal is managed by the Ragioneria Generale dello Stato (State General Accounting Office). The platform is an example of many positive features of modern fiscal reporting, helping to bridge the gap between data and public understanding.
The portal consolidates fiscal data from subnational and national levels, enabling comparisons between regions and government entities. Fiscal data is sourced directly from Italy's Financial Management Information System, ensuring traceability and reliability. The data is refreshed regularly to provide up-to-date insights into public spending.
Data is presented in multiple formats to cater to diverse audiences. For the general public, it offers simplified charts and visualisations. Expert groups can access raw fiscal data for deeper analysis. Interactive tools such as filters, maps, and drill-down functions allow all users to navigate the data intuitively. The platform also includes a "Discover" section, offering:
Explanations of fiscal concepts.
Visual presentations of key indicators.
Comparisons with European counterparts to contextualise Italy's fiscal performance.
In its first year after launching in 2019, OpenBDAP the platform attracted 240 000 users, reaching over 800 000 views and 25 000 downloads.
Korea
In Korea, the Ministry of Economy and Finance has developed a digital portal referred to as “dBrain+” which is hosted on the Ministry’s Open Fiscal Data website to support, budgeting, accounting and fiscal transparency.
In 2022 the Ministry reformed the system to improve its performance and coverage of financial data. The original components of the system can be traced to the early 2000s and it has undergone periodic upgrades over that period. The reform addressed legacy issues from dated infrastructure and data classification. The reporting includes budget management, the financial performance of budget programmes, and short and long-term budget plans of the general and special accounts. Other components look at government revenue, debt management and settlements. Each component is supported by statistical analyses.
Sources: General Accounting Office of the State, Italy, and Ministry of Economy and Finance, Korea.
Artificial intelligence
Governments are starting to exploit the growing potential of generative AI in budgeting, forecasting fiscal risk management and financial reporting (Moretti, 2024[12]). Generative AI differs from earlier forms of AI because it is able to create new content rather than simply analysing or processing existing data. Tools such as ChatGPT, Bard, Bing and Jasper have been quickly embraced by the general public, and governments are following suit, including as a means to improve budget transparency (OECD, 2025[11]).
Generative AI has the potential to make budget documents easier to navigate and understand. Generative AI allows natural language processing, which means someone can ask a question in normal words and in different languages. Users can ask questions such as “how much will be spent on healthcare this year” or and receive a quick, tailored response.
AI-powered search functions and virtual assistants (chatbots) are helping users of budget information find the information they need. In the public finance arena, tax administrations have been early adopters and use chatbots for answering questions on tax legislation. Mexico has introduced an AI-powered search function on its fiscal platform, which supports users to find information on subsidies through searches with plain language (instead of having to pre-research the names of official schemes and programmes).
9.4.3. Reaching audiences
Effective budget communication allows the government to convey key messages to the public. It helps explain the fiscal challenges the country is facing and can build public support for addressing them. It also provides an opportunity to highlight progress on policy goals and to inform citizens about significant changes in public spending or service delivery. OECD countries share these messages through different channels, including the government website and social media. A smaller group of countries also use outreach campaigns to engage directly with schools or the general public (Figure 9.5).
Number of OECD countries reporting each practice, 2023
Note: Data for Lithuania and Mexico are not available.
Source: OECD (2023), Senior Budget Officials Survey on Budget Frameworks, Question 38.
The foundations for effective communication depend on embedding a culture of communications; producing engaging content; using traditional and social media channels; and tracking impact. This is true for the finance ministry as well as for IFIs and SAIs (Casey, 2024[13]). These foundations support communications on specific budget policy announcements and help to strengthen the way the government presents and shares information about the budget more generally (Moretti, 2018[5]).
Building a culture for effective communication
Effective communications are anchored by strong communications and digital teams, together with other roles such as speech writers. However, communications teams in finance ministries tend to be small and have to prioritise where they focus their efforts. That means finance ministries must also develop the organisation’s culture and staff capacity for effective communication.
Within the CBA, budgets and other budget documents are produced by numerous officials working in different divisions. The budget statement may have a lead author, but it will draw inputs from officials who help prepare the details of budget policies with line ministries. The lead author will rely on these officials to identify important facts and to explain the essence of a complex policy change for a general public audience. Alongside this, others in the CBA will prepare the budget speech, ministerial briefing and other products that will be used to communicate budget announcements to the public.
Producing engaging content
Budget documents convey complex and technical information. They can easily become long and hard for the general public to understand. Research shows, for example, that humans find it difficult to relate to big numbers and remember narratives more than figures. This complicates the communication of fiscal aggregates and complex financial statements. However, even more relatable policy measures, such as a change in the indexation of benefits, can be difficult to explain in simple terms without creating ambiguity over who will be affected and by how much.
In general, budget communications are more effective when they are:
Relatable: Communications should recognise that most people have a limited understanding of the budget and public finances. Communications should focus on why issues are important, and how the government’s actions will make a difference. It should offer a clear narrative, using simple language and rounded numbers that are put in the context of people’s lives.
Layered: Budget information should be supplemented with analysis to guide interpretation. Key messages should be delivered using multiple formats tailored to different audiences (e.g. detailed reports, summaries, infographics, and social media posts). Style guides should help the government to ensure clarity across all formats.
Creative: Good content in the budget proposal, end-year financial statements and other reports will be supplemented with innovative graphics, short videos or real-world analogies that get public attention or communicate key messages in a more digestible form.
These principles can be used to explain and share information on policy decisions or the context for the budget. Many OECD countries produce a wide range of communications to complement the budget speech. However, these principles can also improve the presentation of budget documents and data more generally. Estonia, for example, launched a “Tree of Truth” in 2019, which depicts the government’s budget performance framework as a tree rather than a table as a means to encourage more public engagement.
Using both traditional and social media
Finance ministries in OECD countries are communicating through a broad range of channels, including traditional and social media, to maximise reach and engagement across diverse groups.
Traditional media (e.g. newspapers, radio and television) remains influential channels in OECD countries. On a typical day, 7 out of 10 people receive news through television or radio, while 5 out of 10 use newspapers, magazines or online news websites (OECD, 2024[3]). These figures are lower for younger audiences, but traditional media is still important for communicating to a wide audience. This means press briefings and supporting ministers prepare for interviews and other media engagements remain relevant.
Social media, on the other hand, allows for direct, targeted communication with specific audiences, tailored to their preferences and interests. Over half of OECD finance ministries have at least one social media page. Some have numerous profiles through which they communicate to specific audiences. Communications policies guide the organisations’ use of social media.
Gathering feedback and tracking impact
Gathering feedback on budget and financial reports inform improvements to the content and presentation of future reports. Sources of feedback include line ministries, parliament as well as media, sectoral groups, other stakeholders and the public in order to understand what they want to know and how well budget documents and information are serving their needs.
For more targeted messaging, tracking engagement with different communications platforms can help improve the impact of budget communications. Communications teams can monitor how many people are following the content, how it is being picked up in the media and on social media, and what is being said in parliament. This data allows the finance ministry to refine its communications strategy for subsequent budgets and other key reports, such as the pre-budget report, mid-term report or year-end report.
References
[13] Casey, E. (2024), How we communicate the public finances, OECD, https://one.oecd.org/document/GOV/SBO(2024)12/en/pdf.
[4] G20 (2017), G20 Leaders´ Declaration: Shaping an interconnected world, https://www.g20germany.de/Content/EN/_Anlagen/G20/G20-leaders-declaration___blob%3DpublicationFile%26v%3D11.pdf.
[12] Moretti, D. (2024), Using Artificial Intelligence in Public Financial Management, https://one.oecd.org/document/GOV/SBO(2024)14/en/pdf.
[5] Moretti, D. (2018), “Rationalising government fiscal reporting: Lessons learned from Australia, Canada, France and the United Kingdom on how to better address users’ needs”, OECD Journal on Budgeting, https://doi.org/10.1787/budget-17-5j8z25lsphq8.
[10] Moretti, D. and T. Youngberry (2018), “Getting added value out of accruals reforms”, OECD Journal on Budgeting 1, https://doi.org/10.1787/budget-v18-1-en.
[11] OECD (2025), “Empowering fiscal reporting with digital and interactive approaches”, OECD Papers on Budgeting, No. 2025/02, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/82070ddb-en.
[3] OECD (2024), OECD Survey on Drivers of Trust in Public Institutions – 2024 Results: Building Trust in a Complex Policy Environment, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9a20554b-en.
[6] OECD (2023), “2023 OECD Senior Budget Officials Survey on Budget Frameworks”, https://www.oecd.org/en/data/datasets/public-finance-and-budgets-database.html (accessed on 4 August 2025).
[8] OECD (2023), Performance Budgeting Survey, https://data-explorer.oecd.org/.
[7] OECD (2022), Financial Management and Reporting Survey, https://data-explorer.oecd.org/.
[1] OECD (2019), Budgeting and Public Expenditures in OECD Countries 2019, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264307957-en.
[2] OECD (2017), OECD Budget Transparency Toolkit: Practical Steps for Supporting Openness, Integrity and Accountability in Public Financial Management, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264282070-en.
[9] OECD/IFAC (2017), Accrual Practices and Reform Experiences in OECD Countries, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264270572-en.