## sipea2025062

## Source details

**Canonical URL:** [sipea2025062](https://www.imf.org/-/media/files/publications/selected-issues-papers/2025/english/sipea2025062.pdf)

## Other formats

- [Markdown version](/-/media/files/publications/selected-issues-papers/2025/english/sipea2025062.pdf.md)
- [Structured JSON version](/-/media/files/publications/selected-issues-papers/2025/english/sipea2025062.pdf.json)

---

### A. Background and context
- Coordination among authorities and development partners is commendable, but fundamental challenges persist that impede fiscal management efficiency and effectiveness.
- IMF technical assistance missions occurred in 2017, 2021, 2023, and 2024; World Bank evaluation in 2022; Asian Development Bank in 2024.
- The Financial Management Information System (FMIS), upgraded in 2021 (Microsoft Dynamics 365: D365), has not functioned as anticipated.
- The paper provides high-level policy recommendations and identifies technical assistance needs to improve fiscal reporting and data integration for surveillance and capacity development.

### B. Key findings on fiscal transparency and PFM
- PFMA enacted in 2013; PFM reform plan 2014-2017 implemented sporadically.
- Resource constraints: low absorption capacity and heavy reliance on external support.
- Auditor General (OAG) could not express an opinion due to insufficient audit evidence and untimely financial statement submission (OAG, 2020); similar challenges observed by the IMF (2018b).
- PFMA 2013 broadly addresses cash management, reporting requirements, and integrity of implementation processes but focuses on central government and monthly in-year reporting.

### C. Priority recommendations and timelines
- High priority
  - Adhere to international standard practices for public finance management.
    - Compliance with PFMA2013: Regular dissemination. — December 2025 — Responsibility: MOFT
    - Amending the PFMA to adopt the fiscal transparency framework. — December 2027 — Responsibility: MOFT
  - Strengthen capacity of staff in relevant agencies through targeted training and development programs focused on fiscal data management and analysis. — From April 2025 — Responsibility: AG
- Medium priority
  - Ensure that the FMIS performs effectively. — Responsibility: AG
  - Collaborate with PFM experts to address challenges utilizing Microsoft D365 for public finance management. — March 2025 — Responsibility: AG
  - Ensure all government agencies’ accessibility. — December 2025 — Responsibility: AG
  - Increment regular reports, public finance management reform, and transparency:
    - Commit to cash management and control. — From June 2025 — Responsibility: AG
    - Recommence the release of quarterly and monthly budget outturns. — From June 2025 — Responsibility: AG
    - Align fiscal reporting templates with IPSAS and/or GFS standards. — From January 2026 — Responsibility: AG
  - Engage with stakeholders regularly to enhance coordination. — From January 2025 — Responsibility: MOFT
    - Recommence monthly policy implementation meetings between MOFT agencies and the CBSI.
    - Establish a memorandum of understanding to facilitate data sharing and timely submission.

### D. Standard requirements for fiscal reports (excerpt)
- Pillar I: Fiscal reports should provide a comprehensive, relevant, timely, and reliable overview of the government’s financial position and performance.
- Dimension 1.1 Coverage
  - Principle 1.1 Basic: Coverage of institutions—Central government; Coverage of stocks—Government cash and deposits and all debt; Coverage of flows—Cash revenues, expenditures, and financing.
  - Principle 1.1 Advanced: Public sector and report on each subsector; All financial and nonfinancial assets and liabilities and net worth; Cash flows, accrued revenues, expenditures and financing, and other economic flows.
- Dimension 1.2 Frequency and Timeliness
  - Principle 1.2 Basic: Frequency of In-Year Reporting—Quarterly basis, within a quarter; Timeliness of Annual Financial Statements—Within 12 months after financial year ends.
  - Principle 1.2 Advanced: Frequency—Monthly basis, within a month; Timeliness of Annual Financial Statements—Within six months after financial year ends.
- Dimension 1.3 Quality
  - Classification: Basic—Administrative and economic classifications; Advanced—Administrative, economic, functional, and program classifications.
  - Internal consistency with reconciliations between (i) fiscal balance and financing, (ii) debt issued and debt holdings, (iii) financing and the change in the stock of debt: Basic—One of the recommended reconciliations; Advanced—All three of the recommended reconciliations.
  - Historical revisions: Basic—Revisions are reported; Advanced—They are reported, an explanation for each major revision, and a bridging table between the old and new time series.
- Dimension 1.4 Integrity
  - Statistical integrity and external audit: Basic—Disseminated in line with international standards; Annual financial statements are subject to a published audit by an independent supreme audit institution. Advanced—Compiled by a professionally independent body; An independent audit report is published and consistent with international standards, stating whether the financial statements present a true and fair view and without major qualifications.
  - Comparability of fiscal data: Basic—Budget execution report, fiscal statistics and financial statements prepared on the same basis as the fiscal forecast/budget. Advanced—Fiscal forecasts/budget & outturn are comparable, and the outturn is reconciled with both fiscal statistics and final accounts.

### E. Usage for fiscal analysis: data availability and standards adherence
- D365 rollout initially resulted in unavailability of operation or management reports; data extraction to Excel became possible later, with preliminary outputs for Fiscal Year 2023 reported by the Accountant General, but subject to frequent revisions and variable quality.
- Lack of fiscal reporting predates D365: last fiscal quarterly report compiled by Treasury was available in 2011; most recent audited annual report publicly available was for the 2014 budget.
- CBSI consistently publishes fiscal statistics, but official endorsement and dissemination by MOFT is essential for clear policy communication.
- Budget presentation did not follow GFSM 2014 for the cash flow statement nor IPSAS 24; budget fiscal tables were not aligned with these standards and were frequently modified.
- PFTAC technical assistance report (May 2021) recommended inclusion of a Statement of Budgetary Performance and compliance with the revised Cash Basis IPSAS (2017).
- IPSASB recommends consistent presentation formats; issuing a ministerial order or subsidiary legislation to adopt IPSAS 24 templates for fiscal reporting could reduce inconsistencies and reporting burden.

### F. Coverage, accessibility, frequency, and timeliness challenges
- GFS delineation by government subsectors and consolidated statistics are necessary for effective goal setting and policy monitoring; current MOFT budget documents focus on budgetary central government while CBSI GFS submitted to the IMF have broader scope.
- Expenditure managed outside the budget system and financed by external concessional loans complicates financial management and assessment of fiscal policy impact.
- MOFT has disseminated the budget document on its website since 2020; CBSI releases GFS quarterly on its website, but differing templates make comparisons difficult.
- Recommended: MOFT should release monthly fiscal outturns including budget implementation, revenue collection, and financing; MOFT and CBSI should present the government budget in the GFSM 2014 format.
- Timeliness issue: Budget outturns for FY2022 were not published until November 2024; most recent debt bulletin issued in June 2023. Timeliness of actual/preliminary budget disbursement is the most urgent problem to resolve.

### G. Discrepancies in government debt dissemination (Table 3 highlights)
- SIG - Total official debt* (Q2)
  - Domestic Debt: 747.8 (2021), 751.3 (2022), 924.3 (2023)
  - External Debt: 1,163.2 (2021), 1,140.0 (2022), 1,263.4 (2023)
  - Total debt: 1,911.0 (2021), 1,891.3 (2022), 2,187.6 (2023)
- CBSI - Quarterly Review Table 1.25b Issuance
  - Domestic Debt: 747.8 (2021), 819.1 (2022), 1,192.1 (2023)
  - External Debt: 1,137.9 (2021), 1,265.1 (2022), 1,635.1 (2023)
  - Total debt: 1,885.7 (2021), 2,084.2 (2022), 2,827.2 (2023)
- CBSI - Public Sector Debt Statistics Table 1.1 Central Government Debt
  - Domestic Debt: 747.8 (2021), 817.9 (2022), 1,192.1 (2023)
  - External Debt: 1,223.1 (2021), 1,229.7 (2022), 1,716.2 (2023)
  - Total Debt: 1,970.9 (2021), 2,047.6 (2022), 2,908.4 (2023)
- Note: SIG data are available up to 2023 (Q2).
- Implication: These divergences undermine a coherent view of public indebtedness and complicate fiscal policy assessment and cross-statistical use.

### H. Consistency across macroeconomic statistics (grants, GFS, MFS)
- Grants
  - Historical significant discrepancies between grants in the Balance of Payments and grants revenue in the GFS were raised by Article IV missions.
  - CBSI now uses the donor survey as a common data source for compiling grants for both sets of statistics, addressing previous inconsistency in the data submitted to the IMF.
  - Remaining need: further improvements in consistency and coverage of the GFS, including refining metadata coverage and source data.
- Government external borrowing and budget documents
  - Discrepancies between changes in external borrowing in government debt data and government external borrowing in the budget were addressed as non(budget)-appropriated spending.
  - These highlight ongoing gaps in GFS consistency and coverage.
- Monetary and Financial Statistics (MFS) vs GFS
  - Earlier inconsistency noted in the GFS TA report (Rattakul, 2022) has been addressed, but refinement remains possible due to unavailability of government treasury account information.
  - Government financing in the GFS is compiled from MFS government deposits with depository corporations, which have wider coverage than the budgetary central government.
  - Data on government securities issued by the government and holder information disseminated by the CBSI were found to be inconsistent.
  - Recommendation: CBSI dissemination would benefit from provision of metadata on its website.

### I. Fiscal documents, budget presentation, and accounting gaps
- Annual financial statements and audits
  - The SIG’s most recent annual financial statement published on the website is for 2015, released in 2020.
  - The latest audit report (OAG, 2020) covered national accounts for 2016 and 2017 but lacked financial statements.
  - OAG quality observations mirrored Fund TA reports of 2018: statements failed to meet international accounting standards and PFMA 2013 requirements.
- Gaps in budget documents and terminology issues
  - 2024 budget presentation organized into revenue, expenditure, and financing, but terminology overlaps with international standards and has differing meanings.
  - Specific problematic classifications:
    - Cash Flow Identification: debt servicing payments (financing outflows) were incorrectly categorized under "Other Charges" within recurrent expenditure.
    - External Development Financing: defined as government borrowings yet excludes borrowings that finance non-appropriated investment; fiscal balance termed "remaining deficit" that still requires funding.
    - Financing Flows: inflows from financing activities were grouped under the revenue sub-category, though externally sourced funding has been excluded from total revenue since 2021 and is presented below the deficit.
    - Treasury Cash and Deposit Accounts: should be shown as both sources of financing and financial assets.
  - Implication: Clarification and reclassification are needed to avoid misinterpretation of the government's financial position.

### J. FMIS (Microsoft Dynamics 365) utilization and recommendations
- Microsoft Dynamic 365 has modules for public finance management; cloud-based accessibility can serve all government agencies with internet connection.
- Free basic and intermediate Microsoft D365 training courses available online.
- Authorities should collaborate with PFM experts by March 2025 to address challenges.
- Access to D365 should be granted to all line ministries by December 2025.
- Ensure FMIS performs effectively and that all government agencies are accessible on the system.

### K. Budget reporting, cash management, and legal alignment
- Recommence release of quarterly and monthly budget outturns and complete improvements in cash management and control by June 2025.
- Amend subsidiary legislation (PFMA 2013 part 10) to align fiscal reporting templates with IPSAS accounting principles and GFS presentation standards.
- Revise report templates following IPSAS by December 2025 and commence IPSAS-aligned reporting in January 2026 (noting full IPSAS accrual adoption is a longer-term process).

### L. Capacity building and stakeholder coordination
- Strengthen staff capacity via targeted training and development programs on fiscal data management and analysis starting in April 2025.
- IMF stands ready to provide technical assistance in fiscal reporting and the GFS.
- Priority areas for improvement: FMIS (particularly D365), PFM, and the GFS for staff in the budget department, the treasury, and line ministries.
- Government should engage with stakeholders regularly starting from January 2025.
  - Monthly meetings between MOFT agencies and the CBSI to discuss statistics and raise awareness of data quality and budget implementation.
  - Consider a memorandum of understanding to facilitate data sharing and timely submission.
  - Enhance coordination between the MOFT treasury unit and the CBSI, and between the Ministry of Development Planning and Aid Coordination, the CBSI, the MOFT, and donors to exchange timely and consistent grant data.

### M. Conclusion
- Solomon Islands faces PFM challenges and needs strengthened fiscal data governance.
- Non-adherence to international standards has created burdens in preparing financial reports under multiple standards.
- Delays in fiscal reporting were aggravated by the FMIS implementation during the pandemic.
- Alignment with PFMA 2013 and international standards—Fiscal Transparency Code, GFS, and the Data Dissemination Standard—is critical for effective PFM and accountability.
- Engage PFTAC PFM expert to fully utilize FMIS public finance functions and pursue capacity development on PFM and the GFS.
- Regular dissemination of fiscal and budget data will enhance policy credibility and attract investors and donors.

*Source: sipea2025062 — 14.      Fiscal data must align with other macroeconomic statistics to provide a coherent view (IMF).*

### 1. Solomon Islands: Summary of Recommendations ___________________________________ 3

### Solomon Islands: Summary of Recommendations

### A. Background and context
- Coordination among authorities and development partners is commendable, but fundamental challenges persist that impede fiscal management efficiency and effectiveness.
- IMF technical assistance missions occurred in 2017, 2021, 2023, and 2024; World Bank evaluation in 2022; Asian Development Bank in 2024.
- The Financial Management Information System (FMIS), upgraded in 2021 (Microsoft Dynamics 365: D365), has not functioned as anticipated.
- The paper provides high-level policy recommendations and identifies technical assistance needs to improve fiscal reporting and data integration for surveillance and capacity development.

### B. Key findings on fiscal transparency and PFM
- The Public Financial Management Act (PFMA) was enacted in 2013, with a PFM reform plan 2014-2017, but implementation has been sporadic.
- Resource constraints include low absorption capacity and heavy reliance on external support.
- Auditor General (OAG) could not express an opinion due to insufficient audit evidence and untimely financial statement submission (OAG, 2020); similar challenges were observed by the IMF (2018b).
- PFMA 2013 broadly addresses cash management, reporting requirements, and integrity of implementation processes but focuses on central government and monthly in-year reporting.

### C. Priority recommendations (as summarized in Table 1)
- High priority: Adhere to international standard practices for public finance management.
  - Compliance with PFMA2013: Regular dissemination. — December 2025 — Responsibility: MOFT
  - Amending the PFMA to adopt the fiscal transparency framework. — December 2027 — Responsibility: MOFT
- High priority: Strengthen capacity of staff in relevant agencies through targeted training and development programs focused on fiscal data management and analysis. — From April 2025 — Responsibility: AG
- Medium priority:
  - Ensure that the FMIS performs effectively. — Responsibility: AG
  - Collaborate with PFM experts to address challenges utilizing Microsoft D365 for public finance management. — March 2025 — Responsibility: AG
  - Ensure all government agencies’ accessibility. — December 2025 — Responsibility: AG
  - Increment regular reports, public finance management reform, and transparency:
    - Commit to cash management and control. — From June 2025 — Responsibility: AG
    - Recommence the release of quarterly and monthly budget outturns. — From June 2025 — Responsibility: AG
    - Align fiscal reporting templates with IPSAS and/or GFS standards. — From January 2026 — Responsibility: AG
  - Engage with stakeholders regularly to enhance coordination. — From January 2025 — Responsibility: MOFT
    - Recommence monthly policy implementation meetings between MOFT agencies and the CBSI.
    - Establish a memorandum of understanding to facilitate data sharing and timely submission.

### D. Standard requirements for fiscal reports (excerpt from Table 2)
- Pillar I: Fiscal reports should provide a comprehensive, relevant, timely, and reliable overview of the government’s financial position and performance.
- Dimension 1.1 Coverage
  - Principle 1.1 Basic: Coverage of institutions—Central government; Coverage of stocks—Government cash and deposits and all debt; Coverage of flows—Cash revenues, expenditures, and financing.
  - Principle 1.1 Advanced: Public sector and report on each subsector; All financial and nonfinancial assets and liabilities and net worth; Cash flows, accrued revenues, expenditures and financing, and other economic flows.
- Dimension 1.2 Frequency and Timeliness
  - Principle 1.2 Basic: Frequency of In-Year Reporting—Quarterly basis, within a quarter; Timeliness of Annual Financial Statements—Within 12 months after financial year ends.
  - Principle 1.2 Advanced: Frequency—Monthly basis, within a month; Timeliness of Annual Financial Statements—Within six months after financial year ends.
- Dimension 1.3 Quality
  - Classification: Basic—Administrative and economic classifications; Advanced—Administrative, economic, functional, and program classifications.
  - Internal consistency with reconciliations between (i) fiscal balance and financing, (ii) debt issued and debt holdings, (iii) financing and the change in the stock of debt: Basic—One of the recommended reconciliations; Advanced—All three of the recommended reconciliations.
  - Historical revisions: Basic—Revisions are reported; Advanced—They are reported, an explanation for each major revision, and a bridging table between the old and new time series.
- Dimension 1.4 Integrity
  - Statistical integrity and external audit: Basic—Disseminated in line with international standards; Annual financial statements are subject to a published audit by an independent supreme audit institution. Advanced—Compiled by a professionally independent body; An independent audit report is published and consistent with international standards, stating whether the financial statements present a true and fair view and without major qualifications.
  - Comparability of fiscal data: Basic—Budget execution report, fiscal statistics and financial statements prepared on the same basis as the fiscal forecast/budget. Advanced—Fiscal forecasts/budget & outturn are comparable, and the outturn is reconciled with both fiscal statistics and final accounts.

### E. Usage for fiscal analysis: data availability and standards adherence
- The D365 rollout initially resulted in unavailability of operation or management reports; data extraction to Excel became possible later, with preliminary outputs for Fiscal Year 2023 reported by the Accountant General, but subject to frequent revisions and variable quality.
- Lack of fiscal reporting predates D365; last fiscal quarterly report compiled by Treasury was available in 2011; most recent audited annual report publicly available was for the 2014 budget.
- The CBSI consistently publishes fiscal statistics, but official endorsement and dissemination by MOFT is essential for clear policy communication.
- Budget presentation did not follow GFSM 2014 for the cash flow statement nor IPSAS 24; budget fiscal tables were not aligned with these standards and were frequently modified.
- A PFTAC technical assistance report from May 2021 recommended inclusion of a Statement of Budgetary Performance and compliance with the revised Cash Basis IPSAS (2017).
- IPSASB recommends consistent presentation formats; issuing a ministerial order or subsidiary legislation to adopt IPSAS 24 templates for fiscal reporting could reduce inconsistencies and reporting burden.

### F. Coverage, accessibility, frequency, and timeliness challenges
- GFS delineation by government subsectors and consolidated statistics are necessary for effective goal setting and policy monitoring; current MOFT budget documents focus on budgetary central government while CBSI GFS submitted to the IMF have broader scope.
- Expenditure managed outside the budget system and financed by external concessional loans complicates financial management and assessment of fiscal policy impact.
- MOFT has disseminated the budget document on its website since 2020; CBSI releases GFS quarterly on its website, but differing templates make comparisons difficult.
- Recommended: MOFT should release monthly fiscal outturns including budget implementation, revenue collection, and financing; MOFT and CBSI should present the government budget in the GFSM 2014 format.
- Timeliness issue: Budget outturns for FY2022 were not published until November 2024; most recent debt bulletin issued in June 2023. Timeliness of actual/preliminary budget disbursement is the most urgent problem to resolve.

*Source: Solomon Islands: Summary of Recommendations (January 29, 2025).*

### 14.      Fiscal data must align with other macroeconomic statistics to provide a coherent view

### 14.      Fiscal data must align with other macroeconomic statistics to provide a coherent view

### Discrepancies in government debt dissemination
- Table 3 highlights discrepancies of government debt disseminated by the MOFT (SIG) and the CBSI across different publications.
- SIG - Total official debt* (Q2)  
  - Domestic Debt: 747.8 (2021), 751.3 (2022), 924.3 (2023)  
  - External Debt: 1,163.2 (2021), 1,140.0 (2022), 1,263.4 (2023)  
  - Total debt: 1,911.0 (2021), 1,891.3 (2022), 2,187.6 (2023)
- CBSI - Quarterly Review Table 1.25b Issuance  
  - Domestic Debt: 747.8 (2021), 819.1 (2022), 1,192.1 (2023)  
  - External Debt: 1,137.9 (2021), 1,265.1 (2022), 1,635.1 (2023)  
  - Total debt: 1,885.7 (2021), 2,084.2 (2022), 2,827.2 (2023)
- CBSI - Public Sector Debt Statistics Table 1.1 Central Government Debt  
  - Domestic Debt: 747.8 (2021), 817.9 (2022), 1,192.1 (2023)  
  - External Debt: 1,223.1 (2021), 1,229.7 (2022), 1,716.2 (2023)  
  - Total Debt: 1,970.9 (2021), 2,047.6 (2022), 2,908.4 (2023)
- Note: SIG data are available up to 2023 (Q2).
- Implication: These divergences undermine a coherent view of public indebtedness and complicate fiscal policy assessment and cross-statistical use.

### Consistency across macroeconomic statistics (grants, GFS, MFS)
- Grants:
  - Historical significant discrepancies between grants in the Balance of Payments and grants revenue in the GFS were raised by Article IV missions.
  - CBSI now uses the donor survey as a common data source for compiling grants for both sets of statistics, addressing previous inconsistency in the data submitted to the IMF.
  - Remaining need: further improvements in consistency and coverage of the GFS, including refining metadata coverage and source data.
- Government external borrowing and budget documents:
  - Discrepancies between changes in external borrowing in government debt data and government external borrowing in the budget were addressed as non(budget)-appropriated spending.
  - These highlight ongoing gaps in GFS consistency and coverage.
- Monetary and Financial Statistics (MFS) vs GFS:
  - Earlier inconsistency noted in the GFS TA report (Rattakul, 2022) has been addressed, but refinement remains possible due to unavailability of government treasury account information.
  - Government financing in the GFS is compiled from MFS government deposits with depository corporations, which have wider coverage than the budgetary central government.
  - Data on government securities issued by the government and holder information disseminated by the CBSI were found to be inconsistent.
  - Recommendation: CBSI dissemination would benefit from provision of metadata on its website.

### Fiscal documents, budget presentation, and accounting gaps
- Annual financial statements and audits:
  - The SIG’s most recent annual financial statement published on the website is for 2015, released in 2020.
  - The latest audit report (OAG, 2020) covered national accounts for 2016 and 2017 but lacked financial statements.
  - OAG quality observations mirrored Fund TA reports of 2018: statements failed to meet international accounting standards and PFMA 2013 requirements.
- Gaps in budget documents and terminology issues:
  - 2024 budget presentation organized into revenue, expenditure, and financing, but terminology overlaps with international standards and has differing meanings.
  - Specific examples of problematic classification:
    - Cash Flow Identification: debt servicing payments (financing outflows) were incorrectly categorized under "Other Charges" within recurrent expenditure.
    - External Development Financing: defined as government borrowings yet excludes borrowings that finance non-appropriated investment; fiscal balance termed "remaining deficit" that still requires funding.
    - Financing Flows: inflows from financing activities were grouped under the revenue sub-category, though externally sourced funding has been excluded from total revenue since 2021 and is presented below the deficit.
    - Treasury Cash and Deposit Accounts: should be shown as both sources of financing and financial assets.
  - Implication: Clarification and reclassification are needed to avoid misinterpretation of the government's financial position.

### Key recommendations and timelines
- Adhere to international standard practices for PFM:
  - Compliance to the PFMA 2013 by December 2025 to achieve minimum fiscal transparency.
  - Prepare to amend the PFMA to adopt the fiscal transparency framework, targeting December 2027.
  - Aim for PFMA coverage of the general government.
  - Regular and timely dissemination to include annual budget and mid-year documents, monthly fiscal outturns for the budgetary central government, quarterly financial statements, and annual financial statements and balance sheets.
- FMIS (Microsoft Dynamics 365) utilization:
  - Microsoft Dynamic 365 has modules for public finance management; cloud-based accessibility can serve all government agencies with internet connection.
  - Free basic and intermediate Microsoft D365 training courses available online.
  - Authorities should collaborate with PFM experts by March 2025 to address challenges.
  - Access to D365 should be granted to all line ministries by December 2025.
- Budget reporting and cash management:
  - Recommence release of quarterly and monthly budget outturns and complete improvements in cash management and control by June 2025.
  - Amend subsidiary legislation (PFMA 2013 part 10) to align fiscal reporting templates with IPSAS accounting principles and GFS presentation standards.
  - Revise report templates following IPSAS by December 2025 and commence IPSAS-aligned reporting in January 2026 (noting full IPSAS accrual adoption is a longer-term process).
- Capacity building and technical assistance:
  - Strengthen staff capacity via targeted training and development programs on fiscal data management and analysis starting in April 2025.
  - IMF stands ready to provide technical assistance in fiscal reporting and the GFS.
  - Priority areas for improvement: FMIS (particularly D365), PFM, and the GFS for staff in the budget department, the treasury, and line ministries.
- Stakeholder coordination:
  - Government should engage with stakeholders regularly starting from January 2025.
  - Monthly meetings between MOFT agencies and the CBSI to discuss statistics and raise awareness of data quality and budget implementation.
  - Consider a memorandum of understanding to facilitate data sharing and timely submission.
  - Enhance coordination between the MOFT treasury unit and the CBSI, and between the Ministry of Development Planning and Aid Coordination, the CBSI, the MOFT, and donors to exchange timely and consistent grant data.

### Conclusion
- Solomon Islands faces PFM challenges and needs strengthened fiscal data governance.
- Non-adherence to international standards has created burdens in preparing financial reports under multiple standards.
- Delays in fiscal reporting were aggravated by the FMIS implementation during the pandemic.
- Alignment with PFMA 2013 and international standards—Fiscal Transparency Code, GFS, and the Data Dissemination Standard—is critical for effective PFM and accountability.
- Engage PFTAC PFM expert to fully utilize FMIS public finance functions and pursue capacity development on PFM and the GFS.
- Regular dissemination of fiscal and budget data will enhance policy credibility and attract investors and donors.

*Source: sipea2025062 — 14.      Fiscal data must align with other macroeconomic statistics to provide a coherent view (IMF).*

---


_Source: https://www.imf.org/-/media/files/publications/selected-issues-papers/2025/english/sipea2025062.pdf_