Companies often argue that country-by-country reporting can be hindered by local legal, regulatory or even informal requirements. This argument is most often put forward in the context of developing countries. Kazakhstan, Nigeria and Russia were examined to assess the validity of this argument. It was found that even in these challenging environments, some companies were able to disclose information, even if the majority did not. In the diagram below the three countries are compared. Thirty-six companies from our sample operate in Kazakhstan, of which 30 disclose no data on their Kazakh operations. Among the six companies that disclose some data on their operations in Kazakhstan, results range from 10 per cent to 40 per cent. Among the 33 companies operating in Nigeria, 24 report no data and the remaining nine achieve results between 10 per cent and 50 per cent. Among the 71 companies operating in Russia, only 11 produce any country-level reporting and they received results of between 10 per cent and 50 per cent. Such observations demonstrate that local conditions are not an excuse for poor country-by-country reporting. Companies that make the effort can disclose countryby-country information even in challenging environments.
Diagram 8 Country Level Reporting Examples Where 100% means a company fully reports on its operations in the specified country
DIFFERENT LEVELS OF DISCLOSURE ON OPERATIONS IN THE SAME COUNTRY NIGERIA
KAZAKHSTAN 40%
ENI ONGC
RUSSIA 50%
Statoil
50%
Gazprom
ONGC
30%
Statoil
Allianz
20%
Shell
30%
BP
Arcelor
20%
Chevron
20%
ONGC
Chevron
20%
CNOOC
20%
Allianz
20%
Total
20%
Arcelor
20% 20% 20%
SAP
30%
10%
30 other 0% companies
BAT
10%
Conoco
GlaxoSK
10%
ENEL
SAP
10%
NestlĂŠ
24 other 0% companies
50% 40% 30%
20%
BAT
10%
SAP
10%
60 other 0% companies
32
Transparency International