UNIFIL provide TCCs with land on which the TCCs put up their accommodations. UNIFIL is seeking guidance on how to treat these premises and the associated costs incurred when the TCCs depart the mission area

Accommodations can either be provided by the UN or by the TCCs. Where it is provided by the TCCs, it is considered contingent owned buildings and where it is provided by the UN, it is considered UN owned buildings. At the time of repatriation, the TCCs often decide on what to do with its premises. It can donate or sell it to either the UN, another TCC or even to the host community. Recognition of these assets as either donated or acquired by the UN will depend on the decision of the TCC to hand over these assets to the UN either through donation or sales. If it is transferred to another TCC or the host community, it becomes the premises of the recipient TCC or the host community and will not trigger any recognition by the UN. 

 Re: costs associated with the demolition and disposal of these structures in the event that it is abandoned by the TCC, it is recommended that UN bears the cost. The argument is that the UN is responsible to repatriate these assets if the TCCs decide to take it back to their home country and the cost of repatriating these premises cannot be equated to the cost of dismantling and clearing the premises. 

Regarding the land restoration costs, it continues to remain the responsibility of the UN and accordingly, IPSAS policy on Contingent Liabilities will apply.