Independent Assurance Report

To MAN SE, Munich

We have been engaged to perform a limited assurance engagement on the data for the financial year 2012 in the Corporate Responsibility Report (the “CR Report”) of MAN SE, Munich.

Management’s Responsibility

The Executive Board of MAN SE is responsible for the preparation of the CR Report in accordance with the criteria stated in the Sustainability Reporting Guidelines Vol. 3 (pp. 7 – 17) of the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI):

  • Materiality,
  • Stakeholder Inclusiveness,
  • Sustainability Context,
  • Completeness,
  • Balance,
  • Clarity,
  • Accuracy,
  • Timeliness,
  • Comparability, and
  • Reliability.

This responsibility includes the selection and application of appropriate methods to prepare the CR Report and the use of assumptions and estimates for individual sustainability disclosures which are reasonable in the circumstances. Furthermore, the responsibility includes designing, implementing, and maintaining systems and processes relevant for the preparation of the CR Report.

Practitioner’s Responsibility

Our responsibility is to express a conclusion based on our work performed as to whether any matters have come to our attention that cause us to believe that the CR Report for the financial year 2012 has not been prepared, in all material respects, in accordance with the above mentioned criteria of the Sustainability Reporting Guidelines Vol. 3 of the GRI. We also have been engaged to make recommendations for the further development of CR Management and CR Reporting based on the results of our assurance engagement.

We conducted our work in accordance with the International Standard on Assurance Engagements (ISAE) 3000. This standard requires that we comply with ethical requirements and plan and perform the assurance engagement to express our conclusion with limited assurance.

In a limited assurance engagement the evidence-gathering procedures are more limited than in a reasonable assurance engagement (for example, an audit of financial statements in accordance with § (Article) 317 HGB (Handelsgesetzbuch, “German Commercial Code”), and therefore less assurance is obtained than in a reasonable assurance engagement.

The procedures selected depend on the practitioner’s judgement. Within the scope of our work we performed amongst others the following procedures:

  • Inquiries of personnel in the corporate function responsible for the preparation of the CR Report regarding the process to prepare the CR Report and the underlying internal control system;
  • Inquiries of personnel in the central functions that are responsible for the topics included in the CR Report;
  • Inspection and sample testing of the systems and process documentation for collection, analysis, plausibility and aggregation of sustainability data;
  • Site visits as part of the inspection of processes for collection, analysis, and aggregation of the selected data:
    • in the corporate center,
    • at the national production sites
      • MAN Truck & Bus AG, Munich,
      • MAN Diesel & Turbo SE, Augsburg,
      • MAN DWE GmbH, Deggendorf,
    • at the international production sites
      • MAN Latin America, Resende, Brazil,
      • MAN Diesel & Turbo China Production Co. Ltd., Changzhou, China,
      • MAN Truck & Bus, Starachowice, Poland,
      • MAN Türkiye A.S., Ankara, Turkey,
      • MAN Diesel & Turbo SE, Copenhagen, Denmark;
  • Inspection of internal documents, contracts and invoices/ reports of external service providers;
  • Analytical review of CR Data;
  • Comparison of selected data with corresponding data in the MAN SE Annual Report 2012;
  • Inspection of documents regarding the description and approval of the CR Strategy and CR Programme as well as understanding the CR Management structure and the stakeholder dialogue of MAN SE.

Conclusion

Based on our limited assurance engagement, nothing has come to our attention that causes us to believe that the data for the financial year 2012 in the CR Report has not been prepared, in all material respects, in accordance with the criteria of the Sustainability Reporting Guidelines Vol. 3 (pp. 7 – 17) of the GRI.

Emphasis of Matter — Recommendations

Without qualifying our conclusion above, we make the following recommendations for the further development of CR Management and CR Reporting:

  • Further improvement of standardized CR Reporting processes and controls to all reporting areas, especially standardization of data collection and determination;
  • Data collection and reporting of material KPIs during the year to manage the CR and climate strategies and to improve the data quality;
  • Group-wide automation of data consolidation process, for example through the use of a company-wide IT system for reporting of CR Data.

Munich, April 26, 2013

PricewaterhouseCoopers
Aktiengesellschaft
Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft

Petra Justenhoven Hendrik Fink
Wirtschaftsprüferin Wirtschaftsprüfer
(German Public Auditor) (German Public Auditor)

Links

Links outside the report: