OK Paul, I imagine you have some ulterior motive for posting this question, but I still stand by my "consolidated companies" in this context, too. So the heading might be:

Group of Consolidated Companies

or "List of...", "Table of...", or even just "Consolidated Companies". Based on the information you've given us, I don't think the "Composizione e Variazione" needs to be translated explicitly.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 13 mins (2007-04-19 19:39:11 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Sorry, forgot to add a winking smiley above, so here it is:

;-)

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 31 mins (2007-04-19 19:57:04 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

OK, but I'm not sure you need to explicitly translate "variazione" in the title if it's unduly awkward. If the changes are merely discussed in "narrative" form following the table, as opposed to pointed out somehow directly within the table, I might be inclined to take some "poetic license" in translating the title.

FWIW

For one client:
The table that follows contains a list of the subsidiaries included within the consolidation as at 31st December 2006

For another client I translate it "consolidation area", because the client finds it reassuring and the client's US and UK investors obviously have no difficulty in understanding, otherwise they wouldn't lend so much money to the client.

Also "consolidation area" is probably more easily understood by South American and most European investors.

Finally, the other answers are *perfectly* acceptable.

And that makes three ;-)

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 9 hrs (2007-04-20 04:38:24 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

One final note. I seem to remember that in the Seventies there was no requirement to even publish consolidated accounts in Italy. It received attention in the press, because nobody new the financial position of a particularly large and important Group (just as important now) because of this. Also one line of thinking is that my translation "subsidiaries within the consolidation" might seem a "tautology". Well if they weren't subsidiaries, then they wouldn.t be in the consolidations. But of course under Italian GAAP non core subsidiaries were not included in the consolidation. And that is where you start to run into the Whorf hypothesis.

http://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=desk...