Let's say I have 2 interfaces defined like so:

public interface ISkuItem
{
    public string SKU { get; set; }
}

public interface ICartItem : ISkuItem
{
    public int Quantity { get; set; }
    public bool IsDiscountable { get; set; }
}

When I go to implement the interface in C#, VS produces the following templated code:

public class CartItem : ICartItem
{

    #region ICartItem Members

    public int Quantity { get {...} set {...} }

    public bool IsDiscountable { get {...} set {...} }

    #endregion

    #region ISkuItem Members

    public string SKU { get {...} set {...} }

    #endregion
}

In VB.NET, the same class is built out like so:

Public Class CartItem
    Implements ICartItem

    Public Property IsDiscountable As Boolean Implements ICartItem.IsDiscountable
        'GET SET'
    End Property

    Public Property Quantity As Integer Implements ICartItem.Quantity
        'GET SET'
    End Property

    Public Property SKU As String Implements ISkuItem.SKU
        'GET SET'
    End Property
End Class

VB.NET explicitly requires you to add Implements IInterfaceName.PropertyName after each property that gets implemented whereas C# simply uses regions to indicate which properties and methods belong to the interface.

Interestingly in VB.NET, on the SKU property, I can specify either Implements ISkuItem.SKU or Implements ICartItem.SKU. Although the template built by VS defaults to ISkuItem, I can also specify ICartItem if I want. Oddly, because C# only uses regions to block out inherited properties, it seems that I can't explicitly specify the implementing interface of SKU in C# like I can in VB.NET.

My question is: Is there any importance behind being able to specify one interface or another to implement properites in VB.NET, and if so, is there a way to mimic this functionality in C#?