Alte Idee, neues Programm: Der Gründungszuschuss als Nachfolger von Überbrückungsgeld und Ich-AG

Abstract

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents inOld idea, new program: The new start-up subsidy as a successor of the former bridging allowance and the old start-up subsidy Abstract The promotion of self-employment as part of active labour market policy ranks as one of the most important support schemes in Germany. The main idea is to grant unemployed individuals financial support to start their own business and therefore to escape unemployment. For this purpose two schemes provided financial support to the unemployed until 2006, the bridging allowance ("Über-brückungsgeld") and the start-up subsidy ("Existenzgrün-dungszuschuss"). Although both programs have been shown to be very effective, the German government replaced both schemes by one single program, the new start-up subsidy ("Gründungszuschuss", GZ) in August 2006, mainly to reduce bureaucratic burden. This study aims at providing descriptive evidence on participant's structure of the new instrument in comparison to the former programs. Moreover, we shed light on business survival, income situation of founders and job creation by the new businesses. Results show that new program (GZ) supports a smaller range of unemployed individuals than initially subsidized by the former two schemes. However, we do not find indication that individuals exhaust their unemployment benefit entitlement before entering the program. With respect to sustainability we find that 75-84% of subsidized businesses are still selfemployed 19 months after start-up and household income can be considered to secure the livelihood. Finally, with the data at hand we are able to contribute new insights to the discussion about potential deadweight effects associated with business subsidies. We show that those effects indeed exist but to a smaller extent than previously assumed.

Subsidized start-ups out of unemployment: a comparison to regular business start-ups

“…For instance, 19 months after start-up, previously unemployed and subsidized business owners earn on average 2,389 Euro per month from their self-employed activity, which is, conditional on observable characteristics, 684 Euro less than regular business founders earn. However, despite the net income of subsidized founders being smaller compared to regular founders, it still exceeds monthly net earnings of a comparable full-time employee in Germany, which corresponded to about 1,900 Euro per month in 2010 (Caliendo, Hogenacker, and Künn, 2012). Moreover, only 36.1% of previously subsidized business owners employ on average three full-time equivalent workers, compared to 56.5% employing on average six full-time equivalent workers among the regular business founders; whereby the conditional differences are also statistically significant.…”

The dynamics of solo self-employment: Persistence and transition to employership

“…About 70% of founders who received a start-up subsidy still have not employed other workers 19 months after start up (cf. Caliendo et al 2012). Not surprisingly then, solo self-employment is the dominant form of self-employment in many countries.…”

The Economic Contribution of Start-Up Firms in Germany

“…In this line, Audretsch and Thurik (2000) conclude that an increase in the number of entrepreneurs lowers the rate of unemployment. Although the literature suggests rather weak employment effects of subsidized start-ups (Link and Scott, 2012;Caliendo et al, 2012), politicians might tend to overemphasize the direct employment effects of start-ups and discuss how to foster entrepreneurship.…”