Evaluating policy approaches for tackling informal entrepreneurship

Abstract

Purpose When tackling the informal economy, an emergent literature has called for the conventional rational economic actor approach (which uses deterrents to ensure that the costs of undeclared work outweigh the benefits) to be replaced or complemented by a social actor approach which focusses upon improving tax morale. The purpose of this paper is to explore the effectiveness of these two policy approaches in reducing informal sector entrepreneurship. Design/methodology/approach To evaluate this, data are reported from a 2015 representative survey involving 1,384 face-to-face interviews with owners or managers of small businesses in three South-Eastern European countries, namely, Croatia, Bulgaria and FYR Macedonia. Findings The findings provide support for the “social actor” approach and display that small businesses have a greater propensity to perceive competitors as operating informally when the level of tax morale is lower. Meanwhile, no support for the deterrence measures of the “rational economic actor” model is reported. Research limitations/implications The major limitation of the study is that the paper is not able to display the reasons for the low level of tax morale and horizontal trust. Therefore, further in-depth qualitative research is necessary to explain whether and how the low levels of trust are determined by the failures of various formal institutions. Originality/value This is the first known study on small businesses which analyses simultaneously two distinct policy approaches that aim to reduce participation in informal entrepreneurship.

Evaluating the Implications of Starting-Up Unregistered on Future Firm Performance: Evidence a 2019 Survey in Albania

“…Redistributive justice refers to whether they believe that they receive the goods and services they feel that they deserve given the taxes they pay (Richardson and Sawyer, 2001) and procedural justice to the extent to which they feel that the tax authority has treated them in a respectful, impartial and responsible manner (Braithwaite and Reinhart, 2000;Murphy, 2005). Secondly, formal institutions need to provide greater social protection, less public sector corruption and more effective social transfer mechanisms, all of which have been revealed to be strongly associated with lower levels of informal entrepreneurship (Autio and Fu, 2015;Dau and Cuervo-Cazzurra, 2014;Horodnic and Williams, 2019;Klapper et al, 2007;Thai and Turkina, 2014;Williams, 2017Williams, , 2019.…”

Evaluating the Effects of the Informal Sector on the Growth of Formal Sector Enterprises: Lessons From Italy

“…Until now, most governments have focused on increasing the costs of informality by increasing the penalties for operating informally and improving the risk of detection (Allingham and Sandmo, 1972;Williams, 2014). Perhaps greater emphasis now is required on improving the benefits of formality (Horodnic and Williams, 2019;Scott and Haskei, 2015). This could include providing formal enterprises with access to credit, training, marketing support (e.g., trade fairs), business advice and support, belonging to business associations, and new market opportunities such as contracts with large firms and public sector procurement contracts (Fajnzylber et al, 2009;Skousen and Mahoney, 2015;.…”

Determinants of the Level of Informalization of Enterprises: Some Evidence From Accra, Ghana

“…In recent years, this has further developed. It has been suggested that institutional incongruence in the form of trust in institutions, operates at a micro-level (personal norms), meso-level (trust in others similar and close to oneself, namely horizontal trust) and macro-level (trust in state institutions, namely vertical trust) (Horodnic and Williams, 2019). Until now, most studies on institutional incongruence have only focused upon vertical trust.…”