C2 - [Gyomai -VanDeVen 2014] - The Non-Observed Economy in the




 

ANALYSIS OF ARTICLE

Article provides a summary of the OECD measurements of the Non-Observed Economy, using its categories (1) underground, (2) informal and (3) illegal.

NOE estimates compose an important reference to estimating the size of the informal economy.

 

 

Section 1 (Definitions and classifications)

NOE defined as per “Measuring the Non-Observed Economy – a Handbook (OECD-IMFILO-CIS Stat, 2002)”, comprehending five main areas: underground (productive and legal, avoid taxes), illegal (productive but not legal), informal (productive but unregistered), households for own-final use and statistical underground (productive missed from SNA).

 

 

Section 2 (A framework for measurement)

The article uses OECD N1-N7 categories are sized to provide an exhaustive measurement of productive activities in the economy.



 

 

Section 3 (Estimation Methods applied by national statistical offices):

Authors refer to the “Handbook on Measuring the NOE”, as well as country surveys by UNECE in 2005-2006 and by OECD in 2011-2012.

Countries may have different methods, and adjustments to survey results may be made as well, aiming to fix survey deviations.

Upper bound estimates are used as reference points. Special purpose surveys may be added too, e.g., smuggling, prostitution, etc., to provide calibration.

 

 

Section 4 (National Accounts estimates of the NOE) –

Article refers to data provided in the surveys.






Section 5 (Adjustments by institutional sector industry)

Authors explore adjustments made to the estimates collected with the survey. Main adjustments are observed in activities such as construction, wholesale and retail trade. Adjustments can also be considerable in activities of households as employers, other service activities, accommodation and food services, arts, entertainment, recreation and agriculture.

 

 

Section 6 (Conclusions)

Cross-section nature of the data limits its usage from identifying developments over time. Policy analysis should use aggregated categories, N1+N6 (underground), N3+N4+N5 (informal) and N2 for illegal



ADDITIONAL AND RELATED MATERIAL


C2C - Summary of the OECD Survey on Measuring the Non-Observed Economy

- provides details of N1-N7 activities per country, based on their responses to the 2011-2012 OECD survey.


C2A - OECD Handbook Measurement of the Non-Observed Economy

Framework and detail of concepts



C2B - UNECE Survey of Country Practices NOE in National Accounts

Survey from 2005-2006




Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A1 - [Ulyssea 2020] - Informality: Causes and Consequences for Development

Image
  ANALYSIS OF ARTICLE The Article provides a comprehensive analysis of contemporary literature on the subject. Size matters, as informal firms tend to be smaller; once they grow, they get increased pressure to formalize, whereas to get access to credit, whereas the value chain (vendors, Customers) lead the firm to do so. Formality entry costs, ongoing costs (e.g., lower taxes) have limited impact, and enforcement has higher impact. Effects on the firm productivity are not clear. For the worker, the trade-off between labor regulations / social security and informality maybe tackled with education and a redesign of social security. Unemployment insurance serves to define the reserve utility tied to formalization decisions.     SUMMARY OF ARTICLE (provides an overview of the Article, with copy & paste of contents, aiming to summarize its contents). Author provides a definition of margins of informality [Ulyssea 2018]: Extensive margin, based on whether firms register an...
Read more

B2-[Rocha et al 2017] - Do-Lower-Taxes-Reduce-Informality-Evidences-from-Brazil

Image
  ANALYSIS OF ARTICLE Article B2 analyzes the period of 2009-2012 for the introduction of the MEI program in Brazil. Since then, the number of registered firms has grown from ~2.6M MEI firms in 2012 to ~11M firms in 2021. Article B1 shows data from 2009-2015, and present results that show that both (1) reduction of entry cost and (2) reduction of ongoing taxes have impact on MEI growth, while this article B2 with data from 2009-2012 shows that only (2) happens. New data from MEI from 2019 may provide subsidy for further investigation on the application of the policy.     SUMMARY OF ARTICLE   Section 1 (Introduction) – Paper aims to analyze the effects of reducing ongoing formality costs to a firm by estimating the impact of a large-scale program in Brazil called MEI (Individual Micro-Entrepreneur Program – IMP), introduced in 2009. Exogeneity comes from a pre-existing tax framework for micro, small and medium enterprises. Identification hypothesis comes from no indi...
Read more

B1 - [Farias & Rocha 2021] - Formality Costs, Registration and Development of Microentrepreneurs: Evidence from Brazil

Image
  ANALYSIS OF ARTICLE The Article main merit is to provide an empirical study corroborating with the literature that indicates that rate of formality firms increases if registration costs, and taxes reduce. It also indicates that formalization has no effect on their TFP. The Authors analyze the effects of the implementation of the MEI Program in Brazil (MEI = Individual Microentrepreneur) from its establishment in 2009 till 2015. Six million new firms were formalized during such period, and the authors try to demonstrate that the effect is net of other possible movements on formal / informal labor forces. New data from 2021 shows that now 11M MEIs are registered since 2009, and 90% of those firms are active. Phenomena is based on the low registration and tax costs, with microentrepreneurs choosing to formalize their situation as they can be part of the safety net (with some limited benefits), as well as being out of illegality as well as able to take credit lines and formally invoi...
Read more