Advertisement

SCM to Measure Compliance Costs

  • André Nijsen
Chapter
Part of the International Studies in Entrepreneurship book series (ISEN, volume 20)

Abstract

There are three types of compliance costs caused by business regulations, financial costs (taxes, premiums), information compliance costs (administrative burden) and substantive compliance costs (investments etc.). Taxes and premiums are on-budget incomes for government. That is why measuring of financial compliance costs by doing surveys is not that relevant. However, administrative burden and substantive compliance costs are off-budget costs. Besides, administrative burden and substantive compliance costs are hidden costs for businesses too. No bookkeeping system has separate registration for these two types of compliance costs. Therefore, a new instrument was needed to measure these costs of businesses.

One of the most challenging aspects of such a new instrument is to discuss for which target group the results are. Is it the entrepreneurs to help them reduce their own compliance costs? Or, is it the politician or the law maker to facilitate improving the quality of law by avoiding or taking away unnecessary compliance costs? The answer to this question has a big impact on how to measure compliance costs. This chapter tries to answer these questions.

Keywords

Policy Area Usual Cost Noise Pollution Compliance Cost Regulate Business 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Allers, M.A. (1994), Administrative and Compliance Costs of Taxation and Public Transfers in The Netherlands, Wolters-Noordhof, University Groningen, Groningen (diss.)Google Scholar
  2. Boog, J.J., A.F.M. Nijsen (2007), Pilotonderzoek overige nalevingskosten van bestaande wetgeving; Eindrapportage, (Pilot survey substantive compliance costs of existing laws; Final Report), EIM, ZoetermeerGoogle Scholar
  3. Bosch, L., A. Kwaak, A.F.M. Nijsen and P.Th. van der Zeijden (1993), Leidt vereenvoudiging van de premieheffing voor de werknemersverzekeringen tot maatschappelijke lastenverlichting? (Simplifying collection of premiums for workers social insurance will it bring social cost reduction?), EIM, ZoetermeerGoogle Scholar
  4. Burg, B.I. van der, A.F.M. Nijsen (1998), How can administrative burdens of enterprises be assessed? Different methods; advantages and disadvantages, in: Improving the Quality of Legislation in Europe, (ed.) A. Kellerman, G., Azzi, S. Jacobs, R. Deighton-Smith, T.M.C. Asser Institute, Kluwer Law International, The Hague/Boston/LondonGoogle Scholar
  5. Klein-Blenkers, F., H.J. Mortsiefer and W. Renske (1980), Die Belastung von Industrieunternehmen durch administrative Leistungen für den Staat – unter besonderer Berücksichtigung kleiner und mittlerer Unternehmen, Verlag Otto Schwartz & Co., GöttingenGoogle Scholar
  6. Müller, C. (2005), Regulierungsdichte- und Bürokratieindex (ReBiX); Konzept zur Zusammenführung von Verfahren und Methoden zur `Messung und Bewertung von Regulierungsdichte und Bürokratiebelastung für die Wirtschaft, in: S. Empter, F. Frick, R. B. Vehrkamp (eds.), Auf dem Weg zu moderner Regulierung; Eine kritische Bestandsaufnahme, Verlag Bertelsmann StiftungGoogle Scholar
  7. Nijsen, A.F.M. (2003), Dansen met de Octopus; Een bestuurskundige visie op informatie-verplichtingen van het bedrijfsleven in de sociale rechtstaat (Dancing with the Octopus; Information obligations of enterprises in the social constitutional state from a public administration point of view), Eburon, EIM, Delft, Zoetermeer (diss.)Google Scholar
  8. Nijsen, A.F.M., P. van der Hauw and G. Regter (2005), De kosten van inhoudelijke verplichtingen voor het bedrijfsleven; Definitie en ontwikkeling meetmethode, (Costs of substantive obligations for businesses; Definition and development of methodology), Zoetermeer, Research Report H200501Google Scholar
  9. Nijsen, A.F.M., N. Vellinga (2002), Mistral®, A Model to Measure the Administrative Burden of Businesses, Research Report H200110, EIM, ZoetermeerGoogle Scholar
  10. OECD (2004), OECD Reviews of Regulatory Reform. Germany. Consolidating Economic and Social Renewal, OECD, Paris.Google Scholar
  11. OECD (2006), Cutting Red Tape. National Strategies for Administrative Simplification, OECD, Paris.Google Scholar
  12. World Bank Group (2007), Review of the Dutch Administrative Burden Reduction Program.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Adviser Regulatory Reform, SchoonhovenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations