Features of state regulation of entrepreneurship in the Republic of Kazakhstan. Legal regulation of entrepreneurial activity in the Republic of Kazakhstan. Legal regulation of economic activity in the Republic of Kazakhstan

Today, economic changes in Kazakhstan are far ahead of changes in the legal sphere. This situation is no exception in the field of small and medium-sized businesses. Let's consider this situation from a chronological point of view.

The following main stages of legislative support for the formation of small business in Kazakhstan can be distinguished:

On December 11, 1990, the Law of the Kazakh SSR "On freedom of economic activity and the development of entrepreneurship in the Kazakh SSR" was adopted, which is one of the first legislative acts that determined the basic legal, economic and social conditions for free entrepreneurial activity. In this law, entrepreneurship is interpreted as an initiative or other activity at the expense of their own, borrowed and other property and funds, in order to obtain mutually beneficial results and income for all participants in this activity;

On July 4, 1992, the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Protection and Support of Private Entrepreneurship" was adopted, which established that the state provides maximum freedom of private entrepreneurs, protection trade secrets and responsibility of state bodies and officials for violation of the rights of private entrepreneurs. The law confirmed the provision on the refusal of the state to directly interfere in private entrepreneurial activity. For the first time in one legislative act, the issues of state registration of private entrepreneurial activity, economic activity of private entrepreneurs, protection of commercial secrets were reflected;

State program for support and development of entrepreneurship for 1992-1994;

State program for support and development of entrepreneurship for 1995-1996;

On March 6, 1997, the Decree of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On measures to strengthen state support and intensify the development of small business" was adopted. Support and development of small business are proclaimed a priority area of ​​state economic policy. The main tasks of the development of small business are, first of all, the provision of employment of the population, the solution of its social problems and the development of labor activity, filling the consumer market wide assortment goods and services. The decree identified specific measures to support small businesses: the creation of a fund for the development of small businesses, the construction of centers and incubators for small businesses, the extension to small businesses engaged in the production of material products, benefits in the field of tax and customs tax, etc.

The creation of industrial centers for small businesses is preferable in the form of joint stock companies or consortia with the attraction of internal and external investments.

The main activities for the implementation of the Program provide for the development of a project for an industrial center for small business in the city of Astana. In December 1998, a protocol of intent was signed between the Small Business Development Fund and the Fintraco company for the design, management and construction of a technopark in Astana city for 250 small enterprises of various sectors of the economy with the creation of more than 12 thousand new jobs. The Turkish-Kazakh Association of Businessmen, together with the Turkish Agency for the Development and Support of Small and Medium Enterprises (KOSGEB), has begun to develop a project to create a technopark worth from 40 to 60 million US dollars, of which 75% is financed by the Eximbank of Turkey, 25% - by the customer;

On June 19, 1997, the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Individual Entrepreneurship" and the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On State Support of Small Entrepreneurship" were adopted, which defined small business entities with a number of employees of no more than 50 people and a total value of assets on average per year no more than 60,000 times calculated indicator, as well as basic principles and measures for state support of small business;

July 7, 1992 Decree of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On priorities and regional programs for support and development of small business in the Republic of Kazakhstan": established priorities for the development of small business by types of production of goods and services: the creation of new and development of existing production of consumer goods, replacing the import of building materials , small types of equipment, development of the service sector, development of production for further processing of agricultural products;

On December 31, 1998, the State Program for the Development and Support of Small Business in the Republic of Kazakhstan for 1999-2000 was approved. The main results of the program by the end of 2000 were determined: an increase in the number of small businesses by the end of 2000 to 500 thousand, an increase in the number of people employed in small businesses to 2 million people, the share of small businesses in the country's gross domestic product by the end of 2000 was 15% ;

January 19, 2001 N 77 Resolution of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan On the Concept of Development and Support of Small Business in the Republic of Kazakhstan for 2001-2005.

Thus, in the Republic of Kazakhstan the legislative framework for the development and functioning of small business, in general, formed. At the present stage, one of the main tasks is the full implementation in practice of the established provisions.

These acts provided the basis for sustainable development of entrepreneurship in the Republic, created the necessary prerequisites for the formation of an entrepreneurial class. At the same time, the issues related to the functioning of small enterprises were not fully reflected, the definition of clear criteria for classifying certain legal entities as small and medium-sized enterprises, which hampered not only statistical accounting of the main indicators of the activities of these enterprises, but also impeded the development of effective measures to provide measures of state support to entrepreneurs.

The economic development of Kazakhstan in recent years has made significant progress towards the formation of a polysubjective structure of property relations. The Civil Code, following the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan, legislatively fixes this circumstance. Moreover, the specifics of the acquisition and termination of ownership of property, possession, use and disposal of it for each of the subjects are determined exclusively by law. And only the law determines the types of property that can be exclusively in state or private ownership.

The new situation required radical changes in the legal basis of economic activity. The Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan is the most important milestone on this path. He defined the fundamental foundations of economic relations in the transition to market methods of management, formed the basic rules, norms of their legal regulation, generalized and legislatively consolidated the new forms of organizing economic life that have arisen in recent years.

In the Civil Code, in particular, the organizational and legal forms of commercial activity are strictly regulated. This means that all operating commercial structures, without exception, must be brought into line with the norms introduced by the Civil Code.

Along with individuals, the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan recognizes legal entities as subjects of civil rights and obligations.

A legal entity is an organization that owns, economically or operatively manages separate property and is responsible for its obligations with this property, can acquire and exercise property and personal non-property rights on its own behalf, bear obligations, be a plaintiff and defendant in court.

A legal entity can be defined as a combination of the following features:

A legal entity has or may have property that is separate from the property of its participants;

A legal entity has an independent will, which may not coincide with the will of its individual participants;

A legal entity has the right to make transactions on its own behalf, that is, to participate in property turnover;

A legal entity bears independent responsibility for its obligations;

A legal entity can be a plaintiff and a defendant in court;

Existence legal entity is, in principle, unlimited and does not depend on the composition of its participants.

In many respects, the effect of these signs is only assumed, but in practice the legislation introduces its own characteristics and exceptions to their actions. So, for example, the provision on the absolute independence of a legal entity of a commercial nature is largely limited by the requirements of the antimonopoly legislation of different countries.

When deciding on the choice of a form of activity in a particular area (to carry it out as a citizen - an individual, or to create an organization - a legal entity), it is necessary to first study all the features of the legislation that determine the position of legal entities in general (as subjects of civil rights and obligations) , and the rules relating to certain organizational and legal forms of legal entities. Such knowledge is also important for those who, in the course of their activities, come across a legal entity in order to correctly determine its legal status, the procedure and conditions for its participation in commercial turnover, the responsibility that the legal entity and / or participants in the legal entity will bear for its obligations. For example, the liability of a limited liability partnership and joint stock company is limited, as a general rule, only to the property belonging to them, while in the event of insufficient property to satisfy the claims of creditors from a general partnership, limited partnership and partnership with additional liability, their participants will be liable for their debts in accordance with the provisions of the Civil Code.

The Civil Code, recognizing legal entities as subjects of civil rights and obligations, conducts a general differentiation of legal entities into commercial and non-commercial. The division of organizations into commercial and non-commercial is carried out depending on the availability during the creation and activities of the organization as the main goal of making a profit. At the same time, the list of organizational and legal forms of commercial organizations, given in the Civil Code, is exhaustive, which means that it is impossible to use any other company for business activities other than those provided for in the Code. The Code also provides for the following forms of activity of commercial (with profit-making as the main goal) organizations:

Business partnerships - according to the Civil Code (Art. 58), a business partnership is a commercial organization with a charter capital divided into shares (contributions) of founders (participants). The property created at the expense of the contributions of the founders (participants), as well as produced and acquired by the economic partnership in the course of its activities, belongs to the partnership on the basis of ownership. Business partnerships can be created in the form of a full partnership, limited partnership, limited liability partnership, additional liability partnership;

Joint-stock company - a legal entity that issues shares in order to raise funds to carry out its activities. Shareholders of a joint-stock company are not liable for its obligations and bear the risk of losses associated with the company's activities, within the value of their shares;

The third form of organization of entrepreneurial activity, provided for by the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, is a production cooperative, which is a voluntary association of citizens on the basis of membership for joint entrepreneurial activities based on their personal labor participation and the association of property contributions by its members. There must be at least two members of the cooperative. Members of a production cooperative bear additional (subsidiary) responsibility for the obligations of the cooperative in the amount and in the manner provided for by the Law on the Production Cooperative;

In addition to the three types of organization of private entrepreneurship, state entrepreneurship is allowed in the Republic of Kazakhstan. State-owned enterprises include: 1) based on the right of economic management; 2) based on the right of operational management (state enterprise). The property of a state enterprise is indivisible and cannot be distributed according to contributions (shares, shares), including among the employees of the enterprise. The firm name of state enterprises must contain an indication of the owner of its property. The state enterprise is created, liquidated and reorganized by the decision of the authorized state body.

Thus, we see that economic changes in Kazakhstan are far ahead of changes in the legal field. This situation is no exception in the field of small and medium-sized businesses.

For example, in the system of current law, there are bylaws, which, while continuing to operate "de jure", come into conflict with later adopted normative legal acts, create conflicts or become obsolete, losing their legal significance.

This is due to the fact that the authorized state bodies do not conduct constant monitoring of their own regulatory legal acts and acts of other state bodies adopted on their initiative.

LITERATURE

1. The Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan. - Almaty: Zheti Zhargy, 1995

3. Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated October 5, 1995 N 2486 On production cooperatives (as amended by the Laws of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 15.07.96 N 30-1; dated 19.06.97 N 132-1; dated 11.07.97, N 154-1).

4. Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated April 22, 1998 N 220-1 On limited and additional liability partnerships (as amended in accordance with the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated July 16, 1999 N 436-1).

5. The Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Individual Entrepreneurship" dated 19.06.97, No. 135-1.

6. Law of the RK. On the protection and support of private entrepreneurship in the Republic of Kazakhstan.

7. Decree of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan. About the agency of the Republic of Kazakhstan for the support of small business of April 27, 1998. Kazakhstanskaya Pravda, No. 82, April 28, 1998

8. Decree of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan. On the protection of the rights of citizens and legal entities to freedom of entrepreneurial activity of April 27, 1998. Kazakhstanskaya Pravda, No. 82, April 28, 1998

9. Decree of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated May 12, 2005 No. 450 On approval of the Program of accelerated measures for the development of small and medium-sized businesses in the Republic of Kazakhstan for 2005-2007.

10. Message of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan to the people of Kazakhstan dated February 18, 2005 "Kazakhstan on the path of accelerated economic, social and political modernization."

11. Order of the Prime Minister of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated December 8, 2004 No. 358-r "On the creation of working groups on the development and support of small business."

12. Abzhanova D.Sh. The current state of small business in Kazakhstan // Bulletin of the Kazakh Agrarian University. S. Seifullina, 2005, p. 215.

13. Botanov M. Entrepreneurship - one of the ways to the economic security of Kazakhstan. // Al Pari, 2001. № 1-2. page 43.

14. Civil law of the Republic of Kazakhstan. (General part). Tutorial... Volume 1. - Almaty, Gylym, 1998.

15. Glushchenko EV, Kaptsov AI, Tikhonravov Yu. V. Fundamentals of entrepreneurship. Tutorial. - M .: Bulletin, 1996.

Rules for the organization and financing of state support for the development of entrepreneurship to persons participating in active measures to promote employment

General Provisions

1. These Rules for the organization and financing of state support for the development of entrepreneurship to persons participating in active measures to promote employment (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) were developed in accordance with the laws of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated January 23, 2001 "On employment of the population" and dated January 31, 2006 "On private entrepreneurship "and determine the procedure for providing state support for the development of entrepreneurship to persons participating in the second direction of the Employment Roadmap 2020, approved by the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated June 19, 2013 No. 636 (hereinafter - the Program).

2. Measures aimed at promoting the development of entrepreneurship are implemented by:

1) providing microcredits;

2) development of engineering and communication infrastructure;

3) provision of advisory services;

4) teaching the basics of entrepreneurship.

Measures of state support for entrepreneurial initiative are implemented in rural settlements with medium and high development potential, regardless of their administrative subordination, in small towns, villages located in the territories of urban administrative subordination.

The priority settlements for the implementation of state support for entrepreneurial initiatives are stronghold rural settlements.

3. The following concepts are used in these Rules:

1) employment center - a state institution created by the local executive body of the district, cities of regional and republican significance, the capital in order to implement active measures to promote employment;

2) social contract - an agreement between an individual from among the unemployed, self-employed and low-income citizens of the Republic of Kazakhstan, participating in state measures to promote employment, and the employment center, which determines the rights and obligations of the parties;

3) applicant - an individual who applied to the employment center to participate in the Program;

4) Program participants - citizens of the Republic of Kazakhstan and oralmans from among the self-employed, unemployed, low-income, part-time population, disabled people, graduates of 11 classes of secondary schools, technical and vocational education, organizations of higher and postgraduate education who have received a positive decision to participate in the Program, during one year after completion of training, as well as other categories of persons for whom the priority is established by the Program;

6) regional commission - an interdepartmental commission under the local executive body of the region on the implementation of the Program;

7) an authorized regional organization - a national managing holding and legal entities, one hundred percent of whose shares belong to the national managing holding, as well as a bank or an organization with one hundred percent participation of the state, carrying out certain types of banking operations, authorized in accordance with the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan to implement the state investment policy in certain areas of the economy, and socio-entrepreneurial corporations;

8) operator of the Program - the central executive body coordinating the implementation of state policy in the field of employment of the population;

9) an authorized body for regional development - a central executive body that provides guidance on the formation and implementation of state policy in the field of regional development;

10) the authorized body for the development of entrepreneurship - a structural subdivision of the local executive body of the region (city of republican significance, the capital), providing assistance to the development of entrepreneurship;

11) an authorized body for infrastructure development - a structural unit of a local executive body of district / city, regional significance, responsible for the development and arrangement of engineering and communication infrastructure;

12) credit organizations - microfinance (microcredit) organizations and credit partnerships that carry out activities in the manner prescribed by the laws of the Republic of Kazakhstan;

13) microcredit organization - a legal entity engaged in the provision of microcredits;

14) a microfinance organization - a legal entity that is a commercial organization, the official status of which is determined by state registration with the justice authorities and the passage of registration registration, carrying out activities for the provision of microcredits, as well as additional activities permitted by the laws of the Republic of Kazakhstan;

15) credit partnership - a legal entity created by individuals and (or) legal entities to meet the needs of its participants in loans and other financial, including banking services, by accumulating their money and from other sources not prohibited by the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan;

16) the central authorized body for budget execution - the central executive body that carries out management and intersectoral coordination in the field of budget execution, accounting, budget accounting and budget reporting on the execution of the republican budget and, within its competence, local budgets, the National Fund of the Republic of Kazakhstan on the basis of report of the National Bank of the Republic of Kazakhstan;

17) the central authorized body for state planning - the central executive body that exercises leadership and intersectoral coordination in the field of strategic, economic and budget planning, development and formation of budgetary policy;

18) material assistance - cash paid to a program participant undergoing training in the basics of entrepreneurship for partial reimbursement of travel and accommodation costs;

19) an organization providing services is an organization providing a range of services (consulting, marketing, legal, accounting, project support services and other types of services) to support entrepreneurship;

20) training in the basics of entrepreneurship - short-term training up to one month in the legal foundations of doing business, finance and taxation in the Republic of Kazakhstan, the basic concepts and provisions of entrepreneurial activity, focused on creating and developing a business, acquiring practical skills for developing business plans;

21) service services - a range of services for the provision of consulting, marketing, legal, accounting services for project support and other types of services to support entrepreneurship;

22) business development map - a set of measures for the development of entrepreneurship, developed and approved by local executive bodies of districts (cities), and containing a list of business projects proposed for implementation, including their financial and economic indicators, linkage with other state, sectoral programs and development programs territories;

23) master plan for the development of a basic rural settlement - a document providing for the comprehensive development of a basic rural settlement, determining the optimal business model for its development, including specific projects proposed for implementation, promising areas, the development of technological chains, the necessary infrastructure and job creation;

24) Bank - a second-tier bank that has entered into a Cooperation Agreement within the framework of subsidizing the interest rate on loans / microcredits / leasing transactions of second-tier banks and other financial institutions provided to the participants of the Program, carrying out their activities in the support rural settlements;

25) subsidy agreement - a tripartite written agreement concluded between the Financial Agent, a Program participant, the Bank or other financial institutions, under which the Financial Subsidy Agent partially subsidizes the interest rate on a loan / microcredit / leasing transaction of a Program participant issued by the Bank or other financial institutions ;

26) loan agreement - a written agreement concluded between the Program participant, the Bank or other financial organizations, under the terms of which the Bank or other financial organizations provide a loan to the Program participant. The Loan Agreement also includes the Agreement on the opening of a credit line.

27) financial lease agreement - a written agreement concluded between the Program participant, the Bank or other financial organizations, under the terms of which the Bank or other financial organizations provide leasing to the Program participant;

28) other financial organizations - microfinance (microcredit) organizations, leasing companies that have entered into a Cooperation Agreement;

29) project - a set of actions and activities in various areas of business carried out by the participants of the Program as an initiative activity aimed at generating income and not contradicting the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan;

30) an agreement on the provision of a state grant - a tripartite written agreement concluded between the authorized body for the development of entrepreneurship, a financial agent for subsidizing and persons united in rural consumer cooperatives, under which members of rural consumer cooperatives are provided with a targeted grant;

31) grant - targeted funds for the purchase of the necessary equipment and technology for projects implemented by members of rural consumer cooperatives within the framework of the master plan for the development of a basic rural settlement;

32) financial agent for subsidizing - JSC "Entrepreneurship Development Fund" Damu ".

Other concepts and terms used in these Rules are applied in accordance with acting legislation Republic of Kazakhstan.

In order to create an effective system state regulation entrepreneurial activity and the formation of a regulatory policy for the long term Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan DECIDES:
1. To approve the attached Concept of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity until 2020.
2. Control over the implementation of this resolution shall be entrusted to the Office of the Prime Minister of the Republic of Kazakhstan.
3. This resolution comes into force upon the expiration of ten calendar days after the day of its first official publication.

Prime Minister
Republic of Kazakhstan K. Massimov

Approved
government decree
Republic of Kazakhstan
dated April 18, 2014 No. 380

Concept
state regulation of entrepreneurial
activities until 2020

1. Vision of the development of state regulation
entrepreneurial activity in Kazakhstan

This Concept defines the vision, the main approaches to state regulation of entrepreneurial activity and is aimed at ensuring further development in this direction until 2020.
By 2020, this Concept is supposed to create on a permanent basis a centralized system of public analysis of the regulatory impact of existing and newly introduced norms of laws and instruments for regulating the economy and the implementation, on its basis, of harmonizing regulatory legal acts by associations of private entrepreneurship entities operating in the field of adopting these legal norms, based on international experience. At the same time, the possibility of transferring certain state functions of regulating entrepreneurial activity to the business environment is provided with a simultaneous increase in the responsibility of entrepreneurs for violations that entailed damage to consumers. Also, the implementation of the Concept implies further improvement of risk management systems and the introduction of new principles of relations between the state and business, establishing non-interference in the production process and internal activities of private enterprises, and the focus of state control only on quality and safety. final product, elaboration of issues of institutional strengthening of public organizations for the protection of consumer rights, increasing requirements for them, development of transparent mechanisms of activity, raising consumer awareness about the quality and safety of consumed products.

Analysis of the regulation of entrepreneurial
activities in Kazakhstan

№ 672

The task of creating a favorable environment for the development of private entrepreneurship and the arrival of investments has been facing all countries of the former socialist bloc since the early 1990s.
The end of the twentieth century was also marked by the beginning of a revision of the systems of state regulation in Western countries and the development of existing approaches and practices used. At that time, there was no international experience of an effective transition from a planned economy to a market economy, as well as a generally accepted practice of reforming the regulatory environment in developed market economies.
In Kazakhstan, the system of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity was built in new market conditions... In the first years of independence, a legal framework was developed to regulate relations between private property, civil society and freedom of entrepreneurship. Regulatory issues by government bodies were addressed as they arose by introducing new regulatory instruments.
In this regard, preference was given to permissive instruments. Permissions are the easiest tool to administer, but they are subject to the highest corruption risks. At the same time, for entrepreneurs as subjects of regulation, the introduction of permits became a significant barrier to enter the market. And in the presence of complex and sometimes unrealizable requirements, such a barrier is insurmountable for small businesses.
Understanding the need to restrict the arbitrary introduction of regulation of entrepreneurial activity by the state, reforms have been carried out aimed at increasing the efficiency of state regulation.
In 2006, the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Private Entrepreneurship" was adopted, which provided for the creation of expert councils under state bodies. As a result, business has the opportunity to participate in the development of regulatory legal acts through expert advice created under the central state, local representative and executive bodies.
Also, the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Private Entrepreneurship" provided for the principles of state protection and support of private entrepreneurship, criteria for determining the dimension and much more.
In 2007, the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Licensing" was adopted, which approved an exhaustive list of types of licensed activities and new principles of licensing.
In 2011, the principles of “one window” were introduced for approval by all government agencies when obtaining licenses, “silence is a sign of consent” was extended to all permits. Also, a single term for issuing licenses was established - 15 working days, verification of the submitted package of documents for completeness within two days, mandatory notarization of documents is excluded.
In 2012, the issuance of all licenses was transferred to an electronic format for permits that are not associated with a direct risk to the life and health of citizens, are of an informational nature, do not affect security from high threats, a notification procedure was introduced.
An important reform of state control and supervision in relation to business entities was the introduction in 2011 of the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On State Control and Supervision in the Republic of Kazakhstan", which establishes uniform principles for the implementation of control and supervisory activities of state bodies.
In order to increase the transparency of the rule-making activities of state bodies, free access of business to regulatory legal acts, as well as to improve legal literacy, amendments have been made to raise the level of departmental acts of state bodies establishing mandatory requirements for business to the level of resolutions of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan, decrees of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan and laws. In order to implement this provision, 251 normative legal acts were raised to the level of resolutions of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan.
In 2012, a ban was introduced on scheduled inspections of small businesses within three years from the date of their state registration.
In general, the result of the reforms was a significant reduction in the pressure of regulatory bodies on business.
In addition, in recent years, reforms have been carried out in such areas as starting a business, taxation, and investor protection.
Per recent times in Kazakhstan, certain elements of the analysis of the regulatory impact of the adopted regulatory legal acts were introduced. So, to ensure the quality of the development of regulatory legal acts, assess their impact on the regulated area and reduce corruption risks, a methodology for assessing the socio-economic consequences of the developed draft legislative acts was introduced, which is largely based on the regulatory impact analysis model. The Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Private Entrepreneurship" provides for the need to calculate the costs of private business entities in connection with the introduction of regulatory legal acts. There is a mechanism for legal monitoring of existing regulatory legal acts.
However, today in the field of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity, there are the following problems:
1) in the licensing system - the lack of regulation of the existing licensing system, non-use of risk management systems in the licensing practice of Kazakhstan, a constant uncontrolled increase in the number of permits, the complexity of the permitting legislation, the lack of responsibility of officials for the negative consequences of the issued permits, the lack of effective implementation of the ongoing reforms;
2) state control and supervision - the prevalence of detection of violations and punishment over the prevention and prevention of their commission; the presence of a large number of requirements subject to verification by the state, many of which are impracticable, duplicated, outdated, contradictory, unreasonable; insufficient implementation of risk assessment systems.
One of the principles of state control and supervision is the priority of crime prevention over punishment. However, the sanctions applied in the event of a violation are more often fines than warnings and re-checks.
The high percentage of imposition of penalties indicates that penalties are applied even for minor violations, despite the fact that international practice is moving towards the use of notices of the need for improvement.
This practice shows that sanctions are applied without any relation to the severity of the violations;
3) self-regulation of business - the lack of developed competition in the business environment, which could become a good basis for self-regulation, spheres with elements of self-regulation are not yet ready for full-fledged self-regulation, imperfection of the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan on self-regulatory organizations;
4) rule-making - the inefficiency of the existing system for analyzing the regulatory impact in the rule-making activity due to the lack of an organized discussion platform, conducting scientific economic expertise, within the framework of which the analysis of the socio-economic consequences of only draft laws is carried out, the ineffectiveness of business participation in the rule-making process, as well as a formal approach government bodies (developers) to take into account the views of the business community;
5) technical regulation - a plurality of existing normative legal acts and the presence of reference norms in them, which entail duplication of requirements, the absence of a single base of normative and technical documents, as well as control by state bodies. The lack of a unified base of regulatory and technical documents does not provide complete, reliable and timely information to interested parties, which is an administrative barrier, and as a result, the business is unable to quickly get acquainted with the regulatory documents, as well as comply with these requirements, which in the conditions market economy hinders the development of sectors of the economy.
6) information tools - uncontrolled growth in the number information tools, lack of a uniform approach to collecting information, duplication of information tools and deadlines for their implementation. Unlike permits and spheres of state control, the list of which is established in the relevant legislative acts, there is no single list of information tools. Information tools exist in regulatory legal acts of various levels, both at the legislative and subordinate levels.
Most of these problems can be solved by introducing an analysis of the regulatory impact of the introduced and existing regulatory instruments, since the analysis of the regulatory impact improves the quality of state regulation in general and makes it possible to assess its effectiveness, and also provides a sufficient toolkit for improving state regulation across the entire spectrum of state policy implementation.
According to the Concept of Legal Policy of the Republic of Kazakhstan for the period from 2010 to 2020, approved by the Decree of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated August 24, 2009 No. 858, achieving a balance of public and private interests in the implementation of entrepreneurial activity through state regulation of entrepreneurial activity is possible with the adoption of the Entrepreneurial Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, which will enshrine such basic principles of state regulation of relations with the participation of business entities, such as:
1) a guarantee of freedom of private entrepreneurship (it is allowed to carry out any types of activities not prohibited by the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan), ensuring its protection and support (the principle of freedom of private entrepreneurship);
2) the equality of all business entities to carry out entrepreneurial activities (the principle of equality of business entities);
3) a guarantee of the inviolability and protection of the property of business entities (the principle of inviolability of property);
4) the action of business entities within the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan and regulatory legal acts adopted in accordance with it (the principle of legality);
5) stimulation of entrepreneurial activity, including support and priority of the development of small entrepreneurship (the principle of stimulating entrepreneurial activity);
6) participation of business entities in the examination of draft regulatory legal acts, texts of international treaties and other obligations of the Republic of Kazakhstan affecting the interests of entrepreneurship (the principle of participation in rule-making).
The Entrepreneurial Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, adopted on October 29, 2015, provides comprehensive regulation public relations in the field of entrepreneurship, including those arising in connection with the interaction of entrepreneurs and the state, issues of state regulation and support of entrepreneurship. He systematized the provisions of the relevant laws on the principle of homogeneity, while securing uniform principles, measures of state support for private entrepreneurship, the agro-industrial complex, industrial-innovative, investment activities, and special economic zones.
The previous reforms of the licensing system and state control and supervision ensured an inventory of the relevant regulatory instruments and their approval only at the level of laws, with the recognition as illegitimate of all other permits and control functions that were not included in the relevant lists of laws.
On the one hand, this approach provided a guarantee for entrepreneurs against the arbitrary introduction of new burdensome regulatory instruments at the level of bylaws, including departmental acts.
An analysis of the current legislation shows that all the necessary regulatory legal framework at the legislative level already exists.
At the same time, notifications that are part of information tools have already been inventoried and enshrined in the Law
Notifications are a very common informational tool and, as a rule, are applied by the state in relation to activities or actions associated with a low level of hazard, but requiring government authorities to receive information about the beginning or termination of such activities or actions to be carried out in relation to entities carrying out such types activities, state control and supervision.
However, notifications are only a small part of information tools, and in accordance with this Concept, approaches to their further systematization and optimization will be determined.
The main tool for achieving the stated goals and objectives is the analysis of the regulatory impact of the introduced and existing regulatory instruments. In turn, the analysis of regulatory impact is an analytical procedure that allows you to choose the most effective ways to solve problems of government regulation and assess the effectiveness of existing regulation.

World experience and comparative country analysis
strengths and weaknesses

Footnote. Subsection as amended by the Decree of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 07.11.2016 No. 672 (shall be enforced upon expiry of ten calendar days after the day of its first official publication).

Analyzing international experience, we can distinguish three models that have been used to one degree or another since the end of the 1980s.
The first, perhaps the most striking model of radical economic liberalization, which led to large positive changes and before the 2008 crisis was unequivocally assessed as successful. This model has been implemented in the Baltic countries, Eastern Europe and China. The existence of a socio-political consensus, and in China a strong political will of the country's leadership made it possible for the authorities to quickly change the legislative and regulatory framework, significantly increase the inflow of investments and make the transition to a rapidly developing market economy. The general characteristic of this model was that the systems being reformed were initially unstable, the planned economy collapsed in one way or another, and with it the standard of living of citizens and the economic potential of states fell significantly. In other words, changes have begun, systems have become dynamic. In such conditions, the implementation of radical reforms was justified and brought the expected positive results.
The second model was used in developed industrial countries. It is characterized by the construction of mechanisms for improving regulations through the use of efficiency assessments, cost reduction, targeted sectoral reforms, and the construction of an institutional system to prevent ineffective regulations. Elements of this model have been used since the late 1970s as a response to the economic crisis. By the end of the twentieth century, this model was codified by documents of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the European Union, the internal laws of the United States of America, many countries of Western Europe, Australia and New Zealand. The common characteristic of this model was that the reformed systems were initially stable. Despite the crisis, the standard of living of the population did not fall sharply, the viability of the system of relations and management was not in doubt. In other words, the systems were in equilibrium. In such conditions, there was no need for radical reforms.
The third model was not actually a planned policy, but was characterized by a set of half measures, declarations and waste from earlier decisions. This practice, to one degree or another, has developed in most countries of the former Soviet Union... The authorities in such conditions built the rules "for themselves", not paying attention to the possibility of the implementation of these rules. Private business is used to such conditions, leaving in the shadows. The business environment has become unforeseen for new players and is quite expensive. Over time, this system has become more stable. For 20 years, a certain balance has formed, in which the desire to change something is balanced by the desire to maintain the status quo. Unfortunately, such a balance is being established at a point that is disadvantageous neither to the majority of citizens, nor to the interests of the state. The reforms that worked in the first model almost always do not work when applied in countries with such an equilibrium. The reason for this is the lack of motivation to execute them to their logical conclusion, both by representatives of the authorities and by business.
Kazakhstan differs from most countries of the Commonwealth of Independent States in that some radical reforms were successfully carried out in the early years of independence. In this sense, Kazakhstan has some similarities with the countries of Central Europe and China. The success of these reforms, the availability of natural resources led to economic growth and the well-being of the population. At the same time, it is too early to say that the economy of Kazakhstan is completely liberalized, and the conditions for doing business are comparable to the best world standards.
In the current conditions, the most suitable model for carrying out reforms in the Republic of Kazakhstan is the second model tested in developed industrial states. Unlike other described models, this model provides for the formation of a purposeful state policy, its institutional support and consistent implementation, while point and logically incomplete reforms will not lead to the expected result.
State regulation of entrepreneurial activity, along with investment policy, policy for the development of infrastructure and human capital, credit and financial policy, is part of the general policy of economic development of the state.
Since the goals of state regulation often go beyond purely economic policy and affect the security of citizens and society and the stability of the state, state regulation of business activities should be treated as an integral part of the overall state policy, taking into account all existing connections and influences. Business regulation policy differs in the set of instruments used.
The successful development and implementation of a balanced state policy in developed industrial countries directly depended and depend on some starting factors. These factors include, first of all, the controllability of the system of government bodies, their effectiveness and professionalism, the continuity of the political course of the top leadership of states, the existence of a developed system of civil society institutions, an effective system of open reporting and accountability of government bodies, the lack of coalescence of interests of big business and government bodies in individual sectors of the economy.
As good example Inadequate attention to these factors can be attributed to the experience of some countries in countering the financial and economic crisis of 2008. The very emergence of this crisis is rooted in the issue of insufficient attention paid by the authorities of the United States of America to the issue of merging interests of large financial institutions and their regulators in the issue of mortgage loans. The same reason for the merging of the interests of banks and their regulators led to the financial collapse of Iceland. The poor state of the economies of Portugal, Greece, Italy after the 2008 crisis has the same roots and is associated with the unmanageability of the system of government bodies, their inefficiency and unprofessionalism. The difficult ecological situation in large Chinese cities, accidents at enterprises and infrastructure facilities are caused by the lack of effective control over the activities of the authorities and the insufficient development of civil society institutions.
On the other hand, countries where sufficient attention was paid to all these factors have managed to build a sufficiently flexible and competitive economic environment with adequate protection of the interests of citizens and society, which made it possible to avoid a crisis even in the context of globalized economies. This primarily concerns the countries of northern Europe, Canada and Australia.
Today, the strengths of the existing system of public administration and interaction in the triangle of interests of government, business and citizens in the Republic of Kazakhstan include:
1) a relatively high level of professionalism of senior and middle-level civil servants, a high level of executive discipline in most state bodies. This state of affairs is a consequence of the successful implementation of the administrative reform in the Republic of Kazakhstan and the attention of the management to raising the qualifications of civil servants. Unlike other countries of the Commonwealth of Independent States, training programs for future civil servants have been successfully implemented in the Republic of Kazakhstan;
2) long-term stability and predictability of the functioning of the public administration system, continuity of political and administrative leadership of public administration bodies;
3) the political will of the state leadership to improve the business environment and investment attractiveness, plans have been identified to transfer the economy to an innovative path of development, a gradual departure from the resource model of economic development;
4) a relatively high level of control over the activities of the authorities, both at the central and regional levels;
5) positive experience in carrying out comprehensive reforms and introducing state policy in the field of administrative management, automation, introducing risk management systems in individual government bodies, conducting an inventory of licensing procedures and requirements.
The weaknesses of the current system of public administration and interaction in the Republic of Kazakhstan include:
1) organizational weakness and small number of business and professional associations, associations of citizens for the protection of consumer rights, the weak level of development of civil society institutions and, as a result, the lack of an active dialogue between such associations and government bodies;
2) the institutional interest of individual authorities in expanding their spheres of regulation and control;
3) the interest of big business in maintaining the status quo, including preserving high level monopolization of the economy. This interest in maintaining the status quo is explained by the desire to prevent competition for business and not to destroy established ties;
4) insufficient awareness of citizens that the development of private entrepreneurship and competition leads to an improvement in the quality of goods and services, a decrease in their prices, an increase in the number of jobs and salaries;
5) the lack of effective methods for monitoring the effectiveness of the activities of individual government bodies, the implementation of the requirements of legislative acts in terms of the ratio of achieving the stated goals and associated costs, the practice of conducting independent research on issues of public administration and regulation, as well as the implementation of public policies and their effectiveness;
6) the lack of regular open reporting of individual authorities to higher authorities on the results of their activities.
For the high-quality implementation of the policy of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity, it is necessary to clearly build its institutional part in accordance with advanced world experience.
International practice shows that from about the beginning of the 1980s, along with the development and implementation of new requirements and procedures of regulatory policies, developed countries began to create structures of the so-called regulatory oversight.
For example, in the United States of America, in the Office of Management and Budget, the US Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs was established in 1980. In 2005, The Better Regulation Executive was established in the UK. The Netherlands Administrative Barriers Advisory Board (Adviescollege Vermindering Administratieve Lasten) was established in 2000. The Swedish Regulatory Improvement Council (Regelradet) was established in 2008 and became operational in 2009. In Germany, the Nationaler Normenkontollrat was established in 2006. Similar tips also exist in Mexico, Australia, Japan. In some countries, ministerial departments carry out regulatory oversight functions. In Denmark it is the Department for Better Regulation of the Ministry of Finance, in Finland it is the Bureau of Legal Inspection of the Ministry of Justice, in France it is the Quality and Simplification Service of the Ministry of Finance. In Greece, Belgium, Ireland and Korea, these are departments of the Prime Minister's office. In almost all countries of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, except the United States of America, the conclusions of the regulatory oversight are advisory in nature.
In different countries, these bodies have subsequently evolved and they were adapted to effective synergy with government bodies. Therefore, today, there are some differences both in the tasks assigned to these bodies, the functions they perform, and in their structure and place in the public administration system.
The functions of such supervisors in different countries include:
1) provision of information, technical and consulting support to state regulatory bodies and governments;
2) coordination of actions of state bodies of regulators on issues of rule-making and control, supervision over the execution of procedures;
3) providing the political leadership of the state with an assessment of the regulations or agreeing on the requirements and procedures of new and revised regulations;
4) developing proposals for improving regulations, reforming them, analyzing the problems, conducting research, studying the reporting of state bodies, conducting appropriate consultations with non-governmental organizations.
One of the mildest options for government intervention in business is the use of information tools.
At the same time, in many developed countries of the world, it is information tools, which are called information obligations, that are often objects of reform within the framework of regulatory reforms. The costs of information obligations are the main ones in the structure of business administrative costs.
Some developed countries use the Dutch standard cost model to calculate the severity of these costs. This model allows, by analyzing the legislation of the country and a subsequent survey of the subjects of regulation, to determine the real cost of temporary and financial costs caused by specific regulations.
Typically, costing allows you to assess the effectiveness of reforms in specific areas by comparing the costs before and after reforms. At the same time, costs can be assessed as all subjects of regulation (entrepreneurs, social groups etc.) and the state.
The Dutch model has shown its viability and was used in the implementation of reforms in countries such as Germany, Denmark, the United States, the Netherlands itself and many other countries.
In Kazakhstan, this model was introduced and tested in 2010-2014 to assess the operating costs of a business in accordance with the President's instruction to reduce them by 2015 by 30% compared to 2011.
The research was carried out by the National Analytical Center on the instructions of the Ministry of National Economy of the Republic of Kazakhstan.
This model can also be used to assess the effectiveness of the reform of information tools.
In turn, information tools are united by the fact that their use for regulatory purposes does not require authorization (authorization) from government agencies, and for the most part they also do not require any additional capital investments. The use of information tools is reduced to the fulfillment of the requirements for the correct collection (receipt), organization and transmission of information. Such actions mainly incur the costs of working time of the subject of regulation.
Filling out forms, organizing reporting data, checking the correctness, all document flow open for monitoring take a proportionally large amount of time from the heads of business entities. This time is spent not on production management, work with personnel, or other productive goals, but on working with the requirements of the authorities. This is why the costs associated with information tools are often referred to as administrative costs.
According to the World Bank, in international practice, one of the earliest and, probably, the most elaborated and profound version of working with information tools is the practice of implementing the Paper Reduction Act of 1980, adopted in the United States.
The focus of this Act is the collection of information. This collection of information is defined as follows: “Receiving, creating reasons for receiving, requests, requirements for the disclosure of information to third parties or the public, facts, points of view, any organization, regardless of the form or format, such as asking identical questions or requesting an identical type of information or reporting from ten or more people other than departments, organizations, or employees of the US federal government. "
As can be seen from this definition, the subjects of this Act are not only business entities, but also other citizens and organizations, including regional authorities and local self-government.
While recognizing the benefits of information tools, this Act also provides a clear definition of the costs associated with information tools. Cost is defined as “time, effort or financial resources allocated by entities to prepare, maintain, or provide information to any federal government agency, including resources for (A) studying instructions; (B) acquisition, installation and use of technologies and systems; (C) changes in existing methods of execution of pre-existing instructions and requirements; (D) search for data sources; (E) completing and revising the collection of information; and (E) transmission of information. "
The costs of information instruments in the United States are classified by their reasons. Thus, four categories of such reasons have been identified, namely: (1) new legislative requirements; (2) actions of government agencies; (3) changes or recalculations due to changes in the number of subjects or methods of collecting information; (4) errors or non-compliance with requirements, as well as stoppages and resumptions.
The unit of measurement for the cost of information tools in the United States is the hours spent. For example, a FY11 report from the Office of Management and Budget of the United States found that the entire population spent 9.14 billion hours meeting information requirements, an increase of 355 million hours, or 4%, from the 8.78 billion hours spent in fiscal 2010.
With regard to Kazakhstan, this US experience is applicable from the point of view of the need to systematize all information tools and their subsequent optimization.
To date, Kazakhstan has carried out significant reforms of state regulation, but the burden of administrative regulation is still high.

Goals and objectives of this Concept

Footnote. Subsection as amended by the Decree of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 07.11.2016 No. 672 (shall be enforced upon expiry of ten calendar days after the day of its first official publication).

The purpose of this Concept is to increase the efficiency of state regulation of business by creating a balanced system in which regulation will become predictable, cheap for business and will be effective in achieving goals and free from corruption.
Achievement of this goal will be ensured through a phased and systematic solution of the following tasks:
1) reorientation of state control and supervision from detection and punishment to prevention and prevention;
2) creating conditions for the development of business self-regulation;
3) improvement of rule-making based on the analysis of the regulatory impact and public discussion of draft regulatory legal acts affecting the interests of business;
4) bringing technical regulation in line with world practice and integration processes;
5) establishment of proportionate responsibility in order to stimulate law-abiding behavior;
6) increasing the level of consumer protection;
7) reducing the burden of state regulation of entrepreneurs;
8) systematization and optimization of information tools.
The main goal of reforming information tools is to reduce the costs associated with these tools on business through a quantitative decrease in information obligations, optimization of information collection methods, and a qualitative improvement of individual information tools. Such reform is possible provided:
establishing a system for monitoring information commitments using well-measurable indicators of the costs associated with them;
introducing a systematic approach to optimizing information tools.

Stages of implementation of the policy of state regulation
entrepreneurial activity

Footnote. Subsection as amended by the Decree of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 07.11.2016 No. 672 (shall be enforced upon expiry of ten calendar days after the day of its first official publication).

There are three main stages.
Stage 1 - preparatory (2014 - 2016). At this stage, it is planned to carry out the following activities:
1) build a system of institutional policy support;
2) completely reform the regulatory instruments.
A key element of building a system of institutional support is the definition of a consultative and advisory body and its place in the system of executive power of the Republic of Kazakhstan.
Reform of regulatory instruments is already underway in the Republic of Kazakhstan. To complete the first stage, it is necessary to complete the reform of the control and supervision system, develop and implement a self-regulation system where possible, and reform information tools.
Stage 2 - procedural (2016 - 2018). At this stage, it is planned to carry out the following activities:
1) develop the methods necessary for the analysis of regulatory impact;
2) introduce procedures for planning, development and revision of regulations, ensure a dialogue with public associations;
3) to introduce a system of reporting of state bodies.
At the second stage, work will be carried out on the development of:
1) methods for analyzing regulatory impact;
2) the procedure for the preparation and submission of periodic reports of state bodies on regulatory activities;
3) methodology of standard costs.
After the development and testing of appropriate methods, it is planned to conduct appropriate training for civil servants. The procedures for planning, development and revision of regulations stipulated by the Concept should be fully implemented, and the procedures for public discussion should be strictly followed.
At the final part of the second stage, the system of periodic reporting of state bodies on the work done by them on the design and revision of regulations will be fully implemented.
Stage 3 - final (2018 - 2020). At this stage, it is envisaged:
1) analyze the performance of regulatory functions of state bodies;
2) introduce a system for monitoring the effectiveness of state policy;
3) adjust the institutional system, procedures and methodologies.
At the third stage, a pilot analysis of the performance of regulatory functions in one of the state bodies will be carried out. As a result of this analysis, the relevant procedures and methodologies will be refined.
After that, it is supposed to select one state body from each area of ​​public administration and regulation:
1) the sphere of human and social security;
2) the financial sector;
3) humanitarian sphere;
4) sphere natural resources.
Analysis of the performance of the regulatory functions of state bodies in each of these areas will make it possible to further refine the methods and their further use, taking into account the specifics of the regulatory spheres.
The procedure for analyzing the performance of regulatory functions will be carried out in the future for all state bodies.
The results of the first analyzes of the performance of regulatory functions, as well as the analysis of the periodic reporting of state bodies, and research materials should be used when monitoring the effectiveness of regulatory policy and displayed in the corresponding periodic reporting of the advisory body.
Within the framework of the above stages and the sequence of actions in relation to the reform of information instruments, the following sequence of its stages is proposed.
Stage 1.2016 - 2017.
At the first stage, it is necessary to conduct an inventory of all information tools that exist and are used in Kazakhstan.
In the process of conducting an inventory, government agencies should determine the use of information collected through the information tool.
Stage 2.2018 - 2019.
After the inventory, it is necessary to conduct a centralized analysis of all information tools for duplication and requirements for information that has already been collected in national databases. The corresponding optimization must be carried out at the same time for all information tools.
All information tools that will remain after the execution of the previous stages will be accumulated in a single list of information tools (requirements).
During the implementation of all the previous steps, without exception, lessons should be learned and the effectiveness of procedures and methods should be tested. Corresponding changes will be developed by an advisory body and implemented to improve the efficiency of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity.

Expected results from the implementation of the Concept

The implementation of the Concept is expected to increase the efficiency of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity through:
1) creating a favorable business climate by optimizing the state regulation system, confirmed by the 45th place in the Doing Business rating of the World Bank;
2) creating conditions for the development of self-regulation through the implementation of two pilot projects;
3) reducing the number of inspections in the field of technical regulation in relation to food products by more than 20%;
4) ensuring the observability of the state regulation system by maintaining objective and reliable statistics, 100% coverage by automation of risk management systems of control and supervisory bodies approved by joint orders with the authorized body for entrepreneurship;
5) reduction of state budget expenditures related to state regulation of entrepreneurial activity by 10%;
6) reduction of business operating costs associated with regulatory instruments by 10%.

2. Basic principles and general approaches to the sphere of public
business regulation

Footnote. Section 2 as amended by the Resolution of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 07.11.2016 No. 672 (shall be enforced upon expiry of ten calendar days after the day of its first official publication).

The principles of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity are:
1. Balance of interests of consumers, business and the state. The system of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity involves ensuring the most effective protection of consumer rights with a minimum (objectively necessary) burden on business. In such a system, the goals of state regulation are achieved by the least costly methods for business and the budget.
2. Justification and efficiency of the use of regulations through the introduction of mandatory procedures for justification, approval and monitoring of the effectiveness of regulations in achieving the stated goals.
3. Transparency of activities of state bodies and availability of information. The adoption of socially significant decisions is supposed to be carried out only after public hearings and other forms of dialogue with society. Any information not limited to use and business necessary and consumers, should be available and, if possible, presented free of charge.
Rule-making activity involves its implementation with the active involvement of all stakeholders in this process through the use of a centralized system.
4. Responsibility and fairness of punishment through the establishment of responsibility of state bodies for non-compliance with the requirements of state policy of regulation of entrepreneurial activity, compliance of the level of punishment with the level of violation for business, consistent departure from punitive measures when violations are detected to prevent and motivate to comply with regulatory requirements. The ability to appeal against the actions of the authorities in higher instances and courts.
5. Freedom from corruption by reducing the ability to carry out corrupt actions in the field of state regulation, the elimination of such phenomena as conflicts of interest, selective application of law, regulation of monopoly and close to monopoly markets dependent on operators.
6. Comprehensiveness and effectiveness of the implementation of reforms. The effectiveness of the Concept implementation will depend on the solution of the assigned tasks by all state bodies. Sectoral documents on related areas of reforms should be consistent with the Concept. Evaluating the effectiveness of reforms should translate into real improvements in the business environment and customer satisfaction.
The subject of the policy of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity is divided into two main parts:
1) the requirements of the legislation necessary for execution;
2) regulatory instruments (regulatory instruments).
The need to divide the subject into these two component parts is due to the significant difference in the methods of conducting policy in each of them.
Legal requirements are the norms of regulatory legal acts that prescribe mandatory behavior, establish rules, parameters and standards.
Legal requirements are the primary basis for the functioning of any regulation. Examples of such requirements are requirements for the payment of taxes, other payments and the rules for their calculation, standards for emissions of industrial waste, fire safety requirements, construction and sanitary-epidemiological rules and hygiene standards, requirements of technical regulations of the Republic of Kazakhstan, Customs Union.
Each action of an executive authority in relation to a business or a document required for delivery or presentation to an authority is based on the need to comply with the requirements of the law and the existence of these specific requirements.
The policy of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity regulates the life cycle of legislative requirements, establishes the necessary conditions for the emergence of new requirements, the procedure for their justification and approval, public discussion, the parameters for monitoring the achievement of goals, the conditions and procedure for canceling the requirements of the legislation.
The second part of the policy subject is the regulatory instruments through which legal requirements are enforced. Regulatory instruments are divided into four groups:
1) permitting instruments, including licenses, permits of conclusion, registration, etc.
2) control instruments, including audits, inspections, investigations, and related instructions and sanctions;
3) information tools, including the submission of documents, notifications and certificates, tax, financial and other reporting, other documents, declaration of the composition of products, publication of data on bankruptcy, changes in the ownership of enterprises, etc.
4) self-regulation tools. Within the framework of this Concept, a self-regulation system is understood as a regulatory instrument. In addition, the state plays a key role in the process of replacing regulatory instruments with self-regulation and vice versa.
The policy of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity regulates the composition and procedures for the use of these instruments and their life cycle, establishes the classification of regulatory instruments, the necessary conditions for the emergence of new instruments, the procedure for their justification and approval, public discussion, establishes the adequacy of the choice of the instruments used using the results of risk analysis and parameters, according to which the achievement of the goals of their use is monitored, the conditions and procedure for their cancellation or replacement.
Approaches to the reform of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity are conventionally divided into two groups. The first group concerns specific regulations and is associated with the regulation of their life cycle. The second group has a character common to all state regulation of entrepreneurial activity.
First group. The ongoing policy of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity in relation to the specific requirements of the legislation and the instruments used is characterized by a certain cyclical nature. Life cycle legal requirements and tools for their implementation include:
1) regulatory planning;
2) design of new regulations;
3) revision of regulations;
4) reporting of state bodies.
Regulatory planning. The policy of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity regulates the planning by state bodies of legislative and other rule-making activities that establish or change the requirements or instruments of state regulation.
Plans are prepared by state bodies on the basis of methods developed by the consultative and advisory body, approved by the heads of state bodies and submitted to the advisory and advisory body in the form of a notification. After that, the plans are published by state bodies on the official Internet resource of state bodies, including a unified centralized crowdsourcing system that contains a base of regulatory legal acts and provides an opportunity for each public association to comment in detail and in a structured manner, make proposals and discuss both current regulations and projects. regulations. At the same time, it should be possible to evaluate comments and sort them by date, popularity rating and subjects of commenting.
Designing new regulations. State bodies develop drafts of legislative and other normative legal acts that establish new requirements or new use of regulatory instruments in accordance with plans. They also prepare supporting documentation developed and approved in accordance with this Concept.
When preparing accompanying documents for draft regulatory legal acts, state bodies will prove the need to introduce specific regulation. Such projects and accompanying documents are published on the official Internet resource of state bodies.
Verification of compliance with procedures by state bodies in the design of regulations, reliability and completeness of justification is carried out by an advisory body. In cases of revealing violations of the procedure or other disagreements with the state body, the conclusions of the consultative and advisory body are submitted to the leadership of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan for consideration.
Revision of regulations. The revision of the existing regulations is carried out at intervals of 5-10 years in accordance with the plans. Government agencies can revise existing regulations with a higher frequency based on the analysis of data from the model of standard costs, emergencies, or appeals from citizens and organizations.
The advisory and advisory body initiates a revision of existing regulations based on the analysis of the reports of state bodies, research data or appeals from citizens and organizations.
Bodies and persons entitled to legislative initiative initiate a revision of existing regulations in accordance with the requirements of the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan.
National Chamber of Entrepreneurs and others public associations independently initiate the revision of existing regulations.
The concept provides for a methodology for revising existing regulations only for government agencies. In cases where the consultative and advisory body initiates a revision of existing regulations, it submits an appropriate appeal to the state body, which carries out the revision procedure itself.
In cases where the National Chamber of Entrepreneurs or other public associations initiate a revision of existing regulations, they prepare appropriate justifications and submit them to the state and consultative and advisory body.
In the course of a periodic review, state bodies in each specific case prove the need for the existence of regulation, change them or cancel them.
The analysis is performed to ensure that the regulatory objectives identified in the initial regulatory impact analysis approved during the design of the regulation are achieved through existing requirements and tools. In such cases, the following steps are provided:
1) analysis of the text of a normative legal act and study of the experience of its application;
2) analysis of the dynamics of indicators of the effectiveness of regulation and their comparison with the data of the analysis of regulatory impact;
3) analysis of the dynamics of business costs using the standard cost model and their comparison with the corresponding data of the analysis of regulatory impact;


In other cases (in the absence of an initial analysis of the regulatory impact), the analysis is carried out based on a simplified methodology for assessing the achievement of goals (using a standard cost model). In such cases, the following steps are provided:
1) analysis of the text of a normative legal act and study of the experience of its application for the purpose of retrospective determination of the purpose of regulation and used regulations;
2) retrospective determination of indicators of the effectiveness of regulation, substantiation of their objectivity and reliability;
3) measuring direct information costs of a business using a standard cost model;
4) preparation of an opinion on the need to change the regulation;
5) if necessary, preparation of a draft amendments to a regulatory legal act and a corresponding justification.
In both cases, with the tightening of requirements and procedures, the justification necessarily includes an analysis of the regulatory impact.
Revision materials, analyzes and recommendations are published on the official Internet resource of state bodies.
Verification of compliance with the analysis procedures by state bodies of the reliability and completeness of the analysis is carried out by an advisory body. In cases of revealing violations of the procedure or other disagreements with the state body, the conclusions of the consultative and advisory body are submitted to the leadership of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan for consideration.
Reporting of state bodies.
For the formation of consolidated reporting, state bodies submit reports to the consultative and advisory body, which include data on the implementation of plans, shows the dynamics of indicators of achievement of regulatory goals, regulatory costs, budget expenditures. The consultative and advisory body summarizes these reports for all state bodies, analyzes their impact on the development of entrepreneurship, and points out systemic shortcomings.
All reports are published on the official Internet resource of state bodies, including the unified centralized crowdsourcing system, for public analysis of the regulatory impact of existing and newly introduced regulations.
The main tool of the first group of approaches to the reform of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity is the analysis of the regulatory impact.
A regulatory impact analysis is an analytical procedure for comparing costs and benefits, taking into account the potential risks associated with the possible introduction of regulatory legal acts that establish requirements that are mandatory for business entities, as well as tools and procedures for enforcing these requirements. During the regulatory impact analysis, comparative analysis the costs and benefits of possible alternatives to the new requirement being introduced, the relevant instruments and enforcement procedures.
An analysis of the regulatory impact is carried out before government bodies make decisions regarding business regulation issues.
The main goal of the regulatory impact analysis is to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of public policy through the choice of alternative regulatory approaches to more accurately achieve certain goals (solving well-defined problems).
The objectives of the regulatory impact analysis are:
1) a clear definition of the problem to be solved;
2) identification of alternative methods for solving the problem;
3) assessment of the consequences of the adoption of regulation on solving the problem and on the costs of all parties involved;
4) determination of measurable indicators for assessing the problem and achieving the goals of state regulation.
The implementation of the regulatory impact analysis will result in:
1) the ability to make an optimal and rational decision based on complete and reliable information;
2) saving resources of business entities, consumers and the state budget by reducing the corresponding costs;
3) the ability to objectively track the effectiveness of the decisions made to make appropriate adjustments to the regulatory policy.
Regulatory Impact Analysis is a tool that can be used in any decision making by authorities at both the national and local levels.
At the same time, the analysis of the regulatory impact is associated with certain costs, both of the working time of civil servants and, in some cases, direct costs of budgets of different levels. In addition, the analysis of the regulatory impact and its subsequent discussion before making decisions can significantly reduce the speed of their adoption, limit the flexibility of the authorities.
Taking into account the world experience, the Concept defines the following areas of use of the analysis of regulatory impact in the Republic of Kazakhstan:
First. The analysis of regulatory impact is used exclusively in the design of regulatory decisions affecting the interests of business entities. Decisions affecting the interests of business entities, but not changing the mandatory requirements of legislation or instruments and procedures for their implementation are planned without the use of regulatory impact analysis (public investment, subsidies, procurement, and others). Draft solutions for overcoming the consequences of accidents, natural disasters and other emergencies of temporary action, even if they are of a regulatory nature, are planned without the use of regulatory impact analysis.
Second. The analysis of the regulatory impact is used in planning draft laws of the Republic of Kazakhstan, technical regulations of the Customs Union, decrees of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan, decisions of maslikhats developed by akimats.
Third. A regulatory impact analysis is used if the scope of the draft decision extends to more than 100 business entities, regardless of the size of the costs.
Fourth. An analysis of the regulatory impact is used if the planned decision tightens the requirements, complicates the procedures for their implementation, entails any increase in costs associated with its implementation only for business entities.
Fifth. Regulatory Impact Analysis is used when a regulation is renewed if its validity period was originally set.
The analysis of the regulatory impact in the most complete form provides for the use of economic modeling and other resource-intensive methods of collecting and analyzing information. The implementation of such an analysis of regulatory impact requires a very high qualification of performers, is difficult to understand by persons without special economic education, and requires the use of significant financial resources.
In this regard, to simplify the analysis of regulatory impact, it is assumed:
1) liberalization of requirements for measurability of indicators of the existence of a problem that needs to be solved, and achievement of the goal (benefit) of the projected regulation. For the purposes of liberalization, it is possible to assume that it is sufficient to use, in exceptional cases, a clear description of the problem without defining digital indicators;
2) temporary departure from the use of digital indicators with recommendations for their definition and collection for future use;
3) regulation of alternatives to the projected regulation. The practice of using regulatory impact analysis in other countries shows that a full analysis of alternatives is not always carried out. Especially at the initial stages of introducing regulatory impact analysis, government agencies approach the definition and analysis of alternatives formally. For this reason, it is necessary to oblige state bodies to consider the existing situation, the possibility of strengthening control over the implementation of existing requirements, responsibility for violations of existing requirements, the introduction of elements of self-regulation or a notification procedure;
4) determination of only direct costs of business entities associated with the implementation of regulatory requirements ( administrative costs for the fulfillment of information requirements, the costs of working with inspectors, the costs of the necessary investments), direct costs of consumers, if such are foreseen (an example is an increase in the price of goods or services with a possible decrease in supply due to a decrease in competition), direct budget costs, if such are foreseen. When introducing a regulatory impact analysis, an analysis of possible costs due to unused opportunities and other indirect costs will not be performed;
5) the analysis of regulatory impact will not use the analysis of incremental effects. The benefits and costs are estimated assuming full implementation and functionality of the planned regulation;
6) when analyzing the regulatory impact, the method of economic modeling will not be used. The analysis will be based on a direct comparison of costs and benefits analyzed for each alternative based on a simplified methodology;
7) when introducing a regulatory impact analysis, an analysis of possible risks will not be carried out.
Any regulation is adopted with the aim of solving a specific problem, which for one reason or another is not able to solve the market mechanism.
Today, in the preparation of regulatory legal acts and their justification, government agencies often limit themselves to general formulations of problems. This naturally leads to the impossibility of defining target groups and performance assessment indicators from such general formulations. the decision in the future.
When preparing the analysis of the regulatory impact, it is proposed to pay special attention to a clear definition of problems, disclosure of their manifestations and causes. Manifestations of problems are revealed by means of digital or, in exceptional cases, qualitative indicators that determine this manifestation. After the adoption of regulation, such an indicator becomes an indicator for assessing the effectiveness of regulation.
This indicator is also one of the tools for determining the benefits of the proposed regulation. These indicators, among others, can be levels of environmental pollution, the number of accidents or incidents, data on the illegal circulation of goods and services, the number of poisonings, injuries.
When identifying indicators, the circle of subjects is determined, which are directly or indirectly influenced by the manifestation of the problem. Such a circle of subjects, among others, can be consumers of a specific product or service, residents of a specific territory, employees of a particular industry, the state as a whole (in cases affecting state security).
It is proposed to pay special attention to the reliability of indicators and the frequency of their measurements. The reliability of indicators depends on the method of their measurement (collection of primary information, its generalization). In order to analyze the regulatory impact, to ensure the reliability of indicators and the possibility of their re-measurement, it is supposed to use the following sources:
1) data from statistical authorities and tax authorities;
2) data of state bodies obtained in the process of processing reports, data on adventures, measurements;
3) data from law enforcement agencies;
4) data from sociological and other research conducted by organizations with a positive reputation.
The mandatory sections of the regulatory impact analysis include:
1) determination of the problem that needs to be solved by introducing regulation, indicating digital indicators of its manifestation and a clearly defined range of subjects affected by this problem. If the problem is complex, it can be divided into component parts, for each of which a digital indicator of manifestation and a circle of subjects are determined;
2) determination of the causes of the problem with a clear indication of all causal relationships. In the analysis of cause-and-effect relationships, statistical correlations and other methods of analysis are used. Special attention is paid to the description of unaccounted for possible factors of influence (externalities) on the existence of the problem;
3) a description of the mechanisms of influence of the projected regulation on the causes of the problem and its solution;
4) a clear definition of the beneficiaries (beneficiaries) of the projected regulation;
5) determination of the benefits from the regulation project with the design of the dynamics of indicators based on the monetized or other benefit of the beneficiaries;
6) description and analysis of mechanisms of influence, alternative measures to the projected regulation, identification of the respective beneficiaries (beneficiaries), determination of benefits from alternative measures;
7) determination of the range of cost actors from the introduction of regulation. With such a definition, it is necessary to detail what types of business will incur costs (including regional, industry, and other aspects), and provide an approximate number of business entities that will incur the costs. Separately, it is necessary to indicate other entities that will incur direct or indirect costs (including budgets, categories of the population);
8) the costs of implementing the regulation project are calculated for each category separately. Costs are calculated in monetary form or other digital form in cases where the monetary form is not possible to use. Transfer payments are clearly recorded. In exceptional cases, non-digital costs are given in descriptive form.
Types of costs for business entities include:
1) the costs of fulfilling information obligations (time spent in terms of the price of a man-hour);
2) fees for forms, services or fees;
3) the costs of the equipment necessary for installation, its maintenance;
4) other investments in fixed assets;
5) the costs of compulsory insurance, if such is introduced;
6) the costs of examinations and other opinions issued by third parties;
7) travel costs and waiting in lines;
8) payment for refresher courses, other forms of education;
9) membership fees, subscriptions to periodicals, other periodic payments.
For all presented alternatives to the regulation project, the circle of cost actors is determined and the corresponding costs are calculated according to the approaches presented above:
1) a comparative analysis of the summarized data of benefits and costs of the regulatory project and its alternatives;
2) a conclusion with recommendations on the regulation project, the necessary changes to the databases for the implementation of indicators and recommendations on the frequency of monitoring the effectiveness of the regulation project.
The grounds for returning the analysis of the regulatory impact to revision are its incomplete or unfair execution, logical errors made during the analysis. The analysis of the regulatory impact is sent for revision with a clear indication of all the reasons and recommendations for eliminating deficiencies.
The analysis of the regulatory impact is returned for revision in the following cases:
1) the absence of one or more of the above mandatory sections of the regulatory impact analysis;
2) the absence of digital indicators in defining the problem, if any, or a clear circle of subjects affected by this problem;
3) lack of analysis of possible externalities;
4) superficial or deterministic analysis of the mechanisms of influence of alternative measures, their benefits;
5) incomplete accounting of possible types of costs;
6) inattention to double or transfer payments, periodicity of costs;
7) superficial or deterministic cost accounting for alternatives to the regulation project;
8) unreliability of primary information, lack of relevant links.
A detailed methodology for conducting a regulatory impact analysis with accompanying instructions, examples and training manuals is developed by an advisory body with the involvement of experts, associations, scientific and other organizations.
The advisory body develops a training program for civil servants on the use of the regulatory impact analysis methodology.
To ensure the transparency and publicity of the procedure for analyzing the regulatory impact, it is necessary to use a unified centralized system of public analysis of the regulatory impact of existing and newly introduced regulations, containing a base of regulatory legal acts and providing an opportunity for each entity participating in the regulatory impact analysis procedure and citizens to independently enter into the system documents, commenting in detail and in a structured manner, making proposals and discussing both current regulations and draft regulations. At the same time, it should be possible to evaluate comments and sort them by date, popularity rating and subjects of commenting.
The second group of methods refers to the full range of functioning of the regulation system.
These methods include:
1) comprehensive reform of regulatory instruments;
2) analysis of the performance of regulatory functions;
3) tracking the effectiveness of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity.
Comprehensive reform of regulatory instruments.
Regulatory instruments fall into four categories:
1) permitting instruments;
2) instruments of control and supervision;
3) information tools;
4) self-regulation tools.
For the successful implementation of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity, it is necessary that the instruments are streamlined and consistent with the principles of policy in general.
The reform of the instruments of state control and supervision is as follows.
In order to further optimize the control activities of state bodies, a transition to the organization of inspections based on risk assessment is proposed, taking into account the cancellation of scheduled inspections of business entities, a reduction in the requirements to be verified in the implementation of state control and supervision, clear regulation of issues of other forms of control and unscheduled inspections, full automation risk management systems, elimination of duplication of control functions of state bodies.
It is also necessary to work out the issues of using alternative forms of control and security (liability insurance, personal financial guarantees, public control).
It will be necessary to identify control functions unusual for the state, the implementation of which will be more effective in a competitive environment with their subsequent transfer to self-regulation.
To ensure strict compliance with the requirements of laws, increase planning transparency and conduct an objective analysis of the control and supervisory activities of state bodies, it is proposed to carry out full automation of risk management systems.
Based on the results of automation, a database will be formed that will allow obtaining reliable data on the verification activities of state bodies for their subsequent analysis and making appropriate decisions.
Automation of the risk assessment system will ensure minimal human involvement in planning inspections and collecting data on their results. Based on the results of automation, a reliable database on the verification activities of state bodies will be formed, which will be used to analyze the regulatory impact. In this area, it is proposed to automate the risk assessment system at the stages of planning, conducting and completing inspections.
At the stage of planning inspections, the selection of subjects for inclusion in the inspection plan will be carried out without human intervention on the basis of risk assessment criteria, which will be included in the automated system. At the stage of conducting inspections in an automated mode, it is proposed:
1) register the act on the appointment of an inspection with the legal statistics authorities by electronic document management;
2) record all stages of inspections and monitor all terms (start, suspension, extension, completion) of inspections;
3) reflect in the system the results of inspections (including detected violations).
As a result of automation of the risk management system by state bodies, the following will be ensured:
1) full implementation of the analysis for continuous improvement of risk assessment, which will reduce the burden on law-abiding entrepreneurs and increase the effectiveness of state control and supervision;
2) tracking the process from planning to completion of audits for each audited entity;
3) facilitating the elimination of corruption on the part of inspectors;
4) identification of "unnecessary" requirements;
5) simplification of the workflow procedure and increase in the efficiency of using working time;
6) the reliability of the departmental reporting data.
As a result of the automation of the risk management system, transparency of the control and supervisory activities of state bodies will be ensured.
Revision of the issues of proportionality of administrative sanctions to the nature and danger of offenses, a clearer differentiation of the responsibility of small, medium, large businesses.
In accordance with A long-term plan legislative work of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan for 2015 - 2016, the development and adoption on November 12, 2015 of the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Self-Regulation" was ensured.
At the same time, the current legislation of Kazakhstan in certain industries contains elements of self-regulation.
As a rule, self-regulatory organizations are created in industries where the association of subjects is carried out on a professional basis.
This direction is the most long-term and directly depends on the effectiveness of the implementation of all other directions of the Concept.
It should be borne in mind that a serious revision of the legislation of Kazakhstan will be required. For a long time, it has been improved in the direction of a clear regulation of the powers of officials and limiting the possibilities for making subjective decisions. Much attention was paid to the issues of combating corruption. In other words, a balanced system of state regulation was built, in which the powers of civil servants were subject to restrictions, decision-making procedures were strictly formalized, responsibility was tightened, including the formation of anti-corruption legislation. To introduce full-fledged self-regulation, it is necessary to carry out the same serious work in relation to the functions transferred to self-regulatory organizations.
Self-regulation is a set of rules developed, legitimately adopted and executed by business entities by representatives of a certain industry, regardless of direct dependence on government regulation. As a broader concept, self-regulation is also seen as regulation, which includes various forms of co-regulation, in which the state approves the self-regulation regime, or self-regulation and government regulation are carried out in parallel and complement each other. Self-regulation is based on the ability of economic operators, social partners, non-governmental organizations or associations to accept among themselves and for themselves general rules at the country level (codes professional ethics or industry agreements).
Areas of self-regulation can be professional services lawyers, doctors, accountants, auditors, real estate agents, architects. There are other areas of self-regulation: the environment, the advertising industry, Internet service providers and alcohol advertising, print media, healthcare providers.
The self-regulation mechanism provides not only the development of rules that guide industry experts, but also the provision of services for the industry and consumers, including mechanisms for considering complaints and resolving conflicts.
The relationship between legal requirements and a self-regulatory system can take many forms:
1) self-regulation can be carried out in the form of establishing a set of rules in the absence of regulation by the state;
2) self-regulation norms can act alongside legislation, setting higher standards for the industry;
3) self-regulation can replace the existing state norms, if the industry takes an obligation to carry out self-regulation, and the state norms are revised.
A self-regulation system can consist of the following elements:
1) the code of honor of an association of entrepreneurs of a certain industry, inclusive, with a system of sanctions for non-compliance;
2) the system of introduction to the profession, namely, training and preparation for exams or qualification tests, preparation of examination materials and qualification tests and their administration;
3) participation in the control and supervision carried out by the state controlling body, namely, joint inspections, preparation of checklists, risk assessment;
4) development of recommendations for changing legislation;
5) consideration of complaints from consumers and members of a self-regulatory organization, resolving conflicts, imposing sanctions, maintaining statistics;
6) other quality control activities in the industry.
The benefits of self-regulation include that it can replace burdensome government regulation with a less burdensome form or mitigate negative aspects of government regulation. Self-regulation can be more flexible, adaptable to market conditions and cost. Practitioners with detailed knowledge of the industry can set better standards and better identify violations.
The benefits for the state are associated with lower costs and the need for personnel, the transfer of costs and burdens to the market participants themselves and the creation of better conditions for cooperation in the market.
Self-regulation also fosters greater cooperation and synergy in the industry, replaces confrontation with relationships based on cooperation and partnership, and harnesses the potential of pressure from other enterprises in the industry to comply.
On the other hand, self-regulation by professional and sectoral organizations should balance the public interest with the private interests of its members, and avoid anti-competitiveness.
Analysis of the performance of regulatory functions. The analysis of the performance of the regulatory functions of state bodies is carried out in order to compensate for the institutional interest of state bodies to maintain the status quo when revising regulations, reducing the state budget funds allocated for the performance of regulatory functions, optimizing the staffing table and management structure of state bodies. The analysis of the performance of regulatory functions is carried out by commissions created under state bodies.
Such commissions should include representatives of an advisory body, a government body that analyzes the performance of regulatory functions, the National Chamber of Entrepreneurs, the ministries of finance and the national economy.
Representatives of the advisory body are appointed as chairpersons of the commissions. The methodology for analyzing the performance of regulatory functions is developed by the authorized body for entrepreneurship on the basis of the recommendations of the advisory and advisory body and approved by the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan.
The advisory and advisory body is responsible for the organizational support of the work of the commissions.
Based on the results of the analysis of the performance of regulatory functions, a report and recommendations are prepared, which are approved by the chairman of the commission. These documents, as well as the dissenting opinion of the state body, if it differs from the report and recommendations of the commission, are submitted to the government leadership for consideration.
The procedure for analyzing the performance of regulatory functions includes:
1) analysis of documents establishing the functions and responsibilities of the state body;
2) analysis of the scope of regulation for which the state body is responsible, with an emphasis on achieving the stated objectives of regulation;
3) analysis of the reporting of the state body for the revision of regulation;
4) revision of legal requirements and related regulatory impact analyzes, analysis of the use of regulatory instruments;
5) analysis of the staffing table and structure of the state body, a survey of employees and heads of the state body in order to optimize the management and execution of the entrusted regulatory function;
6) consultations with the leadership of the state body;
7) preparation of the report and recommendations.
Tracking the effectiveness of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity.
A necessary component of any state policy is a system for monitoring its implementation. In the policy of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity, it is necessary to monitor the implementation of procedures and requirements by state bodies. It is necessary to analyze the periodic reporting of state bodies, dialogue with nongovernmental organizations, independent research, monitor indicators of achievement of regulatory goals and costs of businesses under the influence of regulation.
An integral monitoring system should be built and the institutional possibility of its implementation should be ensured, relations between regulatory state bodies and structures conducting monitoring and supervision should be regulated, the responsibility of civil servants for violations committed in the execution of state policy should be established.
The central element in tracking the effectiveness of state regulation of business activity is the periodic reports of the advisory body, which summarize the indicators of indicators of achieving regulatory goals and the costs of business and the budget using a standard cost model.
Another element of such tracking is the periodic targeted and general research carried out by independent organizations... Targeted research is carried out on a specific regulation, field of activity or industry. General research are carried out across the entire spectrum of regulatory policies. An example of such studies is the assessment of the price of the regulatory or investment climate of the state through sociological survey enterprises. In such studies, it is important that they are carried out periodically and monitor the dynamics of indicators.
Consultative and advisory body.
An advisory and advisory body is supposed to be created on the basis of the existing Interdepartmental Commission on Business Regulation, chaired by the First Deputy Prime Minister, whose members will be representatives of state bodies at the level of deputy first heads of state bodies, national associations of entrepreneurs, consumers, as well as other persons from interested bodies and organizations.
The organizational support of the advisory and advisory body will be carried out by a working body, the functions of which will be performed by the authorized body for entrepreneurship with the involvement of independent experts, employees of departmental and independent analytical organizations. The head of the working body of the advisory body will be the deputy head authorized body on entrepreneurship.
The functions of the advisory body will include:
1) methodological support of work related to the planning, development and revision of regulatory legal acts that establish regulatory requirements and tools;
2) coordination of plans of state bodies in terms of the development of draft legislative and other regulatory legal acts establishing new requirements and tools, and revision of existing requirements and tools;
3) preparation of conclusions on the implementation of design procedures and revision of regulatory legal acts;
4) conducting a preliminary analysis or organizing a complete analysis of related documents in the design or revision of regulatory legal acts and the preparation of relevant conclusions;
5) analysis of periodic reporting of state bodies and preparation of appropriate approvals and conclusions;
6) development of appropriate methods and monitoring of the implementation of the policy of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity;
7) methodological support of work and participation in the process of optimization of resources and structures of state bodies for the effective implementation of the policy of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity.
Also, this Concept is aimed at carrying out reforms in the following priority areas:
1. Technical regulation. Technical regulation in Kazakhstan differs from international practice.
It will be necessary to analyze the world experience in order to bring the law enforcement practice of Kazakhstan in line with it.
At the same time, technical regulation is of an umbrella nature, when under one normative legal act - technical regulation, many different legislative requirements are combined with a large number of reference norms, which entails duplication of functions of state bodies, including control and supervisory ones.
A number of measures in this direction are already provided for by the Program for Technical Regulation and the Creation of Quality Infrastructure for 2010-2014.
Within the framework of the Concept for further reforming the licensing system, permits issued for products will be identified. In the future, it is proposed to abandon such permits and regulate products only with technical regulation instruments. In turn, technical regulation makes it possible to use the mechanisms of business self-regulation to a significant extent.
In the field of technical regulation in a competitive environment, expert work, the writing of voluntary standards, and so on can be carried out.
The current model of state control in the field of technical regulation is aimed at controlling the object of control and does not ensure the implementation of the main principles of regulation: prevention and suppression of the sale of hazardous products.
The situation is aggravated by poor awareness and low literacy of end users. In Kazakhstan, the activities of societies for the protection of consumer rights are not developed due to insufficient resources and legislatively enshrined instruments of influence.
In order to ensure the safety of products, processes and prevent the practice of deceiving consumers, there is a need for a number of measures to correct the existing system of technical regulation.
To fundamentally solve the problem of inspections, it is necessary to introduce a set of measures that will be aimed both at increasing the efficiency of the work of state control bodies and protecting the legitimate rights and interests of private business entities.
According to the European experience, it is proposed to introduce market surveillance, which will allow to systematically solve the existing problems related to the safety and quality of the final product on the basis of a clear delineation of rights, obligations and toughening the liability of market participants.
Thus, the state will be able to transfer the security control function to the market, in case of violation of which severe liability measures will follow, up to material compensation for the damage caused.
It is necessary to consider the issue of creating an information system for the notification of hazardous products at the state level, which will ensure the timely and prompt exchange of data on hazardous products within the framework of the Common Economic Space, in the future with the EU system (RAPEX).
Such a system will allow building effective system monitoring the fulfillment of the requirements established in the unified Technical Regulations of the Customs Union.
On the other hand, an important guarantee of product safety and an alternative to state control is the insurance of civil liability of the activities of market participants (certification bodies, importers, manufacturers, etc.) to consumers for the quality of products, for harm caused by the produced (sold) goods or provided works, services. ...
Insurance should be carried out in the event of a property liability of the insured to consumers for the sale of products that do not comply with technical regulations and normative technical documents on standardization.
However, it should be borne in mind that liability insurance, although it is an effective measure to ensure product safety, will entail an increase in the burden on business entities.
In this regard, the implementation of this tool should be approached carefully. This issue needs to be worked out from the point of view of the ratio of the economic effect of insurance and the costs of entrepreneurs.
In view of the fact that the instruments of technical regulation allow not only to protect the market from substandard products, but also to solve the problems of increasing the competitiveness of domestic products, by establishing safety and quality requirements that meet international requirements, it is necessary to regulate the issues of standardization. This will make it possible to fill the existing gaps, eliminate the negative tendencies in standardization that appeared during the implementation of the reform of technical regulation, realize the strategic interests of the state (ensuring technological re-equipment, fulfilling state orders, defense capability, environmental protection, social protection population), promote innovative technologies and improve the energy efficiency of the economy.
Mandatory certification still prevails in the Republic of Kazakhstan, while the development of certification on a voluntary basis is necessary. Voluntary certification takes precedence over mandatory certification due to the expansion of the concept of "quality". Here, such requirements can be considered that the buyer considers the most significant, while in the mandatory certification there is a certain list of normatively established operational parameters.
As part of the implementation of the Concept, it is necessary to take a number of measures aimed at developing business self-regulation in terms of the introduction and wider use of voluntary certification.
The implementation of these measures will reduce administrative pressure on business by reducing the range of objects subject to mandatory conformity assessment (confirmation) in areas where there are minor risks, while focusing the certification tool on potentially hazardous products.
It is also necessary to introduce a public monitoring mechanism, in which the control activities of the state in relation to the quality of goods will gradually be replaced by mechanisms for considering consumer complaints and independent examinations.
2. Protection of consumer rights. Any reforms aimed at improving the business environment should be carried out taking into account the need to maintain the appropriate level of protection of consumer rights and interests. At the same time, a consumer can be understood as a fairly wide range of subjects. So the state is a consumer of services and business goods when public procurement, entrepreneurs are consumers of government services when receiving government services, and so on.
Since 2010, the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Protection of Consumer Rights" has been in effect in Kazakhstan, which defines the legal, economic and social framework for protecting consumer rights, as well as measures to provide consumers with safe and high-quality goods (works, services).
According to the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Protection of Consumer Rights", consumer protection is carried out by all state bodies within their competence.
At the same time, the authorized state body in the field of consumer protection until November 2013 was the Agency of the Republic of Kazakhstan for the Protection of Competition, whose work was formal, which was due to the lack of both legislative and actual powers to take measures to respond to consumer complaints, which are often multi-sectoral in nature. ...
As a result, a number of problems arose in this area, the solution of which must be approached comprehensively.
Currently, the problems existing in the field of consumer protection include:
1) insufficient work of state bodies on consumer complaints. Despite the fact that consumer protection should be carried out by all state bodies within their competence, this function is not implemented. Governments are more interested in conducting scheduled inspections than responding to consumer complaints;
2) lack of analysis of the work of central state and local executive bodies in terms of identifying and solving problems in the field of consumer protection;
3) the existing judicial system does not allow for quick and efficient consideration of cases on the protection of consumer rights. Currently, the burden of proof lies with the consumer as an equal party to civil legal relations, and this often leads to a passive attitude of the consumer in protecting his rights and interests. At the same time, elderly people, children, housewives are most often deceived;
4) weak work of public associations for the protection of consumer rights. At present, public associations of consumers work in isolation, do not have stable sources of funding, powers, qualified personnel, and there is no coordination of their activities;
5) outdated material and technical support for research and expertise of product quality and safety (expert laboratories) or the lack of such for certain types of research;
6) low level of awareness and consumer culture of the population due to the lack of publicly available information;
7) the presence of many violations of consumer rights in the form of fraudulent advertising and sale on the Internet, additional payments for unordered services, various violations during sales, sweepstakes, and more.
To solve these problems, it is proposed:
1) determine one of the key points of the work of the authorized body in the field of consumer rights protection to consider consumer complaints at the regional level. This requires structural units empower the authorized body in the field of consumer protection in all regions. This will make it possible to respond more quickly and in a timely manner to specific facts of harm to life, human health, the environment, and will also increase public confidence in the activities of this authorized body.
At the same time, it is planned to consider the issue of vesting the authorized body in the field of consumer protection with the right to pre-trial settlement of conflicts arising from violations of consumer rights. Thus, an authorized body in the field of consumer protection could approve settlement agreements between entrepreneurs and consumers, whose rights have been violated;
2) to introduce an assessment of the activities of central state and local executive bodies for the implementation of functions to protect consumer rights with the maintenance of an appropriate rating;
3) expand the mechanisms of self-protection by consumers of their rights. For example, you can grant the right to record violation of his rights through video and photography.
It is necessary to carefully study the experience of developed countries in determining the status of a consumer or certain target groups (pensioners, children, housewives) as the most vulnerable with the provision of appropriate advantages in the judicial process, including studying the world practice of pre-trial agreements, when the parties make a compromise decision without contacting court;
4) to study and adapt to the conditions of Kazakhstan the world experience in terms of the possibility of providing various measures of state support to existing consumer protection societies in order to improve the quality of their work;
5) develop and support the work of national centers for research and expertise of product quality and safety;
6) create a special independent Internet resource where the consumer will be able to view information about the company, its trade marks, as well as the goods (works, services) provided, write a complaint and, accordingly, receive a response directly from the company.
In addition to complaints, consumers will have the opportunity to comment on and give preference for a particular product (work, service), which will allow consumers to focus on quality.
For entrepreneurs, voluntary registration on the site is offered, which gives the company the opportunity to respond to consumers' complaints, claims and reviews. Such a dialogue between the consumer and the entrepreneur will allow manufacturers to conduct marketing research in order to improve the quality of goods (works, services).
At voluntary registration on the Internet resource, the entrepreneur joins the Memorandum on the provision of quality goods (works, services);
7) in order to increase the level of legal literacy of consumers, wide coverage in the media and public places (cinemas, television, public transport) of the state policy and the work of the authorized body in the field of consumer protection in this direction is necessary;
8) the identification of inappropriate advertising and the fight against it (especially on the Internet) should also become the priorities of the work of the authorized body in the field of consumer protection and all other state bodies in the supervised areas.
As a result of such work, a multiplier effect can be obtained: the identification of inappropriate products, an increase in laboratory discipline, an increase in the consumption of high-quality products and a feedback from the state with consumers.

Approaches to Information Instrument Reform

Footnote. Section 2 was supplemented with a subsection in accordance with the Decree of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 07.11.2016 No. 672 (shall be enforced upon expiry of ten calendar days after the day of its first official publication).

The purpose of working with information tools within the framework of state regulatory policy is to reduce costs associated with information obligations of business entities, optimize the collection and processing of information, and better awareness of public authorities. To this end, it is recommended to identify the following priority areas for this work:
1) conducting a clear functional classification of information tools to put things in order in their use and eliminate duplication;
2) development of a system for using information tools, defining the boundaries of their effective functioning and achieving goals;
3) reduction and optimization of information requirements and costs of information tools necessary for execution by business entities;
4) assessment of the administrative costs of the business in connection with the fulfillment of information requirements.
Reforming information tools presupposes the creation of the necessary institutional and methodological framework.
For a complete coverage of all information tools, their classification and qualitative formation of their list, an expert group will be created under an advisory body from among representatives of government agencies and the business community.
State bodies carry out an inventory of information obligations, for which an analysis of each information instrument (requirement) is carried out by determining the group of this instrument, the use of the information provided, indicative costs for the stages of the information instrument execution.
State bodies should identify the indicator value of the working time spent on the performance of elements (stages) of information obligations, such as:
1) study of instructions;
2) acquisition, installation and use of technologies and systems;
3) search for data sources;
4) filling out and revising the collection of information;
5) transfer of information.
The results of the inventory will be reviewed by the expert group and based on the results of the discussion, depending on the effectiveness in achieving the set goals, a decision will be made to cancel or revise each information tool.
Based on the results of the inventory, it is recommended to classify them according to their functional characteristics.
For this, it is proposed to use the division into the following groups:
1) fulfillment of legal requirements before third parties. For example, marking, declaring, mandatory instructions, service rules, other information obligatory for provision to consumers, information within the framework of bankruptcy procedures, on changes in the ownership structure, other information about private entrepreneurship, obligatory for provision to third parties;
2) regular mandatory reporting to public authorities (with the exception of tax, statistical and financial periodic reporting);
3) a one-time submission of information to state bodies (forms, extracts, declarations, notifications, other documents filled in by private entrepreneurship entities submitted to state bodies within the framework of registration, licensing procedures or other applications to state bodies).
This category also includes notifications of the beginning or termination of entrepreneurial activity, the list of which is approved by the annex to the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Permits and Notifications".
The final list of information tools will be submitted to the advisory body for consideration.
Further optimization of the use of information tools is possible by conducting a detailed analysis of specific requirements or information obligations. The main criterion for such an analysis is the use of the information provided by its recipient (usually a government agency). Sometimes private entrepreneurs provide information that is either not used at all, or the usefulness of its use is limited. Information requirements that contain these types of information should be reviewed first.
In many countries, including Kazakhstan, integrated databases of business entities have been created or are being created. The use of such databases makes it possible to significantly reduce the amount of information required from private business entities, because a certain amount of constant and historical information is already in these databases, and the integration of these databases with the requirements of various government agencies avoids duplication of the provision of requirements by private business entities.
This point should be taken into account when conducting an inventory of information tools and their subsequent optimization.
The steps described above to optimize information tools, when fully implemented, will lead to a reduction in the number of information requirements for private business entities.
The next step is to revise information commitments to reduce costs.
international experience and the experience of Kazakhstan shows that such a reduction is possible and effective in cases when the political leadership of the state sets certain quantitative goals for such a reduction.
For example, after a quantitative reduction and inventory of the remaining information tools, it is possible to determine the goal of reducing the time costs and, accordingly, the financial costs of private business entities.

The list of regulatory legal acts by means of which
implementation of the Concept is expected

Footnote. The list as amended by the Resolution of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 07.11.2016 No. 672 (shall be enforced upon expiry of ten calendar days after the day of its first official publication).

The implementation of the Concept is expected through the following regulatory legal acts:
1. The Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated July 5, 2014 "On Administrative Offenses".
2. The Entrepreneurial Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated October 29, 2015.
3. Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated May 31, 1996 "On public associations".
4. Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated November 27, 2000 "On Administrative Procedures".
5. Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated November 9, 2004 "On technical regulation".
6. Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated November 12, 2015 "On self-regulation".
7. Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated April 6, 2016 "On Legal Acts".

Short description

In the economy of the Republic, qualitative changes are taking place in the organization of the production management structure. For the first time, the years of economic reforms dealt a powerful blow to the functions of the state as an owner and subject of central planning. Denationalization and privatization served as the main levers for a revolution in basic relations and a critical weakening of the economic role of the state. Meanwhile, in a modern market economy, the state should remain the largest owner and the main force for regulating economic processes. And here the problem of improving the legal regulation of the economy becomes more and more urgent.

INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER 1. Theoretical aspects state regulation of entrepreneurial activity.



CHAPTER 2. Basics of formation and development of entrepreneurship in Kazakhstan.
2.1 State and development trends of entrepreneurship in Kazakhstan.
2.2. Analysis of the development of entrepreneurship in the Aktobe region.
CHAPTER 3. The main directions of state regulation
entrepreneurial activity in the Republic of Kazakhstan.
3.1. Legal regulation entrepreneurial activity in the Republic of Kazakhstan.
3.2. Economic regulation of entrepreneurial activity in the Republic of Kazakhstan.
3.3. The main problems and prospects of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity in Kazakhstan.
CONCLUSION
BIBLIOGRAPHY

Attached files: 1 file

STATE REGULATION OF ENTREPRENEURIAL ACTIVITIES ON THE EXAMPLE OF KAZAKHSTAN

INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER 1. Theoretical aspects of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity.

1. Business concept.
2. Forms and types of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity: theory of the issue.
3. Forms and types of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity: world experience.

CHAPTER 2. Basics of formation and development of entrepreneurship in Kazakhstan.

2.1 State and development trends of entrepreneurship in Kazakhstan.

2.2. Analysis of the development of entrepreneurship in the Aktobe region.

CHAPTER 3. The main directions of state regulation

entrepreneurial activity in the Republic of Kazakhstan.

3.1. Legal regulation of entrepreneurial activity in the Republic of Kazakhstan.

3.2. Economic regulation of entrepreneurial activity in the Republic of Kazakhstan.

3.3. The main problems and prospects of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity in Kazakhstan.

CONCLUSION

BIBLIOGRAPHY

INTRODUCTION

The economy of the Republic is undergoing qualitative changes in the organization of the production management structure. For the first time, the years of economic reforms dealt a powerful blow to the functions of the state as an owner and subject of central planning. Denationalization and privatization served as the main levers for a revolution in basic relations and a critical weakening of the economic role of the state. Meanwhile, in a modern market economy, the state should remain the largest owner and the main force for regulating economic processes. And here the problem of improving the legal regulation of the economy becomes more and more urgent.

That is why it seems to be the most important now to determine the essence of the problems facing the economy, to establish the causes of their occurrence and, having made a "diagnosis", to prescribe a "treatment". This course work is devoted to a new phenomenon in our economy, entrepreneurship.

The objective of this course work is to study the legal regulation of entrepreneurship in the Republic of Kazakhstan, to study the positive and negative aspects of regulation. The aim of the work is to study this issue based on the analysis of modern literature on problematic issues of legal regulation of entrepreneurial activity in the Republic of Kazakhstan.

CHAPTER 1. THEORETICAL ASPECTS OF STATE REGULATION OF ENTREPRENEURIAL ACTIVITIES

1. Business concept

Entrepreneurship is an initiative activity of citizens and legal entities, regardless of the form of ownership, aimed at obtaining net income by satisfying the demand for goods (works, services), based on private property (private entrepreneurship) or on the right of economic management of a state enterprise (state entrepreneurship) ... Entrepreneurial activity is carried out under the property responsibility of the entrepreneur. one

Signs of entrepreneurial activity:

1) consistency and consistency;

2) independence, freedom in choosing directions and methods of work, independent decision-making without interference from state bodies, but this does not exclude general regulation by the state. The entrepreneur acts in his own interests, he is free and autonomous in determining any conditions of the contract that do not contradict the legislation, in establishing his rights and obligations on its basis;

3) entrepreneurial risk - the activity of an entrepreneur in the market in a situation of uncertainty regarding the likely receipt of profit or loss, when the decision maker, being unable to unambiguously foresee whether he will achieve profit or incur losses, is faced with the choice of any of the alternative solutions;

4) focus on systematic profit.

Depending on the main purpose of the entrepreneur's activities, commercial and non-commercial organizations are distinguished. The content of entrepreneurial activity is the performance of operations for the use of property, the sale of goods, the performance of work or the provision of services. 2

Are not business activities:

1) notarial activity;

2) advocacy;

3) activities for the sale by citizens of personal subsidiary plots, agricultural products produced and processed in the conduct of personal subsidiary plots;

4) activities for the provision of paid additional educational services to the population, enterprises, state and municipal educational institutions (for training based on additional educational programs, teaching special courses and cycles of disciplines, including tutoring, classes with in-depth study of subjects and other services), not provided for by the relevant educational programs and state educational standards. 3

Entrepreneurial activity - component economic activity, which is closely related to the market, commodity-money relations. Carrying out entrepreneurial activities without registration is prohibited. Entrepreneurship has the right to engage in both legal entities (primarily commercial organizations) and individuals carrying out entrepreneurial activity without forming a legal entity.

1. Forms and types of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity: theory of the issue

State regulation of the economy in a market economy is a system of standard measures of a legislative, executive and regulatory nature, carried out by authorized government agencies and public organizations in order to stabilize and adapt the existing socio-economic system to changing conditions, including a complex of diverse and interrelated economic regulators. 4

An important goal of state regulation of the economy is the creation of economic and social stability and its adaptation to changing conditions. In a market economy, it solves various problems: 5

• Stimulating economic growth;
• Employment regulation;
• Encouraging progressive shifts in sectoral and regional structure;
• Export support.

The main directions, forms, scale of state regulation are determined by the nature and severity of economic and social problems.

Subjects of state regulation are carriers, spokesmen and performers of economic interests. The objects of state regulation of the economy are spheres, industries, regions, as well as situations, phenomena and conditions of the country's socio-economic life, where difficulties have arisen or could arise, problems that are not automatically resolved or resolved in the distant future, while the removal of these problems is necessary ...

In a market economy, the economy is regulated by economic (indirect) and administrative (direct) methods. Economic and administrative methods are, as it were, opposite, since administrative ones restrict freedom of action. 6

In July 1992, the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On the Protection and Support of Private Entrepreneurship" was adopted, which states that private entrepreneurship is the activity of citizens aimed at making a profit or personal income by satisfying the demand for goods (works, services), based either on property of the citizen himself and carried out on his behalf, at his own risk and under his property responsibility (individual entrepreneurship), or on collective property carried out on his behalf, for the risk and under the property responsibility of a legal entity (collective entrepreneurship). 7

1. Forms and types of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity: world experience

The decisive factor in the development of entrepreneurship in industrialized countries is their state support. One of the components of this system are government programs to support small and medium-sized businesses. Stimulating medium-sized businesses is multidisciplinary and differs from country to country. But in all cases it implies, first of all, the creation of a favorable legal and economic climate for its development.

Almost all developed Western countries use various methods and forms of administrative, legal and economic support for small businesses: the creation of state structures in charge of small and medium-sized enterprises; small business financial assistance programs; tax incentives for small businesses; government assistance in obtaining orders for small firms; provision of management and technical assistance; antitrust regulation.

The incentive mechanism includes, first of all, legislative and legal acts that ensure the development and implementation of credit programs, direct and guaranteed loans, preferential subsidies, tax incentives and other forms of financial and economic support. For example, US legislation provides for two tax rates for small businesses - 15% and 28%, while for large corporations they are 34% and 46%, and a network of "incubators" has been created with public funds - special centers where start-up businessmen receive on preferential terms premises, equipment, computers. In addition to the state, small and medium-sized businesses are also called upon to help large firms, joint-stock companies and concerns. Both in the sphere of production itself, and in the creation of a system of training and retraining of personnel for small businesses. An equally important area was the provision of consulting services and information support for small businesses. eight

State regulation of Japan's foreign economic relations is mainly based on the same principles as in other developed countries. It is possible to note such tasks as: creating an effective legal framework and organizational structure for the foreign economic activity of enterprises and firms, maintaining an acceptable state of the country's trade and payments balances and a relatively stable exchange rate of the national currency, timely settlement of trade conflicts with major partners abroad, etc.

It should be emphasized that government regulation in Japan in recent decades has been increasingly developing towards the widest possible use of market self-regulation mechanisms, rejecting the most stringent forms of influence on foreign economic relations. Naturally, such a reorientation is carried out in a very balanced way, and the main criterion for changing the levers of control is to ensure the necessary measure of stability in the country's economy.

The processes of internationalization of the Japanese economy are forcing the state structures of the country to increasingly turn to regulatory actions of a multilateral nature, to take care of the favorable perception of the shares of the Japanese government abroad, especially by the main trading partners. nine

An important fundamental shift in the strategy of state regulation of foreign economic relations in Japan can be considered the increasingly demonstrated willingness to use administrative measures to accelerate the dismantling of elements of traditional trade policy and practice that contradict the principles of free trade and the interests of the internationalization of the country's economy.

The government also prepares general economic forecast programs that guide entrepreneurs with regard to the proposed measures of state support or containment of certain processes of the country's economic development in the medium and long term. 10

CHAPTER 2. BASIS FOR FORMATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN KAZAKHSTAN

2.1. State and development trends of entrepreneurship in Kazakhstan

Kazakhstani business is the sector of the economy that is literally generated by the reforms. One of the priority directions of the economic reform currently being carried out in Kazakhstan is the establishment and development of small business. The development of small business in unity with the diversification (splitting) of the industrial sector is one of the foundations of the strategy "Kazakhstan - 2030". 11 Small business in Kazakhstan is not only a necessary link in the creation of a market economic system, but also the most essential element in the social transformation of society.

The formation of a system of market economic relations is the essence of the reforms being carried out in the Republic of Kazakhstan, as in other post-socialist countries. The experience of the world market economy shows that modern market relations in almost any country are regulated by state legislation.

State regulation of the economy in a market economy is a system of standard measures of a legislative, executive and controlling nature, carried out by competent state institutions and public organizations in order to stabilize and adapt the existing socio-economic system to changing conditions, including a complex of diverse and interconnected economic regulators.

An important goal of state regulation of the economy is the creation of economic and social stability and its adaptation to changing conditions. In a market economy, it solves various problems:

• * stimulating economic growth;
• * regulation of employment;
• * encouragement of progressive shifts in the sectoral and regional structure;
• * export support.

The main directions, forms, scales of state regulation are determined by the nature and severity of economic and social problems.

Subjects of state regulation are carriers, spokesmen and performers of economic interests. The objects of state regulation of the economy are spheres, industries, regions, as well as situations, phenomena and conditions of the country's socio-economic life, where difficulties have arisen or could arise, problems that are not automatically resolved or solved in the distant future, while the removal of these problems is necessary ...

In a market economy, the economy is regulated by economic (indirect) and administrative (direct) methods. Economic and administrative methods are, as it were, opposite, since administrative ones restrict freedom of action.

Economic methods of state regulation are in two main forms: monetary and fiscal.

The monetary form implies changes in the amount of money in circulation and the availability of loans, thanks to the use of monetary policy instruments, such as the required reserve ratio, the rate of interbank loans, transactions with government bonds in the securities market, etc. The state opposes inflation, regulates interest rates, and through them the investment process, production and employment.

Fiscal form involves tax programs and government spending aimed at stimulating the national economy during periods of high unemployment and low inflation, or at slowing it down during periods of high inflation and low unemployment.

Administrative methods are based on the strength of state power and are not associated with measures of financial incentives, material incentives, they determine not the economic conditions of capital turnover, but the very external possibility of its functioning.

The basis for the formation and development of entrepreneurship in Kazakhstan is laid in the State programs for the support and development of entrepreneurship. For the first time, these issues were reflected in the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On freedom of economic activity and the development of entrepreneurship in the Kazakh SSR", adopted in December 1990.

In July 1992, the Law "On the Protection and Support of Private Entrepreneurship" was adopted, which states that private entrepreneurship is the activity of citizens aimed at obtaining profit or personal income by satisfying the demand for goods (work, services), based either on property of the citizen himself and carried out on his behalf, at his own risk and under his property responsibility (individual entrepreneurship), or on collective property carried out on his behalf, for the risk and under the property responsibility of a legal entity (collective entrepreneurship).

Private entrepreneurship does not include the activities of legal entities, a controlling stake or a large share in which belongs to the state.

The property of private entrepreneurs is inviolable and protected by law. Suspension of activities and compulsory liquidation of an economic entity that is a private entrepreneur may take place only by a court decision.

In the conditions of free enterprise, there are a number of problems associated with state regulation of the economy:

• * often the government is less informed than individuals, since accurate information is expensive;
• * natural monopolies, the services of which are most economically represented by a single company (gas supply, water supply, telephony, etc.);
• * external costs that are not reflected in the price or the normal functioning of the market, in which the state must adjust the overproduction and excessive consumption of goods and services, leading to external costs;
• * provision by the state of the economy with the required amount of money;
• * consumption of public goods, i.e. those in the consumption of which all citizens participate (unified energy system, national defense, national communication networks, etc.).

In the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan, adopted on August 30, 1995, paragraph 4 of Article 25 is especially noted, which proclaims the right of every citizen to freedom of entrepreneurial activity.

By the Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 912 of August 17, 1994, plans of assignments and measures for the implementation of state support and the development of entrepreneurship in the Republic of Kazakhstan for 1994-1996 were approved. At the end of 1995, the Program of Action of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan to deepen economic reforms for 1996-1998 was adopted, in which strengthening state support for entrepreneurship, primarily small and medium-sized businesses, was also identified as one of the main tasks. Then, the Decrees of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan of June 14, 1996 "On additional measures to implement state guarantees of freedom of entrepreneurial activity" and of March 6, 1997 "On measures to strengthen state support and enhance the development of small business" were adopted.

The Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan published a number of decrees: dated March 14, 1997, No. 325 "On the formation of the republican information and exhibition center for small businesses", dated April 8, 1997, No. 499 "Issues of small business", dated April 26, 1997, No. 665 " On the creation of a fund for the development of small business ", dated June 4, 1997 No. 923" On the approval of the Regulations on the procedure for supporting the creation of new jobs and the development of individual entrepreneurship from the funds of the state fund for promoting employment. "

The Law "On individual entrepreneurship" signed on June 19, 1997 and the Decree of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On priorities and regional programs for support and development of small business in the Republic of Kazakhstan" entrepreneurship is understood as "initiative activities of citizens aimed at generating income, based on the property of the citizens themselves and carried out on behalf of citizens for their risk and under their property responsibility."

As subjects of individual entrepreneurship, the law defined individuals engaged in this activity "without forming a legal entity and in the absence of signs of a legal entity." The following positive points can be noted:

• * created preferential conditions for obtaining loans;
• * created legislative opportunities for purchase by installments production facilities and areas, office premises, as well as their rental or trust management;
• * identified the priorities of the activity;
• * simplified the procedure for creating and registering private entrepreneurs and private enterprises, as well as opening accounts in second-tier banks.

The main coordinator and conductor of the state policy for the support and development of small business in Kazakhstan is the Department for Small Business Support of the Ministry of Economy and Trade of the Republic of Kazakhstan, created in May 1997. Under him, two expert councils have been created.

The first - from representatives of entrepreneurial structures to support small businesses to study draft regulations and legislation.

The second is an interdepartmental one, from representatives of interested ministries and departments, which is engaged in the implementation of the Presidential Decree on enhancing entrepreneurial activity.

Practical experience shows that due to the abundance of normative legal acts, difficulties are possible due to the preservation of many old laws, as well as their repetition and duplication in new ones for some positions.

In this regard, the idea of ​​creating in Kazakhstan, according to the experience of Belgium, a network of business innovation centers (business incubators), proposed by the consultants of the department for the preparation of a business plan of the Kazakhstan Center for the Support and Development of Entrepreneurship, deserves attention.

In general terms, a business innovation center is a local or regional partner structure that provides medium and small companies with a full range of services at favorable times, with an emphasis on innovative services for industry.

It is necessary to carefully consider and implement specific measures to eliminate or minimize the negative effects of such factors inhibiting the development of entrepreneurship as:

• * underdeveloped political system and inconsistency of the regulatory legal framework;
• * volatility of the Kazakh taxation system;
• * unavailability of loans due to the high difference between the interest rate set by banks and the inflation rate;
• * the majority of entrepreneurs lack the skills to define a strategy for the successful operation of an enterprise;
• * low consumer demand of the population;
• * problems in relationships with partners and competitors both inside Kazakhstan and abroad;
• * poor professional training of employees of small enterprises.

In this regard, it is advisable to use the opportunities not only of state bodies, but also of such non-state institutions as the Center for Business Relations and the Central Asian-American Foundation for the Support of Entrepreneurship in Kazakhstan. The Consultative Council of the CIS member states on the support and development of small business, created after the signing of the corresponding agreement on January 17, 1997, by the governments of all the Commonwealth states, with the exception of Uzbekistan, should also play its positive role.

Research shows that the development of entrepreneurship is associated with a change in the economic situation in the republic. The first wave in the form of cooperatives and private enterprises, taking advantage of the privileges provided, was able to function quite successfully. At that time, there were trends

macroeconomic stabilization, inflation reduction and privatization.

Executive and legislative bodies pay special attention to the problems of institutional transformations, which is reflected in Civil Code Of the Republic of Kazakhstan, a number of legislative acts, policy documents to deepen economic reforms.

The main effective measures of the government are related to the implementation of the Decree of the President of Kazakhstan "On measures to strengthen state support and intensify the development of small business" dated March 6, 1997. In accordance with this decree:

• * the state institute for support of small businesses was created (Department of Small Business Support of the Ministry of Economy and Trade of the Republic of Kazakhstan);
• * the laws “On state support of small business”, “On individual entrepreneurship”, “On amendments and additions to some legislative acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on the simplification of registration of small business entities” and others have been adopted;
• * the number of controlling and inspecting state bodies has been reduced and paid services carried out by them;
• * the Small Business Development Fund was established;
• * set the minimum amount of lending to small businesses by all banks of the second

level (at least 10% of the principal debt of the bank's loan portfolio).

Foreign experience of countries with developed market economies indicates that entrepreneurship performs the most important functions in the national economy, providing a special mechanism for the reproduction of market relations through balancing supply and demand, as well as having a significant impact on the revitalization human resources and innovative potential.

Today, the implementation of the main directions is carried out in accordance with the Decree of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On priorities and regional programs for support and development of small business in the Republic of Kazakhstan" dated July 7, 1997, which creates a strategic basis for supporting entrepreneurial activity.

The Decree establishes the main priority directions for the development of entrepreneurship for 1997-1998. This is the creation of new and the development of existing production of consumer goods, replacing imports, the development of production for further processing of products of the agro-industrial complex. Financial, investment, production and technical support will be provided through state regulation of entrepreneurial activity.

The issue of state regulation of the development of entrepreneurship is of great regional importance, especially in those geographic regions where there is an industry that is in economic decline. Here, the expansion of the regional entrepreneurial sector is often one of the most effective ways ensuring the employment of the working population.

At the same time, the ministry will take into account the feasibility of creating new industries, exclude possible duplication and overproduction. certain types products as a whole in the republic and ensure a balance between the national economic and regional goals for the development of certain industries and services. When making a final decision, the following will be taken into account:

• * an estimate of the costs of raw materials and materials, indicating domestic and imported production;
• * availability of production facilities;
• * the cost of purchasing equipment of domestic and foreign production;
• * assessment of volumes and sources of financing;
• * elaboration of the issue of loans with banks;
• * the number of employed people, etc.

In general, state regulation of entrepreneurial activity in the republic provides for the creation of legal conditions for its development and support and the development of further measures to improve the regulatory framework in order to create conditions conducive to the development and growth of entrepreneurship, as well as measures to remove unnecessary fees from controlling and inspecting organizations.

In the financial-investment and industrial-technological support for the development of entrepreneurship, particular measures are provided for the financial and credit system in order to create a favorable investment climate with the participation of specialized funds and other financial institutions.

Here, proposals for the participation of local banks and branches in lending to business entities, for the further implementation of decisions of the President and the government, in particular, an inventory of unused premises, their sale or transfer, are important.

In addition, the development of infrastructure, staffing of entrepreneurship provide for the creation and development of existing elements with the aim of forming a unified system that includes a network of foundations and centers, exhibition centers, consulting firms, etc.

The implementation of the planned measures of the government of the Republic of Kazakhstan on state regulation of entrepreneurship aimed at developing and supporting it will sharply increase the number of business entities engaged in entrepreneurial activity, and, as a result, conditions will be created to increase the share of domestic products.

State intervention in the economy requires large expenditures, which include both direct costs (preparation of legislation and control over their implementation) and indirect (on the part of firms that must comply with government instructions and reporting). In addition, it is believed that government regulations reduce the incentive to innovate, to the entry of new competitors into the industry, since this requires the permission of the relevant commission.

State regulation of entrepreneurial activity is inextricably linked with the rights, obligations and responsibilities of entrepreneurs. Rights are combined with his duties and responsibilities for violation of duties.

An entrepreneur bears administrative and criminal liability to the state and partners in accordance with the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan for improper performance of concluded contracts, violation of property rights of other entities, tax discipline, product quality requirements, environmental pollution, violation of antimonopoly legislation, non-compliance with safe working conditions, implementation consumers of products that are harmful to health.

General forms of responsibility are provided for in the Law “On freedom of economic activity and development of entrepreneurship”. These measures include monetary fines, revocation of a license or patent, and termination of business activities. Also, the entrepreneur is obliged to compensate for damage caused by non-compliance with the requirements for the rational use of land and other natural resources, protection of the environment from pollution, violation of production safety rules.

An entrepreneur, in accordance with the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan, is liable to partners for failure to fulfill the obligations provided for by the agreement (contract).

Depending on the chosen legal form of entrepreneurial activity, full or limited property liability of the entrepreneur is established for the obligations of the enterprise. The form of responsibility is indicated in the constituent documents. The activity of an unregistered enterprise is prohibited, and the income received from its activity is recovered through the courts.

In accordance with the Law "On Licensing", relations related to state licensing of activities, or certain actions subject to licensing, are regulated. It establishes the types of activities subject to compulsory licensing. Engaging in activities without an appropriate license or in violation of licensing rules and regulations entails administrative and criminal liability established by law. When issuing licenses, production conditions are taken into account that ensure the safety of society, the environment, the life and health of citizens, as well as a guarantee of the quality of goods (works, services) that are the product of this activity.

An entrepreneur who manufactures certain products must apply to a certification body and receive a certificate of conformity.

The most favored nation treatment is introduced for the products of small entrepreneurs. A certification scheme harmonized with international standards will be introduced in Kazakhstan, providing for the issuance of certificates of conformity based on a declaration of conformity. The applicant assumes responsibility for the safety of the products.

Products and types of services produced by the entrepreneur are subject to marking with the indication of the trademark or service mark. Registration of trademarks and service marks takes place in the prescribed manner. The use of someone else's trademark and other actions leading to the elimination or restriction of competition are referred to as unfair competition.

The entrepreneur is also liable for unfair competition. For actions (inaction) that violate the freedom of competition, legal entities and individuals are liable under the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Unfair Competition". In the event of a violation of the law, the subjects of market relations are obliged to stop violations due to unfair competition, terminate or amend agreements aimed at eliminating or restricting competition, compensate for losses (damage) caused as a result of unfair competition, in accordance with the established legislation.

For the first time in Kazakhstan, an entrepreneurial code has been adopted, in which. Chapter 7 is devoted to the issues of legal regulation of entrepreneurship by the state. While strengthening the freedom of entrepreneurship, one cannot fail to note the growing role of state regulation in promoting the development of entrepreneurship. The organizational forms of interaction between state bodies and private business entities are being modified, significant shifts are taking place in the goals, mechanism, management apparatus, in the combination of state and market regulation mechanisms. The definition of state regulation sounds like: “a set of measures of legislative, executive and judiciary authorities, as well as control functions carried out on the basis of regulatory legal acts by state institutions and public organizations in order to stabilize the existing socio-economic system. " According to article 80 of the Entrepreneurial Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan (hereinafter RK), state regulation of entrepreneurship should be carried out to ensure the safety of goods, works, services produced and sold by business entities for the life and health of people, and to protect the legitimate interests of entrepreneurs and the state. Environmental safety and national security of the Republic of Kazakhstan are also priority goals of state regulation of entrepreneurship. The history of the formation in Kazakhstan of a system of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity in the new market conditions is interesting. In the first years of independence, a legal framework was developed to regulate relations between private property, civil society and freedom of entrepreneurship. Regulatory issues by government bodies were addressed as they arose by introducing new regulatory instruments. In this regard, preference was given to permissive instruments. Permissions are the easiest tool to administer, but they are subject to the highest corruption risks. At the same time, for entrepreneurs as subjects of regulation, the introduction of permits became a significant barrier to enter the market. And in the presence of complex and sometimes unrealizable requirements, such a barrier is insurmountable for small businesses. Realizing the need to limit the arbitrary introduction of regulation of business, the state has carried out reforms aimed at increasing the efficiency of state regulation. In 2006, the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Private Entrepreneurship" was adopted, which provided for the creation of expert councils under state bodies. As a result, businesses got the opportunity to participate in the development of regulatory legal acts through expert councils created under the central state, local representative and executive bodies. The principles of state protection and support of private entrepreneurship, criteria for determining the dimension and much more have been fixed. In 2007 normative base was supplemented by the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Licensing", which approved an exhaustive list of types of licensed activities and new principles of licensing. The principles of "one window" have been consistently introduced for agreement with all state bodies when obtaining licenses, "silence is a sign of consent" is extended to all permits, a single term for issuing licenses has been established - 15 working days, verification of the submitted package of documents for completeness within two days, notarization of documents. The issuance of all licenses has been transferred to an electronic format for permits that are not associated with a direct risk to the life and health of citizens, are of an informational nature, and do not affect security against high threats, a notification procedure has been introduced. A certain role in reforming the issues of state control and supervision in relation to business entities was played by the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On State Control and Supervision in the Republic of Kazakhstan" adopted in 2011. In the process of implementing this law, the level of departmental acts of state bodies, establishing mandatory requirements for business, has increased. In particular, more than 250 regulatory legal acts have been raised to the level of resolutions of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan. A three-year ban on scheduled inspections of small businesses, introduced in 2012, has become a great incentive for business development. And, as already noted, on October 29, 2015, the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan signed Entrepreneurial Code RK, which entered into force on January 1, 2016. The previously existing legislative framework governing legal issues of entrepreneurship was codified, gaps and contradictions were eliminated, socio-economic and legal conditions and guarantees for ensuring freedom of entrepreneurship were systematized. The result of the reforms was to significantly reduce the pressure of regulatory bodies on business. Changes have been made to areas such as starting a business, taxation, investor protection. The Entrepreneurial Code, in addition to systematizing the provisions of the relevant laws on the principle of homogeneity, consolidated uniform principles, measures of state support for private entrepreneurship, the agro-industrial complex, industrial-innovative, investment activities, and special economic zones. The previous reform of the licensing system and state control and supervision provided an inventory of the relevant regulatory instruments and their approval only at the level of laws, with the recognition as illegitimate of all other permits and control functions that were not included in the relevant lists of laws. This approach guaranteed the protection of entrepreneurs from the arbitrary introduction of new burdensome regulatory instruments. State control and supervision is aimed, inter alia, at detecting violations and preventing them. The principle is the provision on the priority of preventing an offense over punishment. In practice, the most common sanctions are fines, to a lesser extent, warnings. The high percentage of imposition of penalties indicates that penalties are applied even for minor violations, despite the fact that international practice is moving towards the use of notices of the need for improvement. The Entrepreneurial Code has consolidated the basic principles of state regulation of relations with the participation of business entities, marked by the Concept of legal policy of the Republic of Kazakhstan for the period from 2010 to 2020, approved by the Decree of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated August 24, 2009 No. 858. Such as: guarantee of freedom of private entrepreneurship (it is allowed to carry out any types of activities not prohibited by the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan), ensuring its protection and support (the principle of freedom of private entrepreneurship); equality of all business entities to carry out entrepreneurial activities (the principle of equality of business entities); guarantee of the inviolability and protection of the property of business entities (the principle of inviolability of property); the action of business entities within the framework of the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan and regulatory legal acts adopted in accordance with it (the principle of legality); stimulation of entrepreneurial activity, including support and priority of the development of small entrepreneurship (the principle of stimulating entrepreneurial activity); participation of business entities in the examination of draft normative legal acts, texts of international treaties and other obligations of the Republic of Kazakhstan affecting the interests of entrepreneurship (the principle of participation in rule-making). On April 18, 2014, the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan approved the Concept of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity until 2020, which was adopted in pursuance of the instructions of the Head of State. The implementation of the Concept provides for the achievement of goals and solution of tasks to create a balanced system of government regulation that is cheap for business and free from corruption. The effectiveness of measures of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity also depends on the stability of the institutional structure of entrepreneurial activity. Improving legislation leads to the creation and continuous change of various laws, which, by the fact of their repeated and haphazard changes, can indirectly affect business. Entrepreneurs note that they have to spend more time to delve into constantly changing regulations, which leads to an increase in both explicit and implicit transaction costs. State regulation of entrepreneurial activity should take into account the impact of collective action, as well as informal institutional restrictions on the development of entrepreneurial structures. Summing up, it should be noted that state regulation of entrepreneurial activity is the most important lever of a market economy, where the main instrument is the law that can have a large regulatory impact on the main spheres of society, including entrepreneurial activity. State regulation of entrepreneurial activity is necessary both in order to ensure the implementation of the public interests of society and the state, and to create best conditions for the development of entrepreneurship, with close interaction between entrepreneurship and the state.