Assessing the Effects of Corruption and Crime on Firm Performance: Evidence from Latin America

This paper uses a survey of private firms to assess the effects of corruption on the economic prospects of firms. The paper studies whether corruption and crime affect sales, investment and employment growth at the firm level, and whether bribes and illegal payments by firms reduce bureaucratic interference. The paper finds that corruption and crime substantially reduce sales growth, and that the reported levels of corruption and bureaucratic interferences are positively correlated at the firm level. Overall, the results of the paper suggest that corruption and crime substantially reduce firm competitiveness and that corruption is unlikely to have any positive effects.

Corruption and firm performance in Africa

This paper uses survey data to investigate empirically the importance of corruption in determining firm performance in Africa. We allow for the possibility of perception bias on the part of the respondents and for corruption being endogenous. We find that corruption is linked to significant adverse effects on firm performance in two ways. At the firm (or “local”) level, companies that pay bribes have 20 percent lower levels of output per worker. At the economywide (or “global”) level, firms in countries with pervasive corruption are some 70 per cent less efficient than firms in countries free of corruption. We thus provide evidence that competitive uncoordinated local corruption has substantial global effects.

Corruption and Firm Performance in Africa

This paper uses survey data to investigate empirically the importance of corruption in determining firm performance in Africa. We allow for the possibility of perception bias on the part of the respondents and for corruption being endogenous. We find that corruption is linked to significant adverse effects on firm performance in two ways. At the firm (or “local”) level, companies that pay bribes have 20 percent lower levels of output per worker. At the economy-wide ( or “global”) level, firms in countries with pervasive corruption are some 70 per cent less efficient than firms in countries free of corruption. We thus provide evidence that competitive uncoordinated local corruption has substantial global effects.

STUDY ON COMPETITIVENESS AND CORRUPTION IN ROMANIA. DEPENDENCES AND INTERDEPENDENCES AT MACRO AND MICRO LEVEL

Competitiveness represents the long term objective of any particular entity – country or firm; that’s why all the strategies – no mater the level – aim to obtain and maintain competitiveness. But, if we look closer to the world competitiveness ranking, we can see an important impediment of Romania’s competitiveness (at macro and micro economic level as well): generalized corruption. There are some well proven (through theoretical and methodological studies) dependencies and interdependencies between competitiveness and corruption – at national and firm level as well – which we would like to emphasize by this paper for a better understanding of the context and in order to extract some lessons for the future. Classification-JEL: K4, L2, N4, O1national and firm competitiveness; global competitiveness index; private and public corruption; corporate corruption/ethics indices; corruption perception index

Corruption and productivity : firm-level evidence from the BEEPS survey

Using enterprise data for the economies of Central and Eastern Europe and the CIS, this study examines the effects of corruption on productivity. Corruption is narrowly defined as the occurrence of informal payments to government officials to ease the day-to-day operation of firms. The effects of this"bribe tax"on productivity are compared to the consequences of red tape, which may be understood as imposing a"time tax"on firms. When testing effects in the full sample, only the bribe tax appears to have a negative impact on firm-level productivity, while the effect of the time tax is insignificant. At the same time, unlike similar studies using country-level data, firm level analysis allows a direct test of the"efficient grease"hypothesis by investigating whether corruption may increase productivity by helping reduce the time tax on firms. Results provide no evidence of a trade-off between the time and the bribe taxes, implying that bribing does not emerge as a second-best option to achieve higher productivity by helping circumvent cumbersome bureaucratic requirements. When controlling for EU membership the effects of the bribe tax are more harmful in non-EU countries. This suggests that the surrounding environment influences the way in which firm behaviour affects firm performance. In particular, in countries where corruption is more prevalent and the legal framework is weaker, bribery is more harmful for firm-level productivity.Environmental Economics&Policies,Public Sector Corruption&Anticorruption Measures,Political Economy,Economic Theory&Research,Emerging Markets

Corruption and Cross-Border Investment: Firm-Level Evidence

This paper studies the impact of corruption on inward foreign direct investment using a unique firm-level data set. It examines two effects of corruption simultaneously: a reduction in the volume of foreign investment and a shift in the ownership structure. Corruption makes local bureaucracy less transparent and hence acts as a tax on foreign investors. Moreover, corruption affects the decision to take on a local partner. On the one hand, corruption increases the value of using a local partner to cut through the bureaucratic maze. On the other hand, corruption decreases the effective protection of investor’s intangible assets and lowers the probability that disputes between foreign and domestic partners will be adjudicated fairly, which reduces the value of having a local partner. The importance of protecting intangible assets increases with investor’s technological sophistication, which tilts the preference away from joint ventures in a corrupt country. Empirical evidence shows that corruption reduces inward FDI and shifts the ownership structure towards joint ventures. Technologically more advanced firms are found to be less likely to engage in joint ventures.http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/39879/3/wp494.pd

Lobbying and Bribes - A Survey-Based Analysis of the Demand for Influence and Corruption

We use survey responses by firms to examine the firm-level determinants and effects of political influence, their perception of corruption and prevalence of bribe paying. We find that: (a) measures of political influence and corruption/bribes are uncorrelated at the firm level; (b) firms that are larger, older, exporting, government-owned, are widely held and/or have fewer competitors have more political influence, perceive corruption to be less of a problem and pay bribes less often; (c) influence increases sales and government subsidies and in general makes the firm have a more positive view on the government. In sum, we show that “strong” firms use their influence to bend laws and regulations, whereas “weak” firms pay bribes to mitigate the costs of government intervention.

The Effect of Fiscal Policy and Corruption Control Mechanisms on Firm Growth and Social Welfare: Theory and Evidence

The paper investigates the conflict that arises between the government, its bureaucrats and businesses in the tax collection process. We examine the effect of fiscal policy and corruption control mechanisms on the prevalence of tax evasion and corruption behaviour, and their impact on firm growth and social welfare. We first model a situation where bureaucrats are homogeneous and have complete negotiating power over the firms with which they interact. We show that in such a situation the government can set an optimal tax rate and put in place a corruption control mechanism involving detection of corrupt bureaucrats within the framework of a no-corruption equilibrium. However, when the public administration is composed of heterogeneous types of bureaucrats with the specific ability to impose red tape costs on firms, we show, like Acemoglu and Verdier (2000), that it might be best for the government to allow a certain level of corruption, given the cost of monitoring activities. We also show that the government could face lose-lose as well as win-win situations in the conduct of its fiscal policies. We then verify the predictions of the model using firm-level data collected from 243 businesses in Uganda. We test the effect of monitoring on bribe and tax payments. We also test the effect of tax rates and corruption control mechanisms on firm growth. We compare the effect of actual corruption (as measured by bribe payments) with the effect of government corruption expectations on firms’ growth.Corruption, Tax evasion, Tax administration, Firm growth

Are corruption and taxation really harmful to growth? - firm-level evidence

Exploiting a unique data set containing information about the estimated bribe payments of Ugandan firms, the authors study the relationship between bribe payments, taxes, and firm growth in Uganda for the period 1995-97. Using industry-location averages to circumvent the potential problem of endogeneity, and to deal with issues of measurement error, they find that both the rate of taxation, and the rate of bribery are negatively correlated with firm growth. For the full data set, a one percentage point increase in the bribery rate is associated with three percentage point reduction in firm growth - an effect about three times that of taxation. Moreover, after excluding outliers, the authors find that bribery has a much greater negative impact on growth, and taxation a considerably smaller one. This provides some validation of firm-level theories of corruption, which posit that corruption retards development, even more than taxation does.Governance Indicators,Health Monitoring&Evaluation,Corruption&Anitcorruption Law,Public Sector Corruption&Anticorruption Measures,Achieving Shared Growth

Offshoring of Services and Corruption: Do Firms Escape Corrupt Countries?

In this paper, we analyze how the offshoring of services by Swedish firms is affected by corruption in target economies. The results suggest that firms avoid corrupt countries and that corruption reduces the amount of offshored services. In addition, the sensitivity to corruption is highest for poor countries, and large and internationalized firms are the ones that tend to be the most sensitive to corruption.Corruption; Services; Offshoring; Gravity model; Firm level data