home » Calculation » Legal regulation of entrepreneurial activity in the Republic of Kazakhstan. Coursework state regulation of business activities

Legal regulation of entrepreneurial activity in the Republic of Kazakhstan. Coursework state regulation of business activities

The activity of an entrepreneur is aimed at making a profit, at obtaining property benefits. In this case, we can talk about a possible commercial risk, possible adverse property consequences of the entrepreneur's activities (due to both omissions in work and related to improper fulfillment of one's obligations).

Share work on social networks

If this work does not suit you, there is a list of similar works at the bottom of the page. You can also use the search button

Other related works that may interest you.vshm>
20307.		Legal regulation of audit activity in the Republic of Kazakhstan	86.95KB
	Historical and legal aspect of the emergence of audit and audit activities. Responsibility for offenses in the field of audit activities under the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan Actual problems audit and audit activities in the Republic of Kazakhstan. Problems of application of international auditing standards. Against this backdrop, there is an urgent need to develop an internal and external independent alternative to public control audit as one of the integral...
18231.		Currency regulation in the Republic of Kazakhstan	321.02KB
	Legal basis for the performance of foreign exchange transactions by commercial banks in the foreign exchange market of Kazakhstan. The concept and classification of foreign exchange transactions commercial bank. Analysis of foreign exchange operations of a commercial bank on the example of the regional branch of Sberbank of Kazakhstan. Technological foundations of the bank's activities in the field of organization and methodology of foreign exchange transactions.
18148.		Legal regulation of leasing under the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan	73.39KB
	There are various types of lending: mortgage, secured by securities, secured by consignments of goods, real estate. However, if the company needs to upgrade its fixed assets, it is more profitable to lease equipment.
18421.		Legal regulation of agricultural land under the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan	106.41KB
	Legal characteristics of agricultural land. Legal regulation of agricultural land under the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Legal regime of agricultural land use. new Land Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan.
4130.		Legal regulation of foreign trade activities	55.7KB
	The reforms being carried out in Russia have shown that the rejection of the levers of state influence on the economy turned out to be unreasonable. The state of Russian statehood is characterized by the fact that the economy has freed itself from the administrative-command system, and the forms and methods of state influence on market entities are still being created.
6043.		Legal regulation of service activities	48.92KB
	Licensing authorities have the right to: conduct inspections of the licensee's activities for compliance with the licensing requirements and conditions of the activities carried out by the licensee; request and receive from the licensee the necessary explanations and information on issues arising during the inspections; draw up, based on the results of inspections, acts of protocols indicating specific violations; make decisions obliging the licensee to eliminate the identified violations; set deadlines for the elimination of such violations; issue a warning to the licensee; ...
3210.		International legal regulation of tourism activities	34.58KB
	Tourism charter. Global Code of Ethics for Tourism. Bilateral treaties and agreements of states in the field of tourism. Agreement on cooperation in the field of tourism concluded within the framework of the CIS.
14042.		Legal regulation, tasks and forms of activity of the Russian advocacy	15.64KB
	Achieving this goal required the solution of the following tasks: to consider the legal regulation and principles of the advocacy in Russian Federation; analyze the tasks of the advocacy in the Russian Federation; to characterize the modern forms of lawyer formations. The Constitution of the Russian Federation guarantees to everyone ...
7899.		Legal regulation of activities for the provision of services, performance of work	23.49KB
	The concepts of goods, work and services are contained in both civil law and tax law. Services are the useful actions of the entrepreneur of the service provider of the contractor that satisfy the needs of creditors of the customers of the clients, as such, do not create a materialized result that would remain at the disposal of the client and would have the qualities of an independent object of civil rights ...
10648.		Services as a type of activity. Legal regulation of paid rendering of services	19.48KB
	Topic: Services as an activity. Legal regulation of paid rendering of services Topic: Services as a type of activity. Legal regulation of paid rendering of services 1. Services as a type of activity.

In order to create an effective system of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity and the formation of regulatory policy for the long term, the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan DECIDES:
1. Approve the attached Concept of State Regulation of Entrepreneurial Activity until 2020.
2. To impose control over the execution of this resolution on the Office of the Prime Minister of the Republic of Kazakhstan.
3. This resolution shall enter into force after 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 business
activities until 2020

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

This Concept defines the vision, the main approaches to the state regulation of entrepreneurial activity and is aimed at ensuring further development in this direction until 2020.
By this Concept, by 2020, it is planned to create on an ongoing basis a centralized system for public analysis of the regulatory impact of existing and newly introduced norms of laws and tools for regulating the economy and the introduction on its basis of the harmonization of regulatory legal acts by associations of private business entities operating in the field of data acceptance legal regulations based on international experience. At the same time, it provides for the possibility of transferring certain state functions of regulating entrepreneurial activity to the business environment with a simultaneous increase in the responsibility of entrepreneurs for violations that caused damage to consumers. Also, the implementation of the Concept involves 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 the internal activities of private enterprises, and the focus of state control only on the quality and safety of the final product, the development of issues of institutional strengthening of public organizations for the protection of consumer rights , increasing requirements for them, developing transparent mechanisms for activities, raising consumer awareness of the quality and safety of consumed products.

Analysis of business regulation
activities in Kazakhstan

№ 672

The task of creating a favorable environment for the development of private entrepreneurship and the inflow of investments has been facing all countries of the former socialist bloc since the early 1990s.
The end of the 20th century was also marked by the beginning of the revision of state regulation systems in Western countries and the development of existing approaches and practices. At that time, there was no international experience of an effective transition from a planned economy to a market one, 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 the new market conditions. During the first years of independence, a legal framework was developed to regulate the relations of private property, civil society and freedom of enterprise. Problems of regulation by state bodies were solved as they arose, by introducing new regulatory instruments.
In this regard, preference was given to permissive instruments. Permits are the easiest tool to administer, but 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 entry into the market. And in the presence of complex and sometimes impossible requirements, such a barrier is insurmountable for small businesses.
Realizing the need to limit the arbitrary introduction of regulation of entrepreneurial activity by the state, reforms were carried out aimed at improving 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 for 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 licensing principles.
In 2011, the principles of “one stop shop” were introduced for agreement with all state bodies when obtaining licenses, “silence is a sign of consent” was extended to all permits. Also, a single term for issuing licenses is set - 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 electronic format for permits that are not associated with a direct risk to the life and health of citizens, which are of an informational nature and do not affect the provision of security from high threats, a notification procedure has been 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 government agencies.
In order to increase transparency norm-setting activities government agencies, free access for businesses to regulatory legal acts, as well as improving legal literacy, amendments have been made that provide for an increase in the level of departmental acts of state bodies that establish 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. To implement this norm, 251 normative legal acts have been 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 for three years from the date of their state registration.
In general, the result of the reforms carried out was a significant reduction in the pressure of regulatory authorities on business.
In addition, in recent years, reforms have been carried out in such areas as opening an enterprise, taxation, and protecting investors.
Recently, certain elements of the analysis of the regulatory impact of the adopted regulatory legal acts have been introduced in Kazakhstan. Thus, in order to ensure the quality of the development of regulatory legal acts, assess their impact on the regulated area and reduce corruption risks, a methodology was introduced to assess the socio-economic consequences of draft legislative acts being developed, 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 normative legal acts.
However, today in the field of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity there are the following problems:
1) in the licensing system - the unsettledness of the existing licensing system, the non-use of risk management systems in the licensing practice of Kazakhstan, the constant uncontrolled increase in the number permits, the complexity of the licensing legislation, the lack of responsibility of officials for the negative consequences of the issued permits, the lack of effective implementation of ongoing reforms;
2) state control and supervision - the prevalence of detection of violations and punishment over the prevention of their commission and prevention; the presence of a large number of requirements subject to verification by the state, many of which are unfeasible, duplicated, outdated, contradictory, unreasonable; insufficient implementation of risk assessment systems.
One of the principles of state control and supervision is the priority of preventing an offense over punishment. However, the sanctions applied in the event of a violation are more often fines than warnings, as well as re-checks.
A high penalty rate indicates that fines are applied even to minor violations, despite the fact that international practice follows the path of using notifications about the need for improvements.
This practice shows that sanctions are applied without any relation to the seriousness of the violations;
3) self-regulation of business - lack of developed competition in the business environment, which could become a good basis for self-regulation, areas 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 rule-making activities due to the lack of an organized platform for discussion, conducting scientific economic expertise, within which the analysis of the socio-economic consequences of only draft laws is carried out, the inefficiency of business participation in the rule-making process, as well as a formal approach state bodies (developers) to take into account the opinions of the business community;
5) technical regulation - the multiplicity of existing regulatory legal acts and the presence of reference norms in them, which entail duplication of requirements, the absence of a unified database of regulatory and technical documents, as well as control by state bodies. The lack of a unified database 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, businesses do not have the opportunity to quickly get acquainted with regulatory documents, as well as comply with these requirements, which in a market economy hinders the development of industries economy.
6) information tools - uncontrolled growth in the number of information tools, lack of a uniform approach to collecting information, duplication of information tools and deadlines for their implementation. Unlike permits and areas 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 sub-legal 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 allows you to evaluate its effectiveness, and also provides sufficient tools to improve state regulation across the entire spectrum of implementation. public policy.
According to the Concept of the legal policy of the Republic of Kazakhstan for the period from 2010 to 2020, approved by 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, in which such basic principles state regulation of relations with the participation of business entities, as:
1) guaranteeing the freedom of private entrepreneurship (it is allowed to carry out any types of activities that are not prohibited by the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan), ensuring its protection and support (the principle of freedom of private entrepreneurship);
2) equality of all business entities to carry out entrepreneurial activities (principle of equality of business entities);
3) guarantee of inviolability and protection of property of business entities (principle of inviolability of property);
4) action of business entities within the limits of the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan and normative legal acts adopted in accordance with it (principle of legality);
5) stimulation of entrepreneurial activity, including support and priority for the development of small business (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 (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 for entrepreneurship. He systematized the provisions of the relevant laws according to the principle of homogeneity, while consolidating uniform principles, measures state support private entrepreneurship, agro-industrial complex, industrial-innovative, investment activities, special economic zones.
The earlier reforms of the licensing system and state control and supervision ensured the 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 from the arbitrary introduction of new burdensome regulatory instruments at the level of by-laws, including departmental ones.
An analysis of the current legislation shows that all the necessary regulatory legal framework already exists at the legislative level.
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 communication tool and are generally applied by the state in relation to activities or actions associated with a low level of danger, but requiring the state authorities to receive information about the beginning or termination of such activities or actions in order to be carried out in relation to entities engaged in such activities. 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 state regulation and evaluate the effectiveness of existing regulation.

World experience and comparative country analysis
strengths and weaknesses

Footnote. Subsection as amended by Decree of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated November 7, 2016 No. 672 (shall be enforced ten calendar days after the day of its first official publication).

Analyzing international experience, we can single out three models that have been used to varying degrees since the late 1980s.
The first, perhaps the most striking model of radical economic liberalization, which led to great positive changes and was unequivocally assessed as successful before the 2008 crisis. 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 investment inflows and make the transition to a rapidly developing market economy. General characteristic This model was that the reformed systems 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. Under 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 inefficient regulations. Elements of this model began to be used from the late 1970s as a response to the economic crisis. By the end of the 20th century, this model was codified by the 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 a state of equilibrium. Under 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 departures from earlier decisions. This practice, to varying degrees, has developed in most countries of the former Soviet Union. In such conditions, the authorities built the rules "for themselves", not paying attention to the possibility of implementing these rules. Private business I got used to such conditions, going into the shade. The business environment has become unforeseen for new players and 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 established at a point that is disadvantageous neither to the majority of citizens nor to the interests of the state. Reforms that worked under the first model almost always do not work when they are used in countries with this balance. The reason for this is the lack of motivation to fulfill them to their logical conclusion, both by representatives of authorities and by business.
Kazakhstan differs from most countries in the Commonwealth of Independent States in that some radical reforms were successfully implemented 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 the growth of the economy and the welfare of the population. At the same time, it is too early to say that the economy of Kazakhstan is fully liberalized, and the conditions for doing business are comparable to the best world standards.
Under the current conditions, the most suitable model for reforms in the Republic of Kazakhstan is the second model, tested in developed industrial states. Unlike the other described models, this model provides for the formation of a targeted state policy, its institutional support and consistent implementation, while targeted and logically incomplete reforms will not lead to the expected result.
State regulation of entrepreneurial activity, along with investment policy, the policy of developing infrastructure and human capital, and credit and financial policy, is part of the general policy economic development states.
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 entrepreneurial activity should be treated as an integral part of 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 the 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 efficiency 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 absence of merging of interests big business and authorities in certain sectors of the economy.
A good example of inadequate attention to these factors is the experience of some countries in dealing with the 2008 financial and economic crisis. 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 the coalescence of interests of large financial institutions and their regulators in matters of issuing mortgage loans. The same reason for the merging of 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 uncontrollability of the system of government, their inefficiency and lack of professionalism. The difficult environmental situation in large Chinese cities, the accident rate at enterprises and infrastructure facilities are caused by the lack of effective control over the activities of government bodies and the insufficient development of civil society institutions.
On the other hand, countries where sufficient attention was paid to all these factors managed to build a fairly 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 the globalization of economies. First of all, this concerns the countries of northern Europe, Canada and Australia.
To date, to the strengths of the existing system government controlled and interactions in the triangle of interests of state power, 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 government bodies. This state of affairs is a consequence of the successful implementation of administrative reform in the Republic of Kazakhstan and the attention of the leadership to the improvement of the qualifications of civil servants. Unlike other countries of the Commonwealth of Independent States, the Republic of Kazakhstan successfully implemented training programs for future civil servants;
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 defined for transferring the economy to an innovative development path, a gradual departure from the resource model of economic development;
4) a relatively high level of control over the activities of government bodies, both at the central and regional levels;
5) positive experience in carrying out comprehensive reforms and implementing 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, a 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 areas of regulation and control;
3) the interest of big business in maintaining the status quo, including the preservation high level monopolization of the economy. Such an interest in maintaining the status quo is due to the desire not to allow 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 reduction in their prices, an increase in the number of jobs and wages;
5) the lack of effective methods for monitoring the effectiveness of the activities of individual public authorities, 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 the 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 qualitative implementation of the policy of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity, it is necessary to clearly build its institutional part in accordance with the best international practices.
International practice shows that around the beginning of the 1980s, along with the development and implementation of new requirements and procedures for regulatory policies, developed countries began to create structures of so-called regulatory oversight.
For example, in the United States of America, in the structure of 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 Dutch 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 National Norm Control Board (Nationaler Normenkontollrat) was established in 2006. Similar councils also exist in Mexico, Australia, and Japan. In some countries, regulatory oversight functions are performed by departments in ministries. In Denmark it is the Better Regulation Department of the Ministry of Finance, in Finland it is the Legal Inspection Bureau 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 Cooperation and Development, except for the United States of America, the conclusions of the regulatory oversight body are advisory in nature.
In different countries, these bodies have subsequently evolved and 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 their structure and place in the public administration system.
The functions of such oversight bodies 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 the issues of rule-making and control, supervision over the execution of procedures;
3) providing the political leadership of the state with an assessment of regulations or agreeing on the requirements and procedures for new and revised regulations;
4) development of proposals for the improvement of regulations, their reform, analysis of problems, research, study of the reporting of state bodies, holding relevant consultations with non-governmental organizations.
One of the softest options for government intervention in entrepreneurial activity is the use of information tools.
However, in many developed countries around the world, it is information tools that are called information obligations that are often the objects of reform within the framework of regulatory reforms. The costs of information obligations are the main ones in the structure of administrative costs of business.
Some developed countries use the Dutch standard cost model to calculate the severity of these costs. This model allows, by analyzing the country's legislation and subsequent survey of regulated entities, to determine the real cost of time and financial costs caused by specific regulatory acts.
As a rule, costing allows assessing the effectiveness of reforms in specific areas by comparing the costs before and after reforms. At the same time, the costs of both all subjects of regulation (entrepreneurs, social groups, etc.) and the state can be estimated.
The Dutch model has shown its viability and has been used in 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 business operating costs in accordance with the President's instruction to reduce them by 30% by 2015 compared to 2011.
The study was conducted 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 (sanction) from state bodies, 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 incur mainly the costs of the working time of the subject of regulation.
Filling out forms, organizing reporting data, checking correctness, and the entire document flow open for monitoring take a proportionally large amount of time for the heads of business entities. This time is spent not on production management, work with personnel or other productive purposes, but on working with the requirements of the authorities. That 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 developed and deep version of working with information tools is the practice of implementing the Paper Reduction Act of 1980, adopted in the United States.
The object of attention of this Act is the collection of information. This collection of information is defined as: “Receiving, creating reasons for receiving, requests, requirements for disclosure of information to third parties or the public, facts, points of view, any organization, regardless of form or format, as asking identical questions or demanding identical types 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 clearly defines the costs associated with information tools. Cost is defined as "time, effort or financial resources provided by entities to prepare, maintain, or provide information to any agency of the federal government, including resources for (A) studying instructions; (B) acquisition, installation and use of technologies and systems; (B) changing existing methods for the implementation of already pre-existing instructions and requirements; (D) search for data sources; (E) completing and reviewing the collection of information; and (E) communication of information."
The costs of information tools in the US are classified by their causes. Thus, four categories of such reasons are defined, namely: (1) new legal requirements; (2) the actions of government agencies; (3) changes or recalculations due to changes in the number of subjects or information collection methods; (4) errors or non-compliance with requirements, as well as stops and resumes.
The unit of measure for the cost of information tools in the United States is hours of time spent. For example, the US Office of Management and Budget's FY2011 report found that the entire population spent 9.14 billion hours on information requirements, up 355 million hours or 4% from the 8.78 billion hours spent in FY2010.
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 there is still a high burden of administrative regulation.

Goals and objectives of this Concept

The purpose of this Concept is to increase the efficiency of state regulation of business activities through the creation balanced system where regulation becomes predictable, cheap for business, efficient in achieving goals and free from corruption.
The achievement of this goal will be ensured through the gradual and systematic solution of the following tasks:
1) reorientation of state control and supervision from detection and punishment to prevention and prevention;
2) creation of 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) establishing proportionate liability 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.
main goal reforming information tools is to reduce the costs associated with these tools for business through a quantitative reduction in information obligations, optimization of information collection methods, and qualitative improvement of individual information tools. Such a reform is possible on the condition that:
creating a system for monitoring information obligations using well-measured indicators of the costs associated with them;
implementation systems approach to the optimization of information tools.

Stages of implementation of state regulation policy
entrepreneurial activity

Three main stages are envisaged.
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) to completely reform regulatory instruments.
key element 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.
The 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 methods necessary for conducting regulatory impact analysis;
2) to put in place procedures for planning, developing and revising regulations, to ensure a dialogue with public associations;
3) put in place a system of accountability for state bodies.
At the second stage, work will be carried out on the development of:
1) methods of regulatory impact analysis;
2) the procedure for preparing and submitting periodic reports of state bodies on regulatory activities;
3) methods of standard costs.
After the development and testing of the relevant methods, it is planned to conduct appropriate training for civil servants. It is necessary to fully implement the procedures for planning, development and revision of regulations provided for in the Concept, and ensure strict observance of the procedures for public discussion.
At the final part of the second stage, a system of periodic reporting by state bodies on their work on the design and revision of regulations will be fully implemented.
Stage 3 - final (2018 - 2020). This stage provides for:
1) to analyze the performance of the regulatory functions of state bodies;
2) introduce a system for monitoring the effectiveness of public 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 state administration and regulation:
1) the sphere of human and social security;
2) the financial sector;
3) humanitarian sphere;
4) the sphere of natural resources.
An analysis of the performance of the regulatory functions of state bodies in each of these areas will provide an opportunity for further refinement of the methods and their further use, taking into account the specifics of the areas of regulation.
The procedure for analyzing the performance of regulatory functions in the future will be carried out 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 to monitor the effectiveness of regulatory policy and be reflected in the corresponding periodic reporting of the consultative and advisory body.
Within the framework of the above stages and sequence of actions in relation to the reform of information tools, the following sequence of its stages is proposed.
Stage 1. 2016 - 2017.
At the first stage, it is necessary to make an inventory of all information tools that exist and are used in Kazakhstan.
In the process of conducting an inventory, public authorities should determine the use of the 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 is already collected in national databases. Appropriate optimization must be carried out simultaneously 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 previous steps, without exception, lessons should be learned and the effectiveness of procedures and techniques should be tested. Relevant changes will be developed by a consultative and advisory body and implemented to improve the efficiency of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity.

Expected results from the implementation of the Concept

From the implementation of the Concept, it is expected to increase the efficiency of state regulation of business activities through:
1) creating a favorable business climate by optimizing the system of state regulation, confirmed by the 45th place in the World Bank's Doing Business rating;
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% automation coverage 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 Decree of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated November 7, 2016 No. 672 (shall be enforced 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. The validity and effectiveness of the use of regulations through the introduction of mandatory procedures for substantiating, agreeing and monitoring the effectiveness of regulations in achieving the stated goals.
3. Transparency in the activities of state bodies and the 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 needs and consumers, should be available and, if possible, provided free of charge.
Rule-making activity involves its implementation with the active involvement of all interested parties in this process based on the use of a centralized system.
4. Responsibility and fairness of punishment through establishing the responsibility of state bodies for non-compliance with the requirements of the state business regulation policy, matching the level of punishment to the level of violation for business, a consistent departure from punitive measures when violations are detected to prevention and motivation to comply with regulatory requirements. Opportunity to appeal against the actions of authorities in higher instances and courts.
5. Freedom from corruption by reducing the opportunities to carry out corrupt actions in the field of state regulation, the elimination of such phenomena as conflict 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 implementation of the Concept will depend on the solution of the tasks set by all state bodies. Industry documents on related areas of reform should be in line with the Concept. Evaluation of the effectiveness of reforms should be expressed in real improvement in the conditions for doing business and customer satisfaction.
The subject of the policy of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity is divided into two main parts:
1) 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.
Legislative requirements are norms of normative 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 the requirements for the payment of taxes and other payments and the rules for their calculation, production waste emission standards, requirements fire safety, construction and sanitary and epidemiological rules and hygienic standards, requirements of technical regulations of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Customs Union.
Each action of the executive authority in relation to the business or the document required for delivery or presentation to the 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 the emergence of new requirements, the procedure for their justification and approval, public discussion, the parameters by which the monitoring of the achievement of goals will be carried out, the conditions and procedure for canceling the requirements of the law.
The second part of the subject matter of the policy is the regulatory instruments through which the implementation of the requirements of the legislation is ensured. Regulation tools are divided into four groups:
1) licensing instruments, including licenses, permits, conclusions, registrations, etc.;
2) control instruments, including audit, inspections, investigations, and related orders and sanctions;
3) information tools, including the submission of documents, notifications and certificates, tax, financial and other reporting, other documents, declaring the composition of products, publication of data on bankruptcy, changes in the ownership of enterprises, etc.;
4) tools of self-regulation. Within the framework of this Concept, a self-regulation system is understood as a regulatory tool. 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 business activity regulates the composition and procedures for the application 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 instruments used using the results of risk analysis and parameters, on 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 conditionally divided into two groups. The first group concerns specific regulations and is related to the regulation of their life cycle. The second group has a common character for all state regulation of entrepreneurial activity.
First group. The permanent policy of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity in relation to the specific requirements of the legislation and the tools used is characterized by a certain cyclicity. Life cycle requirements of the legislation and tools for their implementation includes:
1) regulatory planning;
2) designing new regulations;
3) revision of regulations;
4) reporting by 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 tools 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 consultative 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 single centralized crowdsourcing system that contains a database of regulatory legal acts and provides an opportunity for each public association to comment in detail and in a structured way, make proposals and discuss both existing regulations and projects. regulations. At the same time, it should be possible to evaluate comments and sort them by date, popularity rating and commenting subjects.
Designing new regulations. State bodies develop draft laws and other regulatory legal acts that establish new requirements or new use of regulatory tools according to plans. They also prepare the accompanying 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 published on the official Internet resource of state bodies.
The verification of compliance with the procedures by state bodies when designing regulations, the reliability and completeness of the justification is carried out by the consultative and 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. Revision of existing regulations is carried out with a frequency of 5-10 years in accordance with the plans. Government authorities may revise existing regulations at higher intervals based on the analysis of standard cost model data, emergencies, or requests from citizens and organizations.
The consultative and advisory body initiates a revision of existing regulations based on an analysis of the reporting of state bodies, research data or appeals from citizens and organizations.
Bodies and persons with the right of legislative initiative initiate a revision of existing regulations in accordance with the requirements of the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan.
The National Chamber of Entrepreneurs and other public associations independently initiate a review of existing regulations.
The concept provides for a methodology for reviewing existing regulations only for state bodies. 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 review of existing regulations, they prepare appropriate justifications and submit them to the state and advisory body.
In the course of periodic review, state bodies in each case prove the need for the existence of regulation, change them or cancel them.
The analysis is carried out in order to achieve the regulatory objectives specified in the initial regulatory impact analysis, approved during the design of the regulation, 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 relevant regulatory impact analysis data;

In other cases (in the absence of an initial analysis of the regulatory impact), the analysis is carried out on the basis of 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 regulatory legal act and study of the experience of its application in order to retrospectively determine the purpose of regulation and the regulations used;
2) retrospective determination of indicators of the effectiveness of regulation, substantiation of their objectivity and reliability;
3) measuring the direct information costs of the business using the standard cost model;
4) preparation of an opinion on the need to change the regulation;
5) if necessary, preparation of a draft amendment to a normative legal act and the corresponding justification.
In both cases, with the tightening of requirements and procedures, justification in without fail includes regulatory impact analysis.
Revision materials, analyzes and recommendations are published on the official Internet resource of state bodies.
The verification of compliance with the analysis procedures by state bodies of the reliability and completeness of the analysis is carried out by a consultative and 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.
To form consolidated reports, state bodies submit reports to the consultative and advisory body, which include data on the implementation of plans, shows the dynamics of indicators for achieving regulatory goals, regulatory costs, expenses budget funds. The consultative and advisory body summarizes these reports for all state bodies, analyzes their impact on the development of entrepreneurship, points to systemic shortcomings.
All reporting is published on the official Internet resource of state bodies, including a single centralized crowdsourcing system, for a 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 regulatory impact.
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 ensuring that these requirements are met. During the regulatory impact analysis, comparative analysis the costs and benefits of possible alternatives to the new requirement being introduced, the relevant tools and enforcement procedures.
The analysis of regulatory impact is carried out before the adoption of decisions by state bodies concerning the issues of regulation of entrepreneurial activity.
The main goal of 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 (solution of well-defined problems).
The objectives of 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 the solution of 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 result of the implementation of regulatory impact analysis will be:
1) the possibility of making 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 monitor the effectiveness of the decisions taken in order to make appropriate adjustments to the regulatory policy.
Regulatory impact analysis is a tool that can be used in any decision-making by governments at both the national and local levels.
At the same time, regulatory impact analysis is associated with certain costs, both of the working time of civil servants and, in some cases, direct costs of budgets. different levels. In addition, conducting a regulatory impact analysis and its subsequent discussion before making decisions can significantly reduce the speed of their adoption and limit the flexibility of authorities.
Taking into account world experience, the Concept defines the following areas for the use of regulatory impact analysis in the Republic of Kazakhstan:
First. Regulatory impact analysis is used exclusively in the design of regulatory decisions affecting the interests of business entities. Decisions that affect the interests of business entities, but do not change the mandatory requirements of the law or the tools and procedures for their implementation are planned without the use of regulatory impact analysis (public investment, subsidies, procurement, and others). Draft decisions on overcoming the consequences of accidents, natural disasters and other emergency situations of temporary action, even if they are of a regulatory nature, are planned without the use of regulatory impact analysis.
Second. Regulatory impact analysis is used when 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. Regulatory impact analysis is used if the scope of the draft decision covers more than 100 business entities, regardless of the size of the costs.
Fourth. Regulatory impact analysis is used if the planned decision tightens the requirements, complicates the procedures for their implementation, entails any increase in the costs associated with its implementation only for business entities.
Fifth. Regulatory impact analysis is used when renewing a regulation if it was originally set to expire.
Analysis of the regulatory impact in the most complete form involves the use of economic modeling, other resource-intensive methods of collecting and analyzing information. The implementation of such a regulatory impact analysis requires very high qualifications of performers, is difficult to understand for people 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 the requirements for the measurability of indicators of the existence of a problem that needs to be solved, and the achievement of the goal (benefit) of the designed regulation. For the purposes of liberalization, it is possible to admit the sufficiency of using, in exceptional cases, a clear description of the problem without defining numerical indicators;
2) a 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-fledged analysis of alternatives is not always carried out. Especially at the initial stages of implementing regulatory impact analysis, government authorities approach the identification and analysis of alternatives formally. For this reason, it is necessary to oblige state bodies to consider the current situation, the possibility of strengthening control over the implementation of existing requirements, responsibility for violations of existing requirements, introducing elements of self-regulation or a notification procedure;
4) determination of only the direct costs of business entities related to the fulfillment of regulatory requirements (administrative costs for the fulfillment of information requirements, the costs of working with inspectors, the costs of necessary investments), direct costs to consumers, if any are foreseen (an example would be raising the price of goods or services with a possible reduction in supply due to reduced competition), direct budget costs, if any are foreseen. When introducing a regulatory impact analysis, an analysis of possible costs due to unused opportunities, other indirect costs will not be carried out;
5) the analysis of regulatory impact will not use the analysis of incremental effects. 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 in order to solve a specific problem that, for one reason or another, the market mechanism is not able to solve.
Today, when preparing normative legal acts and substantiating them, state bodies often confine themselves to general formulations of problems. This naturally leads to the impossibility of such general formulations to determine the target groups and performance evaluation indicators. decision subsequently.
When preparing a regulatory impact analysis, it is proposed to pay special attention to a clear definition of problems, disclosure of their manifestations and causes. Manifestations of problems are revealed through digital or, in exceptional cases, qualitative indicators that determine this manifestation. After the adoption of regulation, such an indicator becomes an indicator for evaluating the effectiveness of regulation.
This indicator is also one of the tools for determining the benefits of the proposed regulation. Such indicators, among others, may be the 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 determining indicators, a circle of subjects is determined, which are directly or indirectly affected by the manifestation of the problem. Such a circle of subjects, among others, can be consumers of a particular product or service, residents of a particular 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 way they are measured (collection of primary information, its generalization). In order to conduct regulatory impact analysis, to ensure the reliability of indicators and the possibility of their re-measurement, it is supposed to use the following sources:
1) data of statistical and tax authorities;
2) data of state bodies obtained in the process of processing reports, data on occurrences, measurements;
3) data of law enforcement agencies;
4) data from sociological and other studies conducted by organizations with a positive reputation.
The mandatory sections of the regulatory impact analysis include:
1) definition of the problem that needs to be solved by the introduction of regulation, indicating digital indicators of its manifestation and a clearly defined circle of subjects affected by this problem. If the problem is complex, it is allowed to divide it 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 cause-and-effect relationships. In the analysis of cause-and-effect relationships, statistical correlations and other methods of analysis are used. Particular attention is paid to the description of unaccounted possible factors of influence (externalities) on the existence of the problem;
3) description of the mechanisms of influence of the designed regulation on the causes of the problem and its solution;
4) a clear definition of the beneficiaries (beneficiaries) of the proposed 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 that are alternative to the planned regulation of measures, identification of the relevant beneficiaries (beneficiaries), determination of benefits from alternative measures;
7) determination of the circle of cost subjects from the introduction of regulation. In such a definition, it is necessary to detail which types of business will incur costs (including regional, industry, and other aspects), and provide an approximate number of business entities that will incur 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 draft regulation are calculated for each category separately. Expenses are calculated in monetary form or in other digital form in cases where the monetary form cannot be used. Transfer payments are clearly accounted for. In exceptional cases, non-numerical costs are presented in descriptive form.
Cost types for business entities include:
1) the costs of fulfilling information obligations (time spent in terms of the price of a man-hour);
2) payment for forms, services or fees;
3) the costs of the equipment necessary for installation, its maintenance;
4) other investments in fixed assets;
5) costs for compulsory insurance, if such is entered;
6) costs of expert examinations and other conclusions issued by third parties;
7) travel expenses and waiting in queues;
8) payment for advanced training courses, other forms of education;
9) membership fees, subscriptions to periodic information publications, other periodic payments.
For all the presented alternatives to the draft regulation, the circle of cost subjects is determined and the corresponding costs are calculated according to the approaches presented above:
1) comparative analysis of the generalized data of benefits and costs of the regulation project and its alternatives;
2) a conclusion with recommendations on the regulation project, the necessary database changes 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 regulatory impact for revision are its incomplete or dishonest execution, logical errors made during the analysis. The regulatory impact analysis is sent for revision with a clear indication of all causes and recommendations for correcting the deficiencies.
The regulatory impact analysis 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 the definition of the problem, if any, or a clear circle of actors 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) surface or deterministic cost accounting for alternatives to the draft regulation;
8) inaccuracy of primary information, lack of relevant references.
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 is developing a training program for civil servants on the use of the regulatory impact analysis methodology.
To ensure transparency and publicity of the ongoing regulatory impact analysis procedure, it is necessary to use a unified centralized system for public analysis of the regulatory impact of existing and newly introduced regulations, containing a base of normative 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, comment in detail and in a structured way, make proposals and discuss both the current regulations and draft regulations. At the same time, it should be possible to evaluate comments and sort them by date, popularity rating and commenting subjects.
The second group of methods refers to the full range of functioning of the regulatory 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) licensing instruments;
2) instruments of control and supervision;
3) information tools;
4) tools of self-regulation.
For the successful implementation of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity, it is necessary that the instruments be streamlined and consistent with the principles of policy as a whole.
The reform of state control and supervision instruments is as follows.
In order to further optimize the control activities of state bodies, it is proposed to switch to organizing inspections based on risk assessment, taking into account the abolition of scheduled inspections of business entities, reducing the requirements to be verified in the exercise of state control and supervision, clearly regulating the implementation 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 applying 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 the transparency of planning and conduct an objective analysis of the control and supervisory activities of state bodies, it is proposed to implement full automation of risk management systems.
As a result 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 appropriate decision-making.
Automation of the risk assessment system will ensure minimal human involvement in planning inspections and collecting data on their results. As a result 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 planning stage of inspections, the selection of subjects for inclusion in the inspection plan will be carried out without human participation based on the risk assessment criteria that will be included in automated system. At the stage of conducting inspections in an automated mode, it is proposed:
1) register an act on the appointment of an audit in the bodies of legal statistics through electronic document management;
2) record all stages of inspections and control all terms (beginning, suspension, extension, completion) of inspections;
3) reflect the results of checks in the system (including detected violations).
As a result of automation of the risk management system, government agencies will ensure the following:
1) full implementation of the analysis for the 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 inspections for each audited entity;
3) contributing to the elimination of corruption manifestations on the part of inspectors;
4) identification of "unnecessary" requirements;
5) simplification of the document flow procedure and increase in the efficiency of the use of working time;
6) reliability of departmental reporting data.
As a result of the automation of the risk management system, the 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 the Perspective Plan of Legislative Works 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, there are elements of self-regulation in the current legislation of Kazakhstan in certain industries.
As a rule, self-regulatory organizations are created in industries where the association of entities 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 areas of the Concept.
It should be taken into account 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 fight against 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, without direct dependence on state regulation. As a broader concept, self-regulation is also seen as regulation that includes various forms of co-regulation, in which the state approves the self-regulation regime, or self-regulation and state 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 of 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: in the environmental sector, the advertising industry, Internet service providers and advertising of alcoholic beverages, print media media, health care providers.
The self-regulatory mechanism includes not only the development of rules that guide industry professionals, but also the provision of services for the industry and consumers, including mechanisms for handling claims and resolving conflicts.
The relationship between legal requirements and the self-regulatory system can take various forms:
1) self-regulation can be carried out in the form of setting a set of rules in the absence of regulation by the state;
2) self-regulatory norms can operate alongside legislation, setting higher standards for the industry;
3) self-regulation can replace existing state regulations, in case the industry accepts the obligation to carry out self-regulation, and the state regulations are revised.
The self-regulation system may consist of the following elements:
1) the code of honor of the association of entrepreneurs of a certain industry, inclusive, with a system of sanctions for its non-fulfillment;
2) the system of introduction to the profession, namely, education and preparation for examinations 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 regulatory body, namely, joint inspections, preparation of control sheets, risk assessment;
4) development of recommendations for changing legislation;
5) consideration of consumer and member complaints self-regulatory organization, conflict resolution, sanctions, 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 the negative aspects of government regulation. Self-regulation rules can be more flexible, adaptable to market conditions and costs. Practitioners with detailed industry knowledge can set better standards and more effectively detect 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 promotes collaboration and collaboration within the industry, replaces confrontation with relationships based on cooperation and partnership, and exploits the potential for pressure from other industry enterprises to comply.
On the other hand, self-regulation by professional and industry 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, reduce state budget funds allocated for the performance of regulatory functions, optimize the staffing and management structure of state bodies. Analysis of the performance of regulatory functions is carried out by commissions established under state bodies.
Such commissions should include representatives of a consultative and advisory body, a state body that analyzes the performance of regulatory functions, the National Chamber of Entrepreneurs, the ministries of finance and the national economy.
Representatives of the consultative and advisory body are appointed chairmen of the commissions. The methodology for analyzing the performance of regulatory functions is developed by the authorized body for entrepreneurship based on the recommendations of the consultative and advisory body and approved by the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan.
The consultative 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 leadership of the Government 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 sphere of regulation for which the state body is responsible, with an emphasis on achieving the stated goals of regulation;
3) analysis of the reporting of the state body on the revision of regulation;
4) revision of legal requirements and relevant regulatory impact analyzes, analysis of the use of regulatory tools;
5) analysis of the staffing and structure of the state body, a survey of employees and heads of the state body in order to optimize the management and performance of the entrusted regulatory function;
6) consultations with the leadership of the state body;
7) preparation of a report and recommendations.
Tracking the effectiveness of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity.
Necessary integral part any state policy is a system for monitoring its implementation. In the policy of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity, it is necessary to control the implementation of procedures and requirements by state bodies. It is necessary to analyze the periodic reporting of state bodies, dialogue with non-governmental organizations, independent research, track indicators of achieving the goals of regulation and the costs of business under the influence of regulation.
An integrated system of monitoring should be built and the institutional possibility of its implementation should be provided, relations between regulatory state bodies and structures conducting monitoring and supervision should be regulated, and the responsibility of civil servants for violations committed in the implementation of state policy should be established.
The central element of monitoring the effectiveness of state regulation of business activity is the periodic reports of the consultative and advisory body, which summarize the performance of indicators for achieving the goals of regulation and the costs of business and the budget using a standard cost model.
Another element of such monitoring is periodic targeted and general studies conducted by independent organizations. Targeted research is carried out on a specific regulation, field of activity or industry. General research is carried out across the spectrum of regulatory policy. An example of such research is the assessment of the price of the regulatory or investment climate of the state through a sociological survey of enterprises. In such studies, it is important that they are carried out periodically and monitor the dynamics of indicators.
Advisory body.
The consultative and advisory body is supposed to be created on the basis of the current Interdepartmental Commission on Business Regulation under the chairmanship of 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.
Organizational support for the consultative and advisory body will be provided 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 consultative and advisory body will be the deputy head of the authorized body for entrepreneurship.
The functions of the advisory body will include:
1) methodological support works related to planning, development and revision of normative legal acts that establish regulatory requirements and tools;
2) coordination of plans of state bodies in terms of developing draft laws and other regulatory legal acts that establish new requirements and tools, and revision of existing requirements and tools;
3) preparation of opinions on the execution of design procedures and revision of regulatory legal acts;
4) conducting a preliminary analysis or organizing a complete analysis related documents when designing or revising normative legal acts and preparing relevant conclusions;
5) analysis of periodic reporting of state bodies and preparation of relevant 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 optimizing the 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 reforms in the following priority areas:
1. Technical regulation. Technical regulation in Kazakhstan differs from world 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 many different legal requirements with a large number of reference norms are combined under one regulatory legal act - technical regulations, which entails duplication of functions of state bodies, including control and supervisory ones.
A number of measures in this direction are already envisaged by the Program for Technical Regulation and Creation of Quality Infrastructure for 2010-2014.
As part of the Concept for further reform of the licensing system, permits issued for products will be identified. In the future, it is proposed to abandon such permits and regulate products only by means of technical regulation. In turn, technical regulation makes it possible to use the mechanisms of business self-regulation to a large extent.
In the field of technical regulation in a competitive environment, expert work, writing 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 exacerbated by poor awareness and low literacy of end users. In Kazakhstan, the activities of consumer rights protection societies are not developed due to the lack of resources and legislative instruments of influence.
In order to ensure the safety of products, processes and prevent the practice of deceiving consumers, there is a need to take a number of measures to correct the existing system of technical regulation.
A fundamental solution to the problem of inspections requires the introduction of a set of measures that will be aimed both at improving the efficiency of the work of state control bodies and protecting the legitimate rights and interests of private businesses.
According to European experience it is proposed to introduce market supervision, which will allow to systematically solve existing problems related to the safety and quality of the final product on the basis of a clear delineation of rights, duties and toughening the responsibility of market participants.
Thus, the state will be able to transfer to the market the function of security control, in case of violation of which severe penalties will follow, up to material compensation for the damage caused.
It is necessary to consider the issue of creating at the state level information system alerts on hazardous products, which will ensure 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 make it possible to build an effective system for 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 insurance of civil liability of market participants (certification bodies, importers, producers, etc.) to consumers for product quality, for harm caused by the produced (sold) goods or rendered works, services .
Insurance should be carried out in case of 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 increase the burden on business entities.
In this regard, the implementation of this tool should be approached carefully. This question needs to be worked out from the point of view of the ratio economic effect from insurance and business expenses.
In view of the fact that technical regulation instruments allow not only to protect the market from low-quality products, but also solve the problem 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 fill the existing gaps, eliminate the negative trends in standardization that appeared during the implementation of the technical regulation reform, realize the strategic interests of the state (ensuring technological re-equipment, execution of the state order, defense capability, environmental protection, social protection of the population), promote innovative technologies and improve the energy efficiency of the economy .
In the Republic of Kazakhstan, mandatory certification still prevails, while it is necessary to develop certification on a voluntary basis. Voluntary certification has an advantage over mandatory due to the expansion of the concept of "quality". Here, such requirements can be considered that the buyer considers the most significant, while in 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 assessment (confirmation) of conformity in those areas where there are minor risks, while focusing the certification tool on potentially hazardous products.
It is also necessary to introduce a mechanism of public monitoring, in which the control activities of the state in relation to the quality of goods will be gradually replaced by mechanisms for handling 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 at the proper level the protection of the rights and interests of the consumer. At the same time, a consumer can be understood as a fairly wide range of subjects. So the state is a consumer of business services and goods in public procurement, entrepreneurs are consumers of state services when receiving public services and so on.
In Kazakhstan, since 2010, the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan “On Protection of Consumer Rights” has been in force, which defines the legal, economic and social foundations protection of 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, until November 2013, the authorized state body in the field of consumer protection was the Agency of the Republic of Kazakhstan for the Protection of Competition, whose work was formal, 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 have arisen in this area, the solution of which must be approached comprehensively.
Currently, the problems that exist 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. Public authorities are more interested in conducting scheduled inspections than in 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 consumer protection cases. 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 their 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. Currently public associations of consumers operate 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 examination of the quality and safety of products (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 deceptive advertising and sales on the Internet, additional payment for unordered services, various violations during sales, sweepstakes, and more.
To solve these problems, it is proposed:
1) to determine one of the focuses of the work of the authorized body in the field of consumer protection is the consideration of consumer complaints at the regional level. For this it is necessary structural units empower the authorized body in the field of consumer protection in all regions with the relevant powers. This will allow more prompt and timely response to specific facts of harm to life, human health, the environment, as well as increase public confidence in the activities of the specified authorized body.
At the same time, it is supposed to consider the issue of empowering 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, the authorized body in the field of consumer protection could approve settlement agreements between entrepreneurs and consumers whose rights have been violated;
2) introduce an assessment of the activities of central state and local executive bodies for the implementation of functions for the protection of consumer rights with the maintenance of an appropriate rating;
3) to expand the mechanisms of self-defense by the consumer of their rights. For example, you can grant the right to record the violation of his rights through video and photography.
It is necessary to carefully study the experience of developed countries in terms of determining the status of a consumer or individual target groups(pensioners, children, housewives) as the most vulnerable with the provision of appropriate advantages in the litigation, including studying the world practice of pre-trial agreement, when the parties make a compromise decision without going to court;
4) study and adapt to the conditions of Kazakhstan the world experience in terms of the possibility of providing various measures of state support for 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 examination 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 trademarks, 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 be able to comment and give preference for a particular product (work, service), which will allow consumers to focus on quality.
Entrepreneurs are offered voluntary registration on the site, 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).
When voluntarily registering on an Internet resource, an 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 is necessary and in public places(cinemas, television, public transport) state policy and the work of the authorized body in the field of consumer protection in this direction;
8) identifying inappropriate advertising and combating it (especially on the Internet) should also become priorities for the work of the authorized body in the field of consumer protection and all other state bodies in supervised areas.
As a result of such work, a multiplier effect can be obtained: the identification of non-conforming products, the improvement of laboratory discipline, the growth in consumption of quality products and Feedback consumer states.

Approaches to the reform of information tools

Footnote. Section 2 is supplemented by a subsection in accordance with the Decree of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated November 7, 2016 No. 672 (shall be enforced 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 the costs associated with the information obligations of business entities, optimize the collection and processing of information, and better inform public authorities. To this end, it is recommended to identify the following priority areas for this work:
1) carrying out a clear functional classification of information tools to put things in order in their use and avoid duplication;
2) development of a system for the use of information tools, determination of the boundaries of their effective functioning and achievement of goals;
3) reduction and optimization of information requirements and costs of information tools necessary for the execution by business entities;
4) assessment of the administrative costs of business in connection with the fulfillment of information requirements.
The reform of information tools involves the creation of the necessary institutional and methodological framework.
For full coverage of all information tools, their classification and qualitative formation of their list, an expert group will be created under the advisory and advisory body from among representatives of government bodies and the business community.
State bodies carry out an inventory of information obligations, for which purpose an analysis of each information tool (requirement) is carried out by determining the group of this tool, the use of the information provided, indicative costs by the stages of execution of the information tool.
State bodies should identify the indicator value of the working time spent on the fulfillment 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) completion and revision of the collection of information;
5) information transfer.
The results of the inventory will be considered by the expert group and based on the results of the discussion, depending on the effectiveness in achieving the goals, a decision will be made to cancel or revise each information tool.
According to the results of the inventory, it is recommended to classify them according to their functional characteristics.
To do this, it is proposed to use the division into the following groups:
1) fulfillment of the requirements of the legislation before third parties. For example, labeling, declaration, mandatory instructions, service rules, other information required to be provided to consumers, information in the framework of bankruptcy proceedings, on changes in the structure of ownership, other information about private business entities that is required to be provided to third parties;
2) regular mandatory reporting 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 out by private entrepreneurship entities submitted to state bodies as part of registration, licensing procedures or other appeals to state bodies).
This category also includes notifications of the start or termination of entrepreneurial activities, the list of which is approved by the Appendix to the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan “On Permits and Notifications”.
The final list of information tools will be submitted for consideration to the advisory body.
Further optimization of the use of information tools is possible through 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 state body). Sometimes private businesses 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 can significantly reduce the amount of information required from private businesses, because some of the permanent and historical information is already in these databases, and integrating these databases with the requirements of various government agencies avoids duplicating the provision of requirements by private businesses.
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 businesses.
The next step is to review the information obligations for cost reduction.
International experience and the experience of Kazakhstan show that such a reduction is possible and effective in cases where 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 time costs and, accordingly, the financial costs of private business entities.

The list of normative legal acts through which
implementation of the Concept is expected

Footnote. The list as amended by Decree of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated November 7, 2016 No. 672 (shall be enforced 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. Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated July 5, 2014 "On Administrative Offenses".
2. 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".

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 supervisory nature, carried out by authorized 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:

* stimulation of 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.

The 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 socio-economic life of the country where difficulties have arisen or could arise, problems that cannot be automatically resolved or solved in the distant future, while the removal of these problems is necessary .

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

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

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

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

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

The basis for the formation and development of entrepreneurship in Kazakhstan is laid down 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 the 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 an 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, at the risk and under the property liability of a legal entity (collective entrepreneurship).

Private entrepreneurship does not include the activities of legal entities in which a controlling stake or a large share of share participation is owned by the state.

The property of private entrepreneurs is inviolable and protected by law. Suspension and forced liquidation of an economic entity that is a private entrepreneur can 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 private individuals, since accurate information is expensive;
* natural monopolies, the services of which are most economically represented by a single firm (gas supply, water supply, telephone installation, etc.);
* external costs that are not reflected in the price or the normal functioning of the market, in which the state must correct the overproduction and excessive consumption of goods and services leading to external costs;
* providing the economy with the necessary amount of money by the state;
* consumption of public goods, i.e. such, in the consumption of which all citizens participate (unified energy system, national defense, national communications networks, etc.).

The Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan, adopted on August 30, 1995, specifically mentions paragraph 4 of Article 25, which proclaims the right of every citizen to freedom of entrepreneurial activity.

Decree of the Cabinet of Ministers of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 912 dated August 17, 1994 approved plans for tasks and activities for the implementation of state support and development of entrepreneurship in the Republic of Kazakhstan for 1994-1996. At the end of 1995, the Action Program of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan to deepen economic reforms for 1996-1998 was adopted, in which one of the main tasks was also to strengthen state support for entrepreneurship, especially small and medium-sized businesses. 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 resolutions: dated March 14, 1997 No. 325 “On the formation of the republican information and exhibition center for small business”, dated April 8, 1997 No. 499 “Issues of small business”, dated April 26, 1997 No. 665 “ On the establishment of a fund for the development of small business”, dated June 4, 1997 No. 923 “On approval of the Regulations on the procedure for supporting the creation of new jobs and the development of individual entrepreneurship from the state fund for the promotion of employment”.

In the Law “On individual entrepreneurship” and on July 7, 1997, the Decree of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan “On priorities and regional programs for supporting and developing small businesses in the Republic of Kazakhstan” emphasizes that individual entrepreneurship, which is interpreted as a type of private entrepreneurship, is understood as “initiative activity of citizens aimed at generating income based on the property of the citizens themselves and carried out on behalf of the citizens at 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 can be noted positive points:

* created favorable conditions for obtaining loans;
* created legislative opportunities for the purchase by installments of production facilities and areas, office space, as well as their lease or trust management;
* defined activity priorities;
* the procedure for creating and registering private entrepreneurs and private enterprises, as well as opening accounts with second-tier banks, has been simplified.

The main coordinator and conductor in the life of the state policy to support and develop small business in Kazakhstan is the Department for Support of Small Business of the Ministry of Economy and Trade of the Republic of Kazakhstan, established in May 1997. It has two advisory councils.

The first - from representatives of entrepreneurial structures to support small businesses to study draft regulatory and legislative acts.

The second is interdepartmental, consisting of 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 in some positions.

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

In general terms, a business innovation center is a local or regional partnership 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 effect of such factors hindering the development of entrepreneurship as:

* underdeveloped politic system and inconstancy of the regulatory framework;
* volatility of the Kazakh taxation system;
* unavailability of loans due to the high difference between interest rate, appointed by banks, and the inflation rate;
* the majority of entrepreneurs lack the skills to determine the strategy for the successful operation of the enterprise;
* low consumer demand of the population;
* problems in relationships with partners and competitors both within Kazakhstan and abroad;
* poor professional preparedness of employees of small enterprises.

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

Studies show that the development of entrepreneurship is associated with a change in the economic situation in the country. The first wave in the form of cooperatives and private enterprises, using the benefits provided, was able to function quite successfully. At that time, there were trends

macroeconomic stabilization, inflation reduction and implementation of privatization.

Executive and legislative authorities pay special attention to the problems of institutional reforms, which is reflected in Civil Code Republic of Kazakhstan, a number of legislative acts, program documents on deepening 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 enhance the development of small business" dated March 6, 1997. In accordance with this decree:

* the State Institute for Support of Small Business (Small Business Support Department of the Ministry of Economy and Trade of the Republic of Kazakhstan) was established;
* 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 Issues of Simplifying the Registration of Small Business Entities”, etc.;
* reduced the number of controlling and inspecting state bodies and paid services provided by them;
* the Small Business Development Fund was formed;
* set the minimum amount of lending to small businesses by all banks of the second

level (not less than 10% of the principal debt of the bank's loan portfolio).

The foreign experience of countries with developed market economies shows 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 activation of human resources and innovation 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 supporting and developing small businesses 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 that replace imports, the development of production for the further processing of agricultural products. Financial, investment, production and technical support will be provided through state regulation of entrepreneurial activity.

The issue of state regulation of entrepreneurship development 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 entrepreneurial regional sector is often one of the most effective ways to provide employment for the working population.

At the same time, the ministry will take into account the feasibility of creating new production facilities, and exclude possible duplication and overproduction certain types products in the country as a whole and to ensure a balance between the national economic and regional goals for the development of certain industries and services. The final decision will take into account:

* assessment of the cost 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 from 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 excessive fees from controlling and inspecting organizations.

The financial-investment and production-technological support for the development of entrepreneurship specifically provides for certain measures 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 the decisions of the President and the government, in particular, inventory of unused premises, their sale or transfer, are of great importance.

In addition, the development of infrastructure, staffing of entrepreneurship provide for the creation and development of existing elements in order to form a single system, including a network of funds and centers, exhibition centers, consulting firms and etc.

The implementation of the planned measures of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan on the state regulation of entrepreneurship, aimed at development and support, will dramatically increase the number of business entities engaged in entrepreneurial activities, 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 legislative acts and control over their implementation) and indirect costs (on the part of firms that must comply with government instructions and reporting). In addition, it is believed that government regulations reduce the incentive for innovation, for 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, duties and responsibilities of entrepreneurs. The rights are combined with his duties and responsibility for violation of duties.

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

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

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

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

In accordance with the Law “On Licensing”, relations related to state licensing of activities, or certain activities subject to licensing, are regulated. It establishes the types of activities subject to mandatory licensing. Engaging in activities without an appropriate license or in violation of license norms and rules 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, 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 produces certain products must apply to a certification body and obtain a certificate of conformity.

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

Products and services produced by an entrepreneur are subject to labeling with a 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 that lead to the elimination or restriction of competition are classified as unfair competition.

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

For the first time in Kazakhstan, an entrepreneurial code was adopted, in which. Chapter 7 is devoted to the issues of legal regulation of entrepreneurship by the state. While consolidating the freedom of entrepreneurship, it is impossible not to notice 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 a combination of state and market regulation mechanisms. The definition of state regulation sounds like: "a set of measures of legislative, executive and judicial 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 referred to as the 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, 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 the system of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity in the new market conditions is interesting. During the first years of independence, a legal framework was developed to regulate the relations of private property, civil society and freedom of enterprise. Problems of regulation by state bodies were solved as they arose, by introducing new regulatory instruments. In this regard, preference was given to permissive instruments. Permits are the easiest tool to administer, but 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 entry into the market. And in the presence of complex and sometimes impossible requirements, such a barrier is insurmountable for small businesses. Realizing the need to limit the arbitrary introduction of business regulation, the state carried out reforms aimed at improving 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 established 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 replenished with the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Licensing", which approved an exhaustive list of types of licensed activities and new principles of licensing. Consistently introduced the principles of "one window" for agreement with all state bodies when obtaining licenses, "silence is a sign of consent" extended to all permits, a single period for issuing licenses is set - 15 working days, checking the submitted package of documents for completeness within two days, eliminating the mandatory 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 the provision of security from 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 that establish mandatory requirements for business has increased. In particular, more than 250 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, became a big incentive for business development. And, as already noted, on October 29, 2015, the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan signed the Entrepreneurial Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, which entered into force on January 1, 2016. The pre-existing the legislative framework, regulating legal issues entrepreneurship, eliminated gaps and contradictions, systematized the socio-economic and legal conditions and guarantees for ensuring the freedom of entrepreneurship. The result of the reforms carried out was to be a significant reduction in the pressure of regulatory authorities on business. Changes have been made in such areas as the opening of an enterprise, taxation, and the protection of investors. 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 innovation, investment activities, and special economic zones. The earlier 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 of illegitimate all other permits and control functions that were not included in the relevant lists of laws. This approach ensured that entrepreneurs were protected from the arbitrary introduction of new onerous regulatory instruments. State control and supervision is aimed, among other things, at detecting violations and preventing them. The provision on the priority of the prevention of an offense before punishment is fundamental. In practice, fines are most common as sanctions, and warnings are less common. The high penalty rate indicates that fines are applied even to minor violations, even though international practice is moving in the direction of notices of improvement. The Entrepreneurial Code consolidated the basic principles of state regulation of relations with the participation of business entities, marked by the Concept of the Legal Policy of the Republic of Kazakhstan for the period from 2010 to 2020, approved by Decree of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated August 24, 2009 No. 858. Such as: guaranteeing the freedom of private enterprise (it is allowed to carry out any types of activities that are not prohibited by the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan), ensuring its protection and support (the principle of freedom of private enterprise); equality of all business entities to carry out entrepreneurial activities (principle of equality of business entities); guarantee of inviolability and protection of property of business entities (principle of inviolability of property); action of business entities within the limits of the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan and normative legal acts adopted in accordance with it (principle of legality); stimulation of entrepreneurial activity, including support and priority for the development of small businesses (principle of stimulating entrepreneurial activity); 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 (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. Implementation of the Concept provides for the achievement of goals and the solution of tasks to create a balanced system of state 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 unsystematic changes, can indirectly affect business. Entrepreneurs note that they have to spend more time to understand 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 actions, 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 law, which can have a great regulatory impact on the main areas 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.

Short description

Qualitative changes in the organization of the structure of production management are taking place in the economy of the Republic. For the first time in the years of economic reforms, a powerful blow was dealt to the functions of the state as the owner and subject of central planning management. Denationalization and privatization served as the main levers for bringing about 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 in 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. Fundamentals of formation and development of entrepreneurship in Kazakhstan.
2.1 Status and trends in the development 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

Attached files: 1 file

STATE REGULATION OF BUSINESS ACTIVITIES ON THE EXAMPLE OF KAZAKHSTAN

INTRODUCTION

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

The concept of entrepreneurial activity.
Forms and types of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity: the theory of the issue.
Forms and types of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity: world experience.

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

2.1 Status and trends in the development 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

That is why it seems most important now to determine the essence of the problems that the economy faces, to establish the causes of their occurrence and, having made a "diagnosis", 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, the study of positive and negative aspects in the 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 BUSINESS ACTIVITIES

The concept of entrepreneurial activity

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. 1

Signs of entrepreneurial activity:

1) systematic and constancy;

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 terms of the contract that do not contradict the law, 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 probable 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 activity, commercial and non-profit 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 entrepreneurial activities:

1) notarial activities;

2) advocacy;

3) activities for the sale of agricultural products produced and processed by citizens running a personal subsidiary plot;

4) activities for the provision of paid additional educational services to the population, enterprises, state and municipal educational institutions (on 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 is an integral part of economic activity, which is closely connected with the market, commodity-money relations. Carrying out business activities without registration is prohibited. Entrepreneurial activity can be carried out as legal entities(first of all commercial organizations), and individuals engaged in entrepreneurial activities without forming a legal entity.

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

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

Stimulation of economic growth;
Employment regulation;
Encouragement of progressive shifts in the sectoral and regional structure;
Export support.

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

The 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 socio-economic life of the country where difficulties have arisen or could arise, problems that cannot be resolved automatically or resolved in the distant future, while the removal of these problems is necessary .

In the conditions of market relations, the economy is regulated by economic (indirect) and administrative (direct) methods. Economic and administrative methods are, as it were, opposite, since administrative ones limit the 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 an 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, at the risk and under the property liability of a legal entity (collective entrepreneurship). 7

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. Stimulation of medium-sized businesses is multidisciplinary and varies 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 managerial and technical assistance; antitrust regulation.

The incentive mechanism includes, first of all, legislative 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 law 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 at public expense - special centers where novice businessmen premises, equipment, computers on preferential terms. In addition to the state, large firms, joint-stock companies and concerns are called upon to help small and medium-sized businesses. Both in the sphere of production itself, and in the creation of a system of training and retraining of small business personnel. An equally important area was the provision of consulting services and Information Support small businesses. 8

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 payment balances and a relatively stable exchange rate of the national currency, timely settlement of trade conflicts with major partners abroad, etc.

It cannot be emphasized that state regulation in Japan in recent decades has been increasingly developing towards the widest possible use of market self-regulation mechanisms, abandoning the most severe forms of influence on foreign economic relations. Naturally, such a reorientation is carried out very carefully, 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 actions of the Japanese government abroad, especially by the main trading partners. 9

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 are contrary to 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 in relation 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. Status and development trends of entrepreneurship in Kazakhstan

Kazakhstani business is the sector of the economy, which is literally generated by the reforms. One of the priority areas of economic reform currently being carried out in Kazakhstan is the establishment and development of small businesses. 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 market system management, but also the most essential element in the social transformation of society.

Legal regulation of entrepreneurial activity in the Republic of Kazakhstan. Coursework state regulation of business activities

Concept state regulation of business activities until 2020

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

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

The list of normative legal acts through which implementation of the Concept is expected