Suchergebnisse

Increasing the investment activity of the existing companies and stimulating the incorporation of new companies is one of the factors of economic development. Many factors determine the scope of economic activity in a country, one of them is the procedure for incorporating economic entities. If we start from the assumption that the investor, domestic or foreign, has assessed the possibility of profiting in a specific economic environment, the first step in the realization of their business idea is the incorporation of their company. The legislation in Serbia provides an opportunity for a significant part of the procedure for incorporating business entities to be conducted electronically. Using this opportunity implies the knowledge of several laws related to the procedure for incorporation registration, as well as mastering new e-methods of communicating and running business. In this paper, we point out the normative solutions related to the e-registration of companies in Serbia and the problems in the practice that the founders encounter. E-registration of business entities entails the understanding of numerous e-instruments such as: e-documents, qualified e-signature, e-address, user applications, qualified e-time stamp and others. Memorandum of Association and other acts can be made in written or e-form, so the question arises whether all documents when forming a company can be in e-form and how an e-document can be materialized without losing legal force. Another legal obligation in our country, for some companies, is the e-records of beneficial owners. We will deal with these and other practical issues that the founders of companies in Serbia face in this paper.

In this paper, the author analyzes the effects of an emergency situation, primarily the COVID-19 pandemic, on investments in construction industry. In Serbia, the expansion of construction industry continued in the conditions of the COVID-19 pandemic. Based on the risk assessment that accompanies construction projects and the actions of the state to reduce pandemic disturbances, we can conclude that the short-term effects of state measures in construction industry have supported the implementation of construction projects. The first pandemic wave affected a change in the project management strategy aimed at adapting to the changed circumstances. However, the long-term economic consequences of the pandemic are still difficult to observe. Long-term pandemic effects emerge as a consequence of structural disorders, the so-called "multiplied" negative effects, which are the result of the connection between economic flows and activities. The more economic segments are affected, the more multipliers there will be; moreover, there are compensatory effects (e.g. the expansion of the pharmaceutical industry, production of computer equipment, etc.). The complex interaction of related economic activities determines the initial result of individual economic entities, which will affect the profitability of future construction projects. The biggest incentive for construction industry in our country is the introduction of the Central Register of Unified Procedures (CRUP). By using this system, complete documentation required for construction and use of facilities may be submitted and issued online in e-form.

State aid (giving economic advantage to certain economic entities or groups of economic entities by granting subsidies and loans under more favorable conditions, state guarantees, tax breaks and tax exemptions, selling public property under particularly favorable conditions, etc.) may be economically justifiable but entails the risk of distortions of market competition. The EU has strict rules in the area of providing and controlling state aid, which aim to minimize state aid while minimizing competition. Fulfilling some of the commitments undertaken in the EU accession process, the Republic of Serbia passed the State Aid Control Act in 2009, which ceased to be valid with the adoption of a new State Aid Control Act in 2019. The share of state aid in Serbia's GDP is substantial but insufficiently transparent, which justifiably raises the issue of its impact on fair competition. The reform of the Serbian state aid policy is necessary, first and foremost, in order to significantly reduce this aid and to properly select the beneficiaries. The starting point for an effective state aid policy is legal regulation and its implementation but, above all, the genuine independence and responsibility of the institutions in charge of controlling its implementation. It is necessary to find modalities that will ensure that the general interest and economic efficiency are above individual interests. This paper aims to promote awareness about the impact of state aid on economic efficiency, to analyze the legal solutions and the institutional framework in this field in Serbia, and to present the EU state aid policy. The emergence of excessive, improperly selective and uncontrolled state aid can have profound negative consequences on social well-being, for which reason it is necessary to properly standardize and implement the rules envisaged in this area of law.

In this paper, the authors provide a precise terminological demarcation of the following behavioral concepts: "nudge", "shove", and "budge". Based on these concepts and three defined criteria (freedom/coercion, internalities/externalities, and behavioral insights), the authors explain various behavioral public policies and their practical implications: 1) the behavioral public policy of libertarian-paternalistic orientation (the "nudge policy"); 2) the policy of coercive paternalism; and 3) the behavioral regulation of externalities. Then, the authors provide a terminological distinction between the concept of "sludge" and "nudge", and discuss their potential misuses. Finally, based on the level of "frictions", the authors distinguish between the concepts of "administrative burden" and "sludge", as well as the types of public policies that are recommended for their reduction, particularly "sludge audits". The conclusion is that all these public policies are very close, slightly different in terms of the subject matter of regulation and the intensity of encroachment on the freedoms of individuals, but that they all have a common root in behavioral insights. ; U ovom radu autori daju precizno terminološko razgraničenje sledećih biheviorističkih koncepata: "blago usmeravanje ili gurkanje" (engl. nudge), "guranje" (engl. shove) i "pomeranje" (engl. budge). Na osnovu ovih koncepata i tri definisana kriterijuma (sloboda/prinuda, internalije/eksternalije i bihevioristički nalazi), autori objašnjavaju različite biheviorističke javne politike i njihove praktične implikacije: 1) biheviorističke javne politike libertarijansko-paternalističkog usmerenja (politike usmeravanja), 2) politike prinudnog paternalizma, i 3) biheviorističke regulacije eksternalija. Potom, autori pružaju terminološku distinkciju između koncepta "mulja" (engl. sludge) i "usmeravanja" (engl. nudge), te raspravljaju o njihovim potencijalnim (zlo)upotrebama. Konačno, na osnovu nivoa "frikcija", autori razgraničavaju i koncepte "administrativnog ...

In this paper, the authors provide a precise terminological demarcation of the following behavioral concepts: "nudge", "shove", and "budge". Based on these concepts and three defined criteria (freedom/coercion, internalities/externalities, and behavioral insights), the authors explain various behavioral public policies and their practical implications: 1) the behavioral public policy of libertarian-paternalistic orientation (the "nudge policy"); 2) the policy of coercive paternalism; and 3) the behavioral regulation of externalities. Then, the authors provide a terminological distinction between the concept of "sludge" and "nudge", and discuss their potential misuses. Finally, based on the level of "frictions", the authors distinguish between the concepts of "administrative burden" and "sludge", as well as the types of public policies that are recommended for their reduction, particularly "sludge audits". The conclusion is that all these public policies are very close, slightly different in terms of the subject matter of regulation and the intensity of encroachment on the freedoms of individuals, but that they all have a common root in behavioral insights.