Comment by Riaz Haq on December 31, 2022 at 10:34am

How Informal Sector Affects the Formal Economy in Pakistan? A Lesson for Developing Countries

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2277978719898975

There have been multiple estimates for the informal sector of Pakistan (Ahmed & Ahmed, 1995; Ahmed & Hussain, 2008; Arby et al., 2010; Aslam, 1998; Gulzar, Junaid, & Haider, 2010; Iqbal, Qureshi, & Mahmood, 1998; Kemal, 2003; Kemal, 2007; Kemal & Qasim, 2012; Kiani, Ahmed, & Zaman, 2015; Mughal, Schneider, & Hayat, 2018; Shabsigh, 1995; Yasmin & Rauf, 2003), yet most of the studies are limited to measuring the informal sector only. However, Shabsigh (1995) explored the relationship between fiscal deficit and informal sector, while Yasmin and Rauf (2003) and Kemal (2007) attempted to explore the nexus between informal and formal sectors. The estimates of the first author were based on simple ordinary least squares (OLS) without accounting for cointegration among variables. On the other hand, Kemal (2007) used vector autoregression (VAR), and his results showed unidirectional causality from informal sector to nominal GDP. Further, they used Johansen Cointegration test and Error correction model to conclude that shadow economy has a positive effect on the formal sector in short- as well as long run. We, however, argue that the effect of the informal sector on official economy may be of asymmetric in nature in the long and short run, emanating from two contrasting propositions:
1.
First, the informal sector, being more dynamic and extensive, is considered a safe haven for informal employment and production activities stemming from its capacity to avoid the bureaucracy and legalities. This may be supporting the economic activity in the long run when the income and savings from the informal sector are spent on consumption goods being produced by the formal economy. Furthermore, countries with relatively high incidence of poverty and weak social welfare institutions may use the informal sector as a substitute for social security.
2.
On the contrary, informality is a burden on exchequer, particularly when it comes to revenue collection in the short run; hence, it restrains the formal economic activity by raising the cost of being formal; that is, taxpayers have to bear the cost of tax evaders. Lower tax collection implies less expenditure on public utilities and lower productivity and economic growth.
The above contrasting propositions also seek strength from Khan, Khwaja, and Olken (2015) who used an experimental study on performance-based incentives to tax officials in Pakistan. Although they showed that the tax revenue increased, however, bribe requests also increased by 30 per cent, which depicts a clear burden on economic growth in the short run. Therefore, we hypothesize that the informal sector may affect the formal economy positively in the long run and negatively in the short run.

Comment

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page