The authorities are in the midst of a process to improve the legislative and regulatory framework governing business activities. This is an important and necessary undertaking, considering that more than two decades have passed since the previous process of this kind, and much has changed since then. Guillotine 1 and Guillotine 2, as the two stages of the deregulation process carried out more than 20 years ago were commonly known, provided a breath of fresh air for businesses, and their beneficial effects were felt for a long time. Today, we can reasonably conclude that the new deregulation process will once again give a noticeable boost to economic development.

This assessment is based on figures officially presented by the authorities, which indicate that approximately 100 regulatory acts are to be amended in two packages. The first package will provide for amendments to or the repeal of government decisions, while the second will cover legislative amendments. At the same time, approximately 80 types of permits are being reviewed to determine which can be eliminated or replaced with notifications or voluntary compliance documents. The authorities are also examining 172 permit-related procedures identified outside the Nomenclature of Permissive Acts. Appropriate decisions will be made regarding these procedures.

It is encouraging that the review also covers aspects of the activities of state institutions that directly affect economic activity. Specifically, this involves 19 supervisory bodies, 36 authorities empowered to impose administrative penalties, and five investigative bodies that can intervene in economic activities. Reducing the number of inspections and limiting the potential for abuse by these bodies will also have a positive impact on economic development.

The previous reform of the regulatory framework governing business activities went hand in hand with other measures designed to eliminate existing barriers and stimulate business development. At the time, economic liberalization, as the process was commonly known, included a tax amnesty, a capital amnesty, new tax rules for reinvested profits, and other measures.

It remains unclear whether the authorities are planning additional measures—not necessarily along the lines of those mentioned above, but ones that would be relevant to stimulating economic activity. We can see that certain efforts are being made regarding state-owned enterprises, improvements in the management of public property, and the privatization of certain assets, among other initiatives. These are important activities and priorities, but they concern only the public sector, not the private sector.

Therefore, alongside the comprehensive deregulation process, other relevant measures should also be introduced. After all, the challenges facing businesses are not limited to regulatory issues. They need to be addressed through a broad range of measures, from reducing the tax burden to curbing corruption and abuses by various public officials.

In other words, the authorities have launched an important process, but the issues must be considered from a much broader perspective, taking into account their full complexity. Only then can we be confident that we are talking not merely about another breath of fresh air for businesses, but about a powerful stimulus for the development of the national economy.

Victor Slivinschi, Businessman and Investor