IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/prg/jnlaop/v2014y2014i6id457p35-50.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fines for Administrative Offences in Public Procurement: An Econometric Model
[Pokuty za správní delikty ve veřejných zakázkách: ekonometrický model]

Author

Listed:
  • Martin Schmidt

Abstract

This paper examines the fines for administrative offences in public procurement to consider whether their extent can be explained using an econometric approach. These fines, in the Czech Republic, are imposed by the Office for the Protection of Competition. The Public Procurement Act specifies only the maximal level of the fine, however, its actual value depends on the discretion of the Office. This paper analyses the decisions of the Office since 2010 and using multiple linear regression tries to explain the amount of fines. The study examines the significance of parameters such as the size of the contracting authority, the type of award procedure, the number of administrative offences and their nature or the value of the procurement. Moreover, the study identifies which of the parameters are the best to estimate the fines and what accuracy this model achieves.

Suggested Citation

  • Martin Schmidt, 2014. "Fines for Administrative Offences in Public Procurement: An Econometric Model [Pokuty za správní delikty ve veřejných zakázkách: ekonometrický model]," Acta Oeconomica Pragensia, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2014(6), pages 35-50.
    • Handle: RePEc:prg:jnlaop:v:2014:y:2014:i:6:id:457:p:35-50
    DOI: 10.18267/j.aop.457
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://aop.vse.cz/doi/10.18267/j.aop.457.html
    Download Restriction: free of charge
    File URL: http://aop.vse.cz/doi/10.18267/j.aop.457.pdf
    Download Restriction: free of charge
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.18267/j.aop.457?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Motchenkova, Evgenia, 2008. "Determination of optimal penalties for antitrust violations in a dynamic setting," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 189(1), pages 269-291, August.
    2. Gary S. Becker, 1974. "Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach," NBER Chapters, in: Essays in the Economics of Crime and Punishment, pages 1-54, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Becker, Gary S., 1992. "The Economic Way of Looking at Life," Nobel Prize in Economics documents 1992-1, Nobel Prize Committee.
    4. Bose, Pinaki, 1995. "Regulatory errors, optimal fines and the level of compliance," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(3), pages 475-484, March.
    5. James Andreoni, 1991. "Reasonable Doubt and the Optimal Magnitude of Fines: Should the Penalty Fit the Crime?," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 22(3), pages 385-395, Autumn.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Afonso Planas Raposo de Almeida Costa & Pedro Barros, 2012. "Does a Tougher Competition Policy Reduce or Promote Investment?," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 119-141, March.
    2. Plaček Michal & Ochrana František & Schmidt Martin & Půček Milan, 2016. "The Evaluation of the Role of the Office for Protection of Competition of the Czech Republic in Regulating Public Procurement," NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy, Sciendo, vol. 9(1), pages 97-116, June.
    3. Antonio Acconcia & Marcello D'Amato & Riccardo Martina, 2003. "Corruption and Tax Evasion with Competitive Bribes," CSEF Working Papers 112, Centre for Studies in Economics and Finance (CSEF), University of Naples, Italy.
    4. Ezra Friedman & Abraham L. Wickelgren, 2006. "Bayesian Juries and The Limits to Deterrence," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 22(1), pages 70-86, April.
    5. Allain, Marie-Laure & Boyer, Marcel & Kotchoni, Rachidi & Ponssard, Jean-Pierre, 2015. "Are cartel fines optimal? Theory and evidence from the European Union," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 38-47.
    6. Friehe, Tim & Miceli, Thomas J., 2015. "Focusing law enforcement when offenders can choose location," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 105-112.
    7. Arguedas, Carmen & Rousseau, Sandra, 2012. "Learning about compliance under asymmetric information," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 55-73.
    8. Alm, James & Bruner, David M. & McKee, Michael, 2016. "Honesty or dishonesty of taxpayer communications in an enforcement regime," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 85-96.
    9. Dmitri V. Vinogradov & Elena V. Shadrina, 2018. "Discouragement through incentives," Working Papers 2018-05, Business School - Economics, University of Glasgow.
    10. Levitt Steven D., 2002. "Testing the Economic Model of Crime:The National Hockey League's Two-Referee Experiment," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 1(1), pages 1-21, January.
    11. Marcel Boyer & Tracy R. Lewis & Wei Lin Liu, 2000. "Setting standards for credible compliance and law enforcement," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 33(2), pages 319-340, May.
    12. Dahm, Matthias & González, Paula & Porteiro, Nicolás, 2018. "The enforcement of mandatory disclosure rules," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 21-32.
    13. Thomas J. Miceli, 2013. "Escalating Penalties for Repeat Offenders: Why are they So Hard to Explain?," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 169(4), pages 587-604, December.
    14. van der Weele Joël, 2012. "Beyond the State of Nature: Introducing Social Interactions in the Economic Model of Crime," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 8(2), pages 401-432, October.
    15. Philip A. Curry & Steeve Mongrain, 2008. "What you don't see can't hurt you: an economic analysis of morality laws," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(2), pages 583-594, May.
    16. Rafael Di Tella & Ernesto Schargrodsky, 2004. "Do Police Reduce Crime? Estimates Using the Allocation of Police Forces After a Terrorist Attack," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(1), pages 115-133, March.
    17. Levitt, Steven D, 1997. "Using Electoral Cycles in Police Hiring to Estimate the Effect of Police on Crime," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 87(3), pages 270-290, June.
    18. Lando, Henrik, 2000. "The Optimal Standard of Proof in Criminal Law When Both Fairness and Deterrence Matter," Working Papers 2000-7, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Finance.
    19. Lewisch Peter G. & Ottone Stefania & Ponzano Ferruccio, 2011. "Free-Riding on Altruistic Punishment? An Experimental Comparison of Third-Party Punishment in a Stand-Alone and in an In-Group Environment," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 7(1), pages 161-190, June.
    20. DeAngelo, Gregory & Gee, Laura Katherine, 2018. "Peers or Police? Detection and Sanctions in the Provision of Public Goods," IZA Discussion Papers 11540, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    public procurement; award procedure; fine; administrative offence;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D73 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Bureaucracy; Administrative Processes in Public Organizations; Corruption
    • H57 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Procurement

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:prg:jnlaop:v:2014:y:2014:i:6:id:457:p:35-50. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Stanislav Vojir (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/uevsecz.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.