IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/bushst/v62y2020i2p343-363.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Extending William Baumol’s theory on entrepreneurship and institutions: lessons from post-Second World War Greece

Author

Listed:
  • Zoi Pittaki

Abstract

This article examines William Baumol’s theory about the interaction between taxation and entrepreneurship and proposes an extension to it. The analysis shows that the traditional form of Baumol’s model, focusing mainly on the level of taxes, cannot be used in order to explain what happened in the Greek case. Utilising historical evidence from the mid 1950s to the late 1980s, this article confirms that problematic tax rules create difficulties for entrepreneurship and can lead to unproductive forms of it, as Baumol suggests. However, the focus here is on aspects of the system of taxation that Baumol’s model, examining solely tax rates and levels of taxation, neglected. It is shown that, as far as Greek entrepreneurship is concerned, the adverse effects of the system of taxation came not from the level of taxes, but mostly from a series of issues that increased its perceived unfairness and illegitimacy. Some of such issues were the complexity and frequent change of legislation, the insufficient organisation of the tax bureaus as well as the lack of adequate training and arbitrariness of the members of tax services. The evidence presented here suggests that Baumol’s model can be enriched by taking into consideration these aspects of taxation too.

Suggested Citation

  • Zoi Pittaki, 2020. "Extending William Baumol’s theory on entrepreneurship and institutions: lessons from post-Second World War Greece," Business History, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 62(2), pages 343-363, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:bushst:v:62:y:2020:i:2:p:343-363
    DOI: 10.1080/00076791.2018.1451515
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00076791.2018.1451515
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00076791.2018.1451515?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. Gregory M. Randolph & Michael T. Tasto & Robert F. Salvino Jr. (ed.), 2017. "Public Policy, Productive and Unproductive Entrepreneurship," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 14939.
    2. Friedman, Walter A. & Jones, Geoffrey, 2011. "Business History: Time for Debate," Business History Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 85(01), pages 1-8, March.
    3. Henrekson, Magnus, 2007. "Entrepreneurship and Institutions," Working Paper Series 707, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    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. Magnus Henrekson & Anders Kärnä & Tino Sanandaji, 2022. "Schumpeterian entrepreneurship: coveted by policymakers but impervious to top-down policymaking," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 32(3), pages 867-890, July.
    2. Magdalena M. Ulceluse & Martin Kahanec, 2017. "Does employment protection legislation promote immigrant self-employment?," Discussion Papers 46, Central European Labour Studies Institute (CELSI).
    3. Xiaoyu Yu & Xiaotong Meng & Laura Stanley & Franz W. Kellermanns, 2024. "Self-employment and life satisfaction: The contingent role of formal institutions," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 63(1), pages 135-163, June.
    4. Julita E. Wasilczuk & Katarzyna Stankiewicz, 2022. "It is not OK but it works – unproductive entrepreneurship, the case of Poland," Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(1), pages 2943-2959, December.
    5. Dragos Dianu & Monica (Cenan) Ciucos & Alina Badulescu & Daniel Badulescu, 2021. "Public Policies To Support Entrepreneurship: Do They Contribute To Strengthen Smes Sector?," Annals of Faculty of Economics, University of Oradea, Faculty of Economics, vol. 1(1), pages 39-48, July.
    6. Michael Fritsch & Sebastian von Engelhardt, 2010. "Who Starts with Open Source? Institutional Choice of Start-Ups in the German ICT Sector," Jena Economics Research Papers 2010-049, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    7. Niklas Elert & Magnus Henrekson, 2019. "The collaborative innovation bloc: A new mission for Austrian economics," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 32(4), pages 295-320, December.
    8. Li, Zhaohua & Pang, Suqin & Zhu, Zhiyun, 2024. "The impact of pilot free trade zones on entrepreneurship: Evidence from a quasi-natural experiment in China," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    9. Leona Achtenhagen & Friederike Welter, 2011. "‘Surfing on the ironing board’ -- the representation of women's entrepreneurship in German newspapers," Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(9-10), pages 763-786, December.
    10. Szaban Jolanta & Skrzek-Lubasińska Małgorzata, 2018. "Self-Employment and Entrepreneurship: A Theoretical Approach," Journal of Management and Business Administration. Central Europe, Sciendo, vol. 26(2), pages 89-120, June.
    11. Monica Keneley, 2020. "Reflections on the Business History Tradition: Where has it Come from and Where is it Going to?," Australian Economic History Review, Economic History Society of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 60(3), pages 282-300, November.
    12. Bernardo Bátiz-Lazo, 2015. "A Dainty Review of the Business and Economic History of Chile and Latin America," Estudios de Economia, University of Chile, Department of Economics, vol. 42(2 Year 20), pages 5-16, December.
    13. François Facchini & Louis Jaeck & Chafik Bouhaddioui, 2021. "Culture and Entrepreneurship in the United Arab Emirates," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 12(3), pages 1245-1269, September.
    14. Naudé, Wim, 2011. "Entrepreneurship is Not a Binding Constraint on Growth and Development in the Poorest Countries," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 33-44, January.
    15. Fadil Sahiti, 2021. "Institutions and entrepreneurial activity: a comparative analysis of Kosovo and other economies," Journal of Entrepreneurship and Public Policy, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 10(1), pages 98-119, February.
    16. Julita E. Wasilczuk & Katarzyna Stankiewicz, 2017. "Unproductive Entrepreneurship - The Case Of The Polish Economy," GUT FME Working Paper Series A 45, Faculty of Management and Economics, Gdansk University of Technology.
    17. Fritsch, Michael, 2008. "Die Arbeitsplatzeffekte von Gründungen : ein Überblick über den Stand der Forschung (The employment effects of new businesses : a survey of the current state of research)," Zeitschrift für ArbeitsmarktForschung - Journal for Labour Market Research, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany], vol. 41(1), pages 55-69.
    18. Mike W Peng & David Ahlstrom & Shawn M Carraher & Weilei (Stone) Shi, 2017. "An institution-based view of global IPR history," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 48(7), pages 893-907, September.
    19. Wyrwich, Michael, 2013. "Can socioeconomic heritage produce a lost generation with regard to entrepreneurship?," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 28(5), pages 667-682.
    20. Kamilia LOUKIL, 2020. "Intellectual property rights, human capital and types of entrepreneurship in emerging and developing countries," Theoretical and Applied Economics, Asociatia Generala a Economistilor din Romania / Editura Economica, vol. 0(1(622), S), pages 21-40, Spring.

    More about this item

    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:taf:bushst:v:62:y:2020:i:2:p:343-363. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/FBSH20 .

    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.