Accounting for transactions costs of agricultural producers in the shadow economy

Vasil Mukoviz; Lesya Leshchii; Olga Khodakivska; Olena Prokopova; Mykhailo Kuzub

doi:10.51599/are.2022.08.02.04

Vasil Mukoviz Kyiv National University of Trade and Economics https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4163-4072
Lesya Leshchii Ukrainian-American Concordia University https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2520-0589
Olga Khodakivska National Scientific Center “Institute of Agrarian Economics” https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9427-9561
Olena Prokopova Kyiv National University of Trade and Economics https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0823-0188
Mykhailo Kuzub Kyiv National University of Trade and Economics https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6222-4892

DOI: https://doi.org/10.51599/are.2022.08.02.04

Keywords: transaction costs, shadow economy, agribusiness, agricultural producers, formal and informal accounting institutions.

Abstract

Purpose. The purpose of the study – to explain the features of disclosure of transaction costs in the accounting of agricultural enterprises, taking into account the peculiarities of the shadow economy; to identify the main factors that lead to transaction costs and make suggestions for improving their accounting.

Methodology / approach. The main methods used in this study are: statistical analysis to assess the dynamics and cost structure of agricultural enterprises; graphical and analytical methods used to determine the level of the shadow economy; theoretical generalization and comparison, induction and deduction are used to reveal the content of transaction costs and their values for agricultural producers; the current state and trends of the shadow economy in Ukraine in general and in the agricultural sector in particular are assessed through synthesis and economic analysis.

Results. The role of transaction costs as an institutional economic category in the activities of agricultural producers and their impact on the growth of shadow economic processes in agribusiness is studied. The article shows that the share of transaction costs of agricultural enterprises is significant, and this reduces the efficiency of these enterprises. About 8 mln ha of agricultural land are used unofficially, which is about 25 % of all cultivated agricultural land in Ukraine. The classification of factors that contribute to the development of the shadow economy in Ukraine, in particular, the shadow agricultural market, and increase the transaction costs of agricultural producers has been improved. The factors of occurrence of transaction costs and flaws of their coverage by the accounting are investigated, recommendations on their reflection in the accounting are given. The possibilities of reducing the level of transaction costs are substantiated, in particular, due to their more correct accounting, the implementation of information systems and the formation of marketing service cooperatives.

Originality / scientific novelty. The transaction costs of agricultural enterprises were further studied. For the first time, the relationship between the main problems of agricultural producers, transaction costs that arise and accounting sub-accounts, which will allow more accurate accounting of these costs, is schematically presented. Our own vision is proposed to identify the transaction costs of agricultural producers under the influence of non-institutional economic theory, their reflection in the methodology of accounting and their minimization through actions of formal and informal accounting institutions.

Practical value / implications. The results of the study can be used in business operations of agricultural producers, in particular, the peculiarities of accounting for transaction costs are recommended to be taken into consideration when forming the accounting policy of the entity and also judgment of a professional accountant to be considered. It is also recommended to introduce accounting engineering, ie the format of joint management actions.

References

1. Budzіak, V. & Budzіak, O. (2021). Added value in agricultural land use. Agrosvit, 9–10, 3–10. https://doi.org/10.32702/2306-6792.2021.9-10.3.
2. North, D. C. (2016). Institutions and Economic Theory. The American Economist, 61(1), 72–76. https://doi.org/10.1177/0569434516630194.
3. North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511808678.
4. Ilin, V. Y., Nazarenko, T. P., Suprunova, I. V., Tomashuk, I. V., & Shevchenko, A. А. (2020). Method of estimating the volume of the shadow economy. Financial and Credit Activity: Problems of Theory and Practice, 1(32), 244–250. https://doi.org/10.18371/fcaptp.v1i32.200470.
5. Vysochyna, A., Kryklii, O., Minchenko, M., Aliyeva, A. A., & Demchuk, К. (2020). Country innovative development: impact of shadow economy. Marketing and Management of Innovations, 4, 41–49. http://doi.org/10.21272/mmi.2020.4-03.
6. Mishchuk, H., Bilan, S., Yurchyk, H., Akimova, L., & Navickas, M. (2020). Impact of the shadow economy on social safety: the experience of Ukraine. Economics and Sociology, 13(2), 289–303. http://doi.org/10.14254/2071-789X.2020/13-2/19.
7. Quesado, P. R., Silva, M. D., & Rua, S. C. (2018). The financial accounting and the cost management in the agricultural activity. Custos E Agronegocio, 14(4), 241–258. https://doi.org/10.1086/674872.
8. Coase, R. (2013). The Problem of Social Cost. Journal of Law & Economics, 56(4), 1–44. https://doi.org/10.1086/674872.
9. Williamson, O., & Ghani, T. (2012). Transaction cost economics and its uses in marketing. Journal of the Academy Marketing Science, 40(1), 74–85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-011-0268-z.
10. The new Institutional Economics: Its Start, Its Meaning, Its Prospects (2015). Available at: https://lawexplores.com/the-new-institutional-economics-its-start-its-meaning-its-prospects.
11. Haidutskyi, P. I. & Zhuk, V. M. (2012). Accounting for transaction costs – a significant factor in competitiveness in the modern economy. Accounting and finance of agro-industrial complex, 3, 9–19. Available at: http://magazine.faaf.org.ua/oblik-transakciynih-vitrat-vagomiy-faktor-konkurentospromozhnosti-v-suchasniy-ekonomici.html.
12. Zhuk, V., Zamula, I., Liudvenko, D., & Popko, Y. (2020). Development of non-financial reporting of agricultural enterprises of Ukraine. Agricultural and Resource Economics, 6(4), 76–89. https://doi.org/10.51599/are.2020.06.04.05.
13. Zhuk, V. N. (2013). Osnovy instytucionalnoj teorii buhgalterskogo ucheta [Fundamentals of the institutional theory of accounting]. Kyiv, Agricultural Science. Available at: http://magazine.faaf.org.ua/osnovy-institucionalnoy-teorii-buhgalterskogo-ucheta-monografiya-1477.html.
14. Kireitsev, G. G., & Litvinenko, V. S. (2013). Oblik, analiz i kontrol transaktsiinykh vytrat [Accounting, analysis and control of transaction costs]. Kyiv, Phytosocial center.
15. Kantsurov, O. O. (2014). Instytucionalnij aspect buhgalterskogo obliku [Institutional aspect of accounting]. Kyiv, NSC “IAE”.
16. Laburtseva, O. I. (2019). Enterprise cost management in the context of minimizing the level of transaction costs. Economic space, 150, 61–65. https://doi.org/10.32782/2224-6282/150-11.
17. Sokil, O., Zhuk, V., & Vasa, L. (2018). Integral assessment of the sustainable development of agriculture in Ukraine. Economic Annals-XXI, 170(3–4), 15–21. https://doi.org/10.21003/ea.V170-03.
18. Vlasenko, O. P., & Volkova, I. M. (2018). The transaction costs of marketing activities of enterprises of agribusiness. Eastern Europe: Economics, Business and Management, 1(12), 53–57. Available at: http://www.easterneurope-ebm.in.ua/journal/12_2018/11.pdf.
19. Liudvenko, D. (2020). The main problems of identifying transaction costs in the accounting and information management of an agricultural enterprise engaged in animal husbandry. Economic analysis, 30(1), 1, 126–132. https://doi.org/10.35774/econa2020.01.01.126.
20. Georgiev, M., & Roycheva, A. (2017). New institutional economics and methods for measuring the adaptation of Bulgarian agriculture. Trakia Journal of Sciences, 15(1), 199–205. https://doi.org/10.15547/tjs.2017.s.01.037.
21. Ismail, J. I., & Tundui, H. (2015). Transaction costs and market participation decisions of maize smallholder farmers in Dodoma region, Tanzania. Global Journal of Biology, Agriculture and Health Science, 4(2), 12–20. Available at: https://www.walshmedicalmedia.com/open-access/transaction-costs-and-market-participation-decisions-of-maize-smallholder-farmers-in-dodoma-region-tanzania.pdf.
22. Hou, J. & Huo, X. (2015). Transaction costs and farm-to-market linkages: empirical evidence from China apple producers. International Association of Agricultural Economists 2015 Conference, Milan, International Association of Agricultural Economists. https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.211746.
23. Ciliberti, S., Frascarelli, A., & Martino, G. (2020). Drivers of participation in collective arrangements in the agri-food supply chain. Evidence from Italy using a transaction cost economics perspective. Annuals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 91(3), 387–409. https://doi.org/10.1111/apce.12263.
24. Mroczek-Dąbrowska, K., & Gorynia, M. (2019). Understanding transaction costs in the mesoeconomic perspective. Argumenta Oeconomica, 1(42), 337–360. https://doi.org/10.15611/aoe.2019.1.14.
25. Aydemir, A., Gözener, B. & Parlakay, O. (2020). Cost analysis and technical efficiency of dairy cattle farms: a case study of Artvin, Turkey. Custos e @gronegócio, 16(1), 461–481. Available at: http://www.custoseagronegocioonline.com.br/numero1v16/OK%2019%20cattle.pdf.
26. Corporate Finance Institute (2015). What are Transaction Costs? Available at: https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/economics/transaction-costs.
27. State Statistics Service of Ukraine (n.d.). Economic statistics (1998–2021). Available at: http://www.ukrstat.gov.ua/operativ/menu/menu_u/cg.htm.
28. Kelmanson, B., Kirabaeva, K., Medina, L., Mircheva, B., & Weiss, J. (2019). Explaining the Shadow Economy in Europe: Size, Causes and Policy Options (IMF Working Paper, no. 19/278). Available at: https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WP/Issues/2019/12/13/Explaining-the-Shadow-Economy-in-Europe-Size-Causes-and-Policy-Options-48821.
29. Miasyshchev, O. (2021). Tinova ekonomika v Ukraini prodovzhuie zrostaty: vzhe ponad 1 trln hrn [The shadow economy in Ukraine continues to grow: more than 1 trillion UAH]. Available at: https://finance.liga.net/ekonomika/novosti/tenevaya-ekonomika-v-ukraine-prodoljaet-rasti-uje-bolshe-1-trln-grn.
30. Niv’ievskyi, O., & Halytsia, O. (2020). Village communities and land reform. Vox Ukraine. Available at: https://voxukraine.org/uk/silski-gromadi-ta-zemelna-reforma.
31. National Bank of Ukraine (2020). Ukraine’s shadow economy. Available at: https://bank.gov.ua/ua/news/all/doslidjennya-tinovoyi-ekonomiki-v-ukrayini--mayje-chvert-vvp--abo-846-mlrd-griven--perebuvaye-v-tini.
32. The shadow economy in Ukraine continues to grow: more than 1 trillion UAH. Available at: https://finance.liga.net/ekonomika/novosti/tenevaya-ekonomika-v-ukraine-prodoljaet-rasti-uje-bolshe-1-trln-grn.
33. Tylchyk, O., Pluhatar, T., & Kotukha, O. (2018). Determinants of shadowing of the economy: the genesis of economic and legal doctrines. Baltic Journal of Economic Studies, 4(3), 302–310. https://doi.org/10.30525/2256-0742/2018-4-3-302-308.
34. State Financial Monitoring Service of Ukraine (2020). Typological study “Money laundering from tax crimes”. Available at: https://fiu.gov.ua/pages/dijalnist/tipologi/tipologi-derzhfinmonitoringu/tipologichne-doslidzhennya-vidmivannya-doxodiv-vid-podatkovix-zlochiniv-2020-rik.html.
35. Economist (2016). The future of agriculture. Available at: https://www.economist.com/technology-quarterly/2016-06-11.
36. Bobenko, M. (2021). Yield country, Focus, 32, 28–31.
37. Kubach, P. (2021). The impact of the shadow market on the development of agriculture and rural areas. Vox Ukraine. Available at: https://voxukraine.org/vplyv-tinovogo-rynku-na-rozvytok-silskogo-gospodarstva-ta-silskyh-terytorij.