According to existing laws, entrepreneurs do not have the right to a warning and an opportunity to correct mistakes. We are calling for concrete changes that include: publicly available obligations for entrepreneurs by industry, automated notifications, and first advice and education, only then a penalty – these are words copied from the Facebook page of the Association Voice of Entrepreneurs (UGP) that highlight one of the fundamental problems entrepreneurs have always faced: there is no forgiveness, you made a mistake and you will pay a fine.
I have been writing about this problem for a long time, but since it is generally not being resolved, it is necessary to remind the authorities to work a little on this area when drafting all types of regulations. It is true that one can come across an example where an inspector first warns an entrepreneur of a mistake and gives them time to correct it, but there are more examples of immediate penalties after discovering irregularities (at least that is the impression, there are no conducted studies).
Room for arbitrary interpretations
In cases where an inspector warns an entrepreneur, it is likely a gap in the regulation or a somewhat stretched interpretation because our regulations most often do not allow any possibility for the company to correct the irregularity. We can see this by reading the penal provisions of our laws which state that a legal or natural person will be fined if they do not comply with a certain provision. There is no possibility for the inspector to warn the entrepreneur of the irregularity. And it should be written in the penal provisions that they should be warned, and then if they do not correct the mistake within a certain period, they will be justifiably punished with the maximum penalty.
In such cases, we always throw stones at inspectors, but let’s think a little and ask ourselves if they are really to blame in every such situation. For example, UGP published a post from a Split trader (who has a small fruit and vegetable shop) who wrote that he was visited by a state inspector. Everything was in order except for one thing: the trader did not submit a request for registration in the Register of Fruit and Vegetable Traders. He did that immediately after the inspector’s visit, but regardless, he was sent a misdemeanor order. The fine for that offense is 2800 euros, and for the responsible person, 400 euros.
Of course, the inspector is the bad guy in this story, and maybe he really is a corrupt person. But maybe he is not, because what if the regulation does not allow him to do anything other than immediately fine the trader? There is no possibility to warn the person and give them a deadline to submit a request for registration in the Register. And he could have turned a blind eye, as they say, but what if his boss does not think that way, but adheres to the letter of the law, so that inspector could be punished for poor performance, perhaps even suspected of corruption.
