Issuance Date: MAY 11, 2012
Deadline for Receipt of Questions: JUNE 05, 2012 by 5 p.m. CET
Closing Date/Time for Submission of Applications: JUNE 11, 2012 by 3 p.m. CET

SUBJECT:Request for Applications (RFA) Number: RFA-2012-05

The USAID Business Enabling Program in Serbia (Project), a United States Agency for International Development (USAID)-funded contract implemented by Cardno Emerging Markets USA, Ltd., is seeking applications from qualified, legally registered US, Serbian, or a third country non-profit, for-profit, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) for a grant to propose measures to combat shadow economy and its effects in order to increase economic growth in Serbia.

The Successful Applicant will be responsible for ensuring achievement of specified grant objectives.

This RFA consists of the following sections:

  • Section 1 – Funding Opportunity Description
  • Section 2 – Award Information
  • Section 3 – Eligibility Information
  • Section 4 – Application and Submission Information
  • Section 5 – Application Review Information
  • Section 6 – Award and Administration Information
  • Section 7 – Annexes

Pursuant to 22 CFR 226.81, it is USAID policy not to award profit under assistance instruments. However, all reasonable, allocable and allowable expenses, both direct and indirect, which are related to the grant activity and are in accordance with applicable cost standards (22 CFR 226, OMB Circular A-122 for non-profit organizations, the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 31 for for-profit organizations, and OMB Circular A-21 for educational institutions), may be paid under the Award.

Subject to the availability of funds, the Project intends to provide up to 80,000 (US dollars), payable in US dollars if the Grantee is a foreign entity or in Serbian dinars equivalent if the Grantee is a domestic entity. The total funding will be allocated over a five month period.

The Project reserves the right to fund any or none of the applications submitted. Issuance of this RFA does not constitute an award commitment on the part of the Project, nor does it commit the Project to pay for costs incurred in the preparation and submission of an application. Further, the Project reserves the right to reject any or all applications received if such action is considered to be in the best interest of the US Government. Applications are submitted at the risk of the Applicant; should circumstances prevent making an award, all preparation and submission costs are at the Applicant’s expense.

Multinational experience and expertise provided by potential applicants will be considered as an advantage, and organizations from Serbia and other countries with such portfolio are strongly recommended to apply.

Applicants should submit any questions concerning this RFA in writing, electronically, via email to The deadline for receipt of requests for clarifications/explanations is June 5, 2012, by 17:00 hours Local Belgrade Time. No questions will be accepted after this date.

Applicants should submit applications in writing to: Jasmina Debeljak Maljkovic, electronically, via email at The Closing Date for submission of applications is June 11, 2012, and the Closing Time for Submission of Applications is 15:00 hours Local Belgrade Time. Late applications will not be considered.


Section 1 – Funding Opportunity Description

A. Background

The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) has awarded a contract to Cardno Emerging Markets USA, Ltd. (formerly Emerging Markets Group, Ltd.) for the USAID Business Enabling Project in Serbia. The purpose of the Business Enabling Project is to help the Government of Serbia (GoS) improve the competitiveness of the Serbian economy and its private sector businesses. The overall objective is to assist GoS policy makers, business representatives, experts, and others to improve the business enabling environment and macroeconomic framework. The activity provides technical assistance and training to improve the business enabling environment, support macroeconomic stability, further develop financial markets, and improve and increase business and financial management capacities within government and business. The Business Enabling Project is made up of three components:

  1. Component 1 – Business Regulation and Economic Governance: Assist Serbia to improve its business regulation and economic governance, particularly in those areas where it performs poorly in international competitiveness and business environment rankings, so that it can better stimulate private sector growth and development and attract more foreign and domestic investment resources.
  2. Component 2 – Macroeconomic Policy and Public Financial Management: Assist the GoS and the National Bank of Serbia to improve macroeconomic policy, public financial management, and financial stability. Support efforts to improve GoS capacity to develop and implement fiscal policy.
  3. Component 3 – Financial Market Development: Support means to increase access to finance, including development of non bank financial institutions. Also, to support the development of Serbia’s capital markets through improvements in market governance, accounting and disclosure standards. Support Serbia in its efforts to reform accounting and audit standards and practices and assist it in implementing those reforms.

The Project’s activities in Components 1, 2, and 3 are described in more detail on Project’s website:  and

To accomplish reforms in each of these areas the Project helps the Government of Serbia work closely with the private sector and outside experts to make reforms that improve business competitiveness. The purpose of this RFA is to solicit applications to support the Project by providing an evaluation of the shadow economy in selected key economic sectors and, developing a set of recommendations and a strategy for inducing a shift in the informal economic activity within those sectors to the formal economy.


B. Grant Activity Description

Problem Statement

The so-called ‘shadow economy’ represents one of the biggest challenges in Serbia’s economy and politics. The problem has become more acute and grown larger since the start of the global economic crisis, which caused a certain number of companies to resort to activities not in compliance with the regulations. Estimates of its size made in the past have ranged from 15% to 40% of GDP depending on the methodology, the time frame of measurement, the working definition being used, and the assumptions made by the analyst.

A recent survey of more than 900 businesses conducted by the USAID Business Enabling Project and feedback from business roundtables revealed that a large majority of businesses believe that their industry has some shadow economic activity.  A number of businesses could not give an estimate of the amount of activity, but those who could made the following estimates: 11% of businesses believe that the grey economy accounts for up to a quarter of business in their line of work; 24% believe the percentage stands between 25% and 50%, while 14% of them say that more than half of business activities belong to the grey zone. Another similar question in the survey dealt with the perception of interviewees of the percentage of companies that, despite doing business legally, sometimes resort to illegal activities. In this case, a number of companies could not say, but the majority of those who were willing to give a response said that the number of companies that occasionally flout regulation stood at between one quarter and a half.

World research on the impact of a shadow economy on the overall economic growth offers two points of view. On the one hand, the shadow economy is expected to slow or depresses growth because firms that operate informally have limited access to the factors of production – e.g. finance and specialized labor – and they are not able to recourse to official contract enforcement institutions. Their market potential is usually limited and they often need to stay small to avoid detection or they branch out vertically or horizontally into other business. On the other hand, the informal sector may contribute to growth in ways that are not well measured by the conventional data - for example by inducing economic activities that would not ordinarily occur in the formal sector and/or enabling firms to be more competitive and efficient than the formal sector.

In Serbia, the answer may lie somewhere in the middle depending on which sector, which jurisdiction, and which type of enterprise is being evaluated. Certainly, there is a reason to suspect that participation in shadow economy has become a major survival strategy for a considerable portion of the population, and this to some extent probably contributed to social stability during rising formal unemployment. Moreover, there are a number of cottage and trading industries that are likely to exist only in the informal sector.

However, putting aside economic growth question, there is a larger set of concerns that make the presence of the shadow economy distinctly negative for the country. Some of the major issues that are most relevant to policymakers today are the following:

  • Revenue Losses: Among the most important negative consequences are revenue losses in the form of taxes. Tax revenue foregone as a result of the shadow economy may represent a very significant component of the total tax gap. With both the public sector borrowing and the deficit spending near the legal maximums, the GoS must find new sources of income to achieve its fiscal objectives and the shadow economy is a reasonable source for review. Raising taxes on businesses or earnings is not a viable option; in fact tax reductions are probably needed to stimulate investment for long-term growth.

  • Loss of Social Contributions and Wage Inequality – The shadow economy harbors a large balance of informal labor. Labor tax evasion and under-payments are major drivers of informal employment and wage inequality in the country. Employees earn significantly less than those in the formal sector, controlling for a range of other variables. In an era where Serbia needs to nurture the formation of a skilled, productive, and well balanced labor force it cannot afford to have a large portion of the working-age population employed either entirely or partially in the shadow economy with limited access to formal vocational institutions and programs. Moreover, it cannot afford to provide good health and pension benefits to the entire population without wider participation from the working-age population.

  • Hindrance to EU Integration: A large shadow economy may hinder the process of EU integration. Serbian integration into EU is technically a process of opening markets and unifying institutional frameworks.  At the same time, it is a process of convergence of productivity and incomes. The contribution of the EU accession to the productivity improvements would come primarily through integration of companies and sectors from the formal sector into longer international production processes. If companies in the formal sector need to compete with companies in the informal sector for resources, it could discourage investment. In a broad sense the shadow economy is probably distorting to efficient allocation of resources that is needed for Serbia to secure its commercial niche in the wider EU market.

  • Unfair Competition: One of the key negative consequences of the shadow economy is unfair competition and damage done to legitimate businesses. The resulting implications are not just the loss of social contributions, wage inequality, and hindrance to EU of itself. The tax wedge between legal businesses and underground businesses “subsidizes” inefficient production, and it is one of the main economic costs of the underground economy.

  • It Inhibits Good Policymaking: There are a number of ways in which the shadow economy negatively influences economic policymaking. First, it complicates the measurement of economic performance. Second, it weakens the usefulness of policy management instruments and programs. Third, it increases uncertainty about the appropriateness of policy responses and actions. Fourth, it creates an excuse for politicization of economic problems and challenges, which inhibits constructive public-private dialogue about the strategies and actions the government should take. Estimates and assertions about the shadow economy affect expectations among citizens, especially pensioners and those employed in the government sector. They affect expectation about who will gain from reductions in the shadow economy and what the aim of policy measures should be. Overblown estimates can lead to political over-reaction and/or public tolerance and solidarity on the assumption that everyone is doing it.

As a new government comes into formation and begins to address Serbia’s economic challenges, these negative effects and actions to harness the latent economic potential of businesses working in the shadow economy – will need to be an important part of the reform agenda. The most immediate challenge, however, is to understand what actions should be taken. Should the government take a hard-handed, punitive approach or a balanced approach combining incentives with improved enforcement? What incentives should be created to encourage businesses to move from the shadow economy to the formal economy? Do different sectors require different incentives and what should be the approach to different types of informal activities? How should the government prioritize and sequence its actions to minimize disruption and political backlash. What are the expected benefits versus the costs of dealing with these issues?

Answers to these and other questions are essential for developing an effective strategy and political support for reform. However, not much has been done to answer them in a concrete and compelling way. An overview of existing literature measuring the size and related issues of the informal economy in Serbia shows that this subject is fairly unexplored by the local and expat researchers. The statistical bureau publishes semi-annual macro estimate of the shadow economy based on methodologies promoted by the OECD and Eurostat and there has been a few studies on different topics over the last few years. The most comprehensive look at the shadow economy was made more than 10 years ago, which is entirely insufficient for driving policy responses today. In recent years, there is some research that suggests the shadow economy may have been increasing in spite of economic reforms. Feedback from businesses about the challenges and costs of compliance with regulations also suggests that the incentives to operate at some level in the shadow economy remain at a high level.

Further, because the shadow economy is manifested through different types of activities – e.g. legal and illegal, through the way goods, services and labor inputs are sourced, through the way trade and commerce is arranged, etc. – it is necessary to take a closer look at the components of shadow economic activity and their rationale from a business point of view. In one sector the main drivers may be labor-related, whereas in another sector the drivers may go beyond labor; for example, main factor may be excise tax related or input supply related. In order to develop the adequate strategy given the current structure of the economy and the socio-economic situation around the country, a deeper understanding is warranted.

USAID Business Enabling Project intends to award a grant to a qualified organization to conduct an evaluation of the shadow economy in selected key economic sectors and to develop a set of recommendations and a strategy for inducing a shift in the informal economic activity within those sectors to the formal economy.

Purpose and Objectives

The main focus of this grant should be on businesses (registered firms and entrepreneurs) and their involvement in the shadow economy. The purpose of the grant is threefold: 1) to assist the new government to begin to seriously address the challenges created by the shadow economy; 2) to improve conditions for increasing tax revenues; and 3) to improve conditions for investment in key sectors that are fundamental to the country’s long-term economic growth.

The objectives are as follows:

  • To increase awareness of the actual size and impact of the shadow economy in the business community by developing a revised estimate of its aggregate size and its distribution across different sectors.

  • To strengthen understanding of the composition of the shadow economy in key business sectors/industries and across different regions in Serbia - in terms of the types of informal activities that are being undertaken and the reasons businesses are engaging in those activities.

  • To identify and recommend specific policies and programs that the GoS may use to reduce different shadow activities and strengthen the incentives for businesses to work in the formal sector.

  • To identify potential incremental benefits that can be achieved – quantitative and qualitative – in reducing different types of informal activities.

  • To provide information based on empirical research that will help guide good policymaking and reduce the emergence of perverse incentives in the future that could drive businesses to the shadow economy.

The outcome of this work will contribute to higher competitiveness of Serbian private sector by creating a more level playing field among businesses, increasing tax revenue by expanding tax base, and decreasing the deficit and government’s involvement in the economy.

The results of the grant work, in particular the policy and programmatic recommendations, will be presented to a wide forum of stakeholders, including policymakers, economists, IFI’s, and donors, to raise awareness of the need to address the shadow economy and to advocate for specific reforms to be implemented. The study may also be used to catalyze debate about the importance of reducing the shadow economy and suitable policy responses.

Grant Activities

The grantee is expected to conduct a well-organized and expert evaluation of the shadow economy along lines that will inform the creation of new policies and incentives to encourage businesses to operate more in the formal sector. 

The grantee should propose a detailed approach and methodology for undertaking the following activities:

National, Regional, and Sector-Based Estimations

  • Estimate the size and trend of the shadow economy in total, by business sector and also by region. The estimates should be based on a credible and widely used methodology that is suitable for the type of data that is collected and accessible on the Serbian economy and businesses. The estimates should allow a clear distinction on the overall shadow economy turnover realized (most often quoted statistic in the general public) versus the actual value-added realized in the shadow economy sector (an appropriate statistic for estimating potential tax revenue increases). The sector breakdown should correspond to the official classification of sectors used by the GoS and to the extent possible offer further detail where information can be broken down by sub-sector and business attributes, such as small vs. big companies, labor vs. capital intensive companies, etc. The stated sector breakdown analysis should incorporate geographic/regional dimension according to the official classification of regions used by the GoS. For example, there are assertions that grey economy in Vojvodina is only a fraction of that in the rest of the country. The implications of regional differences should be included in the grantees approach.

  • Estimate of the current economic losses incurred through the shadow economy, such as the lost tax revenue and other costs. This should cover the extent of tax evasion of different taxes – income vs. consumption taxes in particular – and the effects of the gray economy on different types of taxes;

  • Estimate the potential effects from reducing shadow economy in Serbia to the level observed in more developed countries (for example, take Croatia, Slovenia, or Italy as benchmarks).

  • Identify five key sectors where new policy responses should be targeted. This should be based on quantitative analysis of where the shadow economy is the largest and research of economic development strategies produced by the government, donors, business associations and other donors. The selections should be justified and subject to mutual agreement between the grantee and USAID BEP.

Identification and Detailed Analysis of the Shadow Economic Activity Drivers in Each Priority Sector

  • Prepare and implement a survey of businesses in each sector that will provide 1) new information on where shadow economic activity is occurring in each sector and 2) the relative contribution of identified activities to the total estimation of shadow activity in that sector. The survey should also be designed to understand the main drivers and rationale for the shadow activities. The focus of the survey should be to complement and expand on information obtained through the econometric analysis. The grantee should also specify its approach to maximizing survey responses and ensuring reliable results. The content of the survey and the sampling will require prior approval from USAID BEP.

  • Prepare a detailed analysis of the main drivers of shadow economic activity across different sectors. This analysis should be sufficiently detailed and supported by such empirical information that policy actions can be identified and that the actions will address the root causes of problems. The analysis should be based on primary research, such as interviews with different stakeholders, examination of various positive and negative incentives that are created by current business and tax regulations (e.g. the efficiency of enforcing tax evasion, the costs of operating informal versus formal, the impact of different taxes, etc.). It should also include a careful review of all of the main business policy and regulatory recommendations that have been submitted for reform in the last few years from various donors, business associations, research organizations, etc. This should include reports published by USAID BEP on inspections reform and quasi-fiscal charges, among others.

  • Provide a detailed assessment of the impact shadow economic activity has on the growth and competitiveness of the key sectors. Explain, based on empirical information, whether this impact is positive or negative, how it manifests and what the potential long-term effects are.

Review of the Institutional Capacity, Inter-Governmental Coordination, and Policy Framework for Fighting Shadow Economic Activity

  • The grantee should set out an approach for evaluating the suitability of the institutional capacity (e.g. human capital skills, information systems, policies and procedures, etc.) that is currently in place for evaluating and combating the shadow economy. This evaluation should consider where strengthening may be needed to improve the detection, enforcement, and analysis of shadow economic activity. It should also address whether shadow economic activity may emerge as a result of how the government is organized, thus leading to conflicts, loopholes, resource shortages, unclear responsibilities, poorly delineated jurisdictions and authorities, etc.

  • The grantee should refer to practices and reforms implemented in other countries that have successfully reduced the shadow economy and what institutional changes were made in these countries to support the reforms.

Policy Recommendations and Actions

  • Recommend an overarching strategy and approach for addressing the shadow economy. This should help to answer the question about what tactics should be employed - for example whether emphasis should be put on creating positive incentives, negative incentives, or a mix of both – and what sort of institutional reforms may be needed. A tailored strategy for each sector may be needed and this would be encouraged.

  • Propose and justify policies, programs, and legal reforms the government should implement to incentivize companies to reduce informal activities and participate in the formal economy. The recommendations should address sector-specific and activity-specific responses as well as responses that may be applied to all sectors.

  • The recommendations should be followed by detailed explanations of how these policy reforms should be implemented and what steps are needed to neutralize any adverse consequences on the economy. Sufficient detail in the recommendations will be needed so that policymakers can understand how the policies should be constructed and implemented. The aim is to provide enough detail and justification to enable policymakers to implement reforms quickly.

  • Provide an estimate and a justification of the benefits that can be achieved through the effective implementation of the recommendations.

Definition of Shadow Economy

The grantee should present the working definition for shadow economy that will be used in its analysis. It is recommended that grantees seek to make the definition logical, measurable and technically aligned with terminology set out by the European Commission (EC, 2004), OECD (OECD, 2004) and/or related research (for instance Schneider et al., 2010).


  1. Report and Recommendations: The grantee is expected to produce a comprehensive report covering the above topics in Serbian and English that is organized in a logical way and can be comprehended by readers with a basic understanding (undergraduate degree) of economics. The title, organization and presentation of the report should be mutually agreed between the grantee and USAID BEP once the initial economic research has been completed and the key sectors have been chosen. The report should be of a quality that is publishable via hard copy and electronic media.

  2. Survey Results: The grantee should provide the detailed results and conclusions from the survey. The survey results should be presented and summarized on a separate report in Serbian and English.

  3. Transcripts and Data Sources: The grantee should provide transcripts and sources of data used for the analysis, as well as any models and analysis that were produced through the study. They can be submitted in their original source language. Notwithstanding any use or disclosure limitations imposed on the grantee by third party data providers, USAID BEP will reserve the right to post the data on its website or use it for other research.

The application should include a list of all deliverables and milestones with the expected timetable for their delivery.

Section 2 – Award Information

Subject to the availability of funds, the Project intends to provide up to 80,000 (US dollars), payable in US dollars if the Grantee is a foreign entity or in Serbian dinars equivalent if the Grantee is a domestic entity. The total funding will be allocated over a five month period. The anticipated period of performance of the grant is expected to start in July 2012. The Project anticipates awarding one Fixed Obligation Grant under this RFA. The grant award will be denoted in Serbian dinars for a domestic entity.

 Under a Fixed-Obligation Grant, all payments will be a fixed-sum payable upon completion of deliverables, which will be defined in detail during grant agreement negotiations.

Section 3 – Eligibility Information

Eligible organizations shall be able to comply with and achieve the proposed Program Description, Tasks, and Results and have a satisfactory performance record and record of integrity and business ethics.

Eligible organizations include legally registered US, Serbian, and third country non-for-profit, for-profit, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs).

Prior to the award of grant under this RFA, successful Applicants will be required to sign a Certification Regarding Terrorist Financing certifying that the Applicant’s organization does not provide and has never provided assistance to terrorists for terrorist activities. Successful Applicants may also be required to sign other Certifications as applicable to the award. The Certifications are attached as Annex 2 of this RFA.

Ineligible organizations include:

  • Public International Organizations;
  • Entities that have misused USAID funds in the past, organizations that advocate, promote or espouse anti-democratic policies or illegal activities;
  • Political parties or institutions;
  • Organizations that intend to use the grant for religious objectives;
  • Organizations that are on the list of parties excluded from federal procurement and non-procurement programs or the United Nations Security Sanctions Committee.

Section 4 – Application and Submission Information

Applicants should submit applications in writing to: Jasmina Debeljak Maljkovic electronically, via email at The Closing Date for submission of applications is June 11, and the Closing Time for Submission of Applications is 15:00 hours Local Belgrade Time. Late applications will not be considered.

All applications in response to this RFA shall consist of a technical proposal and a budget proposal. The technical proposal must not be longer than 15 pages in length. Pages submitted in excess of 15 pages will not be reviewed. The cost proposal (budget) shall be submitted as a separate file from the technical proposal. The budget has to be submitted in Serbian dinars for a domestic entity. Applicants are advised to fill in the budget form as detailed as possible. Lump sums will not be accepted. In addition, applicants are required to provide a brief narrative clarification of budget items demonstrating the necessity of the costs and how they relate to the proposed activities in the second sheet of the Budget form.  Applicants are allowed to add new lines and modify the budget lines (not Budget Headings) according to the needs of the proposal’s activities. The required format for applications is included as Annex 1 - Full Application Form and Annex 1A – Budget Form.

Section 5 – Application Review Information

Applications will be evaluated in accordance with the criteria set forth below. The criteria have been tailored to the requirements of this RFA. Applications should note that these criteria serve to: (a) identify the significant matters which Applicants should address in their applications; and (b) set the standard against which all applications will be evaluated.

To the extent necessary, the Project may request clarification and supplemental materials from Applicants whose applications have a reasonable chance of being selected for Award. The entry into discussion is to be viewed as part of the evaluation process and shall not be deemed as indicative of a decision or commitment upon the part of the Project to make an award to the Applicants with whom discussions are being held.

Applications will be evaluated by the Grants Selection Committee on the basis of 100 possible points. The weighting of various sections will be as follows:



Maximum Points (100 Total)

Understanding of Key Issues
Grant Activity Goals, Objectives and Methodology
Outcomes / Expected Results   
Proposed Tasks and Activities 
Staffing/Management Plan
Relevant Past Experience and Performance
Cost Effectiveness
Total Possible Points


  • Understanding of the Key Issues (15 points): Does the applicant demonstrate a clear understanding of the problems/key issues that the proposed grant activity will address?
  • Grant Activity Goals, Objectives and Methodology (15 points): Is the overall goal of the proposed grant activity clearly stated and achievable? Does the applicant list specific objectives that will contribute to achieving the grant’s goal? Is the proposed methodology clear and suitable for this kind of analysis and recommendations?
  • Outcomes / Expected Results (20 points): Do the expected results of the proposed grant activities relate to the key issues and overall grant objective? Are anticipated results directly linked to a specific objective? Are the results verifiable?
  • Proposed Tasks and Activities (15 points): Does the applicant propose specific activities that are logical, realistic, and relevant to the grant activity’s goal?
  • Staffing/Management Plan (15 points): Does the proposed staffing/management plan reflect the personnel/management needs of the grant activity? Does the applicant propose personnel with experience and skills necessary to successfully implement the proposed activities?
  • Past Experience (10 points): Does the organization have relevant past experience successfully implementing similar activities?
  • Cost Effectiveness (10 points): What resources are provided for the proposed costs? Is the proposed budget realistic, well-though out, and in-line with the proposed activities? Are the proposed costs reasonable, allowable and allocable to the grant? Is the grantee contributing cost-share or providing in-kind support?

The selection of the Applicant for award will be made by the Project’s Grant Selection Committee. Prior to the award of any resultant grant agreement, the Project must obtain prior approval from USAID.

Section 6 – Award and Administration Information

Before the applications’ specified expiration date, successful applicant(s) will receive written notice from the Grants Manager informing the applicant(s) that the Project either intends to award a grant to the applicant without negotiation, or that the Project intends to engage the applicant(s) in further negotiations with respect to a potential grant award. Negotiations conducted after the receipt of an application do not constitute an obligation on the part of the Project to award a grant. Unsuccessful applicants will be notified in writing by the Grants Manager.

Any resultant award will be subject to the terms and conditions of the Prime Contract for the USAID Business Enabling Project (for US organizations: 22 CFR 226, OMB Circulars, and the Standard Provisions for U.S. Non-governmental Recipients; for non-US organizations: Standard Provisions for Non-U.S. Non-governmental Recipients).

Section 7: Annexes

Annex 1: Full Grant Application Form and Budget Form
Annex 2: Certifications






14.08.2017 - New Real Estate Registration Bill Introduces Efficient Registration and Higher Level of Legal Security in Serbia

11.08.2017 - For Stronger Ethics and Integrity in Inspection Oversight

>>> News archive <<<

Business Regulation
and Economic Governance


Monitoring & Evaluation