Fiscal Relief Targeting and Administrative Burden for Small Enterprises

Abstract

Background: Differences in how institutions address fiscal relief raise important questions about accountability, administrative consistency, and effective implementation.

Objective: The research compared approaches to fiscal relief and explored which governance features were most closely associated with outcomes involving administrative burden.

Methods: A cross-sectional survey of 731 relevant officials, professionals, service users, or regulated actors measured implementation quality, institutional capacity, procedural clarity, transparency, and perceived effectiveness. Descriptive statistics and multivariable regression were used to examine factors associated with stronger implementation.

Results: In the fiscal relief analysis, 718 cases were complete: 46% reflected consistent practice and 27% involved important procedural or capacity obstacles. Multivariable modelling showed independent positive associations for role clarity, staff capability, and access to formal guidance after accounting for organization size and jurisdiction.

Conclusion: These findings place institutional capacity at the centre of effective governance relating to fiscal relief. Accordingly, public-service reforms should reduce administrative friction while preserving transparent eligibility rules, review mechanisms, and equitable access.

Study design: small-business survey study.

Publication history: Originally published in print on 15 June 2021, Volume 1, Article 13. Online abstract record added on 16 September 2026. Full-text PDF will be added when the digital galley is ready.