View source for Red tape

{{short description|Idiom for excessively bureaucratic procedures or regulations}}
{{About|the idiom referring to excessive bureaucratic regulation}}
'''Red tape''' is excessive or redundant regulation or [[Bureaucracy|bureaucratic]] procedures that create financial or time compliance costs.<ref name="ET">{{cite web |title=What is red tape? |work=[[The Economic Times]] |date=11 December 2007 |url=https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/et-empower/what-is-red-tape/articleshow/2613130.cms |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211207100656/https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/et-empower/what-is-red-tape/articleshow/2613130.cms |archive-date=2021-12-07 |url-status=live |access-date=2025-03-27 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web | url= https://www.cfib-fcei.ca/en/red-tape-awareness-week | title=Red Tape Awareness Week 2025 | publisher=Canadian Federation of Independent Business }}</ref><ref name=Bozeman>{{cite journal | first=Barry | last=Bozeman |author-link=Barry Bozeman | title=A Theory of Government "Red Tape" | journal=Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory | date=1993 | pages=273–303 }}</ref>{{rp|274, 278–9}} 
It is usually associated with governments, but can apply to other organizations, such as private corporations.<ref name="ET" /><ref name=Bozeman/>{{rp|273–4}}

Red tape differs from beneficial rules and safeguards.<ref name=Bozeman/>{{rp|276, 278–9}} It is the administrative burden, or cost to the public, over and above the necessary cost of implementing policies and procedures.<ref name="ET"/><ref>{{cite web | url= https://www.cfib-fcei.ca/en/red-tape-awareness-week | title=Red Tape Awareness Week 2025 | publisher=Canadian Federation of Independent Business }}</ref><ref name=Bozeman/>{{rp|274, 278–9}}<ref name=":0">{{Cite book |last1=Herd |first1=Pamela |author-link1=Pamela Herd |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=HER0DwAAQBAJ |title=Administrative Burden: Policymaking by Other Means |last2=Moynihan |first2=Donald P. |author-link2=Donald Moynihan |date=2019 |publisher=Russell Sage Foundation |isbn=978-1-61044-878-9 |pages=18 |language=en}}</ref><ref name="Peeters 566–592">{{Cite journal |last=Peeters |first=Rik |date=2019-06-06 |title=The Political Economy of Administrative Burdens: A Theoretical Framework for Analyzing the Organizational Origins of Administrative Burdens |url=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0095399719854367 |journal=Administration & Society |volume=52 |issue=4 |pages=566–592 |doi=10.1177/0095399719854367 |s2cid=195561302 |issn=0095-3997|url-access=subscription }}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Burden |first1=Barry C. |author-link=Barry Burden |last2=Canon |first2=David T. |last3=Mayer |first3=Kenneth R. |last4=Moynihan |first4=Donald P. |author-link4=Donald Moynihan |date=2012 |title=The Effect of Administrative Burden on Bureaucratic Perception of Policies: Evidence from Election Administration |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/41687989 |journal=Public Administration Review |volume=72 |issue=5 |pages=741–751 |doi=10.1111/j.1540-6210.2012.02600.x |jstor=41687989 |issn=0033-3352|url-access=subscription }}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Heinrich |first=Carolyn J. |author-link=Carolyn Heinrich |date=2015-12-08 |title=The Bite of Administrative Burden: A Theoretical and Empirical Investigation |url=https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muv034 |journal=Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory |volume=26 |issue=3 |pages=403–420 |doi=10.1093/jopart/muv034 |issn=1053-1858|url-access=subscription }}</ref> A distinction is sometimes made between rules that are dysfunctional from inception ("rules born bad"), and rules that initially served a useful function but evolved into red tape ("good rules gone bad").<ref name=Bozeman/>{{rp|273, 285–289}}

Red tape can hamper the ability of firms to compete, grow, and create jobs.<ref name=NL>{{cite web |url=https://www.gov.nl.ca/redtape/ |title=Red Tape Reduction Initiative &#124; Business |publisher=Gov.nl.ca |access-date=2012-10-09 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121109084320/http://www.gov.nl.ca/redtape/ |archive-date=2012-11-09 |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref name=Cruz/>  Research finds red tape has a cost to public sector workers, and can reduce employee well-being and job satisfaction.<ref name="burnout"/><ref name=Steijn/><ref name="job demands"/>  In 2005, the UK's ''Better Regulation Task Force'' suggested that red tape reforms could lead to an increase in GDP of 16 billion pounds per year, a greater than 1% rise.<ref name="Keyworth 2006 260–273">{{cite journal | title=Measuring and Managing the Costs of Red Tape: A Review of Recent Policy Developments | journal=Oxford Review of Economic Policy | volume=22 | pages=260–273 | doi=10.1093/oxrep/grj016 | number=2 | date=2006 | first=Tim | last=Keyworth }}</ref>  The [[Canadian Federation of Independent Business]] estimated the cost to business of red tape arising from federal, provincial and municipal government regulations was $11 billion in 2020, or about 28% of the total burden of regulation for businesses in Canada.<ref name=Cruz>{{cite web | url= https://www.cfib-fcei.ca/en/research-economic-analysis/canadas-red-tape-report  | date=2021 | title=Canada's Red Tape Report: Sixth Edition | last1=Cruz | first1=Keyli Kosiorek | first2=Laura | last2=Jones | first3=Taylor | last3=Matchett }}</ref>

Many governments have introduced measures to limit or cut red tape, including the [[European Union]], Argentina, the United States, and India.<ref name=RTRA/><ref>{{cite news | title=Europe is set to start cutting red tape--lightly | url= https://www.economist.com/business/2025/02/20/europe-is-set-to-start-cutting-red-tape-lightly | date=20 February 2025 | newspaper=The Economist }}</ref><ref>{{cite news | newspaper=France24 | title=EU plans to slash red tape for medium-sized companies | date=21 May 2025 | url=https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20250521-eu-plans-to-slash-red-tape-for-medium-sized-companies }}</ref>
Experience from [[British Columbia]], Canada suggests a successful red tape reduction initiative requires strong political commitment.<ref name=Falcon/><ref name=Jones/>

== Red tape definition ==
The term "red tape" is sometimes employed as "an umbrella term covering almost all imagined ills of bureaucracy", both public and private.<ref name=Bozeman/>{{rp|275}}
However, red tape is usually defined more narrowly as government policies, guidelines, and forms that are excessive, duplicative or unnecessary, and that generate a financial or time-based compliance cost.<ref name=Cruz/><ref name=Bozeman/>{{rp|276}} Red tape can be categorized as ''dysfunctional from inception'' (say because of inadequate comprehension of the problem being addressed); or may ''evolve'' into red tape when a rule is inadvertently changed or is no longer needed (for example, a rule that requires carbon copies when communication migrates to electronic mail).<ref name=Bozeman/>{{rp|285–289}}

Whereas red tape refers to unnecessary rules, ''administrative burden'' (sometimes called "white tape") recognizes that regulations that are intended for useful purposes may nonetheless entail a compliance cost. While in contrast ("White Tape") administrative burden is defined as the onerous costs that individuals or organisations experience in their interactions with government or other large institutions, even when the underlying regulations is considered useful, legitimate, or beneficial for public policy purposes. <ref name=":0"/><ref>{{Cite book |last1=Herd |first1=Pamela |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=HER0DwAAQBAJ |title=Administrative Burden: Policymaking by Other Means |last2=Moynihan |first2=Donald P. |date=2019 |publisher=Russell Sage Foundation |isbn=978-1-61044-878-9 |pages=22 |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Nisar |first1=Muhammad Azfar |last2=Masood |first2=Ayesha |date=2022-06-28 |title=Are all Burdens Bad? Disentangling Illegitimate Administrative Burdens through Public Value Accounting |url=https://doi.org/10.1080/23276665.2022.2088581 |journal=Asia Pacific Journal of Public Administration |volume=45 |issue=4 |pages=385–403 |doi=10.1080/23276665.2022.2088581 |s2cid=250127477 |issn=2327-6665|url-access=subscription }}</ref><ref name=Bozeman/>{{rp|276}}<ref name=":0" /><ref name="Peeters 566–592"/><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Burden |first1=Barry C. |last2=Canon |first2=David T. |last3=Mayer |first3=Kenneth R. |last4=Moynihan |first4=Donald P. |date=2012 |title=The Effect of Administrative Burden on Bureaucratic Perception of Policies: Evidence from Election Administration |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/41687989 |journal=Public Administration Review |volume=72 |issue=5 |pages=741–751 |doi=10.1111/j.1540-6210.2012.02600.x |jstor=41687989 |issn=0033-3352|url-access=subscription }}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Heinrich |first=Carolyn J. |date=2015-12-08 |title=The Bite of Administrative Burden: A Theoretical and Empirical Investigation |url=https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muv034 |journal=Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory |volume=26 |issue=3 |pages=403–420 |doi=10.1093/jopart/muv034 |issn=1053-1858|url-access=subscription }}</ref>https://www.vanderbilt.edu/burden/about/

Determining whether a regulation is justified rather than red tape can be difficult. Nevertheless, making the proper distinction is relevant when implementing reforms, and cutting red tape differs from [[deregulation]].<ref name=Jones/>

==Origins and history==
[[File:NARA Backstage Pass (2011-08) - 14.jpg|thumb|Bundle of US [[pension]] documents from 1906 bound in red tape|left]]
It is generally believed that the term "red tape" originated in the early 16th century with the Spanish administration of [[Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor|Charles V]], [[King of Spain]] and [[Holy Roman Emperor]], who started to use red tape, '' balduque'', in an effort to modernize the administration that was running his vast empire. The red tape was used to bind the most important administrative dossiers that required immediate discussion by the [[Spanish Council of State|Council of State]], and separate them from files that were treated in an ordinary administrative way, which were bound with ordinary string.<ref name="DD">{{cite book |last1=Dickson |first1=Del |title=The People's Government: An Introduction to Democracy |date=2015 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |location=New York |isbn=9781107043879 |page=176|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=HnvsAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA176 |access-date=2015-12-13}}</ref> 
The origin of the word ''balduque'' is the name of the Dutch city [['s-Hertogenbosch]] ''Bolduque'' or ''Bois-le-Duc'' ("the duke's forrest"), where in those days the red tape was manufactured.

In Britain, [[Charles Dickens]] spoke of red tape in ''[[David Copperfield]]'' (1850): "Britannia, that unfortunate female, is always before me, like a trussed fowl: skewered through and through with office-pens, and bound hand and foot with red tape."<ref name="DD" /> The English practice of binding documents and official papers with red tape was popularized in [[Thomas Carlyle]]'s writings, protesting against official inertia with expressions like "Little other than a red tape Talking-machine, and unhappy Bag of Parliamentary Eloquence".<ref>p.1152, ''Brewer's Dictionary of Phrase & Fable'', 17th Edition; Revised by J Ayto, 2005</ref> As of the first decade of the 21st century, the British [[barrister]]s' [[Brief (law)|briefs]] continued to be bound with pink-coloured ribbon known as red tape.<ref name="ET" />

In the United States, red tape was used to tie personal records of [[American Civil War|Civil War]] veterans, reputedly making access to them inconvenient.<ref name="DD" />  Early references to red tape in the U.S. include that of [[President of the United States|President]] [[Warren G. Harding]]'s [[United States Secretary of the Interior|Secretary of the Interior]] [[Albert B. Fall]] (later convicted for his role in the [[Teapot Dome scandal]]) who, according to his own annual report for 1921, set himself the goal of removing "red tape and technicalities" from the management of the department's economic resources to combat [[Economic stagnation|stagnation]].<ref name="KC">{{citation |last=Chamberlain |first=Kathleen Patricia |title=The Controversial Term of Albert Bacon Fall, Secretary of the Interior, 1921–1923 |publisher=Ohio State University |date=1992 |url=https://digital.auraria.edu/files/pdf?fileid=f3b97108-f796-4cbe-b774-cb3729b80de6}}</ref>{{rp|40}}   Similarly, the task handed to [[Scott Cordelle Bone|Scott C. Bone]] on his appointment as [[List of governors of Alaska|Governor of Alaska]] on 23 June 1921 was to "unravel government red tape".<ref name="KC" />{{rp|39}}   In 1921, the official explanation for the [[3rd Infantry Regiment (United States)|3rd U.S. Infantry Regiment]]'s strenuous march of 800 miles from [[Camp Sherman, Ohio]] to [[Fort Snelling]] was given as "red tape". While the army reportedly had insufficient funds to transport the regiment by rail, the cost to supply the troops on the march exceeded what their train fare might have been.<ref>{{citation |last=Smith |first=Hampton |title=Confluence: A History of Fort Snelling |journal=[[Minnesota History (journal)|Minnesota History]] |volume=67 |issue=7 |year=2021 |page=317 |jstor=48769226}}</ref>

Red tape has historically often been associated with military procurement.  In 1938, the [[IG Farben]] chairman [[Carl Krauch]] used the argument that red tape was responsible for previous delivery delays on the part of private enterprise in persuading [[Hermann Göring]], the head of the [[Four Year Plan]], to appoint him as plenipotentiary for the chemical industry over an [[Waffenamt|Army Ordnance]] representative.<ref>{{citation |last=Schweitzer |first=Arthur |title=Business Power Under the Nazi Regime |journal=[[Zeitschrift für Nationalökonomie]] |volume=20 |year=1960 |issue=3–4 |doi=10.1007/bf01320054 |page=434}}</ref> In his speech at the meeting of [[Schutzstaffel|SS]] Major-Generals in occupied [[Poznań]] on 4 October 1943, the SS leader [[Heinrich Himmler]] made reference to "red tape" as an example of a potential obstacle to "[[Wunderwaffe|inventions]]" within [[Nazi Germany]]'s armaments industry.<ref>{{citation |author=[[Nuremberg trials#American and British prosecution|Office of United States Chief of Counsel for Prosecution of Axis Criminality]] |title=Nazi Conspiracy and Aggression |volume=4 |publisher=United States Government Printing Office |location=Washington, DC |date=1946 |pages=562–563 |url=https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/llmlp/2011525363_NT_Nazi_Vol-IV/2011525363_NT_Nazi_Vol-IV.pdf}}.</ref> In 1947, a contractor who had worked during [[World War II]] under [[Vannevar Bush]] in the [[Office of Scientific Research and Development]] remembered Bush's "impatience with Army red tape", apparently referring to the OSRD's executive secretary Irvin Stewart's organisational efforts.<ref>{{citation |last=Owens |first=Larry |title=The Counterproductive Management of Science in the Second World War: Vannevar Bush and the Office of Scientific Research and Development |journal=[[Business History Review]] |volume=68 |issue=4 |year=1994 |page=540 |doi=10.2307/3117197 |jstor=3117197}}</ref>

As of the early 21st century, Spanish bureaucracy continued to be notorious for extreme levels of red tape (in the figurative sense).<ref name="Graff">{{cite book |last1=Graff |first1=Marie Louise |title=CultureShock! Spain |date=2009 |publisher=Marshall Cavendish |location=Tarrytown, NY |isbn=9789814435949 |page=57 |edition=6th |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=GRiJAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA57}}</ref>{{Better source needed|reason=The current source is insufficiently reliable ([[WP:NOTRS]]).|date=March 2025}} In 2013, the [[World Bank]] ranked Spain 136 out of 185 countries for ease of starting a business, which took on average 10 procedures and 28 days.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Buck |first1=Tobias |title=Spain hopes new law to cut red tape will attract entrepreneurs |url=http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/fe6c8276-ca0b-11e2-8f55-00144feab7de.html#axzz3uEEMVxsd |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/XsNM7 |archive-date=2022-12-10 |url-access=subscription |access-date=13 December 2015 |work=Financial Times |date=2 June 2013}}</ref>
Similar issues persist throughout [[Latin America]].<ref name="Graff" /><ref>{{cite book |author1=Jose Luis Guasch |author2=Benjamin Herzberg |chapter=Increasing Competitiveness Through Regulatory and Investment Climate Improvements in Latin America; the Case of Mexico |editor1-last=Haar |editor1-first=Jerry |editor2-last=Price |editor2-first=John |title=Can Latin America Compete? Confronting the Challenges of Globalization |date=2008 |publisher=Palgrave Macmillan |location=New York |isbn=9781403975430 |page=255 |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=qYzFAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA255}}</ref> In Mexico in 2009, it took six months and a dozen visits to government agencies to obtain a permit to paint a house.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Ellingwood |first1=Ken |title=No stamp of approval for Mexico bureaucrats |url=https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2009-jan-02-fg-mexico-redtape2-story.html |access-date=13 December 2015 |work=Los Angeles Times |date=2 January 2009}}</ref> To obtain a monthly prescription for [[gamma globulin]] for [[X-linked agammaglobulinemia]], a patient had to obtain signatures from two government doctors and stamps from four separate bureaucrats before presenting the prescription to a dispensary.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Malkin |first1=Elizabeth |title=For Redress of Grievances, Mexicans Turn to Bureaucracy Contest |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/09/world/americas/09mexico.html |access-date=13 December 2015 |work=The New York Times |date=8 January 2009}}</ref>
Mexico was the original home of [[Syntex]], one of the greatest pharmaceutical firms of the 20th century, but in 1959, the company left for the American city of [[Palo Alto, California]], in what is now [[Silicon Valley]], because its scientists were fed up with the Mexican government's bureaucratic delays which repeatedly impeded their research.<ref name="Gereffi_Page_110">{{cite book |last1=Gereffi |first1=Gary |title=The Pharmaceutical Industry and Dependency in the Third World |date=1983 |publisher=Princeton |location=Princeton University Press |isbn=9781400886227 |page=110 |edition=2017 reprint |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Q4grDgAAQBAJ&pg=PA110 |access-date=11 January 2021}}</ref>

==Cost of red tape==
It is impossible to know exactly how much of the burden of government regulations is red tape — i.e., is excessive and delivers little or no benefit.  
However, a survey by the [[Canadian Federation of Independent Business]] (CFIB) found red tape represented about 28% of the total burden of regulation in Canada in 2020.<ref name=Cruz/> A European Union (EU) survey reported in 2008 that 36% of EU small and medium enterprises felt that red tape had "constrained their business activities".<ref>Commission of the European Communities, [https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52008DC0394 {{"'}}Think Small First': A 'Small Business Act' for Europe"], COM(2008) 394 final, page , published on 25 June 2008, accessed on 30 June 2025</ref>

The total cost of regulation for U.S. business was estimated in 2021 at US$364.3 billion, and for Canadian business in 2020 at US$31.9 billion, or CAN$38.8 billion.<ref>{{cite report | url=https://www.cfib-fcei.ca/en/research-economic-analysis/regulator...he%20share%20attributed%20to%20red,stood%20at%2032%20per%20cent  | title=Regulatory Costs in Canada and the United States: A Small Business Perspective | publisher=The Canadian Federation of Independent Business | date=February 2022 }}</ref>
This cost represents 1.5% of GDP for the U.S. and 1.7% for Canada.<ref>{{cite web | date=16 February 2022 | title=Regulatory Costs in Canada and the United States: A Small Business Perspective | url=https://www.cfib-fcei.ca/en/research-economic-analysis/regulatory...he%20share%20attributed%20to%20red,stood%20at%2032%20per%20cent  | publisher=Canadian Federation of Independent Business }}</ref><ref>{{cite web | url= https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/cv.action?pid=3610022201 |author=Statistics Canada | title=Table 36-10-0222-01 Gross Domestic product, expenditure-based provincial and territorial, annual |date=2018 |publisher=Government of Canada | doi=10.25318/3610022201-eng}}</ref><ref>{{cite web | url=https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/NGDPXDCUSA  | title=Nominal Gross Domestic Product for United States (NGDPXDCUSA) | publisher=Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis}}</ref><ref>In 2021, U.S. GDP was US$23,681 billion. In 2020, Canadian GDP was CAN$2,220 billion.</ref>

The CFIB estimated that the cost of red tape arising from Canadian federal, provincial and municipal government regulations was $11 billion in 2020.  (This excluded [[COVID-19]] related costs, to make the amount more comparable to previous years.)<ref name=Cruz/> The annual cost of red tape per employee was higher for firms with fewer than 5 employees, at $1945, versus $398 for firms with 100 or more employees.<ref name=Cruz/>

The ''Better Regulation Task Force'' suggested in 2005 that red tape reforms could potentially deliver an increase in income of 16 billion pounds per year, an amount greater than one percent of UK GDP.<ref name="Keyworth 2006 260–273"/> The EU's "Cutting Red Tape in Europe" report, which presented suggestions on how to reduce the administrative burden when member states implement EU legislation, estimated that the administrative burden reduction potential of all recommendations in the report exceeded €41 billion annually.<ref name=EU>{{cite web | author=High Level Group on Administrative Burdens, Edmund Stoiber (Chairman) | title=Cutting Red Tape in Europe: Legacy and Outlook, Final Report | date=24 July 2014 | url=https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/fb18c49a-e601-4207-bbdd-111892fe91eb_en?filename=final-report-of-the-high-level-group_july2014_en.pdf }}</ref> 
Such calculations have been questioned, however, given that it can be difficult to ascertain costs of regulation in industries that are composed of diverse firms.<ref name=YE>{{Cite journal |last1=Ylönen |first1=Matti |last2=and Erkkilä |first2=Tero |title=What sustains flawed indicators? Unpacking the EU's administrative burden agenda |url=https://doi.org/10.1080/01442872.2025.2519297 |journal=Policy Studies |date=2025 |volume=0 |pages=1–31 |doi=10.1080/01442872.2025.2519297 |issn=0144-2872|doi-access=free }}</ref>

While a regulation may be useful, the cost of imposing it may exceed the benefits.  The Canadian federal government applies a cost-benefit analysis to most regulatory proposals, which takes into account the cost of the policy to consumers, businesses, and other sectors of society.<ref name=FRMI/> Since the 1970s, Australian governments have sought to subject regulation to rigorous cost-benefit analysis so as to constrain both the stock and flow of the regulatory burden.<ref>{{cite journal | journal=Australian Journal of Public Administration | title=The 'forever war' on red tape and the struggle to improve regulation | first1=Arie | last1=Freiberg | first2=Monica | last2=Pfeffer | first3=Jeroen | last3=van der Heijden | date=17 January 2022 | volume=81 | issue=3 | doi= 10.1111/1467-8500.12534 | pages=436–454 | url= https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1467-8500.12534 | publisher=Wiley Online Library | url-access=subscription }}</ref>

==Red tape reduction initiatives==
It can be difficult to distinguish between justified regulatory costs and unneeded regulations. For this reason, the expression "cutting red tape" has been used to refer to both initiatives to reduce ''unnecessary'' regulation, and to policies to reduce the overall regulatory burden.<ref name=Jones/>

===Canada===
Canada's ''Red Tape Reduction Act'' of 2015 implemented a one-for-one rule that requires the removal of a regulation each time regulators impose a new administrative burden on business.<ref name=RTRA>{{cite web | title=Red Tape Reduction Act | author=Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, Government of Canada | url= https://www.canada.ca/en/government/system/laws/developing-improving-...eral-regulations/modernizing-regulations/red-tape-reduction-act.html | date=22 December 2022 }}</ref>
Nevertheless, while ''Regulations'' decreased from 684 to 605 between 2014 and 2023, regulatory ''Requirements'' increased from 129,860 to 149,401.<ref name=Falcon/><ref name=FRMI>{{cite web | url=https://www.canada.ca/en/treasury-board-secretariat/corporate/reports...024-fiscal-year-federal-regulatory-management-initiatives.html#toc10 | title=Appendix C: administrative burden count; Annual Report for the 2023 to 2024 Fiscal Year: Federal Regulatory Management Initiatives | author=Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, Government of Canada }}</ref>

A more successful reduction in red tape took place in the province of [[British Columbia]], Canada, following a 2001 election promise to reduce the regulatory burden by 33%.<ref name=Jones>{{cite report | publisher=Mercatus Center, George Mason University | title=Cutting Red Tape in Canada: A Regulatory Reform Model for the United States? | url=https://www.mercatus.org/research/research-papers/cutting-red-tape-canada-regulatory-reform-model-united-states | first=Laura | last=Jones | date=11 November 2015 }}</ref> 
At the time, regulation was heavy, with rules imposed on, for example, the size of televisions in restaurants, the number of par-four holes at golf courses, and the maximum seating capacity of ski hill lounges.<ref name=Jones/> After three years, a 37% reduction was achieved. A central element of the program was a strong commitment from the minister responsible and the provincial premier.<ref name=Falcon>{{Cite web |date=2019-02-07 |title=How to reduce the regulatory burden: Gordon Campbell, the premier at the time, made sure all ministers were held accountable, through a process that could be described as cabinet peer pressure  |url=https://www.hilltimes.com/2019/02/07/reduce-regulatory-burden/187526 |access-date=2021-10-25 |website=The Hill Times |language=en-CA | first1=Mathieu | last1=Bedard | first2=Kevin | last2=Falcon }}</ref><ref name=Jones/>

===European Union===
In the [[European Union]] (EU), reducing the administrative burden on firms has been a prominent theme since the 1990s.<ref name=YE/>  In 2024, the [[President of the European Commission|European Commission President]] advocated a red tape reduction program that emphasized simplification (eliminating regulatory overlap and contradictions), speed, and coherence to deal with the EU's patchwork of national regulations.<ref name=YE/><ref>{{cite web | url=https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/e6cd4328-673c-4e7a-8683-f63ffb2cf648_en | first=Ursula | last=von der Leyen | title=Europe's Choice: Political Guidelines for the next European Commission, 2024-2029 | date=18 July 2024 }}</ref>{{rp|6–7}}  An ongoing EU objective has been to remove red tape in order to facilitate trade across the [[European single market]].  For example, recycling labels on paint cans in Spain and France may differ because the two countries' interpretation of EU legislation are not aligned, and this prevents a can of paint made for the Spanish market from being sold in France.<ref name=Economist/><ref name=ERT/>  The [[European Round Table for Industry]] recommends stronger single-market enforcement so that lawmakers better transpose EU laws into national laws, which would promote regulatory harmonization and reduce the need for firms to manage different administrative processes in each EU country.<ref name=Economist>{{cite news | newspaper=The Economist | title=The sleeping policeman the heart Europe: Enforcement of EU law has become an afterthought | date=3 July 2025 | url=https://www.economist.com/europe/2025/07/03/the-sleeping-policeman-at-the-heart-of-europe }}</ref><ref name=ERT>{{cite web | author=European Round Table for Industry | title=Renewing the dynamic of European integration: Single Market Stories by Business Leaders | url=https://ert.eu/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/ERT-Single-Market-Stories_WEB-low-res.pdf?_gl=1*1jc2ah0*_up*MQ..*_ga*MTc5MzQ5NDU4Ni4xNzUzMzcyODUx*_ga_1H7R1GQEH1*czE3NTMzNzI4NTAkbzEkZzAkdDE3NTMzNzI4NTAkajYwJGwwJGgw }}</ref>

===India===
To reduce the administrative burden, in September 2021 the Indian government launched the ''National Single Window System'' (''NSWS'') which integrates clearances across central ministries and states.<ref name="UNCTAD">{{cite web |title=India launches national single window system to improve ease of doing business |url=https://investmentpolicy.unctad.org/investment-policy-monitor/measures/3777/india-launches-national-single-window-system-to-improve-ease-of-doing-business |website=Investment Policy Monitor |publisher=UNCTAD |date=22 September 2021 |access-date=19 September 2025}}</ref> 
In addition to providing a common entry point, ''NSWS'' consolidates information requirements and aims to standardise application formats, support online tracking, and enable time-bound processing.<ref name="PIBNSWS">{{cite web |title=National Single Window System facilitates over 44,000 approvals since launch |url=https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleaseIframePage.aspx?PRID=1880251 |website=Press Information Bureau |publisher=Government of India |date=1 December 2022 |access-date=19 September 2025}}</ref>
The Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Act, 2023, is meant to reduce procedural delays by decriminalising minor, technical provisions and allow adjudication rather than prosecution.<ref name="JV2023">{{cite web |title=The Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Act, 2023 |url=https://egazette.gov.in/WriteReadData/2023/248047.pdf |website=The Gazette of India |publisher=Government of India |date=11 August 2023 |access-date=19 September 2025}}</ref><ref name="JV2025">{{cite web |title=Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Bill, 2025 introduced in Lok Sabha |url=https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2157460 |website=Press Information Bureau |publisher=Government of India |date=18 August 2025 |access-date=19 September 2025}}</ref>
To minimize discretionary variation in routine cases, a “faceless” (electronic communication) assessment, appeal, and penalty  process was introduced.<ref name="CBDT">{{cite web |title=Faceless Scheme |url=https://incometaxindia.gov.in/Pages/faceless-scheme.aspx |website=Income Tax Department |publisher=Government of India |access-date=19 September 2025}}</ref><ref name="RTI">{{cite web |title=Right to Information Act, 2005 (English) |url=https://cic.gov.in/sites/default/files/RTI-Act_English.pdf |website=Central Information Commission |publisher=Government of India |access-date=19 September 2025}}</ref>

===Korea===
South Korea's ''Framework Act on Administrative Regulations'' codifies the definition, registration and publication of regulations; mandates regulatory impact analysis; provides for a presidential Regulatory Reform Committee; and requires sunset or re-examination clauses for new or strengthened regulations.<ref>{{cite web |title=Framework Act on Administrative Regulations (English) |url=https://elaw.klri.re.kr/eng_mobile/viewer.do?hseq=29277&key=4&type=part
 |website=Korea Legislation Research Institute (KLRI) |access-date=2025-09-16}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Framework Act on Administrative Regulations — wholly amended on 25 Jan 2010 (English) |url=https://elaw.klri.re.kr/eng_mobile/viewer.do?hseq=63411&key=4&type=part
 |website=KLRI |access-date=2025-09-16}}</ref>
On 15 September 2025 the first ''Core Regulation Rationalization Strategy Meeting'' was chaired by Korean President [[Lee Jae Myung|Lee Jae-myung]], who stated: "Amid complex interests, ministerial differences have left regulations tangled like a spiderweb; sweeping them away is this administration’s goal."<ref>{{cite web |title=Press release: 1st Core Regulation Rationalization Strategy Meeting |url=https://m.korea.kr/briefing/pressReleaseView.do?newsId=156708397
 |website=Korea Policy Briefing |date=2025-09-15 |access-date=2025-09-16}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=News report on the first meeting |url=https://m.ktv.go.kr/program/again/view?content_id=737380
 |website=KTV National Broadcasting |date=2025-09-15 |access-date=2025-09-16}}</ref>

Among the major initiatives is the online Regulatory Reform "Sinmungo" (request system) launched in 2014, which routes public and business complaints for ministerial review in an effort to reduce redundant paperwork and processing time.<ref>{{cite web |title=Regulatory Information Portal (Regulatory Reform Sinmungo) |url=https://www.better.go.kr/
 |publisher=Office for Government Policy Coordination |language=ko |access-date=2025-09-16}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Public Health Control Act Enforcement Rule — Reasons for Amendment (exemption standards regarding forged/borrowed IDs) |url=https://law.go.kr/LSW/lsInfoP.do?lsiSeq=269589
 |publisher=Ministry of Government Legislation |language=ko |access-date=2025-09-16}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Food Sanitation Act Enforcement Decree — amendment introducing exemption criteria for good-faith operators |url=https://law.go.kr/LSW/lsRvsDocListP.do?lsId=001385
 |publisher=Ministry of Government Legislation |language=ko |access-date=2025-09-16}}</ref> 
In 2015 the program ''Transfer Notification Plus'' replaced multiple provider-specific applications with a single authentication and consent procedure, thereby reducing visits, duplicate documentation, mis-entries, and missed applications.<ref>{{cite web |title='Transfer Notification Plus' one-stop service |url=https://www.ktv.go.kr/program/again/view?content_id=623246
 |website=KTV National Broadcasting |date=2020-04-23 |access-date=2025-09-16}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Apply for utility fee concessions when filing a change-of-address ("Transfer Notification Plus") |url=https://www.korea.kr/briefing/policyBriefingView.do?newsId=148872082
 |website=Korea Policy Briefing |publisher=Ministry of the Interior and Safety |date=2020-04-23 |language=ko |access-date=2025-09-16}}</ref> 
Similarly, in 2019 a cross-government regulatory sandbox was introduced to reduce pre-market uncertainty for new technologies.
For example, autonomous delivery robots received a bundled approval for sidewalk operation in designated zones.<ref>{{cite web |title=Industrial Convergence Regulatory Sandbox |url=https://sandbox.kiat.or.kr/
 |publisher=KIAT (MOTIE) |language=ko |access-date=2025-09-16}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Financial Regulatory Sandbox launched (Apr 1, 2019) |url=https://www.fsc.go.kr/eng/pr010101/75720
 |publisher=Financial Services Commission |date=2021-04-08 |access-date=2025-09-16}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Smart-mobility (delivery robot) sandbox trial conditions |url=https://www.smartcity.go.kr/portal/bbs/notice/11/1047982
 |publisher=Smart City, MOLIT |language=ko |access-date=2025-09-16}}</ref> 
Also in 2019, a ''Presidential Decree on Proactive Administration'' was adopted to curb procedural overload and to break the chain: interpretive uncertainty → extra documents → delay.<ref>{{cite web |title=Regulations on the Operation of Proactive Administration (Presidential Decree) |url=https://elaw.klri.re.kr/kor_service/lawView.do?hseq=68452&lang=KOR
 |website=KLRI |language=ko |access-date=2025-09-16}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Pre-consulting audit: purpose and cases |url=https://www.bai.go.kr/proactive/consult/bbs/detailBoardArticle.do?bbsId=BBSMSTR_100000000062&mdex=proactive033&nttId=128545
 |publisher=Board of Audit and Inspection |language=ko |access-date=2025-09-16}}</ref> 

===New Zealand===
In March 2023, New Zealand established a [[Ministry for Regulation]], which promotes a culture where "regulation is a last resort."<ref name=Deloitte>{{cite web | publisher=Deloitte Insights | date=4 June 2025 | title=Delivering on reducing government red tape: Governments can reduce red tape and enhance efficiency through continuous process improvement, workforce training, stakeholder engagement, and leveraging digital tools | url=https://www.deloitte.com/us/en/insights/industry/government-public-sector-services/government-trends/2025/reducing-government-red-tape.html }}</ref><ref>Our te reo name". regulation.govt.nz. Ministry for Regulation. 13 December 2024. Retrieved 19 January 2025.</ref>
The [[Regulatory Standards Bill]] introduced in 2024 aims to codify principles of good regulatory practice and "bring the same level of discipline to regulation that the Public Finance Act brings to public spending, with the Ministry for Regulation playing a role akin to that of Treasury."<ref>{{cite news | work=RNZ News | title=Regulations Ministry: Online tool can be used to share 'red tape horror stories' | url=https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/534171/regulations-ministry-online-tool-can-be-used-to-share-red-tape-horror-stories | date=19 November 2024 }}</ref>
One of the Ministry's key initiatives was to build a red tape "tipline" which is used to prioritize reviews and recommend legislative changes.<ref>{{cite web | author=Ministry for Regulation, New Zealand | url=https://www.regulation.govt.nz/our-work/report-a-red-tape-issue/ | title=Report a red tape issue }}</ref><ref name=NZH>{{cite news | newspaper=The New Zealand Herald | first=Adam | last=Pearse | title=Regulation ministry launches tipline in search of 'red tape horror stories' | date=18 November 2024 | url=https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/regulation-ministry-launches-tipline-in-search-of-red-tape-horror-stories/SJUSI4RBLRECRLHRIGESEVBABU/ }}</ref><ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.regulation.govt.nz/our-work/what-weve-done/ | title=What we've done | author=Ministry for Regulation, New Zealand }}</ref>
Among the Ministry's "horror stories" was a proposal to reduce the size of flour dust in commercial bakeries to such a low level that it couldn't be reliably measured or distinguished from other particles, making compliance effectively impossible.<ref>{{cite web | title=Flour dust standards in bakeries | url=https://www.regulation.govt.nz/our-work/what-weve-done/flour-dust-setting-the-right-standards/ | author=Ministry for Regulation, New Zealand }}</ref>

===United States===
In the United States, cutting red tape was a central principle of a 1993 [[National Performance Review]] study requested by the [[Presidency of Bill Clinton|Clinton Administration]].<ref>{{Cite book |last=Gore |first=Al |url=https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED384294 |title=From Red Tape to Results: Creating a Government That Works Better & Costs Less. Report of the National Performance Review |date=1993-09-10 |publisher=Education Resources Information Center |language=en}}</ref> In November 2024, U.S. President-elect [[Donald Trump]] said [[Elon Musk]] and [[Vivek Ramaswamy]] would co-lead a new [[Department of Government Efficiency]] which would provide advice from outside government on methods to "slash excess regulations", among other objectives.<ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-says-elon-musk-vivek-ramaswamy-will-lead-department-government-efficiency-2024-11-13/  | title=Trump names Elon Musk to lead government efficiency drive | date=12 November 2024 | first=Daniel | last=Trotta | work=Reuters }}</ref><ref>{{cite news | title=Trump gives Elon Musk mission to cut costs, slash red tape | work=The Globe and Mail | date=13 November 2024 | url=https://www.theglobeandmail.com/world/video-trump-gives-elon-musk-mission-to-cut-costs-slash-red-tape/ }}</ref>

==Perceptions of red tape==
Applying rules consistently can affect the extent to which individuals perceive that red tape exists in a government agency.<ref name=Kaufmann>{{Cite journal |last1=Kaufmann |first1=Wesley |last2=Ingrams |first2=Alex |last3=Jacobs |first3=Daan |date=2021 |title=Being Consistent Matters: Experimental Evidence on the Effect of Rule Consistency on Citizen Red Tape |journal=The American Review of Public Administration |language=en |volume=51 |issue=1 |pages=28–39 |doi=10.1177/0275074020954250 |s2cid=225330022 |issn=0275-0740|doi-access=free }}</ref> A survey-based experiment in the context of a jury duty summons found inconsistently-applied rules may be viewed as ineffective or unfair, fueling the perception of a high level of red tape.<ref name=Kaufmann/>

Perception of red tape (as opposed to useful regulation) may be relevant in the public service context, since employees may be more willing to comply with rules that they perceive as valuable.<ref name=Davis>{{Cite journal |last=Davis |first=Randall S. |date=2013 |title=Union Commitment and Stakeholder Red Tape: How Union Values Shape Perceptions of Organizational Rules |journal=Review of Public Personnel Administration |language=en |volume=33 |issue=4 |pages=365–383 |doi=10.1177/0734371X12453056|s2cid=154310022 }}</ref>

==Impact on public sector employees==
===Red tape and employee performance===
India's Hota Committee Report noted "file-pushing", in the form of extensive procedures and layered rules, slowed civil service decision-making, even for routine administrative actions.<ref name="Hota">{{cite web |title=Report of the Hota Committee on Civil Service Reforms |url=https://darpg.gov.in/sites/default/files/Hota_Commitee_Report_1.pdf |publisher=Department of Administrative Reforms and Public Grievances (DARPG), Government of India |access-date=19 September 2025}}</ref><ref name="Sneha2021">{{cite web |last=Sneha |first=P. |title=Bureaucratic Indecision and Risk Aversion in India |url=https://artha.global/working-paper/bureaucratic-indecision-and-risk-aversion-in-india/ |website=Artha Global / IDFC Institute |date=2021 |access-date=19 September 2025}}</ref>
A 2025 survey of 73,795 Korean government officials found 48.11% of respondents agreed that inefficiencies were created by unnecessary documents and reports, and 22.06% said eliminating "formalism and other pseudo-work" was the most urgent priority to reduce inefficiency.<ref name="KIPA2025news">{{cite news |last=Seong |first=So-ui |title=공무원들 '쓸데없는 문서' 매일 76분 쓴다…22% "'가짜노동' 개선 시급" (Translation: Civil servants spend 76 minutes a day writing useless documents... 22% say "improving 'pseudo-labor' is urgently needed") |url=https://www.newsis.com/view/NISX20250424_0003152221 |work=Newsis |date=2025-04-24 |language=ko |access-date=2025-09-15 }}</ref>
Red tape led to unclear direction on rules, policies, and guidelines and, thereby, to poor internal client service, according to the ''Blueprint 2020'' report that surveyed over 2,000 Canadian public servants.<ref name="Blueprint 2020">Blueprint 2020 Internal Red Tape Reduction Report: [https://internal-red-tape-reduction-report.github.io/ Cutting Internal Red Tape – Building a Service Culture]. September 2016.</ref> 

A study that used interviews with 22 New Zealand public sector managers found red tape, in the form of irrelevant goals without real benchmarks, made giving performance feedback difficult.<ref name=Hill/>{{rp|474}}  In turn, this made it difficult to address poor employee performance.  Further, managers were less encouraged to develop their employees' skills.<ref name=Hill>{{cite journal | title=Employee Performance Management: The Impact of Competing Goals, Red Tape, and PSM | first1=Kendra | first2=Geoff | last1=Hill | last2=Plimmer | journal=Public Personnel Management | date=2024 | volume=53 | issue=3 | pages=458-485 | doi=10.1177/00910260241231371 | doi-access=free }}</ref>{{rp|473-475}}

===Red tape and employee autonomy===
Red tape can reduce employee flexibility and autonomy.<ref name="burnout">Fuenzalida, J., Gutiérrez, L., Fernández-Vergara, A., & González, P. (2022). Red Tape and burnout risks of public service managers: Evidence from a survey experiment of school principals. University of Oxford.</ref>
A study of Dutch [[child welfare]] employees showed that red tape reduced interactions with clients and job effectiveness, which decreased job satisfaction.  Highly motivated employees were found to be more sensitive to burdensome rules and procedures.<ref name=Steijn>{{cite journal | url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/padm.12352 | doi=10.1111/padm.12352 | title=Relational job characteristics and job satisfaction of public sector employees: When prosocial motivation and red tape collide | date=2019 | last1=Steijn | first1=Bram | last2=Van Der Voet | first2=Joris | journal=Public Administration | volume=97 | pages=64–80 | url-access=subscription }}</ref>

Evidence from the civil service in India finds ambiguity in interpreting overlapping rules may incentivise risk-averse behaviour and crowd-out professional judgement.  Further, this can dampen morale.<ref name="Hota" /><ref name="Sneha2021" /><ref name="PIB2020">{{cite web |title=Cabinet approves ‘Mission Karmayogi’ – National Programme for Civil Services Capacity Building (NPCSCB) |url=https://www.pib.gov.in/Pressreleaseshare.aspx?PRID=1650633 |website=Press Information Bureau |publisher=Government of India |date=2 September 2020 |access-date=19 September 2025}}</ref> 

===Red tape and employee job satisfaction===
The more employees perceive red tape (formalistic procedural burdens), the significantly lower is their job satisfaction according to a Korean police organization survey study from 2016 (n=294).<ref name="Park2016">{{cite thesis |last=Park |first=Il-sun |title=레드테이프와 조직효과성 간 관계에 대한 연구: 경찰공무원을 중심으로 |type=Master's thesis |publisher=Seoul National University Graduate School of Public Administration |year=2016 |url=https://s-space.snu.ac.kr/handle/10371/130448 |language=ko |access-date=2025-09-15}}</ref>
Similarly, the greater is the red tape perceived by civil servants, the higher is their intent to leave their current employer, as stated in a study that used data from the Korea Institute of Public Administration’s 2019 ''Public Service Life Survey''.<ref name="Park 2021">{{cite thesis |last=Park |first=Jung-Min |title=조직구조 인식이 공무원의 이직의도에 미치는 영향 [Perceptions of organizational structure and turnover intention among Korean civil servants] |publisher=Seoul National University |year=2021 |url=https://s-space.snu.ac.kr/handle/10371/176256 |language=ko}}</ref> 

A 2022 study that used survey data from 354 schools in Chile found school principals experienced increased emotional exhaustion and risk of burnout when they were advised of an increase in red tape in the form of unneeded compliance tasks.<ref name="burnout"/> 
Similarly, research conducted into experiences of public-school leaders and teachers in Belgium observed that when employees were faced with a higher level of red tape (associated with the use of  new digital tools), they were more likely to experience emotional exhaustion and, consequently, have a greater intention to leave their organization.<ref name="job demands">{{cite journal |author1=Muylaert, Jolien |author2=Decramer, Adelien |author3=Audenaert, M. |year=2022 |title=How Leader's Red Tape Interacts With Employees' Red Tape From the Lens of the Job Demands–Resources Model |journal=Review of Public Personnel Administration |volume=43 |issue=3 |pages=430–455 |doi=10.1177/0734371X221087420|hdl=1854/LU-8750823 |url=https://biblio.ugent.be/publication/8750823 |hdl-access=free }}</ref>

==Red tape, economic growth, and corruption==
===Red tape and economic growth===
While efficient government institutions can foster economic growth, cumbersome and unnecessary bureaucracy that delays permits and licenses slows technological advances.<ref name=Mauro/> Red tape has been found to be an obstacle to investment and growth in a study using data for 68 countries.<ref name=Mauro>{{cite journal | title=Corruption and Growth | first=Paolo | last=Mauro | journal=The Quarterly Journal of Economics | doi=10.2307/2946696 | url=https://academic.oup.com/qje/article-abstract/110/3/681/1859244 | date=August 1995 | volume=110 | issue=3 | pages=681–712 | jstor=2946696 | url-access=subscription }}</ref>

Policies that require government regulation and bureaucratic intervention can stifle economic progress, as has been documented by economist [[Anne Osborn Krueger|Anne Krueger]] in the context of an import-substitution development strategy.<ref name=Krueger/><ref name=Duvanova>{{cite journal | journal=World Development | title=Economic Regulations, Red Tape, and Bureaucratic Corruption in Post-Communist Economies | first=Dinissa | volume=59 | last=Duvanova | doi=10.1016/j.worlddev.2014.01.028 | date=2014 | pages=298–312 }}</ref>{{rp|298}} This type of policy reduces the incentive to produce exports, thereby generating a foreign exchange "shortage" that puts pressure on governments to restrict imports to high priority areas such as medicines over consumer luxuries. These restrictions require increased intervention, such as additional customs inspections and import approvals. In turn, this leads to delays and greater complexity of the system, which raises costs for importers. The higher costs create an incentive for black-market activity, thereby leading to political pressure to tighten still further the restrictive import regime. Over time, regulation and red tape promote more red tape and regulation in a vicious circle, as supporters of import substitution become more entrenched, while those who oppose it, such as exporters, cannot survive in the new environment.<ref name=Krueger>{{cite journal | title=Virtuous and Vicious Circles in Economic Development | first=Anne O. | last=Krueger | journal=American Economic Review | date=May 1993 | volume=83 | issue=2 | pages=351–355 | url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/2117689 | doi= | jstor=2117689 }}</ref> Rising costs of administration in the private sector, along with costs of delays and market inefficiency, weigh on economic performance and often result in an economic crisis.<ref name=Krueger/>

===Red tape and corruption===
The existence of regulations and authorizations provides a kind of monopoly power to the officials who must approve or inspect regulated activities.<ref name=Tanzi>{{cite report | url= https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WP/Issues/2016/12/30/Corruption-Around-the-World-Causes-Consequences-Scope-and-Cures-2583 | first=Vito | last=Tanzi | title=Corruption Around the World: Causes, Consequences, Scope and Cures | date=1 May 1998 | publisher=International Monetary Fund | isbn= 9781451848397 }}</ref> When regulations are not transparent, or an authorization can be obtained only from a specific office or individual (that is, there is no competition in the granting of these authorizations), bureaucrats have a great deal of power which may lead to corruption.<ref name=Tanzi/>{{rp|10–11}}<ref name=Duvanova/>{{rp|298–299}}<ref name=Mauro/>{{rp|685}}<ref>{{cite journal | title=Eight Questions about Corruption | first=Jakob | last=Svensson | journal=Journal of Economic Perspectives | date=Summer 2005 | volume=19 | issue=3 | pages=19–42 | doi=10.1257/089533005774357860 }}</ref>{{rp|32}}

Officials may even intentionally introduce new regulations and red tape in order to be able to extract more bribes by threatening to deny permits.<ref name=Mauro/>{{rp|685}}<ref name=Duvanova/> Particularly in [[Developing country|developing]] and [[Transition economy|transition]] economies, surveys indicate that a large proportion of an enterprise manager's time (especially for small enterprises) requires dealing with bureaucracies, and this time can be reduced through the payment of bribes.<ref name=Tanzi/>{{rp|10–11}}

==See also==
{{div col}}
* [[Busy work]]
* [[Byzantinism]]
* [[Crony capitalism]]
* [[Cronyism]]
* ''[[Gestor]]''
* [[Humphrey Appleby]]
* [[Instruction creep]]
* [[Jobsworth]]
* [[License Raj]]
* [[Micromanagement]]
* [[Paperwork Reduction Act]]
* [[Paternalism]]
* [[Prig]]
* [[Purple crocodile]]
* [[Regulatory impact analysis]]
* [[Sludge theory]]
{{div col end}}

==References==
{{reflist|30em}}

==Further reading==
* George et al. (2020), Red Tape, Organizational Performance and Employee Outcomes: Meta-Analysis, Meta-Regression and Research Agenda. ''[[Public Administration Review]]''.
* [[Barry Bozeman]] (2000), ''Bureaucracy and Red Tape'' [[Prentice Hall|Prentice-Hall Publishing]].
* {{cite book |author1=[[Pamela Herd]] |author2=[[Donald Moynihan]] |title=Administrative Burden: Policymaking by Other Means |year=2019 |isbn=978-0871544445 |publisher=Russell Sage Foundation}}
* {{cite book |author=Herbert Kaufman |title=Red Tape: Its Origins, Uses, and Abuses |location=Washington, DC |publisher=[[Brookings Institution]] |date=1977}}
* [[OECD]] (2006), "Cutting red tape; national strategies for administrative simplification". OECD Editions, Paris.

[[Category:Slang]]
[[Category:Administrative theory]]
[[Category:Public choice theory]]
[[Category:Metaphors referring to objects]]
[[Category:Bureaucratic organization]]
[[Category:Waste of resources]]