Kovalenko O. Administrative and legal bases of responsibility for offenses in entrepreneurial activity

The dissertation is devoted to a comprehensive study of the essence and features of the administrative and legal bases of liability for offenses in entrepreneurial activity based on the analysis of the provisions of the current national legislation and the generalization of foreign experience in the regulation of legal responsibility for offenses in entrepreneurial activity, the study of scientific works of specialists in the fields of general theory of law and theory of administrative law, as well as other branch legal sciences (in particular, economic, financial, tax law and social security law). Proposals for improving the legislation of Ukraine on administrative responsibility for offenses in entrepreneurial activity have been scientifically substantiated and developed. Taking into account the conducted study of the peculiarities of the formation of administrative and legal bases of liability for offenses in entrepreneurial activity, several stages of the formation and development of the legislation of Ukraine on administrative liability for offenses in the specified area are highlighted: 1) 1st stage (1991 – 1995) – introduction of administrative liability for violation of antimonopoly and competition legislation in Ukraine; 2) 2nd stage (1994 – 2000) – improvement and development of administrative and legal bases of responsibility for offenses in entrepreneurial activity; 3) 3rd stage (2001 – until today) – update of domestic legislation regarding the legal regulation of the institution of administrative responsibility for offenses in business activities. It is suggested that administrative responsibility for offenses in entrepreneurial activity is understood as the type and extent of the obligation of subjects of public relations to undergo measures of administrative and legal coercion for non-observance and/or non-fulfillment of the legally established procedure for the conduct of entrepreneurial activity, which provides for the onset of the offender of negative material consequences and which is provided by the norms of administrative-delict legislation. It was concluded that, taking into account the specifics of administrative offenses in entrepreneurial activity, the grounds for administrative responsibility for the commission of such offenses (misdemeanors) should be considered as a set of circumstances (conditions), in the presence of which negative consequences of a material nature may occur for the offender (subject of administrative responsibility) for non-observance and/or non-fulfillment of the legally established procedure for conducting business activities. Among the grounds of administrative responsibility for the commission of offenses in business activity, actual, legal (normative), procedural ones are named and disclosed. Signs of administrative liability for offenses in entrepreneurial activity are classified into general (inherent in general administrative liability) and special (characterize administrative liability arising from the commission of offenses specifically in entrepreneurial activity). it was established that certain norms of the current Code of Ukraine on administrative offenses need to be revised for further changes and/or additions to it. Among them, the following are identified as important: 1) consolidation of the general principles of responsibility of legal entities and private entrepreneurs, as subjects of entrepreneurial activity; 2) the use of the single phrase “natural persons-entrepreneurs” (private entrepreneurs) in the norms of the national administrative-delict legislation in order to avoid confusion in the interpretation of terms similar in meaning, such as “citizens engaged in entrepreneurial activities”, “persons engaged in entrepreneurial activities”, “citizens-subjects of entrepreneurial activity”, “natural persons- entrepreneurs”; 3) taking into account the requirements of the current legislation in the field of protection against unfair competition of business entities and consumers, provision of additional measures of administrative responsibility for improper use of markings and improper use of another manufacturer’s goods; 4) implementation of additional fixing of administrative fines for repeated commission of some administrative misdemeanors; 5) increasing the administrative responsibility of officials in the case of repeated offenses in entrepreneurial activity as an aggravating (qualifying) circumstance of the misdemeanor.