Back to History Current Version

Notaries: public officers or private professionals? Evidence from a randomized experiment

Last registered on November 04, 2017

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Notaries: public officers or private professionals? Evidence from a randomized experiment
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0002432
Initial registration date
November 03, 2017

Initial registration date is when the trial was registered.

It corresponds to when the registration was submitted to the Registry to be reviewed for publication.

First published
November 04, 2017, 10:34 AM EDT

First published corresponds to when the trial was first made public on the Registry after being reviewed.

Locations

Region

Primary Investigator

Affiliation
Istituto Bruno Leoni

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Affiliation
Istituto Bruno Leoni

Additional Trial Information

Status
Completed
Start date
2016-02-15
End date
2016-03-04
Secondary IDs
Abstract
Regulatory barriers to competition are often a significant obstacle to a more efficient resource allocation. An interesting case-study is offered by the hurdles and costs that would-be entrepreneurs face as they start a business in Italy, a country plagued by stagnating productivity. According to the Doing Business, “starting a business” sub-index, in 2017 Italy ranked 63rd (out of 190), down from 57 in 2016. In Italy, company incorporation requires a public deed of incorporation drafted and executed by a notary public.
We focused on a new provision (introducing a simplified type of limited liability company with lower incorporation costs) to shed light on the extent to which notaries act as public officials (which supposedly justifies their monopoly power) as opposed to private professionals (who aim at maximizing private profits). We also provided an estimate of notaries’ markup and a general assessment of the effectiveness of the above-mentioned policy.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Lavecchia, Luciano and Carlo Stagnaro. 2017. "Notaries: public officers or private professionals? Evidence from a randomized experiment." AEA RCT Registry. November 04. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.2432-1.0
Former Citation
Lavecchia, Luciano and Carlo Stagnaro. 2017. "Notaries: public officers or private professionals? Evidence from a randomized experiment." AEA RCT Registry. November 04. https://www.socialscienceregistry.org/trials/2432/history/22889
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
Between February 24th and 25th, 2016, we sent 349 emails from two different accounts, presenting ourselves as two graduates willing to incorporate a start up, an approach that is part of a growing stream of literature (Costa 2017, Giulietti et al. 2017, Gottschalk et al. 2017). These emails were identical (same names, same text) but for one, crucial, detail: notaries in the treatment group were asked for the incorporation of a simplified ltd (i.e. free-of-charge type), while those in the control group for a standard ltd (i.e. the more expensive type). We asked for a meeting and an estimate of the incorporation costs. We received 106 answers, the last on March, 4th 2016, with an average response rate of 30 percent, a number in line with similar surveys. Identification is achieved by means of the simple randomization. Given the specific setting (binary dependent variable) we estimated the average treatment effect with a logistic regression.
Intervention Start Date
2016-02-24
Intervention End Date
2016-03-04

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
rates of response in the two groups; average final prices; markups;
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
We designed an experiment to check the effectiveness of the obligation of executing the deed free-of-charge.

In early February 2016, we collected the list of all the notaries with an office in Rome (404 out of a total of 4,900 in the whole country). Of them, 349 (7.1% of the national total) had a publicly available email address. We ordered their names by alphabetical order, assigning the odd surnames to the treatment group and the even ones to the control group. We checked for any difference between the two groups across all the variables we were able to collect (age, sex, start date, years of activity). No significant difference among the two groups was found, supporting the reliability of the randomization process.
Experimental Design Details
Randomization Method
We ordered their names by alphabetical order, assigning the odd surnames to the treatment group and the even ones to the control group.
Randomization Unit
individual level
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
349
Sample size: planned number of observations
349
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
349
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
IRB Approval Date
IRB Approval Number

Post-Trial

Post Trial Information

Study Withdrawal

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information

Intervention

Is the intervention completed?
Yes
Intervention Completion Date
March 04, 2016, 12:00 +00:00
Data Collection Complete
Yes
Data Collection Completion Date
March 04, 2016, 12:00 +00:00
Final Sample Size: Number of Clusters (Unit of Randomization)
349
Was attrition correlated with treatment status?
No
Final Sample Size: Total Number of Observations
349
Final Sample Size (or Number of Clusters) by Treatment Arms
179 control (email with standard ltd request) , 170 treatment (email with simple ltd request)
Data Publication

Data Publication

Is public data available?
No

Program Files

Program Files
No
Reports, Papers & Other Materials

Relevant Paper(s)

Abstract
La figura del notaio ha storicamente svolto un ruolo importante nel garantire la certezza delle transazioni, con particolare riferimento al trasferimento della proprietà di beni mobili e immobili. Tuttavia, con il crescente rafforzamento dei diritti di proprietà e la progressiva diffusione di tecnologie informatiche nella pubblica amministrazione, la necessità di un intermediario super partes, e con esso le riserve legali assegnate ai notai, sono oggetto di discussione, in particolare alla luce della natura «ibrida» del notaio, che è contemporaneamente pubblico ufficiale e libero professionista. Infatti un perimetro di riserva troppo ampio determina l'estrazione di una rendita monopolistica non giustificata dalla produzione di adeguati beni pubblici. Alternativamente alla liberalizzazione di alcune funzioni notarili, negli ultimi anni ai notai è stato richiesto di svolgere gratuitamente alcune attività (tra cui, in particolare, la costituzione di società in forma di Srl semplificata). Essendo pubblico ufficiale, il notaio dovrebbe svolgere con la stessa prontezza e cura tutte le attività, incluse quelle che non prevedono la percezione di un onorario, massimizzando il social welfare; contemporaneamente, il notaio è anche un libero professionista, e come tale si può presumere sia incentivato a dare la precedenza alle attività per cui ottiene un compenso, massimizzando così i propri ricavi. Questo articolo presenta i risultati di un esperimento condotto per verificare se, nel comportamento dei notai, prevalgano gli incentivi a comportarsi come «libero professionista» o come «pubblico ufficiale». L'esperimento, in particolare, è relativo all'obbligo per i notai di stipulare gratuitamente l'atto costitutivo per la «Srl semplificata».
Citation
Luciano Lavecchia, Carlo Stagnaro, Notai: pubblici ufficiali o professionisti privati? Evidenze da un esperimento di randomizzazione, in "Mercato Concorrenza Regole, Rivista quadrimestrale" 1/2017, pp. 79-104, doi: 10.1434/86962

Reports & Other Materials