Regulation · Market · Competition
We're told rules protect people. True — sometimes. But too often, they first protect those who wrote them: established professionals, large companies that can afford to comply, lobbies that shaped them. Regulation weighs 4.5 times more heavily on the small. It shuts the door on new entrants. And in the most regulated sectors, clients pay more — without getting more quality.
You run a 5-employee bakery. You must follow exactly the same hygiene, labour, and safety rules as a 5,000-employee chain. But you don't have a legal team. You don't have a compliance manager. You handle all of this on top of everything else — the pastries, the orders, the accounting.
The cost of paperwork is largely fixed: the same forms, the same procedures, regardless of size. A micro-firm pays around €8,500 per employee per year to comply. A large company: €1,200. Same rule. 4.5 times heavier to carry when you're small.
In 2014, a Paris taxi licence sold for up to €230,000 on the secondhand market. Not because the driver was better. Not because the car was more comfortable. Solely because the law capped the number of taxis — and that licence gave you the right to have no competition. Those €230,000 are exactly the cost that regulation made clients pay: longer waits, higher fares, lower service quality than was possible.
The taxi case is extreme — but the principle applies to every profession where the state controls entry. For every mandatory licence or diploma, the question is always the same: does this rule fix a real problem, or mainly protect those already there? Flip each card for the answer.
The Netherlands has 43 regulated professions. France has 185. Dutch living standards? Higher than French. Sweden and Denmark have among the most generous welfare states in the world — and among the least regulated markets in the OECD. Their philosophy: protect people, not monopolies. Secure careers, not entrenched positions.
The OECD measures market regulation levels annually across its member countries. France consistently scores above average in almost every measured sector. That's not a badge of honour. It's a signal that interest groups have done their job well.
Imagine the government asks pharmacists what should be regulated in pharmacy. Notaries what should be regulated among notaries. Taxi drivers what should be regulated in taxis. You can guess the answer: more mandatory degrees, more approvals, more minimum capital, more setup procedures. Rules that limit competition. It's human — and it's a systemic problem.
Rules meant to protect clients end up protecting professionals. Entry barriers push prices up for everyone — and it's the client who pays. See who concretely benefits from a regulatory barrier, using the pharmacy case.
When talking about too much regulation, the same arguments come up. Here's what you hear — and what the facts say.
Regulation weighs 4.5 times more heavily on the small. It shuts the door on those who want to enter. In the most regulated sectors, clients pay more — without getting more quality. That's not an argument against all rules: some fix real problems. It's an argument for asking the question each time: who exactly does this rule protect? If the answer is "those who wrote it" — that's not protection. That's rent.