The ambition was there: to create a one-stop shop for business formalities. Implementation is a completely different story, as highlighted in the report published in December by the Court of Auditors.
The desire for simplification has encountered obstacles. However, it was justified. The reform desired by the State consisted of simplifying procedures for businesses, which since 1981 had been based on seven networks of business formalities centers (CFE).
A simplification that does not keep its promises
“The existence of these seven networks was a source of complexity and difficulties for both companies and administrations,” note the auditors of the Court of Auditors. The 2019 Pacte law was to provide a response to this through the creation of a one-stop shop.
However, such a reform turns out to be complex from the outset to orchestrate “with a strong technical dimension and a systemic character”. It indeed required “upheavals”, notably of information systems and professional practices of users.
The initial complexity was reflected from the launch on January 1, 2023 by “significant dysfunctions” – which therefore justified a flash audit by the Court to precisely establish the conditions for implementing the project.
“Technical complications in carrying out the formalities, functional specificities of the portal not adapted, impossibility of validating its formalities, formalities not transmitted or even refused by the recipients, etc. This situation has seriously penalized companies, especially since the user assistance system has proven insufficient,” lists the report.
An unrealistic initial deadline
Six months after the opening of the one-stop shop, the situation had still not stabilized, requiring the application of an emergency procedure – which was extended on several occasions. For the Court of Auditors, the roots of the problem go back to the very origins of the project with “an unrealistic initial deadline”.
Other recurring problems in large IT projects have piled up, starting with “inadequate governance and management”. For the Court, these modalities appear to be “very far removed from the standards in this area.” And “it was only in the summer of 2023, far too late, that this initial deficit in collective operational structuring began to be corrected by integrating all the players.”
The report already estimates new malfunctions and serious anomalies in January 2024. Companies could suffer next year and even later, it warns.
“The consequences of an insufficiently prepared and poorly conducted reform could therefore still be felt for several years without having provided companies with the expected simplification,” criticizes the Court of Auditors.
Electronic invoicing reform postponed
This draws from the chaos of the reform two lessons or two conditions “necessary for the success of a complex digital transformation project”: the conduct of an in-depth impact study and an adapted organization involving the stakeholders from the start .
The Court finally highlights the refusal to call into question the implementation date provided for by law. She sees it as “undoubtedly unreasonable risk-taking for which companies and state services have borne the serious consequences.”
The postponement this summer by the Ministry of Finance of the generalization of electronic invoicing perhaps suggests that this error has been taken into account. In this matter too, the State touts an ambition of simplification and modernization for the benefit of businesses.