1.1. Informal economy The concept of the informal sector was born in the early 1970s, when economic anthropologist Keith Hart conducted his research in Ghana and discovered that it not only existed but was expanding. It was later accepted by the ILO, (International Labor Organization) perceiving the range in which the marginal workforce was transformed into profitable enterprises. This was followed by the 2002 International Labor Conference, which broadened its concept to an economic phenomenon involving jobs and the workers within them (ILO, 2013). There are also different definitions adopted by various economists and sociologists, but the 2002 ILO Resolution provided the one commonly applied in many States: «The informal economy comprises half to three-quarters of all non-agricultural employment in developing countries. of development. While it is difficult to generalize about the quality of informal employment, in most cases this means poor working conditions and is associated with increased poverty. Some of the characteristic aspects of informal employment are the lack of protection in case of non-payment of salary, compulsory overtime or additional shifts, dismissals without notice or compensation, unsafe working conditions and the absence of social benefits such as pensions, sickness wages and health insurance. Women, migrants and other vulnerable groups of workers excluded from other opportunities have no choice but to accept low-quality informal jobs (ILO, 2002)”. Various socio-anthropologists and economists define the informal sector in their particular way. Meagher (2004) introduces the following categories: informal survival group, employees and entrepreneurs. House (1984) investigates the motivation that drives entrepreneurs to start a business that conforms to the private sector. The overall negative result can be observed in the post-USSR countries, defined as "countries in transition". Only Poland and Hungary were successful along with Georgia, but the latter showed the worst case of production due to the civil wars of the 1990s. The paper will analyze the relationship between the informal sector, formalization outcomes and macroeconomic structural changes. The analysis is based on the examples of three countries: Brazil, Vietnam and Georgia. These countries were selected for their experience in addressing the informal sector, for example Brazil was chosen for its successful public and financial policy which led to the growth of the formal sector; Vietnam for its partially successful formalization, but above all for the success of its informal institutions and finally Georgia, which made all the necessary structural adjustments, but ended up with a decrease in incentives for formalization.