PurposeThe purpose of this study is to examine whether participating informality is attributed to income shocks such as wage arrears, unexpected wage cuts or compulsory unpaid leaves. The current research uses Russia longitudinal Monitoring Survey 2002–2015.Design/methodology/approachUsing formal jobs as the base category, the authors conducted pooled multinomial logit regressions allowing for the two additional employment statuses: workers without contracts and unincorporated business workers.FindingsThe overall results mainly suggest that no effects occur. In other words, unexpected negative income shocks are not the main driving force of informality. Although the majority of previous studies are based on survey questions on unexpected income shock which has sample selection bias, to obtain robustness, the current study used Russian minimum wage reforms as income shocks. This research shows that Russian minimum wage reform does not affect the decision of informality in the labor market.Research limitations/implicationsGiven the data limitations, the authors only observed and examined the supply-side of the labor market. Tax-evading motives would be the main reason for informality; to ensure this conjecture, however, demand and supply sides need to be simultaneously examined which is beyond the scope of this study.Originality/valueIn contrast to a large number of studies on cross-sectional differences in determinants of informal job holding, emphasis on the effects of income shocks on informal employment across business cycles has been minimal. The current study focuses on the business cycles because trends of informal employment can be interpreted differently regardless of whether in an economic boom or recession. Russia, as a unique natural experiment, provides us to examine informal job holdings over the business cycle.