The informal economy--the fully commodified economy?

Several definitions of decommodification suggest that state intervention in the market has a decommodifying effect. It is interesting that the informal economy is often stigmatized, although some literature recognizes that the informal economy may increase overall productivity inasmuch as the informal activity would not have taken place at all otherwise. In other words, it may be better for someone to make money in the informal economy and to put it back into the economy through purchases than to never make that money at all (this is assuming that the money could not/would not have been made in the formal economy).

However, aside from a few scholarly articles that argue that there are some benefits to the informal economy, few seem to argue in favor of the informal economy--perhaps as evidence that few people support outright commodification (even among those who profess to favor the free market).

So, is the informal economy actually one of the only instances (or one of the closest examples) of a fully commodified system (something that is free of state intervention)? Or should the definition of decommodification go beyond market vs. state as has been argued by so many?

Perhaps there is some validity to the idea that the informal economy is deeply commodified as it seems to have a commodifying effect on its participants. Those who take part in the informal economy are often objectified and dehumanized as they are compelled to make a dollar any way they can outside of the protective auspices of the state. (After all, state intervention is often aimed at protecting social rights that otherwise might be violated should the market be left unchecked).