We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
How much tax revenue is lost each year as a result of noncompliance? How much of this lost revenue is from the richest taxpayers? How do the rich avoid paying taxes and why does it matter? This chapter considers these basic and important questions. The answers explain our motivation for writing this book and provide a starting point for the arguments that follow. This discussion also begins to explain why this book focuses on high-end tax noncompliance as a distinct challenge for the tax system. To answer these questions, we begin by describing exactly what we mean by tax noncompliance. The discussion then presents research findings on the scope of tax noncompliance and how it is shared across the income distribution. It then explains how high-end taxpayers can often avoid paying the taxes they owe by taking advantage of strategies that are not available to low- and middle-income taxpayers. Finally, we discuss why high-end noncompliance is harmful to the tax system, and why policymakers should treat it as a pressing challenge.
This chapter turns to the structure of the tax compliance system and how it attempts to address high-end noncompliance. It begins by situating the tax compliance rules within the broader tax system. The discussion considers what they share with all tax rules and what sets them apart. The following sections begin a more detailed dive into the structure of the tax compliance system. After addressing what motivates taxpayers to comply with the tax law, the discussion considers the main components of the tax compliance system, and how these components leverage taxpayer motivations to improve compliance. With this important context on the tax compliance system established, the discussion then returns to the challenges of high-end noncompliance. The final part of this chapter describes the two most prominent approaches in current law and reform proposals. The first general approach is to increase funding of the Internal Revenue Service so it can more effectively deter noncompliance and recover unpaid taxes. The second general approach is what this book terms “activity-based” rules, targeting the specific taxpayer activities that can either indicate or enable tax noncompliance.
The chapter analyses how the political and economic realities of the aftermath of the First World War gave the term ‘tax justice’ a new meaning in Belgium, occupied during four years by Germany, but also how it was fought over for moral and economic reasons during the 1920s. On the left of the political spectrum, the Socialists brought their own fiscal agenda, entailing new progressive income taxes on the wealthy. On the right, Liberals and Catholics disapproved of such innovations, judging them morally wrong and economically harmful. Compromises were found, with a real shift in the tax system. However, as the 1920s wore on, the Belgian franc suffered from a depreciation like the French and German currencies, with capital fleeing the country. The political debate on progressive income taxes shifted from justice to injustice: the massive level of tax fraud and tax evasion was making the system unfair towards honest taxpayers. Tax policies made in the name of social justice became an achievement to be defended for some and an excessive ideal to be attenuated for others.
Tax avoidance is one of the most controversial and widely debated topics in taxation law. This chapter examines the concept of tax avoidance and distinguishes it from the concepts of tax evasion and tax planning with which it is sometimes confused. It also discusses various judicial and legislative responses to tax avoidance. In particular, it focuses on the specific anti-avoidance provisions in div 6A of pt III ITAA36 and pt 2-42 ITAA97, which have been enacted to address certain income alienation schemes designed to divert income from taxpayers who are subject to high rates of tax to their associates (eg family members and related entities) who are subject to lower rates of tax. It also discusses service entity arrangements, which have been used by some professional firms to split income.
Edited by
Selim Raihan, University of Dhaka, Bangladesh,François Bourguignon, École d'économie de Paris and École des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales, Paris,Umar Salam, Oxford Policy Management
This chapter identifies and evaluates the institutional causes of the failures of the tax system in Bangladesh. At less than 9%, Bangladesh is among the countries with the lowest overall average ratio of tax revenue to GDP. It follows that its fiscal space, that is the capacity to spend on public goods and correct rising income inequality, is extremely limited. The low average tax ratio results from both low nominal tax rates and a low rate of tax collection, itself due to pervasive tax evasion (often with the paid support of tax collection personnel) or to tax exemptions generously granted by the Government to its supporters. In addition, albeit in a limited way, taxation distorts economic incentives, either directly through non-uniform tax rates that favour some sectors or firms and penalise others, or indirectly through exemptions and evasion. This chapter also explores the reasons behind the difficulties that have surrounded previous attempts at tax reforms, and the underlying political economy factors. It, finally, lists the most attractive reforms in terms of increasing tax revenues, the effectiveness of tax collection, and the redistributive impact of the tax system.
Edited by
Selim Raihan, University of Dhaka, Bangladesh,François Bourguignon, École d'économie de Paris and École des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales, Paris,Umar Salam, Oxford Policy Management
This chapter identifies and evaluates the institutional causes of the failures of the tax system in Bangladesh. At less than 9%, Bangladesh is among the countries with the lowest overall average ratio of tax revenue to GDP. It follows that its fiscal space, that is the capacity to spend on public goods and correct rising income inequality, is extremely limited. The low average tax ratio results from both low nominal tax rates and a low rate of tax collection, itself due to pervasive tax evasion (often with the paid support of tax collection personnel) or to tax exemptions generously granted by the Government to its supporters. In addition, albeit in a limited way, taxation distorts economic incentives, either directly through non-uniform tax rates that favour some sectors or firms and penalise others, or indirectly through exemptions and evasion. This chapter also explores the reasons behind the difficulties that have surrounded previous attempts at tax reforms, and the underlying political economy factors. It, finally, lists the most attractive reforms in terms of increasing tax revenues, the effectiveness of tax collection, and the redistributive impact of the tax system.
During the 1970s, governments increasingly expressed concerns about the loss of revenue through the use of tax havens by both individuals and corporations. This article explores a covert international working group (the Group of Four) set up between France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States in 1969 in response to such concerns. At regular meetings, officials exchanged information gathered by their respective tax authorities in auditing multinational companies. In the 1980s, under increasing pressure from governments in a now much more hostile climate to tax authorities, the Group’s work shifted away from multinationals and toward more general, technical questions. The history of the Group of Four illustrates the importance of the 1960s and 1970s as a period for regulating economic actors and the impact of broader circumstances on the success or failure of anti-tax avoidance measures.
This paper reviews work that tests (1) how formal and informal institutions, and especially their interaction, affect participation in the shadow economy in transition countries; and (2) how participating in these shadow economies affects individuals' well-being. The key findings are that a clash of individuals' perceptions of formal institutions with their informal institutions increases involvement in the shadow economy. Conversely, a trustworthy relationship with the government and other individuals makes people more inclined to comply. The importance of their social and institutional context also appears in how individuals' involvement in the shadow economy relates to their well-being. These findings complement insights from the rich literature on tax morale, on the exchange between public institutions and citizens and between culture and institutions more generally. The findings also contribute to the institutional economic literature by empirically showing that: (1) focusing on formal institutions alone, that is strengthening the rule of law, is a necessary but insufficient response to the shadow economy; (2) taking informal institutions, such as individuals' trust and tax morale, into account is of equal importance; and (3) most importantly, formal and informal institutions go hand in hand, and their interaction should be an essential part of the new institutional perspective.
Tax evasion can be considered as a systemic fraud in which different parties such as taxpayers, lawyers, banks, and multinational entities interact. Here, accountants are key agents owing to their legal liability in tax reporting and their knowledge on accounting rules. The present study analyzes the role that accountants play in firms tax evasion by presenting evidence from a randomized field experiment carried out with microenterprises in Ecuador’s tax system in early 2016. The article evaluates to what extent a notification of accountants is more effective in increasing tax reporting than a notification of taxpayers, through five different treatments. The results show that simultaneous persuasive notifications of both accountants and taxpayers were the unique treatment that significantly increased firms’ declared income tax. Furthermore, it was shown that penalty notifications of accountants, rather than taxpayers only, were the most significant treatment at reducing revenue underreporting.
We explore how tax evasion by firms affects the growth- and welfare-maximizing rates of corporate income tax (CIT) in an endogenous growth model with productive public service. We show that the negative effect of CIT on growth is mitigated in the presence of tax evasion. This increases the benefit of raising the CIT rate for public service provision. Thus, in contrast to Barro [(1990) Journal of Political Economy 98, 103–125], the optimal tax rate is higher than the output elasticity of public service. Through numerical exercises, we demonstrate that the role of tax evasion by firms is quantitatively significant.
The sometimes problematic relationship between the private interests of citizens and the public interest of the republic was clearly evident in matters of public finance. The principle that citizens had a duty to pay their taxes was not disputed. There was a perceived connection between enjoying the benefits of eligibility to hold political office and having a duty to pay taxes, and to pay promptly. Taxation raised issues of justice and equity, of a fair distribution of the burden. There was also concern that public moneys gathered with such effort should be administered efficiently and honestly. All the republics identified the protection and promotion of commerce as a matter of public concern. Linked with healthy public revenues, as well as general prosperity, it was seen as fostering the welfare not just of a particular interest group, but of the whole republic.
This chapter examines the peasants’ everyday resistance to heavy taxes, particularly the land tax, the livestock tax, the road tax and the wheat protection tax under the single-party regime. It shows that under the authoritarian single-party system, peasants coped with the increasingly burdensome economic demands of the new state and resulting social injustice through everyday and informal means. In contrast to the existing accounts that mostly regard the peasants as atomized under the absolute control of the state, this chapter portrays them as a relatively active social dynamic, which annulled the great part of the taxes in practice and compelled the government to soften its heavy taxes.
Identifying taxpayers who engage in noncompliant behaviour is crucial for tax authorities to determine appropriate taxation schemes. However, because taxpayers have an incentive to conceal their true income, it is difficult for tax authorities to uncover such behaviour (social desirability bias). Our study mitigates the bias in responses to sensitive questions by employing the list experiment technique, which allows us to identify the characteristics of taxpayers who engage in tax evasion. Using a dataset obtained from a tax office in Jakarta, Indonesia, we conducted a computer-assisted telephone interviewing survey in 2019. Our results revealed that 13% of the taxpayers, old, male, corporate employees, and members of a certain ethnic group had reported lower income than their true income on their tax returns. These findings suggest that our research design can be a useful tool for understanding tax evasion and for developing effective taxation schemes that promote tax compliance.
This chapter indicates the problems the Vagliano brothers encountered in Russia as foreign trading companies. Their businesses could be described as a kind of proto-multinational that carried out international accounting. Their cosmopolitanism affected the hinterland of Imperial Russia’s South, and the story of the confrontation of Mari Vagliano with Russia indicates the populist and nationalist reaction to perceived foreign economic influence. Vagliano’s trial, which shook all of Russia for several months, has been described as the biggest trial in the legal history of Russia. This chapter examines the relationship of Mari Vagliano with Russian businessmen, government, and intelligentsia. As with Onassis’s legal battle with American authorities decades later, Mari Vagliano faced down highly public accusations of fraud and tax evasion, emerging from the confrontation unscathed. Vagliano and Onassis were prime paradigms for the survival of Greek firms involved in the international shipping business. Powerful governments have attacked entrepreneurial elites of foreign origin during periods of increasing nationalism and xenophobia.
Existing corporate taxes distort many aspects of firm behavior. To the extent that the corporate tax rate is lower than personal tax rates, taxes favor corporate activity, and favor retaining earnings rather than paying earnings out to employees and investors. Multinationals can even avoid these taxes by shifting income into tax havens. Given the ease with which multinationals can evade tax, the existing income tax structure faces major pressures, as reflected in average statutory corporate tax rates halving in recent decades. The Element speculates on alternative tax structures that will avoid these problems.
This article explores whether income underreporting for tax purposes can explain why the majority of U.S. farmers earn low or negative net farm income. Using 10 years of U.S. Department of Agriculture farm-level data, the extent of underreporting is estimated by exploiting the fact that farm households face an incentive to underreport farm income that varies with their reported off-farm income. Results indicate that 39% of total farm income is underreported. For large farms, the results imply a substantial discrepancy between reported and earned farm income. For small-scale operations, underreporting reduces but does not eliminate the gap between farm and off-farm wages.
This paper deals with the optimal management of the public debt-to-GDP ratio. We specifically focus on a contrasting tax evasion-based strategy for controlling the debt-to-GDP ratio. Two devices can be employed by the policymaker: by the one side, the tax rate is to be applied to the tax payers; by the other side, the monitoring activity is to be performed in order to detect the evaded taxes. To pursue our scopes, a stochastic control problem is developed and solved. Some numerical experiments validate the theoretical proposal and lead to an intuitive discussion of the obtained findings.
We assess the European Union’s (EU) most significant international tax policy. The 2005 Tax and Savings Directive obliges cooperating jurisdictions to withhold tax or report on interest income earned by entities whose beneficial owner is an EU resident. As the Directive applies only to beneficial ownership in cooperative jurisdictions, it can be circumvented by transferring ownership to a non-EU resident or company or by transferring the entity to a non-cooperative jurisdiction. Using a database on individual offshore entities leaked from two firms in 2013, we compare the response of EU-owned entities with a control group of non-EU-owned entities. We show that the growth of EU-owned entities declined immediately after the Directive’s implementation, whereas that of non-EU-owned entities remained stable. We observe the substitution of EU ownership for non-EU ownership, as well as the substitution of cooperative for non-cooperative offshore jurisdictions. This calls for anti-evasion policies that are broader in scope and scale.
Can governments increase tax compliance by rewarding honest taxpayers? We conducted a controlled laboratory experiment comparing tax compliance under a “deterrence” baseline with tax compliance under two “reward” treatments: a “donation” treatment giving taxpayers a say in the spending purposes of their payments and a “lucky” treatment giving taxpayers the (highly unlikely) chance of winning a lottery. The reward treatments significantly affected tax behaviour but not in a straightforward manner. Although female participants altered their behaviour as expected and complied somewhat more, men strongly reacted in the opposite manner: they evaded a much higher percentage of taxes than under the baseline. Apparently, there is no one-size-fits-all approach to boost tax compliance.