This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

The introduction of an appeals court in Dutch tax litigation

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Kamphorst, Jurjen J.A.
van Velthoven, Ben C.J.

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

As of January 1, 2005, a court of appeal has been introduced in Dutch tax litigation. Before that date, the substantive merits of a tax dispute could only be heard in one instance. In this paper we investigate which consequences the introduction of the appeals court may have for the way tax payers and the tax administration solve their disputes. We focus on the following questions. Are more or less tax payers willing to go to court to solve the dispute? Is it more or less difficult for parties to agree upon a settlement? Which appeal rate can we expect? What is the role of society's confidence in the courts in the answers to the questions above?

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6V7M-4SVKSR9-1/2/122cebca215b29d6be056a01818ccb84
File Format:
File Function:
Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Publisher Info
Article provided by Elsevier in its journal International Review of Law and Economics.

Volume (Year): 29 (2009)
Issue (Month): 1 (March)
Pages: 13-24
Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Handle: RePEc:eee:irlaec:v:29:y:2009:i:1:p:13-24

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/irle

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Heidi Boesdal).

Related research
Keywords: Tax litigation Appeals process Confidence in the courts;

Other versions of this item:

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
  1. Daughety, Andrew F & Reinganum, Jennifer F, 1999. "Stampede to Judgment: Persuasive Influence and Herding Behavior by Courts," American Law and Economics Review, Oxford University Press, vol. 1(1-2), pages 158-89, Fall.
  2. Spitzer, Matt & Talley, Eric, 2000. "Judicial Auditing," Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 29(2), pages 649-83, June.
  3. Andrew F. Daughety & Jennifer F. Reinganum, 2000. "Appealing Judgments," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 31(3), pages 502-526, Autumn.
  4. Lucian Arye Bebchuk, 1984. "Litigation and Settlement under Imperfect Information," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 15(3), pages 404-415, Autumn. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  5. Steven Shavell, 1981. "Suit and Settlement vs. Trial: A Theoretical Analysis under Alternative Methods for the Allocation of Legal Costs," NBER Working Papers 0662, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  6. Andrew F. Daughety & Jennifer F. Reinganum, 2005. "Economic Theories of Settlement Bargaining," Working Papers 0508, Department of Economics, Vanderbilt University. [Downloadable!]
  7. Jennifer F. Reinganum & Louise L. Wilde, 1986. "Settlement, Litigation, and the Allocation of Litigation Costs," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 17(4), pages 557-566, Winter. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  8. Andrew F. Daughety & Jennifer F. Reinganum, 2005. "Imperfect Competition and Quality Signaling," Working Papers 0520, Department of Economics, Vanderbilt University. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  9. Shavell, Steven, 1995. "The Appeals Process as a Means of Error Correction," Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 24(2), pages 379-426, June.
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? RePEc also has a blog.

This page was last updated on 2009-11-7.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.