IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/joepsy/v61y2017icp225-243.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The bomb-crater effect of tax audits: Beyond the misperception of chance

Author

Listed:
  • Mittone, Luigi
  • Panebianco, Fabrizio
  • Santoro, Alessandro

Abstract

The experimental literature has identified the Bomb Crater Effect (BoCE), i.e., the fact that tax compliance drops immediately after a taxpayer is audited. From a theoretical perspective, BoCE has been explained either by the misperception of chance, also known as the gambler’s fallacy, or by the loss repair effect. The aim of this paper is to look more closely at the former. We run a laboratory experiment in which the information set is relatively rich but the implementation of the Bayesian updating process is fairly simple. By doing so, we are able to elicit a range of consistent but heterogeneous probability beliefs and to distinguish between Bayesian and non-Bayesian subjects. We obtain two major results concerning Bayesian subjects. First, they exhibit a strong and robust short-run BoCE. Second, they are seemingly not affected by the audits of other taxpayers in their compliance decision. These results are robust to different definitions of Bayesianity as well as to different specifications and conflict with the evidence that Bayesian agents correctly perceive the chance of being audited. In turn, these findings suggest that the existing explanations of the BoCE are not satisfactory and that alternative theories are needed.

Suggested Citation

  • Mittone, Luigi & Panebianco, Fabrizio & Santoro, Alessandro, 2017. "The bomb-crater effect of tax audits: Beyond the misperception of chance," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 225-243.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:joepsy:v:61:y:2017:i:c:p:225-243
    DOI: 10.1016/j.joep.2017.04.007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167487016306341
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.joep.2017.04.007?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Webley, Paul, 1987. "Audit probabilities and tax evasion in a business simulation," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 267-270.
    2. Michele Bernasconi & Alberto Zanardi, 2004. "Tax Evasion, Tax Rates, and Reference Dependence," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 60(3), pages 422-445, September.
    3. Garrido, Nicolás & Mittone, Luigi, 2013. "An agent based model for studying optimal tax collection policy using experimental data: The cases of Chile and Italy," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 24-30.
    4. Mittone, Luigi, 2006. "Dynamic behaviour in tax evasion: An experimental approach," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 813-835, October.
    5. repec:pri:cepsud:125krueger is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Amedeo Piolatto & Matthew D. Rablen, 2017. "Prospect theory and tax evasion: a reconsideration of the Yitzhaki puzzle," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 82(4), pages 543-565, April.
    7. Amedeo Piolatto & Gwenola Trotin, 2016. "Optimal Income Tax Enforcement under Prospect Theory," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 18(1), pages 29-41, February.
    8. Dhami, Sanjit & al-Nowaihi, Ali, 2007. "Why do people pay taxes? Prospect theory versus expected utility theory," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 171-192, September.
    9. Kastlunger, Barbara & Kirchler, Erich & Mittone, Luigi & Pitters, Julia, 2009. "Sequences of audits, tax compliance, and taxpaying strategies," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 405-418, June.
    10. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    11. Alm, James & Jackson, Betty R. & McKee, Michael, 2009. "Getting the word out: Enforcement information dissemination and compliance behavior," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(3-4), pages 392-402, April.
    12. Daniel Kahneman & Alan B. Krueger & David Schkade & Norbert Schwarz & Arthur A. Stone, 2006. "Would You Be Happier If You Were Richer? A Focusing Illusion," Working Papers 77, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Center for Economic Policy Studies..
    13. Spicer, Michael W. & Thomas, J. Everett, 1982. "Audit probabilities and the tax evasion decision: An experimental approach," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 241-245, September.
    14. Nigar Hashimzade & Gareth D. Myles & Binh Tran-Nam, 2013. "Applications Of Behavioural Economics To Tax Evasion," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(5), pages 941-977, December.
    15. Allingham, Michael G. & Sandmo, Agnar, 1972. "Income tax evasion: a theoretical analysis," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(3-4), pages 323-338, November.
    16. Pietro Battiston & Denvil Duncan & Simona Gamba & Alessandro Santoro, 2016. "The Italian Blitz: a natural experiment on audit publicity and tax compliance," FBK-IRVAPP Working Papers 2016-10, Research Institute for the Evaluation of Public Policies (IRVAPP), Bruno Kessler Foundation.
    17. Daniel Kahneman & Alan B. Krueger & David Schkade & Norbert Schwarz & Arthur A. Stone, 2006. "Would You Be Happier If You Were Richer? A Focusing Illusion," Working Papers 77, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Center for Economic Policy Studies..
    18. Maciejovsky, Boris & Kirchler, Erich & Schwarzenberger, Herbert, 2007. "Misperception of chance and loss repair: On the dynamics of tax compliance," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 678-691, December.
    19. Spicer, Michael W. & Hero, Rodney E., 1985. "Tax evasion and heuristics : A research note," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 263-267, March.
    20. Jason DeBacker & Bradley T. Heim & Anh Tran & Alexander Yuskavage, 2015. "Legal Enforcement and Corporate Behavior: An Analysis of Tax Aggressiveness after an Audit," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 58(2), pages 291-324.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Miloš Fišar & Tommaso Reggiani & Fabio Sabatini & Jiří Špalek, 2022. "Media negativity bias and tax compliance: experimental evidence," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 29(5), pages 1160-1212, October.
    2. Matthias Kasper & James Alm, 2022. "Does the Bomb-crater Effect Really Exist? Evidence from the Laboratory," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 78(1-2), pages 87-111.
    3. James Alm & Peter Gerbrands & Erich Kirchler, 2022. "Using “responsive regulation” to reduce tax base erosion," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(3), pages 738-759, July.
    4. Kasper, Matthias & Alm, James, 2022. "Audits, audit effectiveness, and post-audit tax compliance," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 195(C), pages 87-102.
    5. Kogler, Christoph & Olsen, Jerome & Bogaers, Rebecca I., 2020. "Enhanced anonymity in tax experiments does not affect compliance," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 390-398.
    6. Fatas, Enrique & Nosenzo, Daniele & Sefton, Martin & Zizzo, Daniel John, 2021. "A self-funding reward mechanism for tax compliance," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    7. Nur Cahyonowati & Dwi Ratmono & Agung Juliarto, 2022. "The Moderating Role of Social Norms on Tax Compliance Model: A Laboratory Experimental Evidence in Indonesia," Contemporary Economics, University of Economics and Human Sciences in Warsaw., vol. 16(4), December.
    8. P. Battiston & L. Chollete & S. Harrison, 2022. "May The Forcing Be With You: Experimental Evidence on Mandatory Contributions to Public Goods," Economics Department Working Papers 2022-EP01, Department of Economics, Parma University (Italy).
    9. Sebastian Beer & Matthias Kasper & Erich Kirchler & Brian Erard, 2019. "Do Audits Deter or Provoke Future Tax Noncompliance? Evidence on Self-employed Taxpayers," IMF Working Papers 2019/223, International Monetary Fund.
    10. Victoria I. Tarasova & Yuri V. Mezdrykov & Svetlana B. Efimova & Elena S. Fedotova & Dmitry A. Dudenkov & Regina V. Skachkova, 2018. "Methodological provision for the assessment of audit risk during the audit of tax reporting," Post-Print hal-02166957, HAL.
    11. Philipp Chapkovski & Luca Corazzini & Valeria Maggian, 2021. "Does Whistleblowing on Tax Evaders Reduce Ingroup Cooperation?," Working Papers 2021:20, Department of Economics, University of Venice "Ca' Foscari".
    12. Hebous, Shafik & Jia, Zhiyang & Løyland, Knut & Thoresen, Thor O. & Øvrum, Arnstein, 2023. "Do Audits Improve Future Tax Compliance in the Absence of Penalties? Evidence from Random Audits in Norway," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 207(C), pages 305-326.
    13. Bernasconi, Michele & Bernhofer, Juliana, 2020. "Catch Me If You Can: Testing the reduction of compound lotteries axiom in a tax compliance experiment," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    14. Michele Rabasco & Pietro Battiston, 2023. "Predicting the deterrence effect of tax audits. A machine learning approach," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(3), pages 531-556, July.
    15. Eberhartinger, Eva & Safaei, Reyhaneh & Sureth, Caren & Wu, Yuchen, 2021. "Are risk-based tax audit stretegies rewarded? An analysis of corporate tax avoidance," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 267, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    16. James Alm & Matthias Kasper & Erich Kirchler, 2022. "Can ethics change? Enforcement and its effects on taxpayer compliance," Working Papers 2209, Tulane University, Department of Economics.
    17. James Alm, 2019. "What Motivates Tax Compliance?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(2), pages 353-388, April.
    18. James Alm & Antoine Malézieux, 2021. "40 years of tax evasion games: a meta-analysis," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(3), pages 699-750, September.
    19. James Alm & Matthias Kasper, 2020. "Laboratory Experiments," Working Papers 2008, Tulane University, Department of Economics.
    20. Lancee, Bora & Rossel, Lucia & Kasper, Matthias, 2023. "When the agency wants too much: Experimental evidence on unfair audits and tax compliance," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 214(C), pages 406-442.
    21. Victoria I. Tarasova & Yuri V. Mezdrykov & Svetlana B. Efimova & Elena S. Fedotova & Dmitry A. Dudenkov & Regina V. Skachkova, 2018. "Methodological provision for the assessment of audit risk during the audit of tax reporting," Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, VsI Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Center, vol. 6(1), pages 371-397, September.
    22. Kasper, Matthias & Rablen, Matthew D., 2023. "Tax compliance after an audit: Higher or lower?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 207(C), pages 157-171.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mittone, Luigi & Panebianco, Fabrizio & Santoro, Alessandro, 2017. "The bomb-crater effect of tax audits: Beyond the misperception of chance," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 225-243.
    2. James Alm, 2019. "What Motivates Tax Compliance?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(2), pages 353-388, April.
    3. James Alm & Matthias Kasper, 2020. "Laboratory Experiments," Working Papers 2008, Tulane University, Department of Economics.
    4. Kasper, Matthias & Alm, James, 2022. "Audits, audit effectiveness, and post-audit tax compliance," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 195(C), pages 87-102.
    5. Hashimzade, Nigar & Myles, Gareth D. & Page, Frank & Rablen, Matthew D., 2014. "Social networks and occupational choice: The endogenous formation of attitudes and beliefs about tax compliance," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 134-146.
    6. Hashimzade, Nigar & Myles, Gareth D. & Rablen, Matthew D., 2016. "Predictive analytics and the targeting of audits," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 130-145.
    7. James Alm & Antoine Malézieux, 2021. "40 years of tax evasion games: a meta-analysis," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(3), pages 699-750, September.
    8. Erich Kirchler & Stephan Muehlbacher & Barbara Kastlunger & Ingrid Wahl, 2007. "Why Pay Taxes? A Review of Tax Compliance Decisions," International Center for Public Policy Working Paper Series, at AYSPS, GSU paper0730, International Center for Public Policy, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
    9. Matthias Kasper & James Alm, 2022. "Does the Bomb-crater Effect Really Exist? Evidence from the Laboratory," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 78(1-2), pages 87-111.
    10. James Alm & William D. Schulze & Carrie von Bose & Jubo Yan, 2019. "Appeals to Social Norms and Taxpayer Compliance," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 86(2), pages 638-666, October.
    11. Boris Maciejovsky & Herbert Schwarzenberger & Erich Kirchler, 2012. "Rationality Versus Emotions: The Case of Tax Ethics and Compliance," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 109(3), pages 339-350, September.
    12. Bernasconi, Michele & Corazzini, Luca & Seri, Raffaello, 2014. "Reference dependent preferences, hedonic adaptation and tax evasion: Does the tax burden matter?," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 103-118.
    13. Michele Bernasconi, Luca Corazzini, Raffaello Seri, 2012. "Tax Evasion: Does the Tax Burden Matter?," ISLA Working Papers 43, ISLA, Centre for research on Latin American Studies and Transition Economies, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy.
    14. James Alm & Carolyn J. Bourdeaux, 2013. "Applying Behavioral Economics to the Public Sector," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 206(3), pages 91-134, September.
    15. Amedeo Piolatto & Matthew D. Rablen, 2017. "Prospect theory and tax evasion: a reconsideration of the Yitzhaki puzzle," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 82(4), pages 543-565, April.
    16. Nigar Hashimzade & Gareth Myles & Frank Page & Matthew Rablen, 2015. "The use of agent-based modelling to investigate tax compliance," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 143-164, May.
    17. Bruttel, Lisa & Friehe, Tim, 2014. "On the path dependence of tax compliance," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 90-107.
    18. Lancee, Bora & Rossel, Lucia & Kasper, Matthias, 2023. "When the agency wants too much: Experimental evidence on unfair audits and tax compliance," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 214(C), pages 406-442.
    19. Domenico De Giovanni & Fabio Lamantia & Mario Pezzino, 2018. "Evolutionary Tax Evasion and Optimal Regulation," Economics Discussion Paper Series 1814, Economics, The University of Manchester.
    20. Kastlunger, Barbara & Kirchler, Erich & Mittone, Luigi & Pitters, Julia, 2009. "Sequences of audits, tax compliance, and taxpaying strategies," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 405-418, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Bomb-crater effect; Tax audits; Bayesian updating; Behavioral duality;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • H26 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Tax Evasion and Avoidance

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:joepsy:v:61:y:2017:i:c:p:225-243. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/joep .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.