IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/cesifo/v66yi3p248-264..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do Audits Deter or Provoke Future Tax Noncompliance? Evidence on Self-Employed Taxpayers

Author

Listed:
  • Sebastian Beer
  • Matthias Kasper
  • Erich Kirchler
  • Brian Erard

Abstract

This article employs unique tax administrative data and operational audit information, including risk scores used for audit selection, from a sample of approximately 7500 self-employed US taxpayers to investigate the effects of operational tax audits on future reporting behavior. Our estimates indicate that audits can have substantial deterrent or counter-deterrent effects, depending on the audit outcome. In the aggregate, taxable income is estimated to increase by roughly 15% 1 year after an operational audit. However, this figure masks substantial heterogeneity within the population. Among those taxpayers who receive an additional tax assessment, reported taxable income is estimated to be 64% higher in the first year after the audit (44% after 3 years) than it would have been in the absence of the audit. In contrast, among those taxpayers who do not receive an additional tax assessment, reported taxable income is estimated to be approximately 15% lower the year after the audit (21% 3 years later) than it would have been had the audit not taken place. Our results suggest that improved targeting of audits toward noncompliant taxpayers would not only yield more direct audit revenue but also pay dividends in terms of future tax collections.

Suggested Citation

  • Sebastian Beer & Matthias Kasper & Erich Kirchler & Brian Erard, 0. "Do Audits Deter or Provoke Future Tax Noncompliance? Evidence on Self-Employed Taxpayers," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo Group, vol. 66(3), pages 248-264.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:cesifo:v:66:y::i:3:p:248-264.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/cesifo/ifz018
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. 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.
    2. Pietro Battiston & Simona Gamba & Alessandro Santoro, 2020. "Optimizing Tax Administration Policies with Machine Learning," Working Papers 436, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics, revised Mar 2020.
    3. 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.
    4. Emmanuelle Deglaire & Peter Daly & Fabrice Lec, 2021. "Exposure to tax dilemmas deteriorate individuals' self-declared tax morale," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 363-397, December.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    public administration; public finance; taxation; tax evasion; compliance;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H26 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Tax Evasion and Avoidance
    • H30 - Public Economics - - Fiscal Policies and Behavior of Economic Agents - - - General

    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:oup:cesifo:v:66:y::i:3:p:248-264.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cesifde.html .

    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.