Tax Compliance and Rank Dependent Expected Utility
AbstractFormulating the classic Allingham and Sandmo  tax compliance problem under Rank Dependent Expected Utility (RDEU) provides a simple explanation for the “excess” level of full compliance observed in empirical studies, which standard Expected Utility (EU) theory is unable to explain. RDEU provides a compelling answer to this puzzle, without the need for the moral sentiments or stigma arguments that have recently been advanced in the literature. Formally, we show that the threshold audit probability or penalty rate at which full compliance becomes optimal for the decisionmaker are significantly lower under RDEU axiomatics than in the EU case, and that the optimal level of underreporting is lower under RDEU. Numerical simulations using various parameterizations of the probability weighting function illustrate the large quantitative differences between the two models, while a simulation of underreporting rates in the US over the past 50 years shows how RDEU can go some way towards explaining the tax-compliance puzzle. The Geneva Risk and Insurance Review (2005) 30, 57–69. doi:10.1007/s10836-005-1108-1
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. 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.
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.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Palgrave Macmillan in its journal The Geneva Risk and Insurance Review.
Volume (Year): 30 (2005)
Issue (Month): 1 (June)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.palgrave-journals.com/
Postal: Palgrave Macmillan Journals, Subscription Department, Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire RG21 6XS, UK
Other versions of this item:
- Jean-Louis Arcand & Grégoire Graziosi, 2005. "Tax Compliance and Rank Dependent Expected Utility," The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance Theory, Springer, Springer, vol. 30(1), pages 57-69, June.
- Jean-Louis ARCAND & Grégoire ROTA-GRAZIOSI, 2004. "Tax Compliance and Rank-Dependent Expected Utility," Working Papers 200403, CERDI.
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.:
- Eduardo Engel & James R. Hines Jr., 1998.
"Understanding Tax Evasion Dynamics,"
Documentos de Trabajo, Centro de EconomÃa Aplicada, Universidad de Chile
47, Centro de Economía Aplicada, Universidad de Chile.
- Eduardo Engel & James Hines, 2000. "Understanding Tax Evasion Dynamics," Econometric Society World Congress 2000 Contributed Papers, Econometric Society 1117, Econometric Society.
- Eduardo M.R.A. Engel & James R. Hines, Jr., 1999. "Understanding Tax Evasion Dynamics," NBER Working Papers 6903, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Uzi Segal & Avia Spivak, 1988.
"First Order Versus Second Order Risk Aversion,"
UCLA Economics Working Papers, UCLA Department of Economics
540, UCLA Department of Economics.
- Amos Tversky & Daniel Kahneman, 1979.
"Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk,"
Levine's Working Paper Archive
7656, David K. Levine.
- Kahneman, Daniel & Tversky, Amos, 1979. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, Econometric Society, vol. 47(2), pages 263-91, March.
- Ronald G. Cummings & Jorge Martinez-Vazquez & Michael McKee, 2001. "Cross Cultural Comparisions of Tax Compliance Behavior," International Center for Public Policy Working Paper Series, at AYSPS, GSU, International Center for Public Policy, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University paper0103, International Center for Public Policy, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
- Koskela, Erkki, 1983. "A note on progression, penalty schemes and tax evasion," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 127-133, October.
- Drazen Prelec, 1998. "The Probability Weighting Function," Econometrica, Econometric Society, Econometric Society, vol. 66(3), pages 497-528, May.
- Diecidue, E. & Wakker, P.P., 2000.
"On the Intuition of Rank-Dependent Utility,"
Discussion Paper, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research
2000-74, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
- Allingham, Michael G. & Sandmo, Agnar, 1972. "Income tax evasion: a theoretical analysis," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 1(3-4), pages 323-338, November.
- Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. " Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
- Bernasconi, Michele, 1998. "Tax evasion and orders of risk aversion," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 123-134, January.
- 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, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 134-146.
- Philipp Meyer-Brauns, 2014. "Optimal Auditing with Heterogeneous Audit Perceptions," Working Papers, Max Planck Institute for Tax Law and Public Finance tax-mpg-rps-2014-06, Max Planck Institute for Tax Law and Public Finance.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Elizabeth Gale).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.