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! ]

Tax Evasion and Trust

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Robin Boadway () (Queen's University and CREFE)
Nicolas Marceau () (Center for Research on Economic Fluctuations and Employment, UQAM)
Steeve Mongrain (Simon Fraser University)

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

Abstract

Tax evasion is typically analyzed in a principal/agent framework, the government (principal) trying to provide agents with the incentives to pay their taxes. However, evading sales, excise or trade taxes requires the cooperation of at least two taxpayers. When individuals evade taxes, they face two potential costs. One is that tax evasion may be detected and sanctioned; the other is that their partner in crime might cheat. An increase in the sanction for tax evasion leads to a direct increase in the expected cost of a transaction in the illegal sector. However, it may also reduce the incentive to cheat. It may then be that a small increase in the sanction reduces the total cost of transacting in the illegal sector. Tax evasion may increase as a result.

Il est habituel d'analyser l'évasion fiscale dans le cadre de modèles principal-agent, le gouvernement jouant le rôle du principal et le payeur de taxe potentiel celui de l'agent. Pourtant, l'évasion fiscale n'est fréquemment possible que si plusieurs agents coopèrent ensemble. Une telle coopération est par exemple nécessaire pour l'évasion des taxes de vente et d'assise. Lorsque plusieurs agents décident d'un commun accord de ne pas payer une taxe, ils doivent prendre deux coûts en considération. Le premier est que malgré tous leurs efforts pour que leurs activités d'évasion demeurent secrètes, il est possible qu'elles soient détectées et qu'ils soient sanctionnés. Le second est que le ou les partenaires peuvent ne pas fournir l'effort attendu (i.e. tricher) pour que les activités demeurent secrètes, augmentant alors la probabilité de détection. Une augmentation de la sanction pour évasion fiscale a alors deux effets. Elle augmente tout d'abord, de façon directe, le coût espéré de transiger illégalement. Mais elle peut également réduire l'incitation à tricher des partenaires impliqués dans une transaction illégale. En conséquence, un accroissement de la sanction peut réduire le coût total de certaines transactions illégales et mener à une augmentation de l'évasion fiscale.

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 file. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.unites.uqam.ca/eco/CREFE/cahiers/cah104.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function: Main text
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by CREFE, Université du Québec à Montréal in its series Cahiers de recherche CREFE / CREFE Working Papers with number 104.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML, plain text, BibTeX, RIS (EndNote), ReDIF
Length: 16 pages
Date of creation: Feb 2000
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:cre:crefwp:104

Contact details of provider:
Postal: P.O. Box 8888, Downtown Station, Montreal (Canada) Quebec, H3C 3P8
Phone: (514) 987-6181
Fax: (514) 987-8494
Email:
Web page: http://ideas.uqam.ca/CREFE/
More information through EDIRC

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

Related research
Keywords: Tax Evasion Cooperation Sanctions

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:
H26 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Tax Evasion

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

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. Cremer, Helmuth & Gahvari, Firouz, 1996. "Tax evasion and the optimum general income tax," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 235-249, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  2. Kandori, Michihiro, 1992. "Social Norms and Community Enforcement," Review of Economic Studies, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 59(1), pages 63-80, January. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  3. Hindriks, Jean & Keen, Michael & Muthoo, Abhinay, 1999. "Corruption, extortion and evasion," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(3), pages 395-430, December. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  4. Marhuenda, Francisco & Ortuno-Ortin, Ignacio, 1997. " Tax Enforcement Problems," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 99(1), pages 61-72, March. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  5. Kandori, Michihiro, 1992. "Repeated Games Played by Overlapping Generations of Players," Review of Economic Studies, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 59(1), pages 81-92, January. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  6. Chander, Parkash & Wilde, Louis L, 1998. "A General Characterization of Optimal Income Tax Enforcement," Review of Economic Studies, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 65(1), pages 165-83, January. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  7. 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. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? IDEAS also computes impact factors for journals and working paper series.

This page was last updated on 2008-8-11.


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.