IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/qed/dpaper/4578.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Cost-Benefit Analysis of Tax Administration Reforms in Finland

Author

Listed:
  • Glenn P. Jenkins

    (Department of Economics, Queens University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada, K7L3N6 and Cambridge Resources International Inc.)

  • Mikhail Miklyaev

    (Department of Economics, Queens University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada, K7L3N6 and Cambridge Resources International Inc.)

  • Owotomiwa Christiana Olubamiro

    (Cambridge Resources International Inc.)

  • Siamand Hesami

    (Department of Banking and Finance Eastern Mediterarrean University and Cambridge Resources International Inc.)

Abstract

In Finland, over 98% of the compliance costs incurred by VAT-registered entities are borne on micro, small and medium taxpayers. The Finnish Tax Administration (FTA) project "Design and Implementation of a New VAT Reporting Model" is an analysis of three interventions to enhance the current tax administration system. The three interventions are to expand the information collected on the VAT return (stage 1), to introduce electronic reporting of VAT invoices by all taxpayers to the FTA (stage 2), and finally, for the FTA to pre-fill the VAT returns for small, medium and micro taxpayers (stage 3). A Cost-Benefit Analysis approach is used to evaluate these proposals for potential implementation by measuring the potential costs and benefits of each stage of the reforms. The project's main aim is to increase tax revenues (reduce the tax gap) and reduce the economic costs associated with administration and compliance with the value-added tax (VAT) legislated obligations. Of the three interventions evaluated, the largest net economic benefits are created by the administrative pre-filling of the Value Added Tax returns.

Suggested Citation

  • Glenn P. Jenkins & Mikhail Miklyaev & Owotomiwa Christiana Olubamiro & Siamand Hesami, 2021. "Cost-Benefit Analysis of Tax Administration Reforms in Finland," Development Discussion Papers 2021-11, JDI Executive Programs.
  • Handle: RePEc:qed:dpaper:4578
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://cri-world.com/publications/qed_dp_4578.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: http://cri-world.com/publications/qed_dp_4578_a.xlsx
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: http://cri-world.com/publications/qed_dp_4578_b.xlsx
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jenkins, G.P., 1998. "Evaluation of Stakeholder Impacts in Cost-Benefit Analysis," Papers 631, Harvard - Institute for International Development.
    2. Woolcock, Michael & Narayan, Deepa, 2000. "Social Capital: Implications for Development Theory, Research, and Policy," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 15(2), pages 225-249, August.
    3. Harberger, Arnold C, 1984. "Basic Needs versus Distributional Weights in Social Cost-Benefit Analysis," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 32(3), pages 455-474, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Hatice Jenkins & Glenn P. Jenkins, 2021. "Social Capital and the Social Evaluation of Investments," Development Discussion Papers 2002-14, JDI Executive Programs.
    2. John B. Loomis, 2013. "Incorporating distributional issues into benefit–cost analysis: why, how, and two empirical examples using non-market valuation," Chapters, in: Scott O. Farrow & Richard Zerbe, Jr. (ed.), Principles and Standards for Benefit–Cost Analysis, chapter 9, pages 294-316, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Glenn Jenkins & Chun-Yan Kuo & Arnold C. Harberger, 2011. "Cost-Benefit Analysis for Investment Decisions: Chapter 7 (Principles Underlying The Economic Analysis of Projects)," Development Discussion Papers 2011-07, JDI Executive Programs.
    4. Glenn Jenkins & Chun-Yan Kuo & Arnold C. Harberger, 2011. "Cost-Benefit Analysis for Investment Decisions: Chapter 14 (The Shadow Price of Government Funds, Distributional Weights, and Basic Needs Externalitiess)," Development Discussion Papers 2011-14, JDI Executive Programs.
    5. Mogues, Tewodaj & Carter, Michael R., 2003. "Social Capital and Incentive Compatibility: Modelling the Accumulation and Use of Social Collateral," Staff Paper Series 460, University of Wisconsin, Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    6. Dufhues, Thomas & Buchenrieder, Gertrud & Quoc, Hoang Dinh & Munkung, Nuchanata, 2011. "Social capital and loan repayment performance in Southeast Asia," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 40(5), pages 679-691.
    7. Mahto, Raj V. & Belousova, Olga & Ahluwalia, Saurabh, 2020. "Abundance – A new window on how disruptive innovation occurs," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    8. Pilar Useche, 2016. "Who Contributes to the Provision of Public Goods at the Community Level? The Case of Potable Water in Ghana," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 34(6), pages 869-888, November.
    9. Fox, Jonathan A, 2000. "The World Bank and social capital: Lessons from ten rural development projects in the Philippines and Mexico," Center for Global, International and Regional Studies, Working Paper Series qt1vj8v86j, Center for Global, International and Regional Studies, UC Santa Cruz.
    10. A. Arrighetti & G. Seravalli & G. Wolleb, 2001. "Social Capital, Institutions and Collective Action Between Firms," Economics Department Working Papers 2001-EP08, Department of Economics, Parma University (Italy).
    11. Giuseppina Guagnano & Elisabetta Santarelli & Isabella Santini, 2016. "Can Social Capital Affect Subjective Poverty in Europe? An Empirical Analysis Based on a Generalized Ordered Logit Model," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 128(2), pages 881-907, September.
    12. Hansen, Benjamin & Sabia, Joseph J. & Rees, Daniel I., 2011. "Cigarette Taxes and the Social Market," IZA Discussion Papers 5580, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    13. Martin Gächter & David A. Savage & Benno Torgler, 2009. "Retaining the Thin Blue Line: What Shapes Workers' Intentions not to Quit the Current Work Environment," Working Papers 2010-05, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck, revised Mar 2010.
    14. Kłoczko-Gajewska Anna, 2020. "Long-Term Impact of Closing Rural Schools on Local Social Capital: A Multiple-Case Study from Poland," European Countryside, Sciendo, vol. 12(4), pages 598-617, December.
    15. Utteeyo Dasgupta & Arjun Menon, 2011. "Trust and Trustworthiness among Economics Majors," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 31(4), pages 2799-2815.
    16. Dowling, Michael & O’Gorman, Colm & Puncheva, Petya & Vanwalleghem, Dieter, 2019. "Trust and SME attitudes towards equity financing across Europe," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 54(6), pages 1-1.
    17. Hong Sun & Valentina Hartarska & Lezhu Zhang & Denis Nadolnyak, 2018. "The Influence of Social Capital on Farm Household’s Borrowing Behavior in Rural China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-20, November.
    18. Blocker, Christopher P. & Ruth, Julie A. & Sridharan, Srinivas & Beckwith, Colin & Ekici, Ahmet & Goudie-Hutton, Martina & Rosa, José Antonio & Saatcioglu, Bige & Talukdar, Debabrata & Trujillo, Carlo, 2013. "Understanding poverty and promoting poverty alleviation through transformative consumer research," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(8), pages 1195-1202.
    19. Grootaert, Christiaan, 1999. "Social capital, houshold welfare, and poverty in Indonesia," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2148, The World Bank.
    20. Dufhues, Thomas & Buchenrieder, Gertrud & Munkung, Nuchanata, 2012. "Individual social capital and access to formal credit in Thailand," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 123401, International Association of Agricultural Economists.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Cost-Benefit Analysis; VAT; Compliance Cost; Micro & SME enterprises; Electronic Invoicing; Pre-Filled VAT Returns; Finland.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D61 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Allocative Efficiency; Cost-Benefit Analysis
    • H21 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Efficiency; Optimal Taxation
    • H24 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Personal Income and Other Nonbusiness Taxes and Subsidies
    • H26 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Tax Evasion and Avoidance

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:qed:dpaper:4578. 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: Mark Babcock (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/qedquca.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.