IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/arqudp/150.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

How will the court decide? Tax experts and the estimation of tax risk

Author

Listed:
  • Blaufus, Kay
  • Bob, Jonathan
  • Trinks, Matthias

Abstract

Tax accounting and tax law concern the probability thresholds that can require the taxpayer to estimate the likelihood that a tax position would be upheld by a court. Tax complexity and the consequent ambiguity results in a reliance by most taxpayers on a tax expert estimate of this likelihood. This study examines whether the tax experts are able to accurately forecast the outcome of tax court decisions and compares tax expert predictions to those of laymen. Our results reveal no significant differences with respect to the forecasting performance of professional tax advisors and laymen. Moreover, the tax advisors exhibit a significantly higher level of overconfidence compared to laymen and the degree of overconfidence increases with professional experience. A comparison of two groups of tax experts, tax advisors and revenue agents demonstrates that the tax advisors exhibit the highest level of overconfidence and form stronger appeal recommendations that indicate a type of advisor bias.

Suggested Citation

  • Blaufus, Kay & Bob, Jonathan & Trinks, Matthias, 2013. "How will the court decide? Tax experts and the estimation of tax risk," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 150, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:arqudp:150
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/88160/1/772793603.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Mega Nurmala Sari, 2022. "Examining the Factors That Affect the Loss of Tax Disputes in the Tax Court," GATR Journals afr216, Global Academy of Training and Research (GATR) Enterprise.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    tax risk; overconfidence; client advocacy; tax controversy; forecasting;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • M40 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - General
    • K20 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - General
    • H20 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - General

    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:zbw:arqudp:150. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.arqus.info/ .

    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.