IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/ecogov/v19y2018i4d10.1007_s10101-018-0212-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Governance of tax courts

Author

Listed:
  • Roberto Ippoliti

    (University of Turin)

  • Giovanni B. Ramello

    (Università del Piemonte Orientale)

Abstract

This paper attempts to penetrate the “black box” of the judiciary through an empirical investigation of the Italian tax courts of first instance. Both judicial delay and two-stage Data Envelopment Analysis approach with bootstrap are used to measure the efficiency of the court system and to further identify the main determinants of efficiency which, in line with the previous literature, seem to be mostly related to the judges’ effort. The study also takes advantage of an idiosyncratic feature of this branch of the Italian judiciary—in which judges are temporarily appointed and can continue to practice an external (though not conflicting) profession—to assess the impact of opportunity costs on the behavior of judges. The overall outcome confirms that judges maximize utility “the same as everybody else does” (Posner, Supreme Court Econ Rev 3:1–41, 1993).

Suggested Citation

  • Roberto Ippoliti & Giovanni B. Ramello, 2018. "Governance of tax courts," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 317-338, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:ecogov:v:19:y:2018:i:4:d:10.1007_s10101-018-0212-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s10101-018-0212-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10101-018-0212-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10101-018-0212-5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lambert-Mogiliansky, Ariane & Sonin, Konstantin & Zhuravskaya, Ekaterina, 2007. "Are Russian commercial courts biased? Evidence from a bankruptcy law transplant," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 254-277, June.
    2. Peter C Smith & Andrew Street, 2007. "The measurement of non-market output in education and health," Economic & Labour Market Review, Palgrave Macmillan;Office for National Statistics, vol. 1(6), pages 46-52, June.
    3. Eisenberg, Theodore & Huang, Kuo-Chang, 2012. "The effect of rules shifting supreme court jurisdiction from mandatory to discretionary—An empirical lesson from Taiwan," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 3-18.
    4. Voigt, Stefan, 2013. "How (Not) to measure institutions," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(1), pages 1-26, March.
    5. Falavigna, Greta & Ippoliti, Roberto & Manello, Alessandro & Ramello, Giovanni B., 2015. "Judicial productivity, delay and efficiency: A Directional Distance Function (DDF) approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 240(2), pages 592-601.
    6. Roberto Ippoliti & Alessandro Melcarne & Giovanni Ramello, 2015. "Judicial efficiency and entrepreneurs’ expectations on the reliability of European legal systems," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 40(1), pages 75-94, August.
    7. Ichino, Andrea & Polo, Michele & Rettore, Enrico, 2003. "Are judges biased by labor market conditions?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(5), pages 913-944, October.
    8. Simar, Leopold & Wilson, Paul W., 2007. "Estimation and inference in two-stage, semi-parametric models of production processes," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 136(1), pages 31-64, January.
    9. Stefan Voigt, 2016. "Determinants of judicial efficiency: a survey," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 183-208, October.
    10. Voigt, Stefan, 2013. "How (not) to measure institutions: a reply to Robinson and Shirley," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(1), pages 35-37, March.
    11. Dimitrova-Grajzl, Valentina & Grajzl, Peter & Sustersic, Janez & Zajc, Katarina, 2012. "Court output, judicial staffing, and the demand for court services: Evidence from Slovenian courts of first instance," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 19-29.
    12. Landes, William M & Lessig, Lawrence & Solimine, Michael E, 1998. "Judicial Influence: A Citation Analysis of Federal Courts of Appeals Judges," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 27(2), pages 271-332, June.
    13. Lewin, Arie Y & Morey, Richard C & Cook, Thomas J, 1982. "Evaluating the administrative efficiency of courts," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 401-411.
    14. Di Vita, Giuseppe, 2010. "Production of laws and delays in court decisions," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 276-281, September.
    15. Cook, Wade D. & Seiford, Larry M., 2009. "Data envelopment analysis (DEA) - Thirty years on," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 192(1), pages 1-17, January.
    16. Ahmed E. Taha, 2004. "Publish or Paris? Evidence of How Judges Allocate Their Time," American Law and Economics Review, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(1), pages 1-27.
    17. Ramello, Giovanni B., 2012. "Aggregate litigation and regulatory innovation: Another view of judicial efficiency," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 63-71.
    18. Beenstock, Michael & Haitovsky, Yoel, 2004. "Does the appointment of judges increase the output of the judiciary?," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 351-369, September.
    19. Paul Rubin, 1983. "The objectives of private and public judges," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 41(1), pages 133-137, January.
    20. Ramseyer, J. Mark, 2012. "Talent matters: Judicial productivity and speed in Japan," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 38-48.
    21. Fatih Deyneli, 2012. "Analysis of relationship between efficiency of justice services and salaries of judges with two-stage DEA method," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 34(3), pages 477-493, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Marciano, Alain & Ramello, Giovanni B., 2019. "Introduction to the symposium on the empirics of judicial institutions," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(1), pages 73-80, February.
    2. Francesco Aiello & Graziella Bonanno & Francesco Foglia, 2021. "On The Heterogeneity In The Judicial Efficiency Literature: A Meta-Regression Analysis," Working Papers 202102, Università della Calabria, Dipartimento di Economia, Statistica e Finanza "Giovanni Anania" - DESF.

    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. Falavigna, Greta & Ippoliti, Roberto & Ramello, Giovanni B., 2018. "DEA-based Malmquist productivity indexes for understanding courts reform," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 31-43.
    2. Melcarne Alessandro & Ramello Giovanni B., 2015. "Judicial Independence, Judges’ Incentives and Efficiency," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 11(2), pages 149-169, July.
    3. Roberto Ippoliti, 2015. "La riforma della geografia giudiziaria: efficienza tecnica e domanda di giustizia," ECONOMIA PUBBLICA, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2015(2), pages 91-124.
    4. Berlemann, Michael & Christmann, Robin, 2017. "The Role of Precedents on Court Delay - Evidence from a civil law country," MPRA Paper 80057, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Stefan Voigt, 2016. "Determinants of judicial efficiency: a survey," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 183-208, October.
    6. Przemysław Banasik & Katarzyna Metelska-Szaniawska & Małgorzata Godlewska & Sylwia Morawska, 2022. "Determinants of judges’ career choices and productivity: a Polish case study," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 53(1), pages 81-107, February.
    7. Ippoliti, Roberto, 2014. "Efficienza Tecnica e Geografia Giudiziaria," POLIS Working Papers 178, Institute of Public Policy and Public Choice - POLIS.
    8. Falavigna, Greta & Ippoliti, Roberto & Manello, Alessandro & Ramello, Giovanni B., 2015. "Judicial productivity, delay and efficiency: A Directional Distance Function (DDF) approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 240(2), pages 592-601.
    9. Pontus Mattsson & Jonas Månsson & Christian Andersson & Fredrik Bonander, 2018. "A bootstrapped Malmquist index applied to Swedish district courts," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 109-139, August.
    10. Moral, Alfonso & Rosales, Virginia & Martín-Román, Ángel, 2021. "Professional vs. non-professional labour judges: their impact on the quality of judicial decisions," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    11. Samantha Bielen & Wim Marneffe & Peter Grajzl & Valentina Dimitrova-Grajzl, 2018. "The Duration of Judicial Deliberation: Evidence from Belgium," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 174(2), pages 303-333, June.
    12. Sila Mishra, 2023. "‘Cyclic syndrome’ of arrears and efficiency of Indian judiciary," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 1-27, January.
    13. Eugenia Nissi & Massimiliano Giacalone & Carlo Cusatelli, 2019. "The Efficiency of the Italian Judicial System: A Two Stage Data Envelopment Analysis Approach," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 146(1), pages 395-407, November.
    14. Gustavo Ferro & Victoria Oubiña & Carlos A. Romero, 2019. "Benchmarking Labor Courts: an Efficiency Frontier Analysis," Asociación Argentina de Economía Política: Working Papers 4140, Asociación Argentina de Economía Política.
    15. Przemyslaw Banasik & Monika Odlanicka-Poczobutt & Maciej Wolny & Sylwia Morawska, 2020. "Preliminary Identification of Quantitative Factors Determining the Duration of Court Proceedings in Commercial Cases," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(Special 1), pages 279-293.
    16. Grajzl, Peter & Silwal, Shikha, 2020. "Multi-court judging and judicial productivity in a career judiciary: Evidence from Nepal," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).
    17. Giacalone, Massimiliano & Nissi, Eugenia & Cusatelli, Carlo, 2020. "Dynamic efficiency evaluation of Italian judicial system using DEA based Malmquist productivity indexes," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    18. Dimitrova-Grajzl, Valentina & Grajzl, Peter & Slavov, Atanas & Zajc, Katarina, 2016. "Courts in a transition economy: Case disposition and the quantity–quality tradeoff in Bulgaria," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 18-38.
    19. Roberto Ippoliti & Massimiliano Vatiero, 2014. "An analysis of how 2002 judicial reorganisation has impacted on the performance of the First Instance Courts (Preture) in Ticino," IdEP Economic Papers 1408, USI Università della Svizzera italiana.
    20. Dong, Xiaoge, 2021. "Efficiency of Courts in China – Does Location Matter?," ILE Working Paper Series 50, University of Hamburg, Institute of Law and Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Judicial efficiency; Judges incentives; Data Envelopment Analysis; Tax justice;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • K41 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - Litigation Process
    • J45 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Particular Labor Markets - - - Public Sector Labor Markets
    • M11 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - Production Management
    • C44 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Operations Research; Statistical Decision Theory

    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:spr:ecogov:v:19:y:2018:i:4:d:10.1007_s10101-018-0212-5. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.