Optimal Audit Policy and Heterogenous Agents
Frauds can be explained not only in terms of individual willingness to cheat, but may also be driven by opportunities to behave dishonestly. The audit policy should therefore be different for different categories of agents. This paper focuses on the optimal audit policy when there are two categories of agents and shows that the auditor adopts different policies depending on its budget. When resources are quite limited, the auditor sets identical audit probabilities for both types. On the other hand, in most of the cases, the authority should first ensure that people with lower opportunities choose not to commit an offence.
|Date of creation:||Dec 2002|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Phone: 0117 33 10799
Fax: 0117 33 10705
Web page: http://www.bris.ac.uk/cmpo/
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Reinganum, Jennifer F. & Wilde, Louis L., 1985. "Income tax compliance in a principal-agent framework," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 1-18, February.
- Scotchmer, Suzanne, 1987. "Audit Classes and Tax Enforcement Policy," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(2), pages 229-33, May.
- Greenberg, Joseph, 1984. "Avoiding tax avoidance: A (repeated) game-theoretic approach," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 1-13, February.
- Graetz, Michael J. & Reinganum, Jennifer F. & Wilde, Louis L., .
"The Tax Compliance Game: Toward an Interactive Theory of Law Enforcement,"
589, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
- Graetz, Michael J & Reinganum, Jennifer F & Wilde, Louis L, 1986. "The Tax Compliance Game: Toward an Interactive Theory of Law Enforcement," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 2(1), pages 1-32, Spring.
- Cremer, H. & Marchand, M. & Pestieau, P., 1988.
"Evading, auditing and taxing: the equity-compliance tradeoff,"
CORE Discussion Papers
1988027, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
- Cremer, H. & Marchand, M. & Pestieau, P., 1990. "Evading, auditing and taxing : The equity-compliance tradeoff," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 67-92, October.
- Cremer, H. & Marchand, M. & Pestieau, P., 1988. "Evading, Auditing And Taxing: The Equity-Compliance Tradeoff," Papers 401, Cornell - Department of Economics.
- Hindriks, J., 1994.
"Income Tax Compliance: The No-Commitment Game,"
149, Notre-Dame de la Paix, Sciences Economiques et Sociales.
- Picard, Pierre, 1994. "Auditing claims in insurance market with fraud : the credibility issue," CEPREMAP Working Papers (Couverture Orange) 9420, CEPREMAP.
- James Andreoni & Brian Erard & Jonathan Feinstein, 1998.
Journal of Economic Literature,
American Economic Association, vol. 36(2), pages 818-860, June.
- Reinganum, Jennifer F & Wilde, Louis L, 1986. "Equilibrium Verification and Reporting Policies in a Model of Tax Compliance," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 27(3), pages 739-60, October.
- Picard, Pierre, 1996. "Auditing claims in the insurance market with fraud: The credibility issue," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 27-56, December.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bri:cmpowp:02/054. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ()
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.