Tax Evasion and Trust
Tax evasion has been a huge problem in Russia. Since the breakup of the Soviet Union there has been a steady decline in the share of Gross Domestic Product collected in revenue by the State at all levels, although in the last couple of years the problem has improved somewhat. The standard view of tax compliance in tax theory is that taxes are a "burden" or windfall harm, and that individuals pay only because they are forced to, i.e., that they believe that if they did not , they would be liable to prosecution by the state. On this view, it is essential that the probability of being discovered for tax evasion, and the size of the penalty if caught and convicted are sufficiently large to deter evasion. Once this view is accepted, the chief problem in normative taxation theory is to devise taxes which minimize the "excess burden" of a tax, ie, how to minimize the total burden of taxation. One problem with the standard view is that for some taxes such as income taxes, it is hard to believe that the probability of being caught for evasion is very large. Another problem with the model is that it makes a very odd prediction-namely that an increase in the tax rate t actually leads to less tax evasion. In this paper I take a "public choice" approach to the problem of tax evasion. Moreover, I assume that people will be more willing to pay their taxes when they trust the government more. Thus, we would expect that tax evasion would be lower, ceteris paribus, the more responsive governments are to their citizens' wishes. Finally, since the level of tax evasion depends on the trust of citizens that other citizens pay their taxes, it follows that there are multiple equilibria, which can be broadly classified into two: one in which, broadly speaking, people assume that others are paying and so most of them also pay, and the other in which the opposite is true. I propose four problems which are fundamental to the "bad" equilibrium and which should be addressed in order to improve the situation: (1) As long as people do not believe the government is responsive to their wishes, even if it may he honest, they will attempt to evade their taxes. (2) As long as people do not trust the government they will be unwilling to pay their taxes. Consequently one, obviously very difficult, line of reform is to take measures to increase trust in their government. (3) As long as people believe the tax code is fair, they will be more willing to pay their taxes. (4) As long as people assume other people are trying to evade taxes, they will attempt to evade themselves. This is in line with the solution to crime which has been widely adopted in a number of U.S. cities and is known as the "Fixing Broken Windows" approach. On this last line of thought, disorder and crime are contagious. The program to combat crime focused on minor rather than major problems and in some ways reversed the emphasis on "marginal deterrence" for bigger offenses which is characteristic of the individualistic approach. The application of the approach to tax evasion is straightforward: it suggests de-emphasizing going after big evaders such as Gazprom and raising the level of enforcement on small evaders instead. However, the points raised in #1, 2 and #3 above have to be kept in mind: the system must be seen to be fair, and the government has to be seen to be democratic and responsive to the people's wishes.
|Date of creation:||Jun 2001|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Department of Economics, Reference Centre, Social Science Centre, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada N6A 5C2|
Phone: 519-661-2111 Ext.85244
Web page: http://economics.uwo.ca/research/research_papers/department_working_papers.html
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.:
- Gary S. Becker, 1974.
"Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach,"
in: Essays in the Economics of Crime and Punishment, pages 1-54
National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Gary S. Becker, 1968. "Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 76, pages 169-169.
- Myles, Gareth D. & Naylor, Robin A., 1996. "A model of tax evasion with group conformity and social customs," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 49-66, April.
- Bordignon, Massimo, 1993. "A fairness approach to income tax evasion," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 345-362, October.
- James Andreoni & Brian Erard & Jonathan Feinstein, 1998. "Tax Compliance," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 36(2), pages 818-860, June.
- Andreoni, J. & Erard, B. & Feinstein, J., 1996. "Tax Compliance," Working papers 9610, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
- Andreoni, J. & Erard, B. & Feinstein, J., 1996. "Tax Compliance," Working papers 9610r, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
- 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.
- George A. Akerlof, 1980. "A Theory of Social Custom, of which Unemployment may be One Consequence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 94(4), pages 749-775.
- George A. Akerlof, 1978. "A theory of social custom, of which unemployment may be one consequence," Special Studies Papers 118, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
- Friedland, Nehemiah & Maital, Shlomo & Rutenberg, Aryeh, 1978. "A simulation study of income tax evasion," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 107-116, August.
- Wintrobe,Ronald, 1998. "The Political Economy of Dictatorship," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521583299, January.
- Yitzhaki, Shlomo, 1974. "Income tax evasion: A theoretical analysis," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(2), pages 201-202, May. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)