IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/arqudp/251.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Tax complexity in Australia: A survey-based comparison to the OECD average

Author

Listed:
  • Hoppe, Thomas

Abstract

This article comprehensively reviews Australia's corporate income tax complexity as faced by multinational corporations (MNCs) and compares it to the average of the remaining OECD countries. Building on unique survey data, I find that the Australian tax code is considerably more complex than the OECD average, which is mainly due to overly complex anti-avoidance legislation, such as regulations on transfer pricing, general anti-avoidance or controlled foreign corporations (CFC). In contrast, Australia's tax framework, which covers processes and fea-tures such as tax law enactment or tax audits, is close to the OECD average. A more granular analysis yields further interesting insights. For example, excessive details in the tax code and the time between the announcement of a tax law change and its enactment turn out to be serious issues in Australia relative to the remaining OECD countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Hoppe, Thomas, 2020. "Tax complexity in Australia: A survey-based comparison to the OECD average," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 251, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:arqudp:251
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/213370/1/1688594728.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Simon James & Adrian Sawyer & Tamer Budak (ed.), 2016. "The Complexity of Tax Simplification," Palgrave Macmillan Books, Palgrave Macmillan, number 978-1-137-47869-6, December.
    2. Barkoczy, Stephen, 2016. "Foundations of Taxation Law 2016," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, edition 8, number 9780190304423, Decembrie.
    3. Benjamin C. Ayers & Jeri K. Seidman & Erin M. Towery, 2019. "Tax Reporting Behavior Under Audit Certainty," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(1), pages 326-358, March.
    4. David Smith & Graham Richardson, 1999. "The readability of Australia’s taxation laws and supplemetary materials: an empirical investigation," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 20(3), pages 321-349, September.
    5. Hoppe, Thomas & Schanz, Deborah & Sturm, Susann & Sureth, Caren, 2019. "Measuring tax complexity across countries: A survey study on MNCs," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 245, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    6. Brushwood, James D. & Johnston, Derek M. & Lusch, Stephen J., 2018. "The effect of tax audit outcomes on the reporting and valuation of unrecognized tax benefits," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 1-11.
    7. Binh Tran-Nam & Chris Evans & Richard Krever & Philip Lignier, 2016. "Managing Tax Complexity: The State of Play after Henry," Economic Papers, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 35(4), pages 347-358, December.
    8. Binh Tran‐Nam & Chris Evans, 2014. "Towards the Development of a Tax System Complexity Index," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 35, pages 341-370, September.
    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. Hoppe, Thomas & Rechbauer, Martina & Sturm, Susann, 2019. "Steuerkomplexität im Vergleich zwischen Deutschland und Österreich: Eine Analyse des Status quo," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 240, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    2. Hoppe, Thomas & Schanz, Deborah & Sturm, Susann & Sureth-Sloane, Caren, 2017. "What are the drivers of tax complexity for multinational corporations? Evidence from 108 countries," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 223, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    3. Müller, Jens & Weinrich, Arndt, 2020. "Tax knowledge diffusion via strategic alliances," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 253, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    4. Li, John, 2022. "The effect of employee satisfaction on effective corporate tax planning: Evidence from Glassdoor," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    5. Yost, Benjamin P. & Shu, Susan, 2022. "Does tax enforcement deter managers' self-dealing?," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(1).
    6. Jiang Cheng & Travis Chow & Tzu‐Ting Lin & Jeffrey Ng, 2022. "The effect of accounting for income tax uncertainty on tax‐deductible loss accruals for private insurers," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 89(2), pages 505-544, June.
    7. James Alm & Lilith Burgstaller & Arrita Domi & Amanda März & Matthias Kasper, 2023. "Nudges, Boosts, and Sludge: Using New Behavioral Approaches to Improve Tax Compliance," Economies, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-22, September.
    8. Hoppe, Thomas & Schanz, Deborah & Sturm, Susann & Sureth, Caren, 2019. "Measuring tax complexity across countries: A survey study on MNCs," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 245, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    9. Alexander I. Pogorletskiy, 2017. "Tax policy in the contemporary world: peculiarities and prospects, implementation in Russia," Journal of Tax Reform, Graduate School of Economics and Management, Ural Federal University, vol. 3(1), pages 29-42.
    10. Tanzi, Vito, 2000. "The role of the State and the quality of the public sector," Revista CEPAL, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL), August.
    11. Aishah Sheikh Abu Bakar & Rashid Ameer, 2011. "Readability of Corporate Social Responsibility communication in Malaysia," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(1), pages 50-60, January.
    12. Nihal Bayraktar, 2016. "Tax simplification and tax efficiency," EcoMod2016 9100, EcoMod.
    13. Tereza Zichová, 2022. "Visual Interface Design Innovation: Citizens' Perception of Financial Administration Applications," Acta Informatica Pragensia, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2022(1), pages 1-14.
    14. Yost, Benjamin P., 2023. "Do tax-based proprietary costs discourage public listing?," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(2).
    15. M. Martin Boyer & Philippe d'Astous, 2023. "Tax compliance and firm response to electronic sales monitoring," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 56(4), pages 1430-1468, November.
    16. Vlada V. Karpova & Viktoriia F. Tyschenko & Viktoriia N. Ostapenko & Yuriy B. Ivanov, 2020. "Anti-Crisis Fiscal Measures in the European Union during the COVID-19 Pandemic and their Impact on GDP," Journal of Tax Reform, Graduate School of Economics and Management, Ural Federal University, vol. 6(3), pages 225-243.
    17. Naeem Hayat & Anas A. Salameh & Abdullah Al Mamun & Mohd Helmi Ali & Zafir Khan Mohamed Makhbul, 2022. "Tax Compliance Behavior Among Malaysian Taxpayers: A Dual-stage PLS-SEM and ANN Analysis," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(3), pages 21582440221, September.
    18. Chen Ma & Maoyong Cheng & Gerald J. Lobo, 2024. "How Do Tax Agents Respond to Anti-corruption Intensity?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 190(1), pages 137-164, February.
    19. Fateme Kaghazloo & Ana Clara Borrego, 2022. "Designing a Model of the Factors Affecting Tax professionals' Tax noncompliant behaviour using The ISM Approach," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 1099-1120, December.
    20. Kay Blaufus & Jakob Reineke & Ilko Trenn, 2023. "Perceived tax audit aggressiveness, tax control frameworks and tax planning: an empirical analysis," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 93(3), pages 509-557, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Tax Complexity; Corporate Income Tax System; Survey; Australia; OECD Countries;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H20 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - General
    • H25 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Business Taxes and Subsidies
    • C83 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Survey Methods; Sampling Methods
    • O57 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economywide Country Studies - - - Comparative Studies of Countries

    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:251. 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: 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.