IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/joepsy/v35y2013icp1-16.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Decision heuristics and tax perception – An analysis of a tax-cut-cum-base-broadening policy

Author

Listed:
  • Blaufus, Kay
  • Bob, Jonathan
  • Hundsdoerfer, Jochen
  • Kiesewetter, Dirk
  • Weimann, Joachim

Abstract

In this paper, both a conjoint analysis and a lab experiment are conducted to analyze the influence of changes in the tax rate and the tax base on the perceived tax burden. Our results show that the majority of individuals do not make rational tax decisions based on the actual tax burden but rather use simple decision heuristics. This leads to an irrationally high impact of changes in nominal tax rates on the perceived tax burden. Taxpayers favor tax options that apply a lower tax rate on their gross income over a higher tax rate applied on their net income despite the lower actual tax burden of the latter option. This result suggests that politicians could combine increasing fiscal revenues and decreasing subjects’ tax perception. Furthermore, overestimation of tax rate changes increases considerably when information on tax rate is considered first (framing effect).

Suggested Citation

  • Blaufus, Kay & Bob, Jonathan & Hundsdoerfer, Jochen & Kiesewetter, Dirk & Weimann, Joachim, 2013. "Decision heuristics and tax perception – An analysis of a tax-cut-cum-base-broadening policy," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 1-16.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:joepsy:v:35:y:2013:i:c:p:1-16
    DOI: 10.1016/j.joep.2012.12.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016748701200150X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.joep.2012.12.004?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. Raj Chetty & Adam Looney & Kory Kroft, 2009. "Salience and Taxation: Theory and Evidence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(4), pages 1145-1177, September.
    2. Krishna, Aradhna & Slemrod, Joel, 2003. "Behavioral Public Finance: Tax Design As Price Presentation," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 10(2), pages 189-203, March.
    3. Joel Slemrod, 1989. "The Return To Tax Simplification: an Econometric Analysis," Public Finance Review, , vol. 17(1), pages 3-27, January.
    4. Elffers, Henk & Hessing, Dick J., 1997. "Influencing the prospects of tax evasion," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 18(2-3), pages 289-304, April.
    5. Jochen Hundsdoerfer & Christina Sichtmann, 2009. "The importance of taxes in entrepreneurial decisions: an analysis of practicing physicians’ behavior," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 19-40, March.
    6. Green, Paul E & Devita, Michael T, 1974. "A Complementarity Model of Consumer Utility for Item Collections," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 1(3), pages 56-67, December.
    7. McCaffery, Edward J. & Baron, Jonathan, 2004. "Framing and taxation: Evaluation of tax policies involving household composition," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 679-705, December.
    8. Bernd Genser & Andreas Reutter, 2007. "Moving Towards Dual Income Taxation in Europe," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 63(3), pages 436-456, September.
    9. Kopczuk, Wojciech, 2005. "Tax bases, tax rates and the elasticity of reported income," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(11-12), pages 2093-2119, December.
    10. Paul E. Green & Abba M. Krieger, 1985. "Models and Heuristics for Product Line Selection," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 4(1), pages 1-19.
    11. Pitt, Mark M & Slemrod, Joel, 1989. "The Compliance Cost of Itemizing Deductions: Evidence from Individual Tax Returns," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(5), pages 1224-1232, December.
    12. Urs Fischbacher, 2007. "z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 10(2), pages 171-178, June.
    13. Kay Blaufus & Renate Ortlieb, 2009. "Is Simple Better? A Conjoint Analysis of the Effects of Tax Complexity on Employee Preferences Concerning Company Pension Plans," Schmalenbach Business Review (sbr), LMU Munich School of Management, vol. 61(1), pages 60-83, January.
    14. Kirchler,Erich, 2007. "The Economic Psychology of Tax Behaviour," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521876742, November.
    15. McCaffery, Edward J. & Baron, Jonathan, 2003. "The Humpty Dumpty blues: Disaggregation bias in the evaluation of tax systems," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 91(2), pages 230-242, July.
    16. Yadav, Manjit S, 1994. "How Buyers Evaluate Product Bundles: A Model of Anchoring and Adjustment," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 21(2), pages 342-353, September.
    17. Green, Paul E & Srinivasan, V, 1978. "Conjoint Analysis in Consumer Research: Issues and Outlook," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 5(2), pages 103-123, Se.
    18. Johan Willner & Lena Granqvist, 2002. "The Impact on Efficiency and Distribution of a Base-Broadening and Rate-Reducing Tax Reform," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 9(3), pages 273-294, May.
    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. Blesse, Sebastian & Buhlmann, Florian & Doerrenberg, Philipp, 2019. "Do people really want a simple tax system? Evidence on preferences towards income tax simplification," ZEW Discussion Papers 19-058, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    2. Kay Blaufus & Michael Milde, 2021. "Tax Misperceptions and the Effect of Informational Tax Nudges on Retirement Savings," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(8), pages 5011-5031, August.
    3. Blaufus, Kay & Chirvi, Malte & Huber, Hans-Peter & Maiterth, Ralf & Sureth-Slaone, Caren, 2020. "Tax misperception and its effects on decision making: A literature review," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 261, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    4. Hlouskova, Jaroslava & Tsigaris, Panagiotis, 2020. "Capital income taxation under full loss offset provisions of a prospect theory investor," IHS Working Paper Series 11, Institute for Advanced Studies.
    5. Tomoharu Mori & Hirofumi Kurokawa & Fumio Ohtake, 2022. "Labor Supply Reaction to Wage Cuts and Tax Increases: A Real-Effort Experiment," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 78(3), pages 362-377.
    6. Werner, Peter & Riedl, Arno, 2018. "The role of experiments for policy design," Research Memorandum 022, Maastricht University, Graduate School of Business and Economics (GSBE).
    7. Petutschnig, Matthias & Rünger, Silke, 2017. "The effects of a tax allowance for growth and investment: Empirical evidence from a firm-level analysis," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 221, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    8. Fochmann, Martin & Hemmerich, Kristina & Kiesewetter, Dirk, 2016. "Intrinsic and extrinsic effects on behavioral tax biases in risky investment decisions," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 218-231.
    9. Blaufus, Kay & Milde, Michael, 2018. "Learning to save tax-efficiently: Tax misperceptions and the effect of informational tax nudges on retirement savings," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 225, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    10. Ackermann, Hagen, 2015. "How does the type of subsidization affect investments: Experimental evidence," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 185, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    11. James Alm & Kay Blaufus & Martin Fochmann & Erich Kirchler & Peter N. C. Mohr & Nina E. Olson & Benno Torgler, 2020. "Tax Policy Measures to Combat the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic and Considerations to Improve Tax Compliance: A Behavioral Perspective," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 76(4), pages 396-428.
    12. Zhou, Shuya & Zhou, Peiyan & Ji, Hannah, 2022. "Can digital transformation alleviate corporate tax stickiness: The mediation effect of tax avoidance," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    13. Baumgart, Eike & Blaufus, Kay & Hechtner, Frank, 2023. "The tax treatment of commuting expenses and job-related mobility," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 280, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.

    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. Blaufus, Kay & Bob, Jonathan & Hundsdoerfer, Jochen & Kiesewetter, Dirk & Weimann, Joachim, 2010. "It's all about tax rates: An empirical study of tax perception," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 106, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    2. James Alm & Kay Blaufus & Martin Fochmann & Erich Kirchler & Peter N. C. Mohr & Nina E. Olson & Benno Torgler, 2020. "Tax Policy Measures to Combat the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic and Considerations to Improve Tax Compliance: A Behavioral Perspective," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 76(4), pages 396-428.
    3. Joel Slemrod, 2010. "Old George Orwell Got It Backward: Some Thoughts on Behavioral Tax Economics," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 66(1), pages 15-33, March.
    4. Kuehnhanss, Colin R. & Heyndels, Bruno, 2018. "All’s fair in taxation: A framing experiment with local politicians," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 26-40.
    5. Fochmann, Martin & Hemmerich, Kristina, 2014. "Real tax effects and tax perception effects in decisions on asset allocation," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 156, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    6. Rupert Sausgruber & Jean-Robert Tyran, 2008. "Tax Salience, Voting, and Deliberation," Working Papers 2009-25, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    7. Pántya, József & Kovács, Judit & Kogler, Christoph & Kirchler, Erich, 2016. "Work performance and tax compliance in flat and progressive tax systems," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 262-273.
    8. Doerrenberg, Philipp & Duncan, Denvil, 2014. "Experimental evidence on the relationship between tax evasion opportunities and labor supply," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 48-70.
    9. Fochmann, Martin & Hemmerich, Kristina & Kiesewetter, Dirk, 2016. "Intrinsic and extrinsic effects on behavioral tax biases in risky investment decisions," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 218-231.
    10. Sielaff, Christian, 2011. "Steuerkomplexität und Arbeitsangebot: Eine experimentelle Analyse," Discussion Papers 2011/13, Free University Berlin, School of Business & Economics.
    11. Kay Blaufus & Jonathan Bob & Jochen Hundsdoerfer & Christian Sielaff & Dirk Kiesewetter & Joachim Weimann, 2015. "Perception of income tax rates: evidence from Germany," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 457-478, December.
    12. Shapir-Tidhar, Michal H. & Malul, Miki & Rosenboim, Mosi, 2023. "Tax structure efficiency: Introducing a new index," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 430-437.
    13. Fahr, René & Janssen, Elmar & Sureth, Caren, 2014. "Can tax rate increases foster investment under entry and exit flexibility? Insights from an economic experiment," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 166, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    14. Ackermann, Hagen, 2015. "How does the type of subsidization affect investments: Experimental evidence," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 185, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    15. Hagen Ackermann & Martin Fochmann & Nadja Wolf, 2016. "The Effect of Straight-Line and Accelerated Depreciation Rules on Risky Investment Decisions—An Experimental Study," IJFS, MDPI, vol. 4(4), pages 1-26, October.
    16. Ackermann, Hagen & Fochmann, Martin, 2014. "The effect of straight-line and accelerated depreciation rules on risky investment decisions: An experimental study," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 158, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    17. Kay Blaufus & Michael Milde, 2021. "Tax Misperceptions and the Effect of Informational Tax Nudges on Retirement Savings," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(8), pages 5011-5031, August.
    18. Kotakorpi Kaisa & Laamanen Jani-Petri, 2016. "Prefilled Income Tax Returns and Tax Compliance: Evidence from a Natural Experiment," Working Papers 1604, Tampere University, Faculty of Management and Business, Economics.
    19. Roberto Dell'Anno & Vincenzo Maria De Rosa, 2013. "The Relevance of the Theory of Fiscal Illusion. The Case of the Italian Tax System," HISTORY OF ECONOMIC THOUGHT AND POLICY, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2013(2), pages 63-92.
    20. Fochmann, Martin & Wolf, Nadja, 2019. "Framing and salience effects in tax evasion decisions – An experiment on underreporting and overdeducting," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 260-277.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Behavioral public finance; Decision heuristics; Framing effects; Perceived tax burden; Tax-cut-cum-base-broadening;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D03 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Behavioral Microeconomics: Underlying Principles
    • G11 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Portfolio Choice; Investment Decisions
    • H20 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - General
    • H30 - Public Economics - - Fiscal Policies and Behavior of Economic Agents - - - General
    • K34 - Law and Economics - - Other Substantive Areas of Law - - - Tax Law
    • M41 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Accounting

    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:eee:joepsy:v:35:y:2013:i:c:p:1-16. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/joep .

    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.