IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/pubeco/v190y2020ics0047272720301250.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Heard it through the grapevine: The direct and network effects of a tax enforcement field experiment on firms

Author

Listed:
  • Boning, William C.
  • Guyton, John
  • Hodge, Ronald
  • Slemrod, Joel

Abstract

Tax enforcement may have deterrent effects that extend beyond directly treated taxpayers, but evidence of such deterrent effects for major sources of revenue is limited. This paper studies the effects of a large-scale field experiment on employer deposits that make up most U.S. tax collections. In-person visits by Revenue Officers have a large direct effect on visited firms' tax deposits. The other clients of visited firms' tax preparers also deposit more tax, a network effect that suggests preparers disseminate information. Aggregating over all links, this network effect accounts for 1.2 times as much revenue as the direct effect. Letters conveying the same message are found to have much smaller direct effects and no measurable network effects.

Suggested Citation

  • Boning, William C. & Guyton, John & Hodge, Ronald & Slemrod, Joel, 2020. "Heard it through the grapevine: The direct and network effects of a tax enforcement field experiment on firms," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:pubeco:v:190:y:2020:i:c:s0047272720301250
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2020.104261
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047272720301250
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2020.104261?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. Annette Alstadsæter & Wojciech Kopczuk & Kjetil Telle, 2019. "Social networks and tax avoidance: evidence from a well-defined Norwegian tax shelter," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 26(6), pages 1291-1328, December.
    2. Joel Slemrod, 2019. "Tax Compliance and Enforcement," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 57(4), pages 904-954, December.
    3. Ashenfelter, Orley C, 1978. "Estimating the Effect of Training Programs on Earnings," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 60(1), pages 47-57, February.
    4. Gamannossi degl’Innocenti, Duccio & Rablen, Matthew D., 2020. "Tax evasion on a social network," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 79-91.
    5. Francesco Drago & Friederike Mengel & Christian Traxler, 2020. "Compliance Behavior in Networks: Evidence from a Field Experiment," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 12(2), pages 96-133, April.
    6. Kopczuk, Wojciech & Pop-Eleches, Cristian, 2007. "Electronic filing, tax preparers and participation in the Earned Income Tax Credit," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(7-8), pages 1351-1367, August.
    7. Keen, Michael & Slemrod, Joel, 2017. "Optimal tax administration," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 133-142.
    8. Dina Pomeranz, 2015. "No Taxation without Information: Deterrence and Self-Enforcement in the Value Added Tax," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(8), pages 2539-2569, August.
    9. Johannes Rincke & Christian Traxler, 2011. "Enforcement Spillovers," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 93(4), pages 1224-1234, November.
    10. Blumenthal, Marsha & Christian, Charles W. & Slemrod, Joel, 2001. "Do Normative Appeals Affect Tax Compliance? Evidence from a Controlled Experiment in Minnesota," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association, vol. 54(n. 1), pages 125-38, March.
    11. Michael Hallsworth, 2014. "The use of field experiments to increase tax compliance," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 30(4), pages 658-679.
    12. Perez-Truglia, Ricardo & Troiano, Ugo, 2018. "Shaming tax delinquents," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 120-137.
    13. Slemrod, Joel & Blumenthal, Marsha & Christian, Charles, 2001. "Taxpayer response to an increased probability of audit: evidence from a controlled experiment in Minnesota," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(3), pages 455-483, March.
    14. Andrei, Amanda L. & Comer, Kevin & Koehler, Matthew, 2014. "An agent-based model of network effects on tax compliance and evasion," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 119-133.
    15. Nicky J. Welton & Howard H. Z. Thom, 2015. "Value of Information," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 35(5), pages 564-566, July.
    16. Saurabh Bhargava & Dayanand Manoli, 2015. "Psychological Frictions and the Incomplete Take-Up of Social Benefits: Evidence from an IRS Field Experiment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(11), pages 3489-3529, November.
    17. Raj Chetty & Emmanuel Saez, 2013. "Teaching the Tax Code: Earnings Responses to an Experiment with EITC Recipients," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 1-31, January.
    18. Meiselman, Ben S., 2018. "Ghostbusting in Detroit: Evidence on nonfilers from a controlled field experiment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 180-193.
    19. 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.
    20. John Guyton & Pat Langetieg & Day Manoli & Mark Payne & Brenda Schafer & Michael Sebastiani, 2017. "Reminders and Recidivism: Using Administrative Data to Characterize Nonfilers and Conduct EITC Outreach," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(5), pages 471-475, May.
    21. repec:bla:scandj:v:93:y:1991:i:1:p:75-88 is not listed on IDEAS
    22. Klepper, Steven & Mazur, Mark & Nagin, Daniel, 1991. "Expert Intermediaries and Legal Compliance: The Case of Tax Preparers," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 34(1), pages 205-229, April.
    23. Blumenthal, Marsha & Christian, Charles W. & Slemrod, Joel, 2001. "Do Normative Appeals Affect Tax Compliance? Evidence From a Controlled Experiment in Minnesota," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 54(1), pages 125-138, March.
    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. Puklavec, Žiga & Kogler, Christoph & Stavrova, Olga & Zeelenberg, Marcel, 2023. "What we tweet about when we tweet about taxes: A topic modelling approach," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 1242-1254.
    2. Puklavec, Žiga & Stavrova, Olga & Kogler, Christoph & Zeelenberg, Marcel, 2024. "Diffusion of tax-related communication on social media," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    3. Antinyan, Armenak & Asatryan, Zareh, 2019. "Nudging for tax compliance: A meta-analysis," ZEW Discussion Papers 19-055, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    4. Dario Tortarolo & Guillermo Cruces & Gonzalo Vazquez-Bare, 2023. "Design of partial population experiments with an application to spillovers in tax compliance," IFS Working Papers W23/17, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    5. Bellon, Matthieu & Dabla-Norris, Era & Khalid, Salma, 2023. "Technology and tax compliance spillovers: Evidence from a VAT e-invoicing reform in Peru," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 756-777.
    6. Xing, Qiuhang & Li, Mengzhe & Xu, Gaoshuang, 2024. "The impact of tax enforcement on corporate energy efficiency: Evidence from a tax collection reform in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    7. John A. List & Fatemeh Momeni & Yves Zenou, 2020. "The Social Side of Early Human Capital Formation: Using a Field Experiment to Estimate the Causal Impact of Neighborhoods," NBER Working Papers 28283, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Guillermo Cruces & Dario Tortarolo & Gonzalo Vazquez-Bare, 2022. "Design of two-stage experiments with an application to spillovers in tax compliance," IFS Working Papers W22/32, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    9. Juan F. Castro & Daniel Velásquez & Arlette Beltrán & Gustavo Yamada, 2020. "Spillovers and Long Run Effects of Messages on Tax Compliance: Experimental Evidence from Peru," Working Papers 174, Peruvian Economic Association.
    10. Philippe Aghion & Maxime Gravoueille & Matthieu Lequien & Stefanie Stantcheva, 2017. "Tax Simplicity or Simplicity of Evasion? Evidence from Self-Employment Taxes in France," NBER Working Papers 24049, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Liang, Quanxi & Li, Qiumei & Lu, Meiting & Shan, Yaowen, 2021. "Industry and geographic peer effects on corporate tax avoidance: Evidence from China," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    12. Castro, Juan Francisco & Velásquez, Daniel & Beltrán, Arlette & Yamada, Gustavo, 2022. "The direct and indirect effects of messages on tax compliance: Experimental evidence from Peru," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 203(C), pages 483-518.
    13. Motta Café, Renata & Yarygina, Anastasiya & Escalante, Lisseth, 2024. "Leveraging Data to Improve Tax Compliance for Micro and Small Firms: Evidence from Brazil," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 13603, Inter-American Development Bank.
    14. Debora Di Gioacchino & Domenico Fichera, 2022. "Tax evasion and social reputation: The role of influencers in a social network," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(4), pages 1048-1069, November.
    15. Bjørneby, Marie & Alstadsæter, Annette & Telle, Kjetil, 2021. "Limits to third-party reporting: Evidence from a randomized field experiment in Norway," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    16. Liu, Feng & Liu, Fengrui & Huang, Jiqiang & Dong, Haoran, 2024. "Aid and national tax capacity: Empirical evidence from Chinese aid," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    17. Saulitis, Andris & Chapkovski, Philipp, 2023. "Investigating Tax Compliance with Mixed-Methods Approach: The Effect of Normative Appeals Among the Firms in Latvia," MPRA Paper 116560, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Irene Di Marzio & Sauro Mocetti & Enrico Rubolino, 2024. "The market externalities of tax evasion," Temi di discussione (Economic working papers) 1467, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    19. Kasper, Matthias & Rablen, Matthew D., 2023. "Tax compliance after an audit: Higher or lower?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 207(C), pages 157-171.

    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. Jan-Emmanuel De Neve & Clément Imbert & Johannes Spinnewijn & Teodora Tsankova & Maarten Luts, 2021. "How to Improve Tax Compliance? Evidence from Population-Wide Experiments in Belgium," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 129(5), pages 1425-1463.
    2. Dina Pomeranz & José Vila-Belda, 2019. "Taking State-Capacity Research to the Field: Insights from Collaborations with Tax Authorities," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 11(1), pages 755-781, August.
    3. repec:idq:ictduk:13726 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Marcelo Bergolo & Rodrigo Ceni & Guillermo Cruces & Matias Giaccobasso & Ricardo Perez-Truglia, 2023. "Tax Audits as Scarecrows: Evidence from a Large-Scale Field Experiment," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 15(1), pages 110-153, February.
    5. Antinyan, Armenak & Asatryan, Zareh, 2019. "Nudging for tax compliance: A meta-analysis," ZEW Discussion Papers 19-055, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    6. Giulia Mascagni, 2018. "From The Lab To The Field: A Review Of Tax Experiments," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(2), pages 273-301, April.
    7. Riedel, Nadine & Strohmaier, Kristina & Lediga, Collen, 2019. "Spatial Tax Enforcement Spillovers: Evidence from South Africa," VfS Annual Conference 2019 (Leipzig): 30 Years after the Fall of the Berlin Wall - Democracy and Market Economy 203500, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    8. Philipp Doerrenberg & Andreas Peichl, 2022. "Tax Morale and the Role of Social Norms and Reciprocity - Evidence from a Randomized Survey Experiment," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 78(1-2), pages 44-86.
    9. 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.
    10. Biddle, Nicholas & Fels, Katja M. & Sinning, Mathias, 2018. "Behavioral insights on business taxation: Evidence from two natural field experiments," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 30-49.
    11. Justin E. Holz & John A. List & Alejandro Zentner & Marvin Cardoza & Joaquin Zentner, 2020. "The $100 Million Nudge: Increasing Tax Compliance of Businesses and the Self-Employed using a Natural Field Experiment," NBER Working Papers 27666, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Biddle, Nicholas & Fels, Katja & Sinning, Mathias, 2017. "Behavioral insights and business taxation: Evidence from two randomized controlled trials," Ruhr Economic Papers 698, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    13. Lopez-Luzuriaga, Andrea & Scartascini, Carlos, 2019. "Compliance spillovers across taxes: The role of penalties and detection," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 518-534.
    14. Meiselman, Ben S., 2018. "Ghostbusting in Detroit: Evidence on nonfilers from a controlled field experiment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 180-193.
    15. Castro, Juan Francisco & Velásquez, Daniel & Beltrán, Arlette & Yamada, Gustavo, 2022. "The direct and indirect effects of messages on tax compliance: Experimental evidence from Peru," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 203(C), pages 483-518.
    16. James Alm, 2019. "What Motivates Tax Compliance?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(2), pages 353-388, April.
    17. C. Yiwei Zhang & Jeffrey Hemmeter & Judd B. Kessler & Robert D. Metcalfe & Robert Weathers, 2023. "Nudging Timely Wage Reporting: Field Experimental Evidence from the U.S. Supplemental Security Income Program," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(3), pages 1341-1353, March.
    18. Kristina M. Bott & Alexander W. Cappelen & Erik Ø. Sørensen & Bertil Tungodden, 2020. "You’ve Got Mail: A Randomized Field Experiment on Tax Evasion," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(7), pages 2801-2819, July.
    19. Hallsworth, Michael & List, John A. & Metcalfe, Robert D. & Vlaev, Ivo, 2017. "The behavioralist as tax collector: Using natural field experiments to enhance tax compliance," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 14-31.
    20. Patricia Gil & Justin E. Holz & John A. List & Andrew Simon & Alejandro Zentner, 2023. "Toward an Understanding of Tax Amnesties: Theory and Evidence from a Natural Field Experiment," NBER Working Papers 31210, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    21. Christopher Hoy & Luke McKenzie & Mathias Sinning, 2024. "Improving Tax Compliance without Increasing Revenue: Evidence from Population-Wide Randomized Controlled Trials in Papua New Guinea," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 72(2), pages 691-723.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Tax enforcement; Randomized experiments; Networks;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H26 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Tax Evasion and Avoidance
    • L14 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Transactional Relationships; Contracts and Reputation
    • C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments

    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:pubeco:v:190:y:2020:i:c:s0047272720301250. 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/inca/505578 .

    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.