IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ora/journl/v1y2021i1p187-194.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Tax Evasion And Financial Fraud In The Current Digital Context

Author

Listed:
  • Ioana – Florina Coita

    (Finance and Accounting, Faculty of Economics, University from Oradea, Oradea, Romania)

  • Laura – Camelia Filip

    (Finance and Accounting, Faculty of Economics, University from Oradea, Oradea, Romania)

  • Eliza-Angelika Kicska

    (Finance and Accounting, Faculty of Economics, University from Oradea, Oradea, Romania)

Abstract

Preventing and combating phenomenon of tax evasion is a present concern of national governments due to the magnitude this phenomenon represents and because of the increasingly sophisticated techniques used by the authors in carrying out tax frauds. Evolution of tax evasion phenomenon at international level has acquired a profound technological character due to the increasingly elaborate methods. Illegal behaviour has some specific features that could be recognized easily by artificial intelligence models. They use real data in order to derive characteristics that could be identified in due time so that tax avoidant behaviour be identified and prevented. The use of forecasting models like logistic regression, random forests or decision trees in order to model tax avoidant behaviour shows having a good predictive power. Also, the use of the neural networks allowed scientists to calculate probability of an individual taxpayer that would attempt to evade taxes or commit other types of financial frauds. Scientific literature shows an increasing interest in using neural networks to detect and predict fraudulent behaviour in the fields of tax avoidance and financial domain. Cybercrime, cryptocurrency and blockchain were created in order to facilitate payments and help owner in accumulating wealth. Current landscape of financial frauds shows a different picture. Intracommunity frauds are more and more diversified. European Union and International bodies act together to prevent and combat fraud. Could these new technologies possess a real threat to the financial security of our transactions or encourage fraudulent behaviour? This paper tries to find the answer to this question.

Suggested Citation

  • Ioana – Florina Coita & Laura – Camelia Filip & Eliza-Angelika Kicska, 2021. "Tax Evasion And Financial Fraud In The Current Digital Context," Annals of Faculty of Economics, University of Oradea, Faculty of Economics, vol. 1(1), pages 187-194, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:ora:journl:v:1:y:2021:i:1:p:187-194
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://anale.steconomiceuoradea.ro/volume/2021/n1/020.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rahimikia, Eghbal & Mohammadi, Shapour & Rahmani, Teymur & Ghazanfari, Mehdi, 2017. "Detecting corporate tax evasion using a hybrid intelligent system: A case study of Iran," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 1-17.
    2. Fletcher, Emily & Larkin, Charles & Corbet, Shaen, 2021. "Countering money laundering and terrorist financing: A case for bitcoin regulation," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    3. Klein, Benjamin & Leffler, Keith B, 1981. "The Role of Market Forces in Assuring Contractual Performance," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 89(4), pages 615-641, August.
    4. Jennifer J. Xu, 2016. "Are blockchains immune to all malicious attacks?," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 2(1), pages 1-9, December.
    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. Peter Kuhn, 1982. "Malfeasance in Long Term Employment Contracts: A New General Model with an Application to Unionism," NBER Working Papers 1045, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Minzyuk, Larysa, 2010. "The development of non-monetary means of payment," MPRA Paper 28167, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2010.
    3. Gil, Ricard & Marion, Justin, 2009. "The Role of Repeated Interactions, Self-Enforcing Agreements and Relational [Sub]Contracting: Evidence from California Highway Procurement Auctions," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt2kb8p0cd, University of California Transportation Center.
    4. Blanco Callejo, M, 2007. "LA VENTA DE LA ILUSIÓN Y “LA BRUJA DE ORO”: EL EMBRUJO DE UN CÍRCULO VIRTUOSOi /," Investigaciones Europeas de Dirección y Economía de la Empresa (IEDEE), Academia Europea de Dirección y Economía de la Empresa (AEDEM), vol. 13(3), pages 33-56.
    5. Michelle Haynes & Steve Thompson, 2012. "The Economic Significance of User-Generated Feedback," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(1), pages 153-166, February.
    6. Glenn Boyle & Graeme Guthrie & Luke Gorton, 2010. "Holding onto Your Horses: Conflicts of Interest in Asset Management," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 53(4), pages 689-713.
    7. Grégory Jolivet & Bruno Jullien & Fabien Postel-Vinay, 2014. "Reputation and Pricing on the e-Market: Evidence from a Major French Platform," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-03460312, HAL.
    8. de Bragança, Gabriel Godofredo Fiuza & Daglish, Toby, 2017. "Investing in vertical integration: electricity retail market participation," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 355-365.
    9. David Martimort & Aggey Semenov & Lars Stole, 2017. "A Theory of Contracts with Limited Enforcement," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 84(2), pages 816-852.
    10. Zaheer Allam, 2018. "On Smart Contracts And Organisational Performance: A Review Of Smart Contracts Through The Blockchain Technology," Review of Economic and Business Studies, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, issue 22, pages 137-156, December.
    11. Khurshed, Arif & Kostas, Dimitris & Mohamed, Abdulkadir & Saadouni, Brahim, 2018. "Initial public offerings on the UK when-issued market," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 1-14.
    12. Rafael Rob & Tadashi Sekiguchi, 2006. "Reputation and turnover," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 37(2), pages 341-361, June.
    13. Eric Rasmusen, 2008. "Quality-Ensuring Profits," Working Papers 2008-10, Indiana University, Kelley School of Business, Department of Business Economics and Public Policy.
    14. Benson Bruce L., 2000. "Jurisdictional Choice in International Trade: Implications for Lex Cybernatoria," Journal des Economistes et des Etudes Humaines, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 3-32, March.
    15. González-Díaz, Manuel & Montoro-Sánchez, Ángeles, 2011. "Some lessons from incentive theory: Promoting quality in bus transport," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 299-306, March.
    16. Paul A. Grout & Ian Jewitt & Silvia Sonderegger, 2007. "Governance Reform in Legal Service Markets," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 117(519), pages 93-113, March.
    17. Grubb, Farley, 2000. "The Statutory Regulation of Colonial Servitude: An Incomplete-Contract Approach," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 42-75, January.
    18. Ederer, Florian & Stremitzer, Alexander, 2017. "Promises and expectations," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 161-178.
    19. Martin Gaynor, "undated". "What Do We Know About Competition and Quality in Health Care Markets?," GSIA Working Papers 2006-E62, Carnegie Mellon University, Tepper School of Business.
    20. William A. Masters & Diakalia Sanogo, 2002. "Welfare Gains from Quality Certification of Infant Foods: Results from a Market Experiment in Mali," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 84(4), pages 974-989.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    tax evasion; financial fraud; blockchain; cryptocurrency; cybercrime.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H26 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Tax Evasion and Avoidance
    • C89 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Other

    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:ora:journl:v:1:y:2021:i:1:p:187-194. 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: Catalin ZMOLE (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/feoraro.html .

    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.