IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/pubfin/v28y2000i6p491-510.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Tax Audit Uncertainty and the Work-Versus-Leisure Decision

Author

Listed:
  • Ira Horowitz

    (University of Florida)

  • Ann R. Horowitz

    (University of Florida)

Abstract

The possibility of being audited provides an incentive for the more larcenous among us to accurately report taxable income when underreporting income carries a penalty. It seems safe to assume that by increasing either the likelihood of an income tax audit or the penalty for underreporting taxable income, the tax authority can reduce the extent to which conscious cheating takes place. That seemingly safe assumption, however, becomes much less so when the linkage between posttax income and the work-versus-leisure decision is taken into account. This article explores the ubiquitous and confounding effects on both reported income and work effort for non-risk-preferring taxpayers of changes in the audit probability, the sanction rate, the tax rate, and taxpayer wealth. It is shown that contrary to intuition and popular wisdom, raising the audit probability or the sanction rate will not necessarily lead to higher reported incomes, and neither increases in the tax rate nor greater taxpayer wealth will necessarily encourage increased leisure.

Suggested Citation

  • Ira Horowitz & Ann R. Horowitz, 2000. "Tax Audit Uncertainty and the Work-Versus-Leisure Decision," Public Finance Review, , vol. 28(6), pages 491-510, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:pubfin:v:28:y:2000:i:6:p:491-510
    DOI: 10.1177/109114210002800601
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/109114210002800601
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/109114210002800601?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sandmo, Agnar, 1981. "Income tax evasion, labour supply, and the equity--efficiency tradeoff," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 265-288, December.
    2. Hindriks, Jean & Keen, Michael & Muthoo, Abhinay, 1999. "Corruption, extortion and evasion," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(3), pages 395-430, December.
    3. Lee, Kangoh, 1998. "Tax Evasion, Monopoly, and Nonneutral Profit Taxes," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 51(2), pages 333-338, June.
    4. Macho-Stadler, Ines & Perez-Castrillo, J David, 1997. "Optimal Auditing with Heterogeneous Income," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 38(4), pages 951-968, November.
    5. 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.
    6. repec:bla:scandj:v:96:y:1994:i:2:p:219-39 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Pencavel, John H., 1979. "A note on income tax evasion, labor supply, and nonlinear tax schedules," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 115-124, August.
    8. Leonard F.S. Wang, 1990. "Tax Evasion and Monopoly Output Decisions with Endogenous Probability of Detection," Public Finance Review, , vol. 18(4), pages 480-487, October.
    9. Lee, Kangoh, 1998. "Tax Evasion, Monopoly, and Nonneutral Profit Taxes," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association, vol. 51(n. 2), pages 333-38, June.
    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. James, Simon & Alley, Clinton, 2002. "Tax compliance, self-assessment and tax administration," MPRA Paper 26906, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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. Frank A Cowell, 2003. "Sticks and Carrots," STICERD - Distributional Analysis Research Programme Papers 68, Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, LSE.
    2. K. L. Glen Ueng & Chiaen J. Wu, 2009. "A note on the neutrality of profit taxes and tax compliance with imperfect detection," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 29(1), pages 312-318.
    3. Domenico Buccella & Luciano Fanti & Luca Gori, 2024. "Competitive wages and tax evasion in a Cournot duopoly," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 97(3), pages 585-594, November.
    4. Kalina Koleva, 2005. "Seeking for an optimal tax administration: the efficiency costs’ approach [A la recherche de l'administration fiscale optimale : l'approche par les coûts d'efficience]," Post-Print halshs-00195354, HAL.
    5. Bayer, Ralph & Cowell, Frank, 2016. "Tax compliance by firms and audit policy," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 38-52.
    6. Bayer, Ralph & Cowell, Frank, 2009. "Tax compliance and firms' strategic interdependence," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(11-12), pages 1131-1143, December.
    7. Kalina Koleva, 2005. "A la recherche de l'administration fiscale optimale : l'approche par les coûts d'efficience," Cahiers de la Maison des Sciences Economiques r05050, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1).
    8. Ralph-C. Bayer, 2017. "The Double Dividend of Relative Auditing – Theory and Experiments on Corporate Tax Enforcement," School of Economics and Public Policy Working Papers 2017-14, University of Adelaide, School of Economics and Public Policy.
    9. Laszlo Goerke, 2008. "Bureaucratic corruption and profit tax evasion," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 9(2), pages 177-196, May.
    10. 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.
    11. Ralph‐C. Bayer, 2022. "The double dividend of relative auditing—Theory and experiments on corporate tax enforcement," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 24(6), pages 1433-1462, December.
    12. Slemrod, Joel & Yitzhaki, Shlomo, 2002. "Tax avoidance, evasion, and administration," Handbook of Public Economics, in: A. J. Auerbach & M. Feldstein (ed.), Handbook of Public Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 22, pages 1423-1470, Elsevier.
    13. Laszlo Goerke & Marco Runkel, 2011. "Tax evasion and competition," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 58(5), pages 711-736, November.
    14. Agnar Sandmo, 2012. "An evasive topic: theorizing about the hidden economy," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 19(1), pages 5-24, February.
    15. Josef Falkinger & Herbert Walther, 1991. "Rewards Versus Penalties: on a New Policy against Tax Evasion," Public Finance Review, , vol. 19(1), pages 67-79, January.
    16. Sebastián Castillo, 2024. "Tax policy design in a hierarchical model with occupational decisions," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 31(5), pages 1295-1341, October.
    17. Laszlo Goerke, 2007. "Corporate and personal income tax declarations," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 14(3), pages 281-292, June.
    18. Luciano Fanti & Domenico Buccella, 2020. "Tax Evasion and Unions in a Cournot duopoly," Discussion Papers 2020/266, Dipartimento di Economia e Management (DEM), University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
    19. Domenico Buccella & Luciano Fanti & Luca Gori, 2023. "Tax evasion in a Cournot duopoly with unions," Discussion Papers 2023/293, Dipartimento di Economia e Management (DEM), University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
    20. Laszlo Goerke, 2021. "Tax Evasion by Firms," IAAEU Discussion Papers 202104, Institute of Labour Law and Industrial Relations in the European Union (IAAEU).

    More about this item

    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:sae:pubfin:v:28:y:2000:i:6:p:491-510. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.