IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/snopef/v2y2021i2d10.1007_s43069-020-00045-w.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Dynamic Process Models for the Evaluation of the Compliance Level Evolution: Evidence from Italy

Author

Listed:
  • Vincenzo Adamo

Abstract

Decision support systems are used in different contexts, including tax policies. In these pages a theoretical analysis is proposed, based on random utility maximization and dynamic process models, to forecast the evolution of the taxable income produced by the application of a rewarding-based compliance methodology recently introduced in Italy. We will briefly describe the econometric characteristics of the new fiscal methodology (SIR); then, we will focus on the theoretical aspects concerning the evolution of the taxable income, in case of both a stochastic and a deterministic process, the latter commonly used to estimate a limit condition of the process (usually a worst-case scenario). The results here obtained can be extended to different kind of tax compliance models and are supposed to be as a basic step to implement an effective IT decision support model. The theoretical connection between SIR and sector studies, the previous compliance methodology, will be discussed. Finally, a numerical example of a deterministic process model based on synthetic data will be provided.

Suggested Citation

  • Vincenzo Adamo, 2021. "Dynamic Process Models for the Evaluation of the Compliance Level Evolution: Evidence from Italy," SN Operations Research Forum, Springer, vol. 2(2), pages 1-27, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:snopef:v:2:y:2021:i:2:d:10.1007_s43069-020-00045-w
    DOI: 10.1007/s43069-020-00045-w
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s43069-020-00045-w
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s43069-020-00045-w?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. Rolf Aaberge & Ugo Colombino, 2018. "Structural Labour Supply Models and Microsimulation," International Journal of Microsimulation, International Microsimulation Association, vol. 11(1), pages 162-197.
    2. Oded Galor, 2007. "Discrete Dynamical Systems," Springer Books, Springer, edition 1, number 978-3-540-36776-5, July.
    3. De Cesare, Luigi & Sportelli, Mario, 2005. "A dynamic IS-LM model with delayed taxation revenues," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 233-244.
    4. James Alm, 2019. "What Motivates Tax Compliance?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(2), pages 353-388, April.
    5. 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.
    6. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555, September.
    7. Brockmann, Hilke & Genschel, Philipp & Seelkopf, Laura, 2016. "Happy taxation: increasing tax compliance through positive rewards?," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 36(3), pages 381-406, September.
    8. Akio Matsumoto & Ferenc Szidarovszky, 2016. "Delay Dynamics in a Classical IS-LM Model with Tax Collections," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 67(4), pages 667-697, November.
    9. H. Peyton Young & Mary A. Burke, 2001. "Competition and Custom in Economic Contracts: A Case Study of Illinois Agriculture," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(3), pages 559-573, June.
    10. Tamara Merkulova & Tatyana Bitkova & Kateryna Kononova, 2016. "Tax Factors of Sustainable Development: System Dynamics Approach towards Tax Evasion Analyses," RIVISTA DI STUDI SULLA SOSTENIBILITA', FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2016(1), pages 35-47.
    11. Joana Naritomi, 2019. "Consumers as Tax Auditors," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(9), pages 3031-3072, September.
    12. Benno Torgler, 2003. "Beyond Punishment: a tax compliance experiment with taxpayers in Costa Rica," Revista de Analisis Economico – Economic Analysis Review, Universidad Alberto Hurtado/School of Economics and Business, vol. 18(1), pages 27-56, June.
    13. Henrik Jacobsen Kleven & Martin B. Knudsen & Claus Thustrup Kreiner & Søren Pedersen & Emmanuel Saez, 2011. "Unwilling or Unable to Cheat? Evidence From a Tax Audit Experiment in Denmark," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 79(3), pages 651-692, May.
    14. 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.
    15. Benno Torgler, 2016. "Tax Compliance and Data: What Is Available and What Is Needed," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 49(3), pages 352-364, September.
    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. Vincenzo Adamo, 2022. "Cobb–Douglas production function: on the causal effects of factors and predictions," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 2(7), pages 1-14, July.

    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. James Alm & Antoine Malézieux, 2021. "40 years of tax evasion games: a meta-analysis," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(3), pages 699-750, September.
    2. Jana Cahlikova & Lubomir Cingl & Katerina Chadimova & Miroslav Zajicek, 2021. "Carrots, Sticks, or Simplicity? Field Evidence on What Makes People Pay TV Fees," Working Papers tax-mpg-rps-2021-12, Max Planck Institute for Tax Law and Public Finance.
    3. Kotakorpi, Kaisa & Nurminen, Tuomas & Miettinen, Topi & Metsälampi, Satu, 2024. "Bearing the burden — Implications of tax reporting institutions on evasion and incidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 220(C), pages 81-134.
    4. Cingl, Lubomír & Lichard, Tomáš & Miklánek, Tomáš, 2023. "Tax designation effects on compliance: An online experiment with taxpayers," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 214(C), pages 615-633.
    5. 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.
    6. Engel, Christoph & Zamir, Eyal, 2024. "Is transparency a blessing or a curse? An experimental horse race between accountability and extortionary corruption," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    7. Lubomir Cingl & Tomas Lichard & Tomas Miklanek, 2022. "Mist Over a Meadow: Tax Designation Effects on Compliance," CERGE-EI Working Papers wp725, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague.
    8. 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.
    9. Gonzalo E. Sánchez, 2022. "Non-compliance notifications and taxpayer strategic behavior: evidence from Ecuador," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 29(3), pages 627-666, June.
    10. Benno Torgler, 2022. "The power of public choice in law and economics," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(5), pages 1410-1453, December.
    11. James Alm & Carolyn J. Bourdeaux, 2013. "Applying Behavioral Economics to the Public Sector," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 206(3), pages 91-134, September.
    12. 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.
    13. Antinyan, Armenak & Asatryan, Zareh, 2019. "Nudging for tax compliance: A meta-analysis," ZEW Discussion Papers 19-055, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    14. James Alm & Matthias Kasper, 2020. "Laboratory Experiments," Working Papers 2008, Tulane University, Department of Economics.
    15. James Alm, 2019. "What Motivates Tax Compliance?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(2), pages 353-388, April.
    16. Kaisa Kotakorpiⓡ & Tuomas Nurminenⓡ & Topi Miettinen ⓡ & Satu Metsälampiⓡ & Kaisa Kotakorpi, 2022. "Bearing the Burden - Implications of Tax Reporting Institutions and Image Concerns on Evasion and Incidence," CESifo Working Paper Series 9791, CESifo.
    17. Benno Torgler, 2021. "The Power of Public Choice in Law and Economics," CREMA Working Paper Series 2021-04, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    18. Kaisa Kotakorpi & Tuomas Nurminen & Topi Miettinen & Satu Metsälampi, 2022. "Bearing the burden – Implications of tax reporting institutions and image concerns on evasion and incidence," Working Papers 3, Finnish Centre of Excellence in Tax Systems Research.
    19. Christiansen, Tobias Gabel, 2024. "Dynamic effects of tax audits and the role of intentions," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 234(C).
    20. 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.

    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:spr:snopef:v:2:y:2021:i:2:d:10.1007_s43069-020-00045-w. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.