IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/coacre/v11y1994i1p553-594.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Should Taxpayers Be Subsidized to Hire Third†Party Preparers? A Game†Theoretic Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • NAHUM D. MELUMAD
  • MARK A. WOLFSON
  • AMIR ZIV

Abstract

. This article examines the tax†compliance game between taxpayers, a tax†collecting agency, and third†party tax†return preparers. In our model, taxpayers are uncertain about their taxable income and may hire tax practitioners to reduce tax uncertainty. We examine the viability of tax practitioners as a signaling device (taking into account the effects on the behavior of the tax†collecting agency) and investigate the desirability of encouraging (or discouraging) the use of tax practitioners via the use of alternative tax†crediting rules. Our study establishes that tax crediting enables legislators to deal better with the consequences of taxpayers' strategic reporting. We show that the effects of changes in crediting rates cannot be replicated by changes in tax rates or penalties; the government would generally like to “price discriminate†in subsidizing tax practitioners' involvement in the tax†compliance process. It is suboptimal to permit all taxpayers to take a tax credit for preparers' fees; some taxpayers should be denied such a subsidy. Further, if the government is constrained to adopt an identical credit schedule for all taxpayers, it will often find that a policy allowing no tax credit Pareto dominates any uniform crediting policy. Résumé. Les auteurs examinent le jeu auquel se livrent, en matière d'observation de la législation fiscale, les contribuables, les agences de perception de l'impôt et les tiers chargés de la préparation des déclarations de revenus. Dans le modèle retenu par les auteurs, les contribuables sont incertains de leur revenu imposable et peuvent recourir aux services de fiscalistes dans le but de réduire cette incertitude. Les auteurs se penchent sur le caractère indicatif du choix du fiscaliste (en tenant compte de l'influence qu'exerce l'agence de perception sur le comportement) et se demandent s'il convient d'encourager les contribuables à recourir aux fiscalistes ou de les en dissuader au moyen de différents mécanismes de dégrèvement fiscal. L'étude démontre que le dégrèvement fiscal permet au législateur de mieux faire face aux conséquences des stratégies de déclaration des contribuables. L'on constate que la modification des taux d'imposition ou des pénalités ne livre pas les mêmes résultats que la modification des taux de dégrèvement; l'État vise généralement la ≪ discrimination en fonction du prix ≫ en subventionnant le recours aux fiscalistes dans le processus d'observation fiscale. Il ne serait pas optimal de permettre à tous les contribuables de se prévaloir d'un crédit d'impôt pour les honoraires des auteurs de leurs déclarations; une telle subvention devrait être refusée à certains contribuables. En outre, si l'État se voit contraint d'adopter un programme de dégrèvement identique pour tous les contribuables, il constatera dans bien des cas qu'une politique ne permettant aucun dégrèvement est supérieure, au sens de Pareto, à toute politique de dégrèvement uniforme.

Suggested Citation

  • Nahum D. Melumad & Mark A. Wolfson & Amir Ziv, 1994. "Should Taxpayers Be Subsidized to Hire Third†Party Preparers? A Game†Theoretic Analysis," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(1), pages 553-594, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:coacre:v:11:y:1994:i:1:p:553-594
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1911-3846.1994.tb00456.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1911-3846.1994.tb00456.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1911-3846.1994.tb00456.x?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. Melumad, Nd & Thoman, L, 1990. "On Auditors And The Courts In An Adverse Selection Setting," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(1), pages 77-120.
    2. Dilip Mookherjee & Ivan Png, 1989. "Optimal Auditing, Insurance, and Redistribution," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 104(2), pages 399-415.
    3. Graetz, Michael J & Reinganum, Jennifer F & Wilde, Louis L, 1986. "The Tax Compliance Game: Toward an Interactive Theory of Law Enforcement," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 2(1), pages 1-32, Spring.
    4. Erekson, O. Homer & Sullivan, Dennis H., 1988. "A Cross-Section Analysis of IRS Auditing," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association, vol. 41(2), pages 175-89, June.
    5. In-Koo Cho & David M. Kreps, 1987. "Signaling Games and Stable Equilibria," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 102(2), pages 179-221.
    6. Banks, Jeffrey S & Sobel, Joel, 1987. "Equilibrium Selection in Signaling Games," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(3), pages 647-661, May.
    7. Nahum D. Melumad & Dilip Mookherjee, 1989. "Delegation as Commitment: The Case of Income Tax Audits," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 20(2), pages 139-163, Summer.
    8. Erekson, O. Homer & Sullivan, Dennis H., 1988. "A Cross-Section Analysis of IRS Auditing," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 41(2), pages 175-189, June.
    9. 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.
    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. Grottke, Markus & Lorenz, Johannes, 2017. "Tax consultants' incentives: A game-theoretic investigation into the behavior of tax consultants, taxpayers, and the tax authority in a setting of tax complexity," Passauer Diskussionspapiere, Betriebswirtschaftliche Reihe B-30-17, University of Passau, Faculty of Business and Economics.

    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. 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.
    2. Martin Besfamille & Pablo Olmos, 2010. "Inspectors or Google Earth? Optimal fiscal policies under uncertain detection of evaders," Department of Economics Working Papers 2010-09, Universidad Torcuato Di Tella.
    3. 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).
    4. Georges Dionne & Florence Giuliano & Pierre Picard, 2009. "Optimal Auditing with Scoring: Theory and Application to Insurance Fraud," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(1), pages 58-70, January.
    5. Pierre Picard, 2012. "Economic Analysis of Insurance Fraud," Working Papers hal-00725561, HAL.
    6. Thierry Pénard & Saïd Souam, 2002. "Collusion et politique de la concurrence en information asymétrique," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 66, pages 209-233.
    7. Martin Besfamille & Cecilia Parlatore Siritto, 2009. "Modernization of Tax Administrations and Optimal Fiscal Policies," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 11(6), pages 897-926, December.
    8. M. Martin Boyer, 2004. "Overcompensation as a Partial Solution to Commitment and Renegotiation Problems: The Case of Ex Post Moral Hazard," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 71(4), pages 559-582, December.
    9. Leandro Arozamena & Martin Besfamille & Pablo Sanguinetti, 2010. "Optimal taxes and penalties when the government cannot commit to its audit policy," Department of Economics Working Papers 2010-10, Universidad Torcuato Di Tella.
    10. 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.
    11. Kirchmaier, Thomas & Selvaggi, Mariano, 2006. "The dark side of 'good' corporate governance: compliance-fuelled book-cooking activities," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 24513, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    12. Persons, John C., 1997. "Liars Never Prosper? How Management Misrepresentation Reduces Monitoring Costs," Journal of Financial Intermediation, Elsevier, vol. 6(4), pages 269-306, October.
    13. Picard, Pierre, 1996. "Auditing claims in the insurance market with fraud: The credibility issue," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 27-56, December.
    14. Heiko Gerlach, 2013. "Self-Reporting, Investigation, and Evidentiary Standards," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(4), pages 1061-1090.
    15. Wane, Waly, 2000. "Tax evasion, corruption, and the remuneration of heterogeneous inspectors," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2394, The World Bank.
    16. Franzoni, Luigi Alberto, 1998. "Independent auditors as fiscal gatekeepers1," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 365-384, December.
    17. M. Martin Boyer, 2007. "Resistance (to Fraud) Is Futile," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 74(2), pages 461-492, June.
    18. Eduardo Perez & Delphine Prady, 2012. "Complicating to Persuade?," Working Papers hal-03583827, HAL.
    19. Eduardo Perez-Richet, 2014. "Interim Bayesian Persuasion: First Steps," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(5), pages 469-474, May.
    20. Vaccari, Federico, 2023. "Competition in costly talk," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).

    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:wly:coacre:v:11:y:1994:i:1:p:553-594. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1911-3846 .

    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.