IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cdf/wpaper/2021-17.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Does the Frequency of Reminders Matter for their Effectiveness? A Randomized Controlled Trial

Author

Listed:
  • Antinyan, Armenak

    (Cardiff Business School, Cardiff University.)

  • Asatryan, Zareh

    (ZEW Mannheim)

  • Dai, Zhixin

    (China Financial Policy Research Center, School of Finance, Renmin University of China)

  • Wang, Kezhi

    (Shanghai Municipal Tax Service, State Taxation Administration)

Abstract

We assess the impact of reminder frequency on the probability of paying overdue property taxes in a randomized controlled trial in China. One reminder a week (sent as a text message) considerably increases the probability of tax compliance and results in tangible fiscal gains compared to a one-off reminder. However, increasing the frequency of reminders to two text messages a week diminishes their effectiveness. The takeaway of our study is that frequent reminders are an important trigger for human behavior, nonetheless, beyond a certain frequency the effectiveness of additional reminders seems to decline.

Suggested Citation

  • Antinyan, Armenak & Asatryan, Zareh & Dai, Zhixin & Wang, Kezhi, 2021. "Does the Frequency of Reminders Matter for their Effectiveness? A Randomized Controlled Trial," Cardiff Economics Working Papers E2021/17, Cardiff University, Cardiff Business School, Economics Section.
    • Handle: RePEc:cdf:wpaper:2021/17
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://carbsecon.com/wp/E2021_17.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dean Karlan & Margaret McConnell & Sendhil Mullainathan & Jonathan Zinman, 2016. "Getting to the Top of Mind: How Reminders Increase Saving," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(12), pages 3393-3411, December.
    2. Gillitzer, Christian & Sinning, Mathias, 2020. "Nudging businesses to pay their taxes: Does timing matter?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 284-300.
    3. Altmann, Steffen & Traxler, Christian, 2014. "Nudges at the dentist," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 19-38.
    4. Du, Zaichao & Zhang, Lin, 2015. "Home-purchase restriction, property tax and housing price in China: A counterfactual analysis," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 188(2), pages 558-568.
    5. 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.
    6. James Alm & Weizheng Lai & Xun Li, 2022. "Housing market regulations and strategic divorce propensity in China," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 35(3), pages 1103-1131, July.
    7. Uri Gneezy & Muriel Niederle & Aldo Rustichini, 2003. "Performance in Competitive Environments: Gender Differences," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 118(3), pages 1049-1074.
    8. Monica Mogollon & Daniel Ortega & Carlos Scartascini, 2021. "Who’s calling? The effect of phone calls and personal interaction on tax compliance," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 28(6), pages 1302-1328, December.
    9. Taylor Cranor & Jacob Goldin & Tatiana Homonoff & Lindsay Moore, 2020. "Communicating Tax Penalties to Delinquent Taxpayers: Evidence from a Field Experiment," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 73(2), pages 331-360, June.
    10. Ortega, Daniel & Scartascini, Carlos, 2020. "Don’t blame the messenger. The Delivery method of a message matters," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 170(C), pages 286-300.
    11. Antinyan, Armenak & Bertoni, Marco & Corazzini, Luca, 2021. "Cervical cancer screening invitations in low and middle income countries: Evidence from Armenia," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 273(C).
    12. Apesteguia, Jose & Funk, Patricia & Iriberri, Nagore, 2013. "Promoting rule compliance in daily-life: Evidence from a randomized field experiment in the public libraries of Barcelona," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 266-284.
    13. Joel Slemrod, 2019. "Tax Compliance and Enforcement," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 57(4), pages 904-954, December.
    14. Giacomo Calzolari & Mattia Nardotto, 2017. "Effective Reminders," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(9), pages 2915-2932, September.
    15. Castro, Lucio & Scartascini, Carlos, 2015. "Tax compliance and enforcement in the pampas evidence from a field experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 65-82.
    16. Philipp Doerrenberg & Jan Schmitz, 2017. "Tax compliance and information provision. A field experiment with small firms," Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics (SABE), vol. 1(1), pages 47-54, February.
    17. Olga Shurchkov, 2012. "Under Pressure: Gender Differences In Output Quality And Quantity Under Competition And Time Constraints," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 10(5), pages 1189-1213, October.
    18. Ximena Cadena & Antoinette Schoar, 2011. "Remembering to Pay? Reminders vs. Financial Incentives for Loan Payments," NBER Working Papers 17020, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    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. Antinyan, Armenak & Asatryan, Zareh, 2019. "Nudging for tax compliance: A meta-analysis," ZEW Discussion Papers 19-055, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    21. Alvaro Carril, 2015. "RANDTREAT: Stata module to randomly assign treatments uneven treatments and deal with misfits," Statistical Software Components S458106, Boston College Department of Economics, revised 13 Apr 2017.
    22. Anne Brockmeyer & Alejandro Estefan & Karina Ramírez Arras & Juan Carlos Suárez Serrato, 2021. "Taxing Property in Developing Countries: Theory and Evidence from Mexico," NBER Working Papers 28637, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    23. Keith Marzilli Ericson, 2017. "On the Interaction of Memory and Procrastination: Implications for Reminders, Deadlines, and Empirical Estimation," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 15(3), pages 692-719.
    24. Stefano DellaVigna, 2009. "Psychology and Economics: Evidence from the Field," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(2), pages 315-372, June.
    25. Cass Sunstein, 2014. "Nudging: A Very Short Guide," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 37(4), pages 583-588, December.
    26. Akerlof, George A, 1991. "Procrastination and Obedience," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(2), pages 1-19, May.
    27. De Paola, Maria & Gioia, Francesca, 2016. "Who performs better under time pressure? Results from a field experiment," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 37-53.
    28. 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.
    29. Peter John & Toby Blume, 2018. "How best to nudge taxpayers? The impact of message simplification and descriptive social norms on payment rates in a central London local authority," Journal of Behavioral Public Administration, Center for Experimental and Behavioral Public Administration, vol. 1(1).
    30. Matthew Rabin, 1998. "Psychology and Economics," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 36(1), pages 11-46, March.
    31. Koichiro Ito & Takanori Ida & Makoto Tanaka, 2018. "Moral Suasion and Economic Incentives: Field Experimental Evidence from Energy Demand," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 10(1), pages 240-267, February.
    32. Michael Chirico & Robert Inman & Charles Loeffler & John MacDonald & Holger Sieg, 2019. "Deterring Property Tax Delinquency in Philadelphia: An Experimental Evaluation of Nudge Strategies," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 72(3), pages 479-506, 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. Antinyan, Armenak & Asatryan, Zareh, 2019. "Nudging for tax compliance: A meta-analysis," ZEW Discussion Papers 19-055, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    2. Jin, Liyin & Li, Lingfang (Ivy) & Zhou, Yi & Zhou, Yifang, 2022. "How to Remind People to Work Out via Feedback: Evidence from a Field Experiment," MPRA Paper 112418, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Matej Lorko & Tomas Miklanek & Maros Servatka, 2024. "Why do some nudges work and others not?," CERGE-EI Working Papers wp777, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague.

    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. Antinyan, Armenak & Asatryan, Zareh, 2019. "Nudging for tax compliance: A meta-analysis," ZEW Discussion Papers 19-055, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    2. Monica Mogollon & Daniel Ortega & Carlos Scartascini, 2021. "Who’s calling? The effect of phone calls and personal interaction on tax compliance," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 28(6), pages 1302-1328, December.
    3. Yogama, Eko Arief & Gray, Daniel J. & Rablen, Matthew D., 2024. "Nudging for prompt tax penalty payment: Evidence from a field experiment in Indonesia," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 224(C), pages 548-579.
    4. Gillitzer, Christian & Sinning, Mathias, 2020. "Nudging businesses to pay their taxes: Does timing matter?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 284-300.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. Belnap, Andrew & Welsch, Anthony & Williams, Braden, 2023. "Remote tax authority," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(2).
    8. Sinning, Mathias & Zhang, Yinjunjie, 2023. "Social norms or enforcement? A natural field experiment to improve traffic and parking fine compliance," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 210(C), pages 43-60.
    9. Antinyan, Armenak & Bellio, Stefania & Bertoni, Marco & Corazzini, Luca & Narne, Elena, 2021. "Digital Access to Healthcare Services and Healthcare Utilization: A Quasi-Experiment," IZA Discussion Papers 14916, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    10. Castro, Juan Francisco & Velásquez, Daniel & Beltrán, Arlette & Yamada, Gustavo, 2020. "Spillovers and Long-Run Effects of Messages on Tax Compliance: Experimental Evidence from Peru," IZA Discussion Papers 13974, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    11. Dong, Sarah Xue & Sinning, Mathias, 2022. "Trying to Make a Good First Impression: A Natural Field Experiment to Engage New Entrants to the Tax System," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    12. Simeon Schächtele & Huáscar Eguino & Soraya Roman, 2023. "Fiscal Exchange and Tax Compliance: Evidence From a Field Experiment," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(3), pages 796-814, June.
    13. Schächtele, Simeon & Eguino, Huáscar & Roman, Soraya, 2022. "Improving taxpayer registration through nudging? Field experimental evidence from Brazil," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    14. Essl, Andrea & Steffen, Angela & Staehle, Martin, 2021. "Choose to reuse! The effect of action-close reminders on pro-environmental behavior," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    15. Antinyan, Armenak & Horváth, Gergely & Jia, Mofei, 2020. "Curbing the consumption of positional goods: Behavioral interventions versus taxation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 1-21.
    16. 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.
    17. 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.
    18. 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.
    19. 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.
    20. James Alm & Laura Rosales Cifuentes & Carlos Mauricio Ortiz Niño & Diana Rocha, 2019. "Can Behavioral “Nudges” Improve Compliance? The Case of Colombia Social Protection Contributions," Games, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-23, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Reminder Frequency; Randomized Controlled Trial; Tax Compliance;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments
    • H24 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Personal Income and Other Nonbusiness Taxes and Subsidies
    • H26 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Tax Evasion and Avoidance

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:cdf:wpaper:2021/17. 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: Yongdeng Xu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ecscfuk.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.