IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/gtr/gatrjs/afr216.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Examining the Factors That Affect the Loss of Tax Disputes in the Tax Court

Author

Listed:
  • Mega Nurmala Sari

    (Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Indonesia, Indonesia Author-2-Name: Riatu Mariatul Qibthiyyah Author-2-Workplace-Name: Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Indonesia, Indonesia Author-3-Name: Author-3-Workplace-Name: Author-4-Name: Author-4-Workplace-Name: Author-5-Name: Author-5-Workplace-Name: Author-6-Name: Author-6-Workplace-Name: Author-7-Name: Author-7-Workplace-Name: Author-8-Name: Author-8-Workplace-Name:)

Abstract

" Objective - The high tax administration loss rate sparked various speculations in Society. This study aims to determine the factors that led to the defeat of the tax administration in the Indonesian Tax Court. Methodology/Technique - Simple random sampling is used to obtain 1,000 samples of decisions on appeal disputes which is three times the minimum sample size. The logit model is used to find out whether the independent variable affects the dependent variable. The linear probability model is also used to test whether the Logit Model is robust. Findings - The estimation of results shows that the interaction between the tax dispute resolution period and the type of tax, as well as the number of representatives of the tax authorities, had a positive and significant impact on the loss of the tax administration in the prosecution. Novelty - No economic study has comprehensively analyzed the determinants of administrative defeat in the Indonesian Tax Court. This study uses data that have not been used in previous studies. The information includes evidence at audits/objections and appeals, types of taxes, tax dispute resolution periods, interactions between dispute resolution periods and evidence at audits/objections and requests, interactions between dispute resolution periods and types of taxes, interactions between periods dispute resolution, types of taxes and evidence at examination/objection and appeal, initial value, gender of judges, representatives of taxpayers and representatives of tax authorities in court. Type of Paper - Empirical."

Suggested Citation

  • Mega Nurmala Sari, 2022. "Examining the Factors That Affect the Loss of Tax Disputes in the Tax Court," GATR Journals afr216, Global Academy of Training and Research (GATR) Enterprise.
    • Handle: RePEc:gtr:gatrjs:afr216
    DOI: https://doi.org/10.35609/afr.2022.7.2(3)
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://gatrenterprise.com/GATRJournals/AFR/pdf_files/AFR-Vol-7(2)/3.Mega%20Nurmala%20Sari.pdf
    Download Restriction: http://gatrenterprise.com/GATRJournals/online_submission.html
    File URL: https://libkey.io/https://doi.org/10.35609/afr.2022.7.2(3)?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. Benjamin Alarie & Andrew J. Green, 2014. "Policy Preferences and Expertise in Canadian Tax Adjudication," Canadian Tax Journal, Canadian Tax Foundation, vol. 62(4), pages 985-1027.
    2. Johnston, Jason Scott & Waldfogel, Joel, 2002. "Does Repeat Play Elicit Cooperation? Evidence from Federal Civil Litigation," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 31(1), pages 39-60, January.
    3. Blaufus, Kay & Bob, Jonathan & Trinks, Matthias, 2013. "How will the court decide? Tax experts and the estimation of tax risk," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 150, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    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. Cooper, James C., 2017. "Information and settlement: Empirical evidence on Daubert rulings and settlement rates," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 1-11.
    2. Bielen, Samantha & Grajzl, Peter & Marneffe, Wim, 2017. "Procedural events, judge characteristics, and the timing of settlement," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 97-110.
    3. Peter Grajzl & Valentina Dimitrova-Grajzl & Katarina Zajc, 2016. "Inside post-socialist courts: the determinants of adjudicatory outcomes in Slovenian commercial disputes," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 41(1), pages 85-115, February.
    4. Gillian K. Hadfield, 2004. "Where Have All the Trials Gone? Settlements, Nontrial Adjudications, and Statistical Artifacts in the Changing Disposition of Federal Civil Cases," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 1(3), pages 705-734, November.
    5. Eric Helland & Jonathan Klick & Alexander Tabarrok, 2005. "Data Watch: Tort-uring the Data," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(2), pages 207-220, Spring.
    6. Daniel P. Kessler & Daniel L. Rubinfeld, 2004. "Empirical Study of the Civil Justice System," NBER Working Papers 10825, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Brinig Margaret F., 2005. ""Unhappy Contracts": The Case of Divorce Settlements," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 1(2), pages 241-275, September.
    8. Hans W. Friederiszick, & Linda Gratz, & Michael Rauber,, 2019. "The impact of EU cartel policy reforms on the timing of settlements in private follow-on damages disputes: An empirical assessment of cases from 2001 to 2015," ESMT Research Working Papers ESMT-19-03, ESMT European School of Management and Technology.
    9. Hans W. Friederiszick & Linda Gratz & Michael Rauber, 2019. "The impact of EU cartel policy reforms on the timing of settlements in private follow-on damages disputes: An empirical assessment of cases from 2001 to 2015," ESMT Research Working Papers ESMT-19-03_R1, ESMT European School of Management and Technology, revised 25 Jun 2020.
    10. Stephen L. Jones & Aija Leiponen & Gurneeta Vasudeva, 2021. "The evolution of cooperation in the face of conflict: Evidence from the innovation ecosystem for mobile telecom standards development," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(4), pages 710-740, April.
    11. Chris Kuo, 2013. "Billing Abuses by the Experts: A Game-Theoretic Analysis of Legal Services," Journal of Economics and Management, College of Business, Feng Chia University, Taiwan, vol. 9(1), pages 13-30, January.
    12. Yannis Bakos & Chrysanthos Dellarocas, 2011. "Cooperation Without Enforcement? A Comparative Analysis of Litigation and Online Reputation as Quality Assurance Mechanisms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(11), pages 1944-1962, November.
    13. Liu, Xiaoge & Miao, Miao & Liu, Ruiming, 2020. "Litigation and corporate risk taking: Evidence from Chinese listed firms," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Tax dispute; appeal decision; influencing factors; Tax Authorities defeat; Tax Court.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • G18 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Government Policy and Regulation
    • K41 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - Litigation Process

    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:gtr:gatrjs:afr216. 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: Prof. Dr. Abd Rahim Mohamad (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://gatrenterprise.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.