IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/116560.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Investigating Tax Compliance with Mixed-Methods Approach: The Effect of Normative Appeals Among the Firms in Latvia

Author

Listed:
  • Saulitis, Andris
  • Chapkovski, Philipp

Abstract

This study employs a field experiment and qualitative content analysis to examine the effect of various behaviourally-informed messages on increasing tax compliance in Latvia. In a field experiment, more than 3,000 businesses received a message with a normative appeal to increase the relatively low salaries compared to firms operating in the same industry and region. Other treatment groups received the same message with an additional paragraph that varied audit probabilities or included prosocial messages. All treatments effectively increased the average declared salaries in the enterprises relative to not sending a message. Even though the overall fiscal effect was positive, the qualitative analysis of the feedback by the firms indicates that messages, particularly those that did not state the future actions of the tax administration, provoked discontent and distrust between the taxpayer and the tax administration. Our findings demonstrate that clear communication of the intended actions of the tax administration is the most effective approach to promoting tax compliance. Furthermore, our research indicates that a relatively small audit probability (5%) is as effective as a larger probability (66%), implying that there is no need to carry out audits on a large scale to address tax evasion.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:116560
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/116560/1/MPRA_paper_116560.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Boning, William C. & Guyton, John & Hodge, Ronald & Slemrod, Joel, 2020. "Heard it through the grapevine: The direct and network effects of a tax enforcement field experiment on firms," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    2. Henrik Jacobsen Kleven & Claus Thustrup Kreiner & Emmanuel Saez, 2016. "Why Can Modern Governments Tax So Much? An Agency Model of Firms as Fiscal Intermediaries," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 83(330), pages 219-246, April.
    3. James Alm & Benno Torgler, 2011. "Do Ethics Matter? Tax Compliance and Morality," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 101(4), pages 635-651, July.
    4. Stephen P. Roll & Blair D. Russell & Dana C. Perantie & Michal Grinstein‐Weiss, 2019. "Encouraging Tax‐Time Savings with a Low‐Touch, Large‐Scale Intervention: Evidence from the Refund to Savings Experiment," Journal of Consumer Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(1), pages 87-125, March.
    5. Iyer, Govind S. & Reckers, Philip M.J. & Sanders, Debra L., 2010. "Increasing Tax Compliance in Washington State: A Field Experiment," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 63(1), pages 7-32, March.
    6. 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).
    7. 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.
    8. Perez-Truglia, Ricardo & Troiano, Ugo, 2018. "Shaming tax delinquents," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 120-137.
    9. Slemrod, Joel & Blumenthal, Marsha & Christian, Charles, 2001. "Taxpayer response to an increased probability of audit: evidence from a controlled experiment in Minnesota," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(3), pages 455-483, March.
    10. Gerlinde Fellner & Rupert Sausgruber & Christian Traxler, 2009. "Testing Enforcement Strategies in the Field: Legal Threat, Moral Appeal and Social Information," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2009_31, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    11. Olsen, Jerome & Kasper, Matthias & Enachescu, Janina & Benk, Serkan & Budak, Tamer & Kirchler, Erich, 2018. "Emotions and tax compliance among small business owners: An experimental survey," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 42-52.
    12. Todd Kumler & Eric Verhoogen & Judith Frías, 2020. "Enlisting Employees in Improving Payroll Tax Compliance: Evidence from Mexico," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 102(5), pages 881-896, December.
    13. Maris Vainre & Laura Aaben & Alari Paulus & Helleka Koppel & Helelyn Tammsaar & Keiu Telve & Katre Koppel & Kaia Beilmann & Andero Uusberg, 2020. "Nudging towards tax compliance: A fieldwork-informed randomised controlled trial," Journal of Behavioral Public Administration, Center for Experimental and Behavioral Public Administration, vol. 3(1).
    14. Richard M. Walker & Oliver James & Gene A. Brewer, 2017. "Replication, experiments and knowledge in public management research," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(9), pages 1221-1234, October.
    15. 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.
    16. Emily Chamlee-Wright, 2010. "Qualitative methods and the pursuit of economic understanding," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 23(4), pages 321-331, December.
    17. Jacob A. Mortenson & Andrew Whitten, 2020. "Bunching to Maximize Tax Credits: Evidence from Kinks in the US Tax Schedule," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 12(3), pages 402-432, August.
    18. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    19. 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.
    20. Deaton, Angus & Cartwright, Nancy, 2018. "Understanding and misunderstanding randomized controlled trials," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 210(C), pages 2-21.
    21. Holz, Justin E. & List, John A. & Zentner, Alejandro & Cardoza, Marvin & Zentner, Joaquin E., 2023. "The $100 million nudge: Increasing tax compliance of firms using a natural field experiment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 218(C).
    22. Gerlinde Fellner & Rupert Sausgruber & Christian Traxler, 2013. "Testing Enforcement Strategies In The Field: Threat, Moral Appeal And Social Information," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 11(3), pages 634-660, June.
    23. Murphy, Kristina, 2008. "Enforcing Tax Compliance: To Punish or Persuade?," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 113-135, March.
    24. Blumenthal, Marsha & Christian, Charles W. & Slemrod, Joel, 2001. "Do Normative Appeals Affect Tax Compliance? Evidence From a Controlled Experiment in Minnesota," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 54(1), pages 125-138, March.
    25. Herbert Gintis & Samuel Bowles & Robert T. Boyd & Ernst Fehr (ed.), 2006. "Moral Sentiments and Material Interests: The Foundations of Cooperation in Economic Life," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262572370, April.
    26. Dina Pomeranz, 2015. "No Taxation without Information: Deterrence and Self-Enforcement in the Value Added Tax," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(8), pages 2539-2569, August.
    27. Blumenthal, Marsha & Christian, Charles W. & Slemrod, Joel, 2001. "Do Normative Appeals Affect Tax Compliance? Evidence from a Controlled Experiment in Minnesota," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association, vol. 54(n. 1), pages 125-38, March.
    28. 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.
    29. Enachescu, Janina & Olsen, Jerome & Kogler, Christoph & Zeelenberg, Marcel & Breugelmans, Seger M. & Kirchler, Erich, 2019. "The role of emotions in tax compliance behavior: A mixed-methods approach," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    30. Nadja Dwenger & Henrik Kleven & Imran Rasul & Johannes Rincke, 2016. "Extrinsic and Intrinsic Motivations for Tax Compliance: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Germany," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 8(3), pages 203-232, August.
    31. 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.
    32. Maciej A. Górecki & Natalia Letki, 2021. "Social Norms Moderate the Effect of Tax System on Tax Evasion: Evidence from a Large-Scale Survey Experiment," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 172(4), pages 727-746, September.
    33. Ganzach, Yoav & Karsahi, Nili, 1995. "Message framing and buying behavior: A field experiment," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 11-17, January.
    34. Privitera, Alessandra & Enachescu, Janina & Kirchler, Erich & Hartmann, Andre Julian, 2021. "Emotions in Tax Related Situations Shape Compliance Intentions: A Comparison between Austria and Italy," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    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. 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. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. James Alm, 2019. "What Motivates Tax Compliance?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(2), pages 353-388, April.
    6. Belnap, Andrew & Welsch, Anthony & Williams, Braden, 2023. "Remote tax authority," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(2).
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. Biddle, Nicholas & Fels, Katja M. & Sinning, Mathias, 2018. "Behavioral insights on business taxation: Evidence from two natural field experiments," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 30-49.
    10. Biddle, Nicholas & Fels, Katja & Sinning, Mathias, 2017. "Behavioral insights and business taxation: Evidence from two randomized controlled trials," Ruhr Economic Papers 698, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. Philipp Doerrenberg & Andreas Peichl, 2022. "Tax Morale and the Role of Social Norms and Reciprocity - Evidence from a Randomized Survey Experiment," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 78(1-2), pages 44-86.
    14. 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).
    15. 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.
    16. repec:idq:ictduk:13726 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Blesse, Sebastian, 2023. "Do your tax problems make tax evasion seem more justifiable? Evidence from a survey experiment," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    18. 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.
    19. 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).
    20. Perez-Truglia, Ricardo & Troiano, Ugo, 2018. "Shaming tax delinquents," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 120-137.
    21. Martinangeli, Andrea F.M. & Windsteiger, Lisa, 2024. "Inequality shapes the propagation of unethical behaviours: Cheating responses to tax evasion along the income distribution," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 220(C), pages 135-181.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    tax collection; shadow economy; prosocial behaviour; tax audits; mixed-methods;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments
    • D03 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Behavioral Microeconomics: Underlying Principles
    • H26 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Tax Evasion and Avoidance
    • H32 - Public Economics - - Fiscal Policies and Behavior of Economic Agents - - - Firm
    • H83 - Public Economics - - Miscellaneous Issues - - - Public Administration

    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:pra:mprapa:116560. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.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.