如何提高富人的纳税遵从度?乌干达的证据

IF 2 3区 经济学 Q2 DEVELOPMENT STUDIES Development Policy Review Pub Date : 2023-11-12 DOI:10.1111/dpr.12754
Fabrizio Santoro, Ronald Waiswa
{"title":"如何提高富人的纳税遵从度?乌干达的证据","authors":"Fabrizio Santoro,&nbsp;Ronald Waiswa","doi":"10.1111/dpr.12754","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Motivation</h3>\n \n <p>Appropriately taxing the richest is a priority for African governments, which need tax revenues to invest and pay for public services. In Uganda, the revenue authority launched a unit in 2015 to monitor the tax affairs of high-net-worth individuals (HNWIs) and very important persons (VIPs), 393 individuals in all. The unit combined persuasion, assistance, and enforcement.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Purpose</h3>\n \n <p>To establish the extent to which the unit was able to improve tax compliance by the rich.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods and approach</h3>\n \n <p>In collaboration with the Uganda Revenue Authority, this study builds on taxpayer-level data on tax filing and payment. The analysis employs a standard difference-in-difference framework, exploiting the timing of the launch of the unit (September 2015). It also makes use of the existence of the target group of 393 wealthy individuals and a group of another 1,731 potentially wealthy individuals who have been identified but never included in the unit's operations owing to limited resources. We match the groups using a propensity score algorithm.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Findings</h3>\n \n <p>The unit has been only partially successful. While the unit increased the probability of filing a return, especially by VIPs, taxpayers declared less on different measures, with no impacts on tax liability. On tax payments, only a small and significant positive impact was found, again due to complex offsetting responses across tax categories. This study also measures the spillover effect on companies controlled by the richest—again documenting complex compensating reactions and no meaningful impacts on tax take. Lastly, while deterrence is more effective for HNWIs, taxpayer assistance and public shaming are more relevant for VIPs.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Policy implications</h3>\n \n <p>This case shows that the rich can be identified and their tax monitored. It also shows the limits of what can be achieved. The Uganda unit lacked staff; it needed twice as many people to monitor the tax of wealthy persons adequately. Moreover, it was hamstrung by the difficulties of sharing data between different departments of the Tax Authority, among government agencies, and between government and key agents such as banks. Ultimately, the unit did not have the staff and data to challenge the tax avoidance schemes deployed by wealthy people and the companies they own.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":51478,"journal":{"name":"Development Policy Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How to improve tax compliance by wealthy individuals? Evidence from Uganda\",\"authors\":\"Fabrizio Santoro,&nbsp;Ronald Waiswa\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/dpr.12754\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Motivation</h3>\\n \\n <p>Appropriately taxing the richest is a priority for African governments, which need tax revenues to invest and pay for public services. In Uganda, the revenue authority launched a unit in 2015 to monitor the tax affairs of high-net-worth individuals (HNWIs) and very important persons (VIPs), 393 individuals in all. The unit combined persuasion, assistance, and enforcement.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Purpose</h3>\\n \\n <p>To establish the extent to which the unit was able to improve tax compliance by the rich.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods and approach</h3>\\n \\n <p>In collaboration with the Uganda Revenue Authority, this study builds on taxpayer-level data on tax filing and payment. The analysis employs a standard difference-in-difference framework, exploiting the timing of the launch of the unit (September 2015). It also makes use of the existence of the target group of 393 wealthy individuals and a group of another 1,731 potentially wealthy individuals who have been identified but never included in the unit's operations owing to limited resources. We match the groups using a propensity score algorithm.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Findings</h3>\\n \\n <p>The unit has been only partially successful. While the unit increased the probability of filing a return, especially by VIPs, taxpayers declared less on different measures, with no impacts on tax liability. On tax payments, only a small and significant positive impact was found, again due to complex offsetting responses across tax categories. This study also measures the spillover effect on companies controlled by the richest—again documenting complex compensating reactions and no meaningful impacts on tax take. Lastly, while deterrence is more effective for HNWIs, taxpayer assistance and public shaming are more relevant for VIPs.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Policy implications</h3>\\n \\n <p>This case shows that the rich can be identified and their tax monitored. It also shows the limits of what can be achieved. The Uganda unit lacked staff; it needed twice as many people to monitor the tax of wealthy persons adequately. Moreover, it was hamstrung by the difficulties of sharing data between different departments of the Tax Authority, among government agencies, and between government and key agents such as banks. Ultimately, the unit did not have the staff and data to challenge the tax avoidance schemes deployed by wealthy people and the companies they own.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51478,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Development Policy Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Development Policy Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/dpr.12754\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Development Policy Review","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/dpr.12754","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

动机 对最富有的人适当征税是非洲各国政府的首要任务,因为它们需要税收来投资和支付公共服务。在乌干达,税务局于 2015 年成立了一个部门,负责监督高净值人士(HNWIs)和非常重要人士(VIPs)(共 393 人)的税务事务。该部门将劝说、协助和执法结合在一起。 目的 确定该部门在多大程度上改善了富人的纳税遵从情况。 方法与途径 本研究与乌干达税务局合作,以纳税人层面的报税和缴税数据为基础。分析采用了标准的差分框架,利用了该单位的启动时间(2015 年 9 月)。分析还利用了由 393 名富裕人士组成的目标群体和另外 1731 名潜在富裕人士组成的群体,这些富裕人士已被识别出来,但由于资源有限,从未被纳入该单位的运作中。我们使用倾向得分算法对这两个群体进行匹配。 研究结果 该小组只取得了部分成功。虽然该小组提高了纳税人(尤其是富豪)申报的概率,但纳税人在不同指标上的申报率都有所下降,对纳税义务没有影响。在纳税额方面,同样由于不同税种之间复杂的抵消反应,只发现了微小而显著的积极影响。本研究还衡量了对首富控制的公司的溢出效应--同样记录了复杂的补偿反应,但对纳税额没有产生有意义的影响。最后,虽然威慑对高净值人士更有效,但纳税人援助和公开羞辱对贵宾更有意义。 政策含义 本案例表明,富人是可以识别的,他们的税收也是可以监控的。同时也说明了所能达到的效果的局限性。乌干达税务局缺乏人手,需要两倍的人手才能充分监控富人的纳税情况。此外,税务局不同部门之间、政府机构之间以及政府与银行等主要代理机构之间难以共享数据,也阻碍了该单位的工作。最终,该部门没有足够的人员和数据来挑战富人及其拥有的公司的避税计划。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
How to improve tax compliance by wealthy individuals? Evidence from Uganda

Motivation

Appropriately taxing the richest is a priority for African governments, which need tax revenues to invest and pay for public services. In Uganda, the revenue authority launched a unit in 2015 to monitor the tax affairs of high-net-worth individuals (HNWIs) and very important persons (VIPs), 393 individuals in all. The unit combined persuasion, assistance, and enforcement.

Purpose

To establish the extent to which the unit was able to improve tax compliance by the rich.

Methods and approach

In collaboration with the Uganda Revenue Authority, this study builds on taxpayer-level data on tax filing and payment. The analysis employs a standard difference-in-difference framework, exploiting the timing of the launch of the unit (September 2015). It also makes use of the existence of the target group of 393 wealthy individuals and a group of another 1,731 potentially wealthy individuals who have been identified but never included in the unit's operations owing to limited resources. We match the groups using a propensity score algorithm.

Findings

The unit has been only partially successful. While the unit increased the probability of filing a return, especially by VIPs, taxpayers declared less on different measures, with no impacts on tax liability. On tax payments, only a small and significant positive impact was found, again due to complex offsetting responses across tax categories. This study also measures the spillover effect on companies controlled by the richest—again documenting complex compensating reactions and no meaningful impacts on tax take. Lastly, while deterrence is more effective for HNWIs, taxpayer assistance and public shaming are more relevant for VIPs.

Policy implications

This case shows that the rich can be identified and their tax monitored. It also shows the limits of what can be achieved. The Uganda unit lacked staff; it needed twice as many people to monitor the tax of wealthy persons adequately. Moreover, it was hamstrung by the difficulties of sharing data between different departments of the Tax Authority, among government agencies, and between government and key agents such as banks. Ultimately, the unit did not have the staff and data to challenge the tax avoidance schemes deployed by wealthy people and the companies they own.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Development Policy Review
Development Policy Review DEVELOPMENT STUDIES-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
5.90%
发文量
87
期刊介绍: Development Policy Review is the refereed journal that makes the crucial links between research and policy in international development. Edited by staff of the Overseas Development Institute, the London-based think-tank on international development and humanitarian issues, it publishes single articles and theme issues on topics at the forefront of current development policy debate. Coverage includes the latest thinking and research on poverty-reduction strategies, inequality and social exclusion, property rights and sustainable livelihoods, globalisation in trade and finance, and the reform of global governance. Informed, rigorous, multi-disciplinary and up-to-the-minute, DPR is an indispensable tool for development researchers and practitioners alike.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Assessing the success of National Human Rights Action Plans from a political economy perspective: The case of Chile Reshaping gender norms: Exploring the ripple effect of refugeeism on women's empowerment Does subsidizing seed help farmers? Nepal's rice seed subsidies Social sustainability discourse in cohesion policy: A critical review of Interreg Europe 2021–2027
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1