税法和执法机构的灵活性

IF 0.9 3区 社会学 Q3 ECONOMICS International Review of Law and Economics Pub Date : 2024-07-22 DOI:10.1016/j.irle.2024.106215
Emanuela Carbonara , Philip A. Curry , Claire A. Hill , Francesco Parisi
{"title":"税法和执法机构的灵活性","authors":"Emanuela Carbonara ,&nbsp;Philip A. Curry ,&nbsp;Claire A. Hill ,&nbsp;Francesco Parisi","doi":"10.1016/j.irle.2024.106215","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This paper examines how governments can optimally audit to discourage tax avoidance. We assume that an accounting firm designs and promotes strategies for tax avoidance. This firm adapts the quality and diversity of these strategies in response to shifts in government policies. We investigate when it is more effective to approve some methods while cracking down on others, rather than targeting all tax-avoidance activities uniformly. We find that selectively enforcing against specific methods can be optimal. This approach not only reduces the quality but also limits the variety of tax avoidance activities in the market and positively impacts the government’s tax revenue collection. Our analysis provides practical insights, linking the costs of auditing with the interaction between enforcement, the quality of tax avoidance methods, and tax revenue outcomes.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47202,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Law and Economics","volume":"79 ","pages":"Article 106215"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0144818824000358/pdfft?md5=5fb3f5a2241bc42558a23c711f35043a&pid=1-s2.0-S0144818824000358-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Institutional flexibility in tax law and enforcement\",\"authors\":\"Emanuela Carbonara ,&nbsp;Philip A. Curry ,&nbsp;Claire A. Hill ,&nbsp;Francesco Parisi\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.irle.2024.106215\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>This paper examines how governments can optimally audit to discourage tax avoidance. We assume that an accounting firm designs and promotes strategies for tax avoidance. This firm adapts the quality and diversity of these strategies in response to shifts in government policies. We investigate when it is more effective to approve some methods while cracking down on others, rather than targeting all tax-avoidance activities uniformly. We find that selectively enforcing against specific methods can be optimal. This approach not only reduces the quality but also limits the variety of tax avoidance activities in the market and positively impacts the government’s tax revenue collection. Our analysis provides practical insights, linking the costs of auditing with the interaction between enforcement, the quality of tax avoidance methods, and tax revenue outcomes.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47202,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Review of Law and Economics\",\"volume\":\"79 \",\"pages\":\"Article 106215\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0144818824000358/pdfft?md5=5fb3f5a2241bc42558a23c711f35043a&pid=1-s2.0-S0144818824000358-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Review of Law and Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0144818824000358\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Review of Law and Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0144818824000358","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文探讨了政府如何以最佳审计方式阻止避税行为。我们假设一家会计师事务所设计并推广避税策略。该公司会根据政府政策的变化调整这些策略的质量和多样性。我们研究了在什么情况下,批准某些方法的同时打击另一些方法,比统一针对所有避税活动更有效。我们发现,有选择地对特定方法进行执法可能是最佳选择。这种方法不仅能降低避税活动的质量,还能限制市场上避税活动的多样性,并对政府的税收产生积极影响。我们的分析将审计成本与执法、避税方法质量和税收结果之间的相互作用联系起来,提供了实用的见解。
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
Institutional flexibility in tax law and enforcement

This paper examines how governments can optimally audit to discourage tax avoidance. We assume that an accounting firm designs and promotes strategies for tax avoidance. This firm adapts the quality and diversity of these strategies in response to shifts in government policies. We investigate when it is more effective to approve some methods while cracking down on others, rather than targeting all tax-avoidance activities uniformly. We find that selectively enforcing against specific methods can be optimal. This approach not only reduces the quality but also limits the variety of tax avoidance activities in the market and positively impacts the government’s tax revenue collection. Our analysis provides practical insights, linking the costs of auditing with the interaction between enforcement, the quality of tax avoidance methods, and tax revenue outcomes.

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
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
18.20%
发文量
38
审稿时长
48 days
期刊介绍: The International Review of Law and Economics provides a forum for interdisciplinary research at the interface of law and economics. IRLE is international in scope and audience and particularly welcomes both theoretical and empirical papers on comparative law and economics, globalization and legal harmonization, and the endogenous emergence of legal institutions, in addition to more traditional legal topics.
期刊最新文献
Estimating the effect of concealed carry laws on murder: A response to Bondy, et al. The broken-windows theory of crime: A Bayesian approach Workload, legal doctrine, and judicial review in an authoritarian regime: A study of expropriation judgments in China Illicit enrichment in Germany: An evaluation of the reformed asset recovery regime's ability to confiscate proceeds of crime On the strategic choice of overconfident lawyers
×
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