Tax Compliance and Public Goods Provision. An Agent-based Econophysics Approach

• Autorzy: Sascha Hokamp , Götz Seibold
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

We calculate the dynamics of tax evasion within a multi-agent econophysics model which is adopted from the theory of magnetism and previously has been shown to capture the main characteristics from agent-based based models which build on the standard Allingham and Sandmo approach. In particular, we implement a feedback of public goods provision on the decision-making of selfish agents which aim to pursue their self interest. Our results imply that such a feedback enhances the moral attitude of selfish agents thus reducing the percentage of tax evasion. Two parameters govern the behavior of selfish agents, (i) the rate of adaption to changes in public goods provision and (ii) the threshold of perception of public goods provision. Furtheron we analyze the tax evasion dynamics for different agent compositions and under the feedback of public goods provision. We conclude that policymakers may enhance tax compliance behavior via the threshold of perception by means of targeted public relations. (original abstract)

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Tax regulations; Adjustment policy; Public goods; Economic models

PL

Prawo podatkowe; Polityka dostosowawcza; Dobra publiczne; Modele ekonomiczne

• Czasopismo: Central European Journal of Economic Modelling and Econometrics (CEJEME)
• Rocznik: 2014
• Tom: 6
• Numer: nr 4
• Strony: 217--236

Twórcy

autor

Sascha Hokamp

• University of Hamburg, Germany

autor

Götz Seibold

• BTU Cottbus - Senftenberg

Bibliografia

• [1] Allingham, M. G. and A. Sandmo (1972). Income Tax Evasion: A Theoretical Analysis. Journal of Public Economics 1, 323-338.
• [2] Alm, J., B. Jackson and M. McKee (1992a). Estimating the Determinants of Taxpayer Compliance with Experimental Data. National Tax Journal 45(1), 107-114.
• [3] Alm, J., G. II. McClelland and W. D. Schulze (1992b). Why do people pay taxes? Journal of Public Economics 48, 21-38.
• [4] Alm, J. (2010). Testing Behavioral Public Economic Theories in the Laboratory. National Tax Journal 63 (4), 635-658.
• [5] Andrei, A., K. Comer and M. Koehler (2014). An agent-based model of network effects on tax compliance and evasion. Journal of Economic Psychology 40, 119-133.
• [6] Andreoni, J., B. Erard and J. Feinstein (1998). Tax Compliance. Journal of Economic Litemture 36(2), 818-860.
• [7] Antunes, L., J. Balsa, A. Respicio and H. Coelho (2007). Tactical Exploration of Tax Compliance Decisions in Multi-agent Based Simulation, in: Luis Antunes and Koiki Takadama (Eds.). Multi-Agent-Based Simulation VII, International Workshop MABS 2006, LNAI 4442, Heidelberg: Springer, 80-95.
• [8] Bazart, C. and M. Pickhardt (2011). Fighting Income Tax Evasion with Positive Rewards. Public Finance Review 39(1), 124-149.
• [9] Bloomquist, K. M. (2004). Modeling Taxpayers' Response to Compliance Improvement Alternatives. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the North American Association for Computational Social and Organizational Sciences, Pittsburgh, PA.
• [10] Bloomquist, K. M. (2006). A Comparison of Agent-based Models of Income Tax Evasion. Social Science Computer Review 24(4), 411-425.
• [11] Bloomquist, K. M. (2008). Taxpayer Compliance Simulation: A Multi-Agent Based Approach, In: Edmonds, B., Hernández, C. and "Roitzsch, K. G. (eds.) Social Simulation: Technologies, Advances and New Discoveries. Premier References Series, Chap. 2, 13-25.
• [12] Bloomquist, K. M. (2011). Tax Compliance as an Evolutionary Coordination Game: An Agentbased Approach. Public Finance Review 39 (1), 25-49.
• [13] Bordignon, M. (1993). A Fairness Approach to Income Tax Evasion. Journal of Public Economics 52, 345-362.
• [14] Cowell, F. A. and J. P. F. Gordon(1988). Unwillingness to Pay - Tax Evasion and Public Goods Provision. Journal of Public Economics 36. 305-321.
• [15] Cowell, F. A. (1992). Tax Evasion and Inequity. Journal of Economic Psychology 13, 521 - 543.
• [16] Davis, J. S., G. Ilecht and J. D. Perkins (2003). Social Behaviors, Enforcement, and Tax Compliance Dynamics. The Accounting Review 78(1), 39-69.
• [17] Falkinger, J. (1988) Tax Evasion and Equity: A Theoretical Analysis. Public Finance/Finances Publiques 43, 388-395.
• [18] Falkinger, J. (1991) On Optimal Public Good Provision with Tax Evasion. Journal of Public Economics 45, 127-133.
• [19] Falkinger, J. and H. Walther (1991). Rewards versus Penalties: On a New Policy against Tax Evasion. Public Finance Quarterly 19, 67-79.
• [20] Falkinger, J. (1995). Tax Evasion, Consumption of Public Goods and Fairness. Journal of Economic Psychology 16, 63-72.
• [21] Heinemann, F. and F. Schneider (2011). Religion and the Shadow Economy. ZEW Discussion Papers 11-038.
• [22] Hokamp, S. and M. Pickhardt (2010). Income Tax Evasion in a Society of Heterogeneous Agents - Evidence from an Agent-based Model. International Economic Journal 24(4), 541-553.
• [23] Hokamp, S. (2013). Income Tax Evasion and Public Goods Provision -Theoretical Aspects and Agent-based Simulations Brandenburg University of Technology Cottbus, Ph.D. Thesis.
• [24] Hokamp, S. (2014). Dynamics of tax evasion with back auditing, social norm updating and public goods provision - An agent-based simulation. Journal of Economic Psychology 40, 187-199.
• [25] Hokamp, S. and G. Seibold (2014). How much Rationality tolerates the Shadow Economy? - An Agent-based Econophysics Approach. Advances in Social Simulation; Conference Series: Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing 229, 119-128.
• [26] Ising, E. (1925). Beitrag zur Theorie des Ferromagnetismus. Zeitschrift für Physik 31(1), 253-258.
• [27] Kirchler, E. (2007). The Economic Psychology of Tax Behavior. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
• [28] Korobow, A., C. Johnson and R. Axtell (2007). An Agent-based Model of Tax Compliance with Social Networks. National Tax Journal 60(3), 589-610.
• [29] Krauth, W. (2006). Statistical Mechanics; Algorithms and Computations. Oxford University Press.
• [30] Lima, F. W. S. and G. Zaklan (2008). A Multi-agent-based Approach to Tax Morale. International Journal of Modern Physics C: Computational Physics and Physical Computation 19(12), 1797-1808.
• [31] Lima, F. W. S. (2010). Analysing and Controlling the Tax Evasion Dynamics via Majority-Vote Model. Journal of Physics: Conference Series 246. 1-12.
• [32] Méder, Z. Z., A. Simonovits and J. Vincze (2012). Tax Morale and Tax Evasion: Social Preferences and Bounded Rationality. Economic Analysis and Policy 42(2), 171-188.
• [33] Mittone, L. and P. Patelli (2000). Imitative Behaviour in Tax Evasion, in: Francisco Luna and Benedikt Stefansson (eds.), Economic Simulations in Swarm: Agent-based Modelling and Object Oriented Programming, Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 133-158.
• [34] Mittone, L. (2006). Dynamic Behaviour in Tax Evasion: An Experimental Approach. The Journal of Socio-Economics 35, 813-835.
• [35] Musgrave, R. A. (1939). The Voluntary Exchange Theory of Public Economy. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 53. 213-237.
• [36] Musgrave, R. A. (1969). Provision for Social Goods. Public Economics, McMillan, London, 124-144.
• [37] Musgrave, R A. (1999). The Nature of the Fiscal State: The Roots of My Thinking. Public Finance and Public Choice, Cambridge: MIT Press, 29-49.
• [38] Nordblom, K. and J. Zamac (2012). Endogenous Norm Formation Over the Life Cycle - The Case of Tax Morale. Economic Analyis & Policy 42(2), 153-170.
• [39] Pelizzari, P. and D. Rizzi (2014). Citizenship and power in an agent-based model of tax compliance with public expendit ure. Journal of Economic Psychology 40. 35-48.
• [40] Pickhardt, M. (2003). Studien zur Theorie öffentlicher Güter. Metropolis, Marburg, Germany.
• [41] Pickhardt, M. (2006). Fifty Yeare after Samuelson's 'The Pure Theory of Public Expenditure': What Are We Left with? Journal of the History of Economic Thought 28 (4) 439-460.
• [42] Piekhardt. M. and A. Prinz (2014). Behavioral Dynamics of Tax Evasion - A Survey. Journal of Economic Psychology 40. 1-19.
• [43] Pickhardt, M. and G. Seibold (2014). Income Tax Evasion Dynamcis: Evidence from an Agent-based Eeonophysics Model. Journal of Economic Psychology 40. 147-160.
• [44] Samuels on. P. A. (1954). The Pure Theory of Public Expenditure. The Review of Economics and Statistics 36, 387-389.
• [45] Samuelson, P. A.(1955). Diagrammatic Exposition of a Theory of Public Expenditure. Review of Economics and Statistics 37, 350-356.
• [46] Samuelson, P. A.(1969). Pure Theory of Public Expenditure. Public Economics, McMillan, London, 98-123.
• [47] Samuelson, P. A. and W. D. Nordhaus (1998). Economics. McGraw-Hill, New York, 16th edition.
• [48] Seibold. G. and M. Pickhardt (2013). Lapse of time effects on tax evasion in an agent-based Econophysics model. Physica A 392(9), 2079-2087.
• [49] Szabo, A., L. Gulyas and I. J. Toth (2009). Sensitivity Analysis of a Tax Evasion Model Applying Automated Design of Experiments, in: Luis S. Lopes, Nuno Lau, Pedro Mariano, and Luis M. Rocha (Eds.), Progress in Artificial Intelligence, 14th Portuguese Conference on Artificial Intelligence, EPIA 2009, Aveiro, Portugal, LNAI 5816, Berlin Heidelberg: Springer, 572-583.
• [50] Szabo, A. and L. Gulyas and I. J. Toth (2010). Simulating Tax Evasion with Utilitarian Agents and Social Feedback. International Journal of Agent Technologies and Systems 2(1), 16-30.
• [51] Zaklan, G., F. W.S. Lima and F. Westerhoff (2008). Controlling Tax Evasion Fluctuations. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications 387(23), 5857-5861.
• [52] Zaklan, G., F. Westerhoff and D. Stauffcr (2009). Analysing Tax Evasion Dynamics via the Ising Model. Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination 4, 1-14.

Identyfikatory

DOI

DOI: 10.24425/cejeme.2014.119241