Tax audits as scarecrows. Evidence from a large- scale field experiment

Bérgolo, Marcelo - Ceni, Rodrigo - Cruces, Guillermo - Giaccobasso, Matías - Pérez-Truglia, Ricardo

Resumen:

The canonical model of Allingham and Sandmo (1972) predicts that firms evade taxes by optimally trading off between the costs and benefits of evasion. However, there is no direct evidence that firms react to audits in this way. We conducted a large-scale field experiment in collaboration with Uruguay’s tax authority to address this question. We sent letters to 20,440 small- and medium-sized firms that collectively paid more than 200 million dollars in taxes per year. Our letters provided exogenous yet nondeceptive signals about key inputs for their evasion decisions, such as audit probabilities and penalty rates. We measured the effect of these signals on their subsequent perceptions about the auditing process, based on survey data, as well as on the actual taxes paid, based on administrative data. We find that providing information about audits had a significant effect on tax compliance but in a manner that was inconsistent with Allingham and Sandmo (1972). Our findings are consistent with an alternative model, risk-as-feelings, in which messages about audits generate fear and induce probability neglect. According to this model, audits may deter tax evasion in the same way that scarecrows frighten off birds.


El modelo canónico de Allingham y Sandmo (1972) predice que las empresas evaden impuestos al balanceando de manera óptima los costos y los beneficios de la evasión. Sin embargo, no hay evidencia directa de que las empresas reaccionen a las auditorías de esta manera. En este estudio, llevamos a cabo un experimento de campo a gran escala en colaboración con la autoridad recaudadora de impuestos de Uruguay para abordar esta cuestión. Enviamos cartas a 20,440 pequeñas y medianas empresas que colectivamente pagaron más de 200 millones de dólares en impuestos por año. Nuestras cartas proporcionaron señales exógenas pero no engañosas sobre insumos clave para sus decisiones de evasión, como las probabilidades de auditoría y las tasas de penalidad. Medimos el efecto de estas señales en las percepciones posteriores de las firmas sobre el proceso de auditoría, a partir de datos de una encuesta, así como en los impuestos reales pagados, a partir de datos administrativos. Encontramos que proporcionar información sobre auditorías tuvo un efecto significativo en el cumplimiento tributario, pero de una manera que fue inconsistente con Allingham y Sandmo (1972). Nuestros hallazgos son consistentes con un modelo alternativo, “riesgo-como-sentimientos”, en el cual los mensajes sobre auditorías generan temor e inducen a “desatención” de la probabilidad. Según este modelo, las auditorías pueden disuadir la evasión fiscal de la misma manera que los espantapájaros asustan a las aves.


Detalles Bibliográficos
2019
Impuestos
Fricciones
Penalidades
Auditorías
Evasión
Tax
Frictions
Penalties
Audits
Evasion
EVASION TRIBUTARIA
EXPERIMENTOS DE CAMPO
Inglés
Universidad de la República
COLIBRI
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12008/23041
Acceso abierto
Licencia Creative Commons Atribución - No Comercial - Sin Derivadas (CC - By-NC-ND 4.0)
Resumen:
Sumario:The canonical model of Allingham and Sandmo (1972) predicts that firms evade taxes by optimally trading off between the costs and benefits of evasion. However, there is no direct evidence that firms react to audits in this way. We conducted a large-scale field experiment in collaboration with Uruguay’s tax authority to address this question. We sent letters to 20,440 small- and medium-sized firms that collectively paid more than 200 million dollars in taxes per year. Our letters provided exogenous yet nondeceptive signals about key inputs for their evasion decisions, such as audit probabilities and penalty rates. We measured the effect of these signals on their subsequent perceptions about the auditing process, based on survey data, as well as on the actual taxes paid, based on administrative data. We find that providing information about audits had a significant effect on tax compliance but in a manner that was inconsistent with Allingham and Sandmo (1972). Our findings are consistent with an alternative model, risk-as-feelings, in which messages about audits generate fear and induce probability neglect. According to this model, audits may deter tax evasion in the same way that scarecrows frighten off birds.