NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH
NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH
loading...

Tax Audits as Scarecrows: Evidence from a Large-Scale Field Experiment

Marcelo L. Bérgolo, Rodrigo Ceni, Guillermo Cruces, Matias Giaccobasso, Ricardo Perez-Truglia

NBER Working Paper No. 23631
Issued in July 2017, Revised in May 2019
NBER Program(s):Development Economics, Law and Economics, Public Economics

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.

download in pdf format
   (672 K)

email paper

Machine-readable bibliographic record - MARC, RIS, BibTeX

Document Object Identifier (DOI): 10.3386/w23631

Users who downloaded this paper also downloaded* these:
Carrera, Royer, Stehr, and Sydnor w23567 Can Financial Incentives Help People Trying to Establish New Habits? Experimental Evidence with New Gym Members
Hansen, Miller, and Weber w23632 The Taxation of Recreational Marijuana: Evidence from Washington State
Gerardino, Litschig, and Pomeranz w23978 Can Audits Backfire? Evidence from Public Procurement in Chile
Benzarti w23903 How Taxing Is Tax Filing? Using Revealed Preferences to Estimate Compliance Costs.
Stango, Yoong, and Zinman w23625 Quicksand or Bedrock for Behavioral Economics? Assessing Foundational Empirical Questions
 
Publications
Activities
Meetings
NBER Videos
Themes
Data
People
About

National Bureau of Economic Research, 1050 Massachusetts Ave., Cambridge, MA 02138; 617-868-3900; email: info@nber.org

Contact Us