Road to Improved

Tax Compliance
Ways to ensure tax compliance
Catherine B. Pasco

I. Introduction
For quite some time, tax evaders had happily succeeded with their utmost objective to pay least
taxes (or none at all) by all means and in varied faces of tax evasion. They came in various
ways such as the following:

Non-reporting of income,
Over-declaration of expenses,
Fictitious expenses,
Claiming personal expenses as business expenses
Borrowing of invoices and receipts,
Non-filing of returns, and more.

Philippine tax system is on a pay-as-you-file system under voluntary compliance where

taxpayers learn for themselves how, what, and when to pay taxes. Unfortunately, tax evaders
look at it is as PAY-AS-YOU-LIKE.
The Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) is doing its best in improving the system that would
enforce tax laws, rules and regulations, and eventually hit hard tax evaders. Even though there
are loopholes in the taxation process and in the tax administration, the BIR continues to develop
programs and tactics that are geared towards strict tax compliance in the Philippines, discover
lapses, and track down tax evaders.
There are many benefits when tax compliance is strictly observed. First, it can raise GDP
growth by 3% from taxes alone if Filipinos, especially the professionals, pay the right taxes.
Second, without new tax measures, the government will not be able to generate the necessary
revenues to achieve inclusive growth and meet the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)
considering that the tax gap in certain taxes exceed 4% of the countrys gross domestic
product.
This paper discusses how to combat the present problems our taxing authority faces nowadays,
especially on how to encourage tax compliance on taxpayers. Before trying to figure out such
treatments and responses to these problems, it is important to know how what drives taxpayers
to be non-compliant. Being knowledgeable on the causes of such behavior will enhance tax
compliance and will result to long-term outcomes in the end.

2 | Page

II. Understanding what influences taxpayer behavior

It has been shown that before planning any response to non-compliance, risks need to be
assessed in terms of their potential impacts the likely cost to revenue, in the short term and
the long term, the potential impact on the government programs and the risk to the reputation of
the authority and community confidence in its administration. Then, an authority needs to
determine, in accordance with some standardized criteria, how the risks identified should be
grouped and prioritized for treatment. Confidence that any action taken will be successful grows
from a clear understanding of what is motivating the non-compliant behavior identified.
Two broad approaches to the problem of compliance have been identified. The first stems from
an economic rationality perspective and has been developed using economic analysis. The
second is concerned with wider behavioral issues and draws heavily on concepts and research
from disciplines such as psychology and sociology. Each approach can be valuable in terms of
understanding tax compliance and the issue is to determine how the two approaches might be
used to reinforce each other.
Many OCED (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development) have invested
resources into research to help understand the factors that influence taxpayer behavior. From
this research the following factors emerge as significant:
A. Economic Factors
Financial burden There appears to be a relationship between the amount of tax owed
and compliance behavior. For example, if a business owner has a tax liability that can
easily be paid they may be willing to comply. However, if the liability is large
potentially threatening the existence of the business the owner may avoid paying at
all or try to adjust the data reported so as to incur a smaller (but incorrect) tax liability.
Cost of compliance Taxpayers appear to face a number of common costs of having to
comply with their tax obligations over and above the actual amount of tax they pay.
These include the time taken to complete requirements, the cost of having to rely on
accountants, and the indirect costs associated with the complexity of tax legislation.
Furthermore, small businesses often express resentment about being unpaid tax
collector because of their role in collecting and paying both indirect and direct taxes.

3 | Page

Disincentives Investigations into the impact of deterrents, such as financial penalties

and threats of prosecution(s), suggest that they may have a time limited effect on
compliance behavior of taxpayers. However, studies have shown that those who are
compliant want those who are non-compliant to be punished.
B. Behavioral Factors
Individual differences - While many taxpayers comply with their tax obligations, some do
not. Individual factors influencing behavior include gender, age, education level, moral
compass, industry, personality, circumstances, and personal assessment of risk.
Perceived inequity Taxpayers who believe the system is unfair or who have personal
experiences of unfair treatment are less likely to comply.
Perception of minimal risk If a taxpayer has the opportunity not to comply and thinks
that there is only a minimal risk of being detected, he or she will take the risk. This
presumably accounts for the greater under-reporting of certain types of income. For
example, salary and wage income is usually highly visible to a taxing authority because
of third party reporting. However, other forms of income may be much less visible and
therefore subject to more creative accounting.
Risk taking If people view tax avoidance as a game to be played and won: they like to
test their skill in avoiding their obligations and avoiding being caught.
In a recent work, economic psychologist Paul Webley focuses on business tax compliance. He
provides an overview that non-compliance behavior occurs in relation to both individuals and
businesses. According to Webley, the main reasons for non-compliant behavior can be
categorized as:
Equity The perceived fairness of a taxation system is important, with taxpayers
behavior influenced by two perceptions: that the system treats them unfairly compared to
others, and that the government is doing too little with the revenue it collects.
Opportunity for non-compliance Several studies report this as the most significant
explanatory factor for non-compliant behavior. However, it is unclear whether those who
4 | Page

are pre-disposed to non-compliance seek work where there are more opportunities for
example, self-employment as opposed to Pay As You Earn (PAYE) employment.
Individual differences Those who do not comply tend to be male, younger, egotistical,
have positive attitudes towards tax evasion and negative attitudes towards taxation
authorities. There is some evidence to suggest that education about the taxation system
has a direct impact on reducing the propensity to evade.
Social norms If a person believes that non-compliance is widespread they are much
more likely not to comply themselves. Studies indicate that it is effective in reducing noncompliant behavior to ensure that taxpayers have an accurate understanding of the
compliance behavior of others.
Dissatisfaction with revenue authorities There is a positive correlation between belief
by taxpayers that the revenue authority is inefficient or unhelpful and the likelihood of
their non-compliance. However, it is unclear just how potent this is compared to other
factors.
III. Discovering what drives specific behavior
Understanding the general theory of taxpayer motivation can help the revenue authority to
shape and manage its compliance program in a strategic way. In the same way, understanding
the factors that drive specific compliance behavior is essential to guide the selection of
appropriate treatment strategies. Analyzing the taxpayers compliance behavior will assist the
taxing authority in addressing the direct cause of the non-compliance rather the symptom,
thereby achieving a longer-term compliance outcome. This process can be illustrated in the
figure below:
Figure 1 Understanding taxpayer compliance behavior
WHAT is
occuring?
e.g. Under reporting of
income
Over claiming of
expenses
Duplicate books

5 | Page

WHO is doing
it?
e.g.
Characteristics
of the
taxpayer
(group)

WHY are they

doing it?
e.g. Lack of
knowledge Cost
of compliance
Perceived
inequity
Dishonesty

For example, over claiming business expenses (failure to report accurately) may be the noncompliant behavior that is observed and that needs to be addressed. However, the driver of the
behavior may be the taxpayers need to increase cash in an attempt to remain competitive in a
business environment where competitors routinely under-report their income or deal in cash.
Alternatively, the driver may be the taxpayers perception that the tax rates are too high and the
desire to earn some money as compensation.
In a situation such as this, treating the behavior (the symptom) will only have an impact on the
affected taxpayer and even then only for a limited period of time. Moreover, the taxpayer
concerned may actually feel hard done by to have been singled out for attention when those
around get away with the same behavior. This may in turn simply serve to fuel feelings of
resentment to the taxation system and provoke further acts of non-compliance. Thus, looking for
the underlying cause of the behavior and selecting the appropriate strategy to address it could
account for a difference in outcomes between short-term, isolated compliance (or even
aggravated non-compliance) and long-term sustainable compliance.
IV. Recognizing the effect of the tax system itself
It should not be automatically assumed that the target population will able to change their
behavior by themselves. This is a further reason why a taxing authority must understand where
the cause of the behavior problem lies.
For example, the behavior of the target population may be to always submit tax returns late
(failure to file). Further analysis and investigation might determine the cause to be third party
entities not making necessary information (e.g. details of dividend distributions) available to the
target population in a timely fashion.
In this situation, penalizing the target population for their behavior is not going to fix the
underlying systemic problem. A more effective strategy would be to work with the third party
information providers to improve the timeliness of their information distribution.
A. Legislation
Good compliance outcomes begin with good legislation. Tax laws that are clearly defined with
regards to its purpose and interpretation can combat non-compliant behavior. Furthermore, it
can guide tax authorities in establishing administrative compliance programs that will increase
6 | Page

compliance risk management. Difficult or ambiguous laws create increased opportunities for
taxpayers to behave in ways that were unintended by the law.
In many ways, good laws strengthen the taxing authoritys ability to deliver fairness in the
conduct of its administration. If the community perceives the law to be unjust or inappropriate
then, inevitably, there is an increased risk of non-compliant behavior. For example, some
taxpayers in the UK refused to pay the poll tax of the early 1990s. This action was regarded by
many of those refusing to pay the tax as morally right because the tax was perceived as unfair
it treated people on similar incomes in a different way. Further, the extent of non-compliance
snowballed when the amount of tax payable increased as a result of non-payment by others.
A variation on this theme is that the application of the law can sometimes have unintended
consequences from an administrative perspective. Obvious examples of this are instances of
the law that take effect at economic boundaries. The law is clear about its intent and application
and yet we observe behavior that indicates active effort on the part of the community to either
avoid being covered by the law when it is deemed to be onerous or else to be covered by the
law when it is considered to be desirable.
B. Administration
Administration begins with the law in place. The law represents a component of the context or
environment in which a revenue authority operates and it is from this environment that we
discern the compliance risks associated with administration of the law. The challenge for
revenue authorities is to administer the law in a manner that sustains community confidence in
their administration.
To that end, the manner of administration must be commensurate with the level of exposure to
compliance risk. Any compliance imposition on the community or sub-section of the community
needs to be acceptable according to community standards. In general, the compliance costs to
the taxpayer associated with administration must be appropriate. Perceived high costs in
relation to a given risk can inadvertently lead to increased community dissatisfaction and
therefore to a decrease in taxpayer compliance. In short, as a participant in the community, a
revenue authority must administer within community standards.

7 | Page

V. Determining the treatment strategies

If the risk has been appropriately stated, and if the driver of the non-compliant behavior for the
selected target group has been clearly identified, then the next step is to select or develop an
appropriate treatment strategy to address the behavior.
An important insight in the development of a compliance program is that it be well balanced. It
should include a good mix of both proactive and reactive strategies as well as strategies that
cover all aspects of compliance management from education to prosecution. Furthermore, a
good balance will see the inclusion of strategies to address risks relating to different taxes or
revenue products, such as income tax (including tax collected through withholding
arrangements) and VAT. Because, non-compliance may arise as a consequence of many
different drivers and express itself in the form of different behavior, a good compliance response
will oftentimes be a suite of strategies rather than a single approach.
Building community confidence
Act with fairness and integrity A number of empirical studies have shown that compliance is
nurtured by trust. The key to creating trust for a revenue authority is to act in ways that the
community will experience to be fair. Peoples judgments about trust are linked to their
evaluations of the procedures by which authorities act. Evidence shows that people who feel
they have been treated fairly by an organization will be more likely to trust that organization and
be inclined to accept its decision and follow its directions.
The perceived fairness of an organization is largely influenced by personal experience from
earlier encounters, other peoples experience, and media reports. This suggests that an
authority should treat citizens fairly and respectfully, listening to them and providing clear
explanations on their queries. Treatment must also be equitable and consistent: the perception
that one has been dealt with more or less favorably than the other will rapidly weaken trust.
A very important conclusion is that the behaviour of the revenue authority should be regarded as
a part of the overall treatment strategy for influencing taxpayer behaviour. Each encounter with
a taxpayer provides an opportunity for the authority to strengthen the loyalty and support of
members of the public. Trust is a resource like no other; it is not depleted through use but rather
through lack of use.

8 | Page

A lack of integrity destroys trust. Corruption in any administration cannot be tolerated because
trust and corruption cannot coexist.
Pursue a flexible, customized approach If it is to build and sustain the confidence of the
community, a revenue authority must respond appropriately to the actions and motivations of
the community it serves. The figure below presents a continuum of regulatory and enforcement
strategies aligned to a continuum of individual taxpayer attitudes and motivations. By
understanding the factors that influence taxpayer behaviors and the range of attitudes towards
compliance, the revenue authority is able to select the most appropriate meaning fair and just
response.
Figure 2 Model of compliance

The model shows that for the majority of taxpayers who choose to pay the correct amount of tax
on time, the provision of ongoing assistance will be the most helpful response to encouraging
continuing compliance. However, as we move up the continuum from taxpayers who are willing
to do the right thing to taxpayers who have decided not to comply, taxpayers must be made
aware that the authority will detect their non-compliance and take credible enforcement action.
Credible enforcement means the taxpayer will be in a worse position after the enforcement
action than they would have been if they had complied in the first instance. Achieving this will
require sufficient resources to maintain a sustained effort.
Revenue authorities must have at their disposal the tools to permit them to impose sanctions
upon taxpayers for non-compliant behavior. However, the research clearly shows us that
taxpayers will only respond better to compliant efforts if they perceive that they have been
treated fairly by the authority and can accept that the authority has the power to take the course
of action it has. If the model of compliance (see figure 2) is consistently and appropriately
9 | Page

applied, this in itself represent a significant step towards demonstrating procedural justice and,
in turn, building community confidence.
Improving compliance
Compliance is most likely to be optimized when a revenue authority pursues a citizen-inclusive
approach to compliance through policies that encourage dialogue and persuasion, combined
with an effective mix of incentives and sanctions. The following discussion outlines principles
that have been derived both from the research literature and the practical experience of revenue
authorities. An enduring challenge for a revenue authority is to convert these principles of fair
treatment into concrete operations and routines in the day-to-day practices of its officers.
Make taxpayers obligations clear If taxpayers do not understand what their obligations are, any
intervention to enforce compliance will be perceived as unfair. Taxpayers must be at least
aware that such policies exist and that if it cant be complied with, they will be accountable for
their actions. Thus, a first step in considering how to address a specific non-compliant behavior
should be to review whether or not the appropriate steps have been taken to make obligations
clear meaning transparent, easy to understand, simple, and not confusing.
Make it easy to comply Experience tells us that the majority of taxpayers want to comply with
their taxation obligations (within cultural and social norms). The appropriate response from a tax
administration perspective is, therefore, to make it easy for them to do so. The attention to new
businesses in various jurisdictions is simply an example of attempts to make it easy for
taxpayers to comply by clearly advising them of their taxation obligations at the commencement
of their business lives.
Making it easy to comply can, potentially, include all the initiatives an authority might take to
improve service delivery. For example, in recent years, many authorities have sought to expand
the range of electronic services (e-services) provided and have seen a rapid increase in the
number of taxpayers and tax advisers taking advantage of the ease and convenience they
provide. In many countries, the administrative burden of tax compliance has been shown to fall
more heavily on small businesses than on large businesses. This has prompted authorities to
increase efforts to simplify administrative requirements, including exploring ways of more closely
aligning tax reporting to the natural systems businesses use for their own banking, accounting

10 | P a g e

and financial reporting. Such initiatives have the potential to save businesses time and cost and
improve the reliability of information received by the authority.
Exercise sanctions when appropriate (See Figure 2) Taxpayers move up and down the
continuum of the compliance pyramid for a variety of reasons. These reasons (drivers) are what
revenue authorities attempt to identify through risk assessment process. Experience has taught
us that overall, it is a more cost effective proposition to achieve compliance by increasing the
numbers of taxpayers at the lower levels of the pyramid. Thus, the challenge for authorities is to
employ strategies that progressively move taxpayers down the continuum to the lower levels.
While the revenue authoritys preferred strategy will be one of self-regulation or voluntary
compliance (at the base of the pyramid), the greatest leverage the authority can exert towards
that outcome comes from taxpayers knowing that the authority has the power and will use it (at
the top of the pyramid) to punish those who do not comply.
According to Ayres and Braithwaite, the threat of severe punishment is most effective when it is
used with a hierarchy of lesser sanctions. That is, regulators will be able to speak softly when
they carry big sticks (and crucially a hierarchy of lesser sanctions). Paradoxically, the bigger and
more various are the sticks, the greater the success regulators will achieve by speaking softly.
Sanctions are important, not so much as a prevention, but as a mechanism to convince people
that others are complying.
Make your powers and activity visible A revenue authority must not only have powers of credible
enforcement, but must also communicate effectively its use of these powers. This aura of
power helps give the authority as an institution its credibility and allows individual officers more
freedom to be co-operative with individual taxpayers.
How might perception of an authoritys legitimate power be enhanced? Strategies that may help
to achieve this outcome include:

Encouraging media reports of successful prosecutions;

Publishing information that provides taxpayers with early warning of behavior that may
be regarded by the authority as non-compliant. This kind of alert may, for example,
provide reports of court or tribunal decisions or interpretive rulings by the authority on
matters of law or administrative practice;

11 | P a g e

Sending leverage letters advising taxpayers that the authority is aware of a specific risk
and inviting a specific response. Such letters have dual utility: they prompt compliant
behavior from the potentially non-compliant (deterrence) and they support the perception
among the compliant that their compliance is not in vain: wrongdoers are being pursued

(reinforcement); and
Exercising vigilance in follow-through of known defaults in relation to basic obligations of
registration, filing, reporting and payment. At some point, leniency in extending time to
pay becomes counterproductive in promoting voluntary compliance.

However, its not so much as to making your powers and activity visible rather, it is also very
important for the image of the taxing authority to know how and when to exercise such power.
Knowing your limitations and putting justice at the top will gain the taxpayers trust and
confidence which will most likely improve tax compliance.
Emerging evidence suggests that the efficacy of the risk management process can be
enhanced if the risks identified and the proposed treatments are given appropriate visibility not
only within the administration but within the customer base as well.
Provide incentives One area of influence that is not used to any great extent by revenue
authorities is that of incentives as a tool to achieve compliance. However, initial research
evidence suggests that individual responses to positive incentives are greater than the
responses to deterrence factors.
Even I, as a future taxpayer, would be more inclined to comply with my responsibilities and pay
taxes on time if revenue authorities will give incentives to those who fulfill and conform to their
tax duties. The losses suffered with those who do not comply will be much greater and more
dangerous in comparison to providing incentives to those faithful taxpayers. Positive
reinforcement, as they say, will give better results in the end.
VI. Classifying risk treatments and developing a suit of responses
All taxing authorities face common problems when dealing with taxpayers even in the initial
stages of the taxation process. This includes failure to register, failure to file, failure to
accurately report, and failure to pay. The discussions that will follow can help taxing authorities
combat these problems and eventually ensure tax compliance in the end.
12 | P a g e

Failure to register
Failure to register is often a result of lack of awareness or misunderstanding by taxpayers of
their obligations, particularly where registration requirements may be based on the definition of
business versus hobby, revenue turnover thresholds, or more complex employee versus
contractor rules. Non-compliance through these types of factors is often at the lesser end of the
continuum as distinct from deliberate attempts to evade registration or falsely register in order to
obtain future refunds or entitlements.
Early education programs Several revenue bodies are developing tax awareness programs at
schools as a means of providing an early initial understanding of the tax system with a longer
term outcome of instilling future complaint behaviors during formative learning periods. This is
clearly a future-based initiative with the expectation that the large majority of new generations of
taxpayers will increasingly be self-managing and compliant.
Most, if not all, business owners only learn how to file taxes when it is time to actually do so.
Sometimes, they dont even take the effort to learn and understand how our taxes come and go.
It would be great if we will be able to learn about taxation in schools and not only when the need
arises.
Targeting new entrants Similarly, there is also expansion of education and assistance programs
targeting new business entrants under broader over-arching assistance strategies. These
programs are aimed at informing taxpayers of their obligations together with available
assistance and self support programs at early engagement points within respective tax systems
including registration and initial filing or payment activities.
A number of revenue bodies have also developed protocols with other government agencies
including co-location of tax administration staff with staff of other agencies to provide a common
contact point for taxpayers to complete registration requirements for a number of government
agencies or services.
General education programs Several agencies commented on the use of broadcast
communication programs to target a range of general compliance obligations including
correction of common misconceptions within both the SMEs and general taxpayer populations.
These programs are being applied both at a singular risk area such as failure to register and
13 | P a g e

also simultaneously at a combination of risk areas such as failure to register in conjunction with
failure to accurately report. In some instances, such campaigns have been used to present the
revenue bodys perspective in response to heightened media activity that tends to occur in
relation to the introduction of tax law amendments or new regimes.
Other initiatives across revenue bodies have included the progressive review and updating of
information materials using simple and clear language to both enhance understanding of
registration requirements and to convey information in a style that encourages voluntary
interaction and seeks to positively influence community perceptions of the tax administration.
Similarly, many revenue bodies are progressively increasing the range of information held on
agency websites. This is seen a cost effective option through both reduced print requirements
and greater speed in providing updated information. The use of website subscription functions
are enabling revenue bodies to generate messages when new updates are made potentially
reaching much broader taxpayer groups at low cost. While web-based information sites allow
large amounts of information to be made available, effective site design that enables easy
access to this information is critical. Similarly, maintaining the currency of web-based
information is essential and periodic reviews to remove redundant material must be undertaken.
Media and the internet, in todays generation, now plays a very important role. How the media
sees it and it portrays information to the public is very crucial. Taxing authorities must learn how
to use technology in order to be able to use it to their advantage.
Failure to file
It is evident that the use of alternative technologies and enhanced online services is an area
revenue bodies are seeking to pursue in order to leverage the high use of technology based
tools by SMEs. Technologies, such as web-based portals, are seen as offering increased cost
effectiveness over traditional contact and response methods. However, they also require
considerable investment not only in application development but, also in the infrastructure
required to support them, particularly where the requirements may be subject to regular change.
Increase use of technology to assist filing While only limited new risk treatments were identified,
each uses a different form of technology and is unique in its intended focus, including:

14 | P a g e

Online submission of standard audit files and returns to both increase filing performance
and also assign compliance ratings for future service strategies;

Proactive pre-filing contacts via SMS to habitual late filers;

Use of third party data and data matching to more accurately identify non-filers; and

Development of self-management tool for access and use by taxpayers.

Revenue bodies need to consider whether developing new technology-based solutions will by
themselves is enough to drive taxpayers to utilize them. Some experiences to date suggest that
while SME taxpayers are early adopters of technologies and may be comfortable with accessing
and downloading useful information and tools, this may not necessarily extend to engagement
in real-time interactions with revenue bodies.
Failure to accurately report
Audits and investigations are generally viewed by all countries as constituting the key means of
detecting non-compliance. However, many revenue bodies no longer regard audit as the
immediate response. Most audits are of an administrative nature but may also extend to criminal
investigations where fraud or other serious wrong doing is identified. Several revenue bodies
indicated that, in combination with increasing access to and use of third party information and
improved risk assessment techniques, more targeted audit activity on priority risk is occurring. In
many instances, audit activity is concentrated on selected cash based industries or other high
risks sectors with the intent to generate leverage through wider publicity and word of mouth
throughout target groups. This targeted activity is often done with the cooperation of key
industry representatives.
Acting with transparency and integrity Actively promoting programs of enforcement activity not
only informs non-compliant taxpayers that they may be selected for review but, also enhances
community perceptions that effective actions are being taken by the agency, particularly when
combined with publication of examples of serious non-compliance.
Incentives and sanctions Incentive based approaches need to contain a component that is of
value to the taxpayer so that they are encouraged to comply, or include a sanction that deters
the taxpayer from not complying, or a combination of both.

15 | P a g e

From the research, three different examples provided incentive based components ranging from
enhanced disclosure provisions, enhanced tax credits, and reward lottery to software grants to
encourage improved record keeping.
The most common form of sanctions are monetary penalties that may take the form of additional
taxes, administrative penalties for late filing or payment, interest, penalties on tax shortfalls, or
criminal penalties imposed by the courts. In many countries, approaches have been developed
whereby penalties may be reduced under statutory provisions where disclosure of noncompliance is made prior to or during an audit.
Promote effective record keeping Poor record keeping is a recognized compliance risk for many
SMEs and improvements in this area are central to accurate reporting. Not only is this sound
business practice for taxpayers, it also provides an audit trail of cash and other financial
transactions. As such, there is an incentive for revenue bodies to provide support in this area
and a number of countries have programs in place.
Audit revisit programs A number of countries have established or are establishing audit re-visit
programs. These programs generally establish a timeframe for a follow-up compliance check
where an earlier audit has identified material reporting discrepancies. Taxpayers may be
identified for a revisit audit at the time the original audit is concluded or identified based on risk
profiling or random selection. These types of review commonly revisit previously identified areas
of concern to identify whether these have been addressed in subsequent reporting periods.
They also signal persistence by the revenue body to ensure repeated non-compliance does not
occur. This type of program can also be used to measure changes in compliance levels over
time and the effectiveness of audit activity.
Informant leads programs A number of revenue bodies also indicated the use of an informant or
anonymous information program by which members of the public can provide reports to the
revenue body of suspected or observed non-compliance with tax laws. In many cases, revenue
bodies have actively promoted such programs to create a sense of self regulation by the wider
community. In some countries these programs provide incentives through monetary rewards for
validated information about non-complying businesses.

16 | P a g e

While countries with these types of programs in place have commented that they are actively
used and can result in significant examples of individual non-compliance, they are also prone to
misleading or vexatious claims driven by incomplete information, business competition, or
relationship breakdowns. The use of these types of programs however can be enhanced by
short and targeted promotion of informant program in support of the commencement of a new
and broader risk treatment.
Failure to pay
If a taxpayer has met the initial three compliance obligations of registration, filing, and reporting,
it does not necessarily mean that payment compliance is assured. Payment compliance risks
are, in most cases, not necessarily identifiable until after a due date has lapsed and no payment
has been made.
Common to treatments in this risk area was the focus on continual education of payment
obligations and for the revenue body to demonstrate greater persistence in pursuing collection.
In most examples, messaging targeted early contact by potentially defaulting taxpayers to avoid
penalties or other collection actions. In respect of persistence in collection activities, agencies
commented that as with many functions they perform, broad-based education efforts must be
supported by appropriate targeting of key and persistent defaulters to ensure ongoing noncompliant behaviors are minimized. Agencies have also noted that this requires increasing
investment in more sophisticated and automated case management and monitoring tools.
Some agencies have also commented that under-reporting or failure to make payment is
sometimes regarded by some taxpayers as victimless non-compliance and that despite the
greater use of broad-based social responsibility campaigns, levels of unpaid taxes continue to
grow. In response to this risk, a small number of agencies have developed disclosure initiatives
whereby the details of persistent large tax debtors are made public to discourage such behavior
and increase collection levels.
VII. Conclusion
In order to manage and improve compliance with tax and other relevant laws, revenue
authorities need to adopt an administrative approach that encourages voluntary compliance
within a cooperative and participative regulatory environment. Such an approach recognizes
that almost all authorities rely, at least to some extent, on self-assessment, given that a system
17 | P a g e

based on reviewing every event or transaction that may have taxation implications would be
too time-consuming and costly. It also recognizes that modern revenue administration is
founded on managing risk responding quickly to circumstances and leveraging the impact of
interventions.
It has been proven that taxpayers are more likely to increase voluntary compliance when they
believe that the revenue authority acts in a way that is fair and reasonable. Regulatory response
that is consistent with a framework such as the compliance pyramid reinforces this belief
because taxpayers tend to regard tough enforcement action as more procedurally fair when
persuasion has been tried first. Further, while taxpayers value being trusted themselves, they
want to know that the authority will be able to deal with others who cannot be trusted. In this
way, responsive regulation builds community confidence and belief in the legitimacy of the tax
system.
In the end, when both the taxing authority and the taxpayer are at the same level in terms of
understanding the importance and impact of taxation, only then will there be a systematic and
strict observance of the laws and policies embodied.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
(Sub-group, 2004)
(Foundation, 2009)
(Pinshaw, 2009)
(Administration, 2009)
18 | P a g e