Theoretical Perspective on Tax Evasion: An Analysis within the Framework of Crime Theories

Abstract

This study examines tax evasion through various criminological perspectives, including strain theory, rational choice theory, social learning theory, and control theories. The study aims to identify the fundamental motivations and structural factors that lead individuals and businesses to engage in illegal practices based on these theoretical frameworks. Theoretical analyses and related studies emphasize that economic pressures, social learning processes, and weakening social norms significantly contribute to tax evasion. Furthermore, the study highlights that effectively combating tax evasion requires not only legal measures but also the implementation of social and economic policies. The results demonstrate that addressing the strains, opportunities, and social influences that lead to tax evasion is critical for establishing a more equitable and sustainable tax system. In this context, integrating deterrence strategies into the system, strengthening social bonds, and promoting a culture of compliance are key to reducing tax evasion. By comprehensively analyzing the complex interactions between economic, social, and psychological factors involved in tax evasion, this study provides valuable insights for policymakers and academics seeking to develop more effective tax compliance strategies. On the other hand, by examining the phenomenon of tax evasion through the method of crime theories, it theoretically addresses the reasons for turning to practices other than what can be done and what cannot be done, and the method of effective combat methods for policy studies.

Keywords

• Tax evasion
• Theory of crimes
• Criminology

Vergi Kaçakçılığına Teorik Bakış: Suç Teorileri Çerçevesinde Bir İnceleme

Abstract

Bu çalışma; gerilim teorisi, rasyonel seçim teorisi, sosyal öğrenme teorisi ve kontrol teorileri dahil olmak üzere çeşitli kriminolojik perspektiflerden vergi kaçakçılığını incelemektedir. Çalışma, bu teoriler ışığında bireylerin ve işletmelerin yasa dışı uygulamalara yönelmesine neden olan temel motivasyonları ve yapısal faktörleri ortaya koymayı amaçlamaktadır. Teorik analizler ve bu kapsamda yapılan çalışmalar; ekonomik baskılar, sosyal öğrenme süreçleri ve zayıflayan toplumsal normların vergi kaçakçılığına önemli katkılarda bulunduğunu vurgulamaktadır. Ayrıca, vergi kaçakçılığıyla etkin bir şekilde mücadele etmek için yalnızca yasal önlemlerin değil, aynı zamanda sosyal ve ekonomik politikaların da devreye girmesi gerektiğine dikkat çekilmektedir. Sonuçlar, vergi kaçakçılığına yol açan gerilimlerin, fırsatların ve toplumsal etkilerin ele alınmasının, daha adil ve sürdürülebilir bir vergi sistemi oluşturmak için kritik olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır. Bu bağlamda; caydırıcılık stratejilerinin sisteme entegrasyonu, sosyal bağların güçlendirilmesi ve uyum kültürünün teşvik edilmesi, vergi kaçakçılığını azaltmada kilit öneme sahiptir. Çalışma, vergi kaçakçılığında rol oynayan ekonomik, sosyal ve psikolojik faktörlerin karmaşık etkileşimini kapsamlı bir şekilde analiz ederek, vergi uyum stratejileri geliştirmek isteyen politika yapıcılar ve akademisyenler için değerli içgörüler sunmaktadır. Diğer yandan, vergi kaçakçılığı olgusunu suç teorileri bağlamında inceleyerek, bireylerin ve işletmelerin yasa dışı uygulamalara yönelme nedenlerini teorik bir çerçevede ele almakta ve politika yapıcılar için etkili mücadele stratejileri önerilmektedir.

Keywords

• Vergi kaçakçılığı
• Suç teorisi
• Kriminoloji

References

1. Agnew, R. (1992). Foundation for a general strain theory of crime and delinquency. Criminology, 30(1), 47-88.
2. Agnew, R. ve Brezina, T. (2019). General strain theory. In M. D. Krohn, N. Hendrix, G. Penly Hall, & A. J. Lizotte (Eds.), İçinde Handbook on crime and deviance (ss. 145-160). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20779-3_8
3. Akers, R. L. (1985). Deviant behavior: A social learning approach. Wadsworth.
4. Akers, R. L. ve Sellers, C. S. (2013). Student study guide for criminological theories: Introduction, evaluation, application (6th ed.). Oxford University Press.
5. Allingham, M., & Sandmo, A. (2002). Income tax evasion: A theoretical analysis. Taxation: Critical Perspectives on the World Economy, 3, 305-318.
6. Alm, J. ve Antoine, M. (2020). 40 years of tax evasion games: A meta-analysis. Experimental Economics, 24, 699-750. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10683-020-09679-3
7. Altuntop, S. (2012). Suça bakışta kontrol yaklaşımı ve kontrol teorileri̇. Kriminoloji Dergisi, 4(2), 1-15.
8. Amira Izzatie, I. ve Mazurina Mohd, A. (2020). Factors influencing intention to participate in tax evasion: Individual perspectives. Journal of Accounting and Finance, 8, 103-114. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujaf.2020.080403

9. Becker, H. S. (1963). Outsiders. İçinde Studies in the Sociology of Deviance. (1-15).New York:MacMilan.
10. Bernasconi, M., Corazzini, L. ve Seri, R. (2014). Reference dependent preferences, hedonic adaptation and tax evasion: Does the tax burden matter? Journal of Economic Psychology, 40, 103-118. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2013.01.005
11. Bernburg, J. G. (2002). Anomie, social change and crime. A theoretical examination of institutional‐anomie theory. The British Journal of Criminology, 42(4), 729-742. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/42.4.729
12. Bernburg, J. G., Krohn, M. D. ve Rivera, C. J. (2006). Official labeling, criminal embeddedness, and subsequent delinquency:A longitudinal test of labeling theory. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 43(1), 67-88. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427805280068
13. Bethencourt, C. ve Kunze, L. (2019). Tax evasion, social norms, and economic growth. Journal of Public Economic Theory, 21(2), 332-346. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/jpet.12346
14. Bingöl, İ. (2022). Sosyolojik suç teorilerine kuramsal bir yaklaşım: Sosyal süreç teorileri. Bingöl Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi (BUSBED), 12(24), 640-652.
15. Bordignon, M. (1993). A fairness approach to income tax evasion. Journal of Public Economics, 52(3), 345-362. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/0047-2727(93)90039-V
16. Braithwaite, J. (1997). Charles tittle's control balance and criminological theory. Theoretical Criminology, 1(1), 77-97. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362480697001001005
17. Charles, W. B.-A., John, B. C., Kelly, D. M. ve Parboteeah, K. P. (2013). National culture and firm-level tax evasion. Journal of Business Research, 66, 390-396. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JBUSRES.2011.08.020
18. Chriss, J. J. (2007). The functions of the social bond. The Sociological Quarterly, 48(4), 689-712. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.2007.00097.x
19. Commey, J. (2023). Conceptualizing tax evasion and tax compliance strategies. International Journal of Research and Scientific Innovation, 10(8), 169-181.
20. DiCristina, B. (2016). Durkheim’s theory of anomie and crime: A clarification and elaboration. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 49(3), 311-331. https://doi.org/10.1177/0004865815585391
21. Doerrenberg, P. ve Duncan, D. (2014). Distributional implications of tax evasion: Evidence from the lab. Public Finance Review, 42(6), 720-744.
22. Etzioni, A. (1986). Tax evasion and perceptions of tax fairness: A research note. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 22(2), 177-185.
23. Farrar, J. ve King, T. (2023). To punish or not to punish? The impact of tax fraud punishment on observers’ tax compliance. Journal of Business Ethics, 183(1), 289-311.
24. Feld, L. P. ve Frey, B. S. (2007). Tax compliance as the result of a psychological tax contract: The role of incentives and responsive regulation. Law & Policy, 29(1), 102-120. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9930.2007.00248.x
25. Feld, L. P., Torgler, B. ve Dong, B. (2008). Coming closer? Tax morale, deterrence and social learning after german unification. CREMA Working paper,No. 2008-09.
26. Frasieur, J. (2019). Criminological theory. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.24363.16164
27. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/350396915_Criminological_Theory?channel=doi&linkId=605d3e09a6fdccbfea085130&showFulltext=true
28. Froggio, G. (2007). Strain and juvenile delinquency: A critical review of Agnew’s general strain theory. Journal of Loss and Trauma, 12(4), 383-418. https://doi.org/10.1080/15325020701249363
29. Ganon, M. W. ve Donegan, J. J. (2010). Microanomie as an explanation of tax fraud: A preliminary investigation. İçinde Advances in taxation (ss. 123-143). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
30. Gottfredson, M. (2017). Self-control theory and crime. İçinde Oxford research encyclopedia of criminology and criminal justice.Oxford University Press.
31. Gottfredson, M. R., & Hirschi, T. (1990). A general theory of crime. İçinde A general theory of crime. Stanford University Press.
32. Green, S. P. (2008). What is wrong with tax evasion. Hous. Bus. & Tax LJ, 9, 221.
33. Gul, S. (2009). An evaluation of rational choice theory in criminology. Girne American University Journal of Sociology and Applied Science, 4(8), 36-44.
34. Hay, C. (2001). Parenting, self-control, and delinquency: A test of self-control theory. Criminology, 39(3), 707-736. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2001.tb00938.x
35. Hesselink, A.-M. E. ve Herbig, F. J. W. (2009). The scientific basis of criminology. Journal of Psychology in Africa, 19(2), 275-279. https://doi.org/10.1080/14330237.2009.10820291
36. Hickman, M. J., Piquero, A. R., Lawton, B. A. ve Greene, J. R. (2001). Applying tittle’s control balance theory to police deviance. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 24(4), 497-520.
37. Holtfreter, K., Beaver, K. M., Reisig, M. D. ve Pratt, T. C. (2010). Low self‐control and fraud offending. Journal of Financial Crime, 17(3), 295-307. https://doi.org/10.1108/13590791011056264
38. Holzman, E. R., Miller, B. P. ve Williams, B. M. (2021). The local spillover effect of corporate accounting misconduct: Evidence from city crime rates. Contemporary Accounting Research, 38(3), 1542-1580.
39. Howitt, D. (2019). Introduction to qualitative research methods in psychology. Pearson UK.
40. Hughes, L. A., Antonaccio, O. ve Botchkovar, E. V. (2018). Neighborhoods, individuals, and instrumental crime in Russia and Ukraine: A multilevel test of Merton’s anomie theory. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 34(4), 1019-1046. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-017-9364-7
41. Ibadin, P. O. ve Kemebradikemor, E. (2020). Tax fraud in Nigeria: A review of causal factors. Journal of Taxation and Economic Development, 19(1), 64-80.
42. Janssen, H. J., Bruinsma, G. J. ve Weerman, F. M. (2022). Can inner and outer containment counteract pulls and pushes toward delinquency? A test of Walter Reckless’s containment theory. European Journal of Criminology, 19(6), 1615-1637.
43. Kassa, E. T. (2021). Factors influencing taxpayers to engage in tax evasion: Evidence from woldia city administration micro, small, and large enterprise taxpayers. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 10(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13731-020-00142-4
44. Krohn, M. D. (1999). Social learning theory:The continuing development of a perspective. Theoretical Criminology, 3(4), 462-476. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362480699003004006
45. Kroneberg, C., Heintze, I. ve Mehlkop, G. (2010). The interplay of moral norms and instrumental incentives in crime causation. Criminology, 48, 259-294.
46. Langton, L. ve Piquero, N. L. (2007). Can general strain theory explain white-collar crime? A preliminary investigation of the relationship between strain and select white-collar offenses. Journal of criminal justice, 35(1), 1-15.
47. Levaggi, R. ve Menoncin, F. (2013). Optimal dynamic tax evasion. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 37(11), 2157-2167. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jedc.2013.06.007
48. Loughran, T. A., Paternoster, R., Chalfin, A. ve Wilson, T. (2016). Can rational choice be considered a general theory of crime? Evidence from individual‐level panel data. Criminology, 54, 86-112.
49. Mazerolle, P., Burton Jr, V. S., Cullen, F. T., Evans, T. D. ve Payne, G. L. (2000). Strain, anger, and delinquent adaptations specifying general strain theory. Journal of criminal justice, 28(2), 89-101.
50. McBarnet, D. (1991). Whiter than white collar crime: Tax, fraud insurance and the management of stigma. The British Journal of Sociology, 42(3), 323-344. https://doi.org/10.2307/591184
51. Merton, R. K. (1938). Social structure and anomie. American Sociological Review, 3, 672-682.
52. Merton, R. K. (1968). Social theory and social structure. New York: Free Press.
53. Moore, M. (2011). Psychological theories of crime and delinquency. Journal of Human Behaviour in the Social Environment, 21(3), 226-239. https://doi.org/10.1080/10911359.2011.564552
54. Morris, R. G. ve Higgins, G. E. (2010). Criminological theory in the digital age: The case of social learning theory and digital piracy. Journal of criminal justice, 38(4), 470-480. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2010.04.016
55. Näsi, M., Aaltonen, M. ve Kivivuori, J. (2016). Youth hate crime offending: The role of strain, social control and self-control theories. Journal of Scandinavian Studies in Criminology and Crime Prevention, 17(2), 177-184. https://doi.org/doi:10.1080/14043858.2016.1260332
56. Noguera, J. A., Quesada, F. J. M., Tapia, E. ve Llàcer, T. (2014). Tax compliance, rational choice, and social influence: An agent-based model. Revue française de sociologie, 55(4), 765-804.
57. OECD. (2013). Action plan on base erosion and profit shifting. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/doi:https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264202719-en
58. Okada, D. (2015). Criminological theory and crime explanation. İçinde Criminal Justice and Criminological Paradigms.(ss.33-50). SAGE Publications.
59. Palan, R., Murphy, R. ve Chavagneux, C. (2010). Tax havens: How globalization really works. Cornell University Press.
60. Paternoster, R., Jaynes, C. M. ve Wilson, T. (2017). Rational choice theory and interest in the “fortune of others”. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 54(6), 847-868. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427817707240
61. Petrunik, M. (1980). The rise and fall of "labelling theory": The construction and destruction of a sociological strawman. The Canadian Journal of Sociology / Cahiers canadiens de sociologie, 5(3), 213-233. https://doi.org/10.2307/3340175
62. Piquero, A. R. ve Hickman, M. (2003). Extending tittle's control balance theory to account for victimization. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 30(3), 282-301. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854803030003002
63. Plummer, K. (2001). Labeling theory. Encyclopedia of criminology and deviant behavior, 1, 191-193.
64. Porcano, T. M. (1988). Correlates of tax evasion. Journal of Economic Psychology, 9(1), 47-67. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-4870(88)90031-1
65. Pratt, T. C. (2008). Rational choice theory, crime control policy, and criminological relevance. Criminology & Pub. Pol'y, 7, 43-52.
66. Pratt, T. C., & Cullen, F. T. (2000). The empirical status of Gottfredson and Hirschi’s general theory of crime: A meta-analysis. Criminology, 38(3), 931-964. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2000.tb00911.x
67. Pratt, T. C., Cullen, F. T., Sellers, C. S., Thomas Winfree Jr, L., Madensen, T. D., Daigle, L. E., Fearn, N. E. ve Gau, J. M. (2010). The empirical status of social learning theory: A meta‐analysis. Justice Quarterly, 27(6), 765-802. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418820903379610
68. Reckless, W. C. (1963). A non-causal explanation: Containment theory proceedings of the twelfth international course in criminology: The causation and prevention of crime in developing countries: Inaugural session: Lectures - conferences. Int'l Annals Criminology, 2, 220.
69. Reiss, A. J. (1951). Delinquency as the failure of personal and social controls. American Sociological Review, 16(2), 196-207. https://doi.org/10.2307/2087693
70. Richardson, G. (2006). Determinants of tax evasion: A cross-country investigation. Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, 15(2), 150-169. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intaccaudtax.2006.08.005
71. Ross, A. M. ve McGee, R. W. (2012). Education level and ethical attitude toward tax evasion: A six-country study. J. Legal Ethical & Regul. Isses, 15, 93.
72. Sandmo, A. (2005). The theory of tax evasion: A retrospective view. National Tax Journal, 58(4), 643-663.
73. Schneider, F. ve Enste, D. H. (2000). Shadow economies: Size, causes, and consequences. Journal of economic literature, 38(1), 77-114.
74. Sellers, C. S., Cochran, J. K. ve Branch, K. A. (2005). Social learning theory and partner violence: A research note. Deviant Behaviour, 26(4), 379-395. https://doi.org/10.1080/016396290931669
75. Slemrod, J. (2007). Cheating ourselves: The economics of tax evasion. Journal of economic perspectives, 21(1), 25-48.
76. Sykes, G. M. ve Matza, D. (1957). Techniques of neutralization: A theory of delinquency. American Sociological Review, 22(6), 664-670. https://doi.org/10.2307/2089195
77. Tarmidi, D., Suryati, A. ve Purwaningsih, S. (2020). Tax evasion: Impact of internal and external factors, an individual tax payer perception. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 10(5), 675-685.
78. Taylor, C. (2001). The relationship between social and self-control:Tracing Hirschi’s criminological career. Theoretical Criminology, 5(3), 369-388. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362480601005003004
79. Thio, A. (1995). Evaluation of labelling theory. Deviance: A symbolic interactionist approach, 118-131.
80. Tittle, C. R. (1995). Control balance: Toward a general theory of deviance. Boulder.
81. Vito, G. F. ve Maahs, J. R. (2020). Criminology: Theory, research, and policy: Theory, research, and policy (4th ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning.
82. Wallschutzky, I. G. (1984). Possible causes of tax evasion. Journal of Economic Psychology, 5(4), 371-384. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-4870(84)90034-5
83. Wangechi, P. M. ve Ndung’u, P. (2019). Crime of the powerful: A theoretical review. East African Journal of Law and Ethics, 1(2), 35-42.
84. Waring, E. J., Weisburd, D. ve Chayet, E. S. (2020). White-collar crime and anomie. İçinde The legacy of anomie theory (ss. 207-225). Routledge.
85. Wartick, M. L. ve Rupert, T. J. (2010). The effects of observing a peer's likelihood of reporting income on tax reporting decisions. İçinde Advances in taxation (ss. 65-94). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
86. Wentworth, D. ve Rickel, A. U. (1985). Determinants of tax evasion and compliance. Journal of The History of The Behavioral Sciences, 3, 455-466. https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6696(1985)3:4<455::AID-JHBS2300030411>3.0.CO;2-D