Article Sidebar

Download
Download Article

Main Article Content

Abstract

This study aims to analyze the effect of tax sanctions, tax authorities, level of understanding, awareness, and the environment of taxpayers on individual taxpayer compliance at KPP Pratama Makassar Barat. This study uses primary and secondary data. Primary data was obtained through the answers of each respondent and secondary data was obtained from KPP Pratama Makassar Barat related to the number of registered individual taxpayers, taxpayers who are subject to SPT, and the number of taxpayers who report SPT. The sample in this study is 100 individual taxpayers who are registered at KPP Pratama Makassar Barat. Data were analyzed using the SPSS statistical program. The results of this study indicate that simultaneously all independent variables have a positive and significant effect on individual taxpayer compliance. Then based on partial testing, only the level of understanding variable (X3) and the awareness variable (X4) do not significantly influence individual taxpayer compliance (Y) at KPP Pratama Makassar Barat.

Keywords

Tax Sanctions Tax Authorities Level of Understanding Awareness Taxpayer Environment Individual Taxpayer Compliance

Article Details

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

How to Cite
Nasrullah, N. (2022). KPP Pratama Makassar Barat Assesses The Impact of Tax Sanctions, Fiskus Services, and The Taxpayer’s Environment. Golden Ratio of Taxation Studies, 2(1), 47–62. https://doi.org/10.52970/grts.v2i1.243
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

References

  1. Alm, J., Cherry, T., Jones, M., & McKee, M. (2010). Taxpayer information assistance services and tax compliance behavior. Journal of Economic Psychology, 31(4), 577–586. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2010.03.018
  2. Ayupov, A. A., & Kazakovtseva, M. V. (2014). Management of Financial Stability of the Non-Tax Income of Regional Budgets. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 131, 187–192. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.04.102
  3. Bernasconi, M., Levaggi, R., & Menoncin, F. (2015). Tax evasion and uncertainty in a dynamic context. Economics Letters, 126, 171–175. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2014.12.013
  4. De Geest, G., Dari-Mattiacci, G., & Siegers, J. J. (2009). Annullable bonuses and penalties. International Review of Law and Economics, 29(4), 349–359. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irle.2009.03.006
  5. Eichfelder, S., & Kegels, C. (2014). Compliance costs caused by agency action? Empirical evidence and implications for tax compliance. Journal of Economic Psychology, 40, 200–219. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2012.08.012
  6. Eisenhauer, J. G. (2008). Ethical preferences, risk aversion, and taxpayer behavior. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 37(1), 45–63. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2007.01.030
  7. Hunt, N. C., & Iyer, G. S. (2018). The effect of tax position and personal norms: An analysis of taxpayer compliance decisions using paper and software. Advances in Accounting, 41, 1–6. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adiac.2018.02.003
  8. Kasper, M., & Alm, J. (2022). Audits, audit effectiveness, and post-audit tax compliance. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 195, 87–102. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2022.01.003
  9. Maciejovsky, B., Kirchler, E., & Schwarzenberger, H. (2007). Misperception of chance and loss repair: On the dynamics of tax compliance. Journal of Economic Psychology, 28(6), 678–691. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2007.02.002
  10. Mascagni, G., Mengistu, A. T., & Woldeyes, F. B. (2021). Can ICTs increase tax compliance? Evidence on taxpayer responses to technological innovation in Ethiopia. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 189, 172–193. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2021.06.007
  11. Mawani, A., & Trivedi, V. U. (2021). Collusive vs. coercively corrupt tax auditors and their impact on tax compliance. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, 30, 100470. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbef.2021.100470
  12. Mittone, L., Panebianco, F., & Santoro, A. (2017). The bomb-crater effect of tax audits: Beyond the misperception of chance. Journal of Economic Psychology, 61, 225–243. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2017.04.007
  13. Nussim, J., & Tabbach, A. D. (2009). Deterrence and tax treatment of monetary sanctions and litigation costs. International Review of Law and Economics, 29(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irle.2008.01.001
  14. Okafor, O. N., & Farrar, J. (2021). Punishing in the public interest: Exploratory Canadian evidence pertaining to convictions and incarcerations for tax offences. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 40(5), 106848. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2021.106848
  15. Savitri, E., & Musfialdy. (2016). The Effect of Taxpayer Awareness, Tax Socialization, Tax Penalties, Compliance Cost at Taxpayer Compliance with Service Quality as Mediating Variable. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 219, 682–687. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.05.051
  16. Schächtele, S., Eguino, H., & Roman, S. (2022). Improving taxpayer registration through nudging? Field experimental evidence from Brazil. World Development, 154, 105887. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2022.105887
  17. Semerád, P., & Bartůňková, L. (2016). VAT Control Statement as a Solution to Tax Evasion in the Czech Republic. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 220, 417–423. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.05.516
  18. Skenderi, D., & Skenderi, B. (2022). Understanding Tax Evasion and Professionalism of Tax Administration in Kosovo. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 55(39), 70–75. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2022.12.013