Abstract
Given the recent interest of the Internal Revenue Service in having academic social scientists do research on the problem of tax noncompliance, it is important to consider the political and administrative context in which such research would occur. While the IRS offers a tremendous opportunity in the form of data and expertise, its tax enforcement mission and political environment play an important role in shaping the research agenda. Specifically, the academic social scientists, wishing to avail themselves of the opportunity, must be able to demonstrate the practical application of their research, something that researchers of the so-called “underground economy” did not do. Moreover, the research must not perpetuate the notion that the ability or efficiency of the IRS to enforce the tax laws is being widely eroded. The criminal deterrence doctrine is an area of basic research having particular interest to the IRS. There is a discussion of how research on the deterrence of tax crime might develop.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bartlett, Bruce. 1981.Reaganomics: Supply-Side Economics in Action. New York: Quill.
Berk, Richard A. 1981. “On the Compatibility of Applied and Basic Sociological Research: An Effort in Marriage Counseling.”The American Sociologist 16: 204–11.
CSR, 1980.A General Taxpayer Opinion Survey. Washington, DC: Prepared for the Internal Revenue Service (Office of Planning and Research).
Cox, Dennis. 1984. “Raising Revenue in the Underground Economy.”National Tax Journal xxxvii, no. 3, September: 83–288.
Feige, Edgar. 1979. “How Big is the Irregular Economy?”Challenge November–December: 5–13.
_____ 1980. “A New Perspective on Macro Economic Phenomena, the Theory and Measurement of the Unobserved Sector in the United States Economy: Causes, Consequences, and Implications.” Working Paper, Department of Economics, University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Fratanduono, Richard. 1986. “Trends in Voluntary Compliance of Taxpayer Filing of Individual Tax Returns.”Trend Analyses and Related Statistics Washington, DC: Internal Revenue Service: 15–26.
Guttman, Peter. 1977. “The Subterranean Economy.”Financial Analysts Journal November–December: 24–27, 34.
Hood, Christopher. 1986. “Privatizing UK Tax Law Enforcement.”Public Administration 64 Autumn: 319–33.
Internal Revenue Service. 1975. “Effect of a Prior TCMP Audit.” Washington, DC: Research Division.
Internal Revenue Service. 1982. “Effect of a Prior TCMP Audit-Second Panel.” Washington, DC: Research Division.
___ 1983.Income Tax Compliance Research. Washington, DC: Research Division.
___. 1984.TCMP Handbook. Washington, DC: Office of the Assistant Commissioner (Planning, Finance, Research).
___ 1985b.Conference on Tax Administration Reseach. Washington, DC: Assistant Commissioner (Planning, Finance, and Research).
___ 1986.Fiscal Years 1986–1994 Projections. Washington, DC: Research Division.
ICF. 1985.Summary of Public Attitude Survey Findings. Washington, DC: Prepared for Internal Revenue Service.
Long, Susan. 1980.The IRS: Measuring Tax Offenses and Enforcement Response. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Mak, Marion. 1985. “Relationship of Individual Returns to Employment and Other Trends.”Trend Analyses and Related Statistics. Washington, DC: Internal Revenue Service: 81–90.
Malanga, Frank. 1986. “Relationship Between IRS Enforcement and Tax Yield.”National Tax Journal xxxix: 333–337.
Miller, James C. 1985. “Gramm-Rudman-Hollings and the Budget Deficit.” Unpublished speech, Washington, DC: Office of Management and Budget.
National Opinion Research Center. 1968. “Report on Role of Sanctions in Tax Compliance.” Washington, DC: Prepared for the Internal Revenue Service.
Packer, H.L. 1968.The Limits of Criminal Sanction. Stanford CA: Stanford University Press.
Paternoster, Raymond, Linda Saltzman, Gordon Waldo, and Theodore Chiricos. 1982. “Perceived Risk and Deterrence: Methodological Artifacts in Perceptual Deterrence Research.”Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology: 1238–58.
Rossi, Peter. 1980. “The Challenge and Opportunities of Applied Social Research.”American Sociological Review 45(6):889–904.
Scholz, John. 1986. “Political Context of Tax Administration.” Padre Island, Texas: Paper prepared for the National Academy of Sciences Symposium on Taxpayer Compliance Research.
Smith Kent and Karyl Kinsey. 1985. “Cooperation and Control: Strategies and Tactics of Tax Examination.”ATaxpayer Compliance Project Working Paper: 85-2 Chicago, IL.: American Bar Foundation.
Tanzi, Vito. 1982.The Underground Economy of the United States and Abroad. Lexington MA: D.C. Heath and Company.
Thurman, Quint, Craig St. John and Lisa Riggs. 1984. “Neutralization and Tax Evasion: How Effective Would a Moral Appeal Be in Improving Compliance to Tax Laws.”Law and Policy 6:309–27.
U.S. House of Representatives. 1986. “Staffing Levels and Allocation of Resources of the IRS.” Washington, DC: Oversight Committee of the Ways and Means Committee.
Yankelovich, Skelly and White, Inc. 1984.Taxpayer Attitudes Study. Prepared for the IRS. Washington, DC.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
He has done research for the IRS and presently is studying the untaxed economy.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Wiegand, B. Political considerations of studying tax compliance. Am Soc 18, 375–384 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02692368
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02692368