1 / 59

Resistant and Dismissive Defiance in Taxation: A Challenge beyond Compliance Valerie Braithwaite Regulatory Institutions

Resistant and Dismissive Defiance in Taxation: A Challenge beyond Compliance Valerie Braithwaite Regulatory Institutions Network Australian National University OECD/FTA Conference: Influencing Taxpayers’ Compliance Behaviour 28-29 September 2009, The Hague, The Netherlands. Three Objectives.

rebekkah
Télécharger la présentation

Resistant and Dismissive Defiance in Taxation: A Challenge beyond Compliance Valerie Braithwaite Regulatory Institutions

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Resistant and Dismissive Defiance in Taxation: A Challenge beyond Compliance Valerie Braithwaite Regulatory Institutions Network Australian National University OECD/FTA Conference: Influencing Taxpayers’ Compliance Behaviour 28-29 September 2009, The Hague, The Netherlands

  2. Three Objectives Understanding pathways to defiance Observing the glass - both half full and half empty Reflecting on three models of community engagement central to Centre for Tax System Integrity research

  3. Defiance … is a signal that individuals express attitudinally or behaviourally toward an authority (and shared with others) that communicates unwillingness to follow the authority’s prescribed path without question or protest. Any of us can experience, indeed practice defiance if the circumstances are right.

  4. Motivational Postures … are sets of beliefs and attitudes that sum up how individuals feel about and wish to position themselves in relation to another social entity, in this case a tax authority. Motivational postures send social signals or messages to the authority about how that authority is regarded.

  5. The Central Ideas of Threat … Agency and Social Distance Authority threatens everyone, by virtue of being an authority. As an authority’s threat increases, taxpayers use their motivational postures to adjust their social distance and establish a comfort zone for themselves in relation to the authority. Different contexts bring to the fore different postures, and different postures direct individuals to make different responses, some obliging and deferential, others adversarial and dismissive.

  6. Five motivational postures: Commitment Capitulation Resistance Disengagement Game playing

  7. How Do We Measure Socially Proximal Postures? Note: Respondents were asked to rate each statement on a five-point scale from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5).

  8. How Do We Measure Socially Proximal Postures? Note: Respondents were asked to rate each statement on a five-point scale from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5).

  9. How Do We Measure Socially Distal Postures? Note: Respondents were asked to rate each statement on a five-point scale from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5).

  10. How Do We Measure Socially Distal Postures? Note: Respondents were asked to rate each statement on a five-point scale from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5).

  11. How Do We Measure Socially Distal Postures? Note: Respondents were asked to rate each statement on a five-point scale from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5).

  12. Centre for Tax System Integrity 6 tax focused national mail surveys between 1999 and 2005 3 national mail surveys on governance between 2000 and 2005 3 of the tax focused surveys tracked Australians’ responses to tax reform and the introduction of the goods and services tax (GST) in July 2001: 2000 CHFAS survey pre-GST 2001 ATFONS survey immediately post-GST 2005 HEHF survey post the reform process

  13. From Postures to Defiance

  14. Dimension 1: Resistant Defiance

  15. Dimension 2: Dismissive Defiance

  16. Two Types, Two Purposes Resistance – The purpose is to change the course of action that the authority is taking but not destroy the authority itself. “ I don’t like the way you are doing this and I want you to change, but I don’t dispute that we need an authority to regulate us in this area” Dismissiveness – The purpose is to disable the authority, to prevent the authority from intervening in this aspect of life “You have no business telling me what to do – no-one should have the authority that you have over me”

  17. Disillusionment with Democracy Values (seeking status, harmony)

  18. Disillusionment with Democracy Values (seeking status, harmony) Coping Styles (thinking morally, feeling oppressed) Perceived Deterrence

  19. Disillusionment with Democracy Values (seeking status, harmony) Social Modelling (bending rules, winning, aggressive or honest adviser) Coping Styles (thinking morally, feeling oppressed) Perceived Deterrence

  20. Disillusionment with Democracy Values (seeking status, harmony) Social Modelling (bending rules, winning, aggressive or honest adviser) Coping Styles (thinking morally, feeling oppressed) Defiance (resistance, dismissiveness) Perceived Deterrence

  21. Perceived Institutional Integrity Disillusionment with Democracy Trust Values (seeking status, harmony) Social Modelling (bending rules, winning, aggressive or honest adviser) Coping Styles (thinking morally, feeling oppressed) Defiance (resistance, dismissiveness) Perceived Deterrence

  22. Resistant defiance is … A battle between pathways of moral obligation and of grievance. Moral obligation or the belief that the law should be obeyed reins in a person’s defiance. Grievance or the belief that government has broken its contract with citizens fuels defiance.

  23. Disillusionment .51 -.49 Resistance Integrity -.66 .29 Feeling Oppressed A composite structural equation model predicting resistance

  24. .17 Honest Adviser Disillusionment -.35 .14 Thinking Morally -.17 .51 .18 .33 -.49 Resistance Integrity .18 -.66 .22 .29 Perceived Deterrence R2=.58 Feeling Oppressed .23 A composite structural equation model predicting resistance

  25. What is our best model of resistant defiance?

  26. Impact on Governance: Resistance

  27. Dismissive Defiance is …

  28. Disillusionment -.40 .52 Dismissiveness .27 .42 Feeling Oppressed Aggressive Adviser .57 Seeking Status .30 Composite structural equation model predicting dismissiveness

  29. -.35 Disillusionment Honest Adviser .17 Thinking Morally -.40 .52 -.40 -.18 .19 Perceived Deterrence -.15 Dismissiveness .18 .27 .42 Feeling Oppressed Aggressive Adviser .57 Seeking Status .30 R2=.50 Composite structural equation model predicting dismissiveness

  30. What is our best model of dismissive defiance?

  31. Impact on Governance: Dismissive Defiance

  32. Theoretical propositions: Defiance in Taxation and Governance (Braithwaite, 2009) Authority threatens us all. In the process of dealing with authority, three selves go forward to face the enemy: a moral self a status seeking self a democratic collective self. Conclusion: Tax reform in its outcomes and process needs to be respectful of these selves.

  33. Moral self: a self that wants to be honest and seen to be honest, as law abiding, as not needing to be fearful of authority, a good person. “I am a good person and the authority should recognize this.” When a moral self is under-valued: The morally obligated pathway is weakened, and the way is cleared for defiance.

  34. A status seeking self: a self that aspires to wealth, power and status in some cases and to a job, family and home in others. “I have hopes of success and authority should not block my path.” When a status seeking self can’t be expressed within the authority’s domain: A competitive pathway to defiance comes into being, strengthened by alternative authorities that provide resources to defeat the government agenda.

  35. Democratic collective self: a self that expects government to deliver in exchange for our cooperation, an expectation of being respected as a citizen. “I am a good citizen and the authority should treat me and other citizens as valued participants of the democracy.” When a democratic collective self is betrayed: A grievance pathway to defiance comes into being that is shared with others and expressed as protest against authority.

  36. What do tax agencies have going for them – The Glass Half Full What do tax agencies have going against them – The Glass Half Empty The process of learning a new way forward – See Both Realities

  37. Glass Half Full

  38. Snapshot Statistics of what Australians Think: How many Australians feel a moral obligation to pay tax in 2000, 2002 and 2005 ?

  39. Imagine you are caught for tax evasion – not declaring $5,000 in income or claiming work deductions unlawfully worth $5,000. How would you feel if you were caught ? 60% in 2000 and 60% in 2002 said they were likely or certain to feel ashamed or guilty 8% in 2000 and 8% in 2002 said they were likely to feel angry with the tax office and express that anger 7% in 2000 and 8% in 2002 said they would just shrug it off and not worry too much about it

  40. How is the moral self undermined? Imagine that you have to find a tax adviser. What would your ideal tax adviser be like? Would you give a top or high priority to some who is …

  41. Glass Half Empty

  42. Snapshot Statistics of what Australians Think: How many Australians feel oppressed by taxation agreeing with the following in 2000, 2002 and 2005?

  43. How is the status seeking self undermined? Pathways to success are more easily accessed by some than others: Opportunities for investment and prosperity Opportunities for tax minimization and avoidance Opportunities for home, family and job. Correlational analyses show that those who seek these opportunities most strongly express weaker moral obligation.

  44. 5 Unskilled factory workers 6 9 Farm labourers 9 11 Waitresses 10 24 Trades people 22 23 Small business owners 24 29 Farm owners 29 Tax ATSFONS Tax CHFAS 47 Tax agents and advisors 45 49 Doctors in general practice 51 60 Surgeons 59 73 Senior judges and barristers 64 75 Owner managers 70 78 Chief executives 77 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Percent paying a bit less or much less than their fair share Perceptions of the degree to which different occupational groups are paying their fair share of tax

  45. 48 Freemarket 38 40 85 Tax HFHE (L) 2005 Disillusionment 87 Hope 2003 Tax CHFAS 2000 86 0 20 40 60 80 100 Percent agree or strongly agree A comparison of levels of disillusionment with Australian democracy and support for small government and free markets 2000 - 2005

  46. Snapshot Statistics of what Australians Think: How many Australians agree or say yes in 2000, 2002, and 2005 to questions on “value for money”?

  47. 12 Game playing 11 9 Disengagement 8 50 Resistance 55 70 Capitulation 62 82 Hope Commitment Democracy 84 0 20 40 60 80 100 Percent agreement Percent endorsing each motivational posture to federal government

  48. What are the big ideas that we tested? To make the link with policy and practice let us ground the findings in three models of community engagement – practical tools that come out of theory driven and empirically tested research (a) Taxpayers’ Charter (b) ATO Compliance Model (c) Wheel of Social Alignments

More Related