The DOI matches its Crossref record; 49 of the 50 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Tax farming redux: experimental evidence on performance pay for tax collectors
Open accessAbstract
Abstract Performance pay for tax collectors has the potential to raise revenues, but might come at a cost if it increases the bargaining power of tax collectors vis-à-vis taxpayers. We report the first large-scale field experiment on these issues, where we experimentally allocated 482 property tax units in Punjab, Pakistan, into one of three performance pay schemes or a control. After two years, incentivized units had 9.4 log points higher revenue than controls, which translates to a 46% higher growth rate. The scheme that rewarded purely on revenue did best, increasing revenue by 12.9 log points (64% higher growth rate), with little penalty for customer satisfaction and assessment accuracy compared to the two other schemes that explicitly also rewarded these dimensions. The revenue gains accrue from a small number of properties becoming taxed at their true value, which is substantially more than they had been taxed at previously. The majority of properties in incentivized areas in fact pay no more taxes, but instead report higher bribes. The results are consistent with a collusive setting in which performance pay increases collectors’ bargaining power over taxpayers, who have to either pay higher bribes to avoid being reassessed or pay substantially higher taxes if collusion breaks down.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Moral Hazard and Observability
Holmstrom, B. R. (1979) · The Bell Journal of Economics · doi:10.2307/3003320 · Cited by 8,159
Multitask principal – agent analyses: Incentive contracts, asset ownership, and job design
Holmstrom, B., & Milgrom, P. (1991) · The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization · doi:10.1093/jleo/7.special_issue.24 · Cited by 6,046
Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1994) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.2307/2118354 · Cited by 3,440
The Provision of Incentives in Firms
Prendergast, C. (1999) · Journal of Economic Literature · doi:10.1257/jel.37.1.7 · Cited by 3,338
Monitoring Corruption: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Indonesia
Olken, B. A. (2005) · Journal of Political Economy · doi:10.1086/517935 · Cited by 1,949
Law Enforcement, Malfeasance, and Compensation of Enforcers
Becker, G. S., & Stigler, G. J. (1974) · The Journal of Legal Studies · doi:10.1086/467507 · Cited by 1,842
Unwilling or Unable to Cheat? Evidence From a Tax Audit Experiment in Denmark
Kleven, H., Knudsen, M., Kreiner, C. T., Pedersen, S., & Saez, E. (2011) · Econometrica · doi:10.3982/ecta9113 · Cited by 1,282
Boycko, M., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1996) · The Economic Journal · doi:10.2307/2235248 · Cited by 1,221
Subjective Performance Measures in Optimal Incentive Contracts
Baker, G. P., Gibbons, R. S., & Murphy, K. J. (1994) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.2307/2118358 · Cited by 955
Subjective Performance Measures in Optimal Incentive Contracts
Baker, G. P., Gibbons, R. S., & Murphy, K. (1993) · National Bureau of Economic Research · doi:10.3386/w4480 · Cited by 926
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- City of Cambridge, 2014, Annual Budget 2014–2015
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Tax Compliance and Enforcement
Slemrod, J. (2019) · Journal of Economic Literature · doi:10.1257/jel.20181437 · Cited by 765
The effect of a fiscal squeeze on tax enforcement: Evidence from a natural experiment in China
Chen, S. X. (2017) · Journal of Public Economics · doi:10.1016/j.jpubeco.2017.01.001 · Cited by 300
Duflo, E. (2017) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.p20171153 · Cited by 276
Patronage and Selection in Public Sector Organizations
Colonnelli, E., Prem, M., & Teso, E. (2020) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.20181491 · Cited by 273
Bureaucracy and Service Delivery
Pepinsky, T. B., Pierskalla, J. H., & Sacks, A. (2017) · Annual Review of Political Science · doi:10.1146/annurev-polisci-051215-022705 · Cited by 292
Metadata
- Authors
- Khan, A. Q., Khwaja, A. I., & Olken, B. A.
- Affiliations
- London School of Economics and Political Science (GB)
- ORCID
- Olken, Benjamin A.
- Venue
- The Quarterly Journal of Economics
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2015-10-01
- Volume
- 131
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 219-271
- ISSN
- 0033-5533 (ISSN-L)
- 1531-4650
- OpenAlex
- W1592605479
- Cited by
- 267
- References
- 50
- Citations by year
- 2026: 14 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 31 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 40 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 24 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 4
- FWCI
- 49.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- The Quarterly Journal of Economics (publishedVersion)
- London School of Economics and Political Science Theses Online (London School of Economics and Political Science) (acceptedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (1124134)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Taxation and Compliance Studies
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Local Government Finance and Decentralization
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Economic and Fiscal Studies
- Keywords
- tax farming, performance-based pay, tax collectors, property tax, tax revenue, bribery, collusion, bargaining power, customer satisfaction, Punjab, Pakistan
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review