Deterring economic crimes: The case of tax evasion
Abstract
Criminal justice policies and measures for reform almost invariably include some aspect of deterrence-based models in their attempt to control crime. It is believed that making the costs of offences more onerous than the derived benefits will inhibit individuals from committing crimes. This study explores the utility of deterrence theory for criminal justice by examining it in the context of tax evasion. Tax evasion is useful in examining deterrence since it occurs in a setting in which the conditions for deterrence are most likely to. exist. In this study, Canadian survey data were examined to gain an understanding of the effect of criminal justice sanctions on tax evasion. Findings suggest that perceived penalties are not as important to decisions about evading tax as are perceptions of the possibility of being apprehended. Some implications of this finding are that strategies of deterrence based upon penalty size may be in effective if individuals contemplating tax evasion do not think they will be caught. This study raises questions about the adequacy of compliance strategies based upon the severity of sanctions, and discusses regulatory measures that lie outside of the criminal justice system which may hold more promise.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Varma and Doob (1998) found that the greater the acceptability of tax evasion, the greater the tendency to have cheated on taxes.
“In the case of 1,908 Canadian taxpayers, Varma and Doob (1998) found that the greater the acceptability of tax evasion the greater the tendency to have cheated on taxes.”
From The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross‐National Analysis (2006) · cites this paper as Varma and Doob 1998
Available research indicates that tax fraud acceptability is a significant and often powerful predictor of reported tax fraud.
“Available research indicates that tax fraud acceptability is a significant and often powerful predictor of reported tax fraud (Spicer and Lundstedt 1976;Varma and Doob 1998).”
From The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross‐National Analysis (2006) · cites this paper as Varma and Doob 1998
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross‐National Analysis
STACK, S., & KPOSOWA, A. (2006) · Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion · doi:10.1111/j.1468-5906.2006.00310.x · Cited by 148 · see citing works
- Authors
- Varma, K. N., & Doob, A. N.
- Affiliations
- University of Toronto (CA)
- Venue
- Canadian Journal of Criminology
- Published
- 1998-04
- Volume
- 40
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 165-184
- ISSN
- 0704-9722 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2778406596
- Cited by
- 92
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 5
- FWCI
- 0.97
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Canadian Journal of Criminology (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Taxation and Compliance Studies
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Crime, Illicit Activities, and Governance
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems
- Keywords
- tax evasion, deterrence theory, economic crime, tax compliance, severity of punishment, regulatory instruments
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