El comportamiento fiscal según el modelo de la pendiente resbaladiza en muestras de Argentina y España

Lucas Tanos-Robein; Bianca Saavedra; Débora Mola; Cecilia Reyna

Autores/as

Lucas Tanos-Robein
Bianca Saavedra
Débora Mola
Cecilia Reyna

Palabras clave:

comportamiento fiscal, transcultural, confianza, poder, Slippery Slope Framework

Resumen

Los mecanismos habituales para reducir la evasión fiscal suelen sustentarse en enfoques racionales. Evidencia empírica contrapuesta a estos enfoques llevó al desarrollo de un marco conceptual integrador: el Slippery Slope Framework (SSF), según el cual el cumplimiento fiscal depende de la confianza hacia las autoridades y el poder percibido. En ese marco, condujimos dos estudios experimentales. En ambos estudios utilizamos un diseño factorial inter-sujetos 2 (confianza: alta vs. baja) x 2 (poder: alto vs. bajo). En el primero evaluamos el efecto de la manipulación sobre el comportamiento fiscal de estudiantes de contextos socio-económicos distintos, Argentina y España, sin observar efectos significativos. En el segundo condujimos una réplica de Kogler et al. (2013) con estudiantes de Argentina, evaluando la intención de pago de impuestos. En general, los resultados aportaron evidencia a favor del SSF. Se discuten los resultados de cada estudio y se destaca la relevancia de contar con abordajes experimentales que utilicen el comportamiento fiscal como variable dependiente, así como de continuar evaluando las hipótesis del SSF en distintos contextos.

Citas

Allingham, M., & Sandmo, A. (1972). Income tax evasion: A theoretical analysis. Journal of Public Economics, 1(3-4), 323-338. doi: 10.1016/0047-2727(72)90010-2

Alm, J., Bloomquist, K. M., & McKee, M. (2015). On the external validity of laboratory tax compliance experiments. Economic Inquiry, 53(2), 1170-1186. doi: 10.1111/ecin.12196

American Psychological Association. (2010). Ethical principles of psychologist and code of conduct. Washington, DC: APA.

Ayuba, A., Saad, N., & Ariffin, Z. Z. (2018). Testing the assumptions of slippery slope framework on tax compliance: Evidence from Nigerian SMEs. DLSU Business & Economic Review, 27(2), 166-178. https://ejournals.ph/article.php?id=11957

Andrighetto, G., Zhang, N., Ottone, S., Ponzano, F., D'Attoma, J., & Steinmo, S. (2016). Evidence from a Tax Compliance Experiment in Sweden and Italy. Frontiers in Psychology, 7(472), 1-8. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00472

Benk, S., & Budak, T. (2012). Power and trust as determinants of voluntary versus enforced tax compliance: Empirical evidence for the slippery slope framework from Turkey. African Journal of Business Management, 6(4), 1499-1505. doi: 10.5897/AJBM11.2157

Bologna, E. (2013). Estadística para psicología y educación. Córdoba: Editorial Brujas.

Da Silva, F. P., Guerreiro, R., & Flores, E. (2019). Voluntary versus enforced tax compliance: The slippery slope framework in the Brazilian context. International Review of Economics, 1-34. doi: 10.1007/s12232-019-00321-0

Feld, L. P., & Frey, B. S. (2002). Trust breeds trust: How taxpayers are treated. Economics of Governance, 3(2), 87-99. doi: 10.1007/s101010100032

Feld, L. P., & Frey, B. S. (2007). Tax compliance as the result of a psychological tax contract: The role of incentives and responsive. Law & Policy, 29(1), 102-120. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9930.2007.00248.x

Fjeldstad, O. & Semboja, J. (2001). Why people pay taxes: The case of the development levy in Tanzania. World Development, 29(12), 2059-2074. doi: 10.1016/S0305-750X(01)00081-X

Frey, B. S., & Torgler, B. (2007). Tax morale and conditional cooperation. Journal of Comparative Economics, 35(1), 136–159. doi: 10.1016/j.jce.2006.10.006

Fukuyama, F. (1995). Trust: The social virtues and the creation of prosperity. Nueva York: The Free Press.

Gangl, K., Hofmann, E., Hartl, B., & Berkics, M. (2019). The impact of powerful authorities and trustful taxpayers: evidence for the extended slippery slope framework from Austria, Finland, and Hungary. Policy Studies, 1-14. doi: 10.1080/01442872.2019.1577375

Gneezy, U., & Rustichini, A. (2000). A fine is a price. Journal of Legal Studies, 29(1), 1–18. doi: 10.1086/468061

Hammar, H., Jagers, S. C., & Nordblom, K. (2009). Perceived tax evasion and the importance of trust. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 38(2), 238-245. doi: 10.1016/j.socec.2008.07.003

Hofmann, E., Voracek, M., Bock, C., & Kirchlerb, E. (2017). Tax compliance across sociodemographic categories: Meta-analyses of survey studies in 111 countries. Journal of Economic Psychology, 62, 63-71. doi: 10.1016/j.joep.2017.06.005

Hyun, J. K. (2005). Tax Compliances in Korea and Japan: Why are they different? Available at https://www.mof.go.jp/pri/international_exchange/visiting_scholar_program/kou16-c02.pdf (accessed 5 November 2016).

Jiménez, E. F., & Moreno, J. B. (2001). Pesimismo defensivo, optimismo y dificultad de la tarea: El papel de las expectativas. Revista de Psicología General y Aplicada, 54(3), 371-388.

Kasper, M. (2012). Voluntary and enforced tax compliance (PhD Theses). Universidad de Viena, Austria.

Kasper, M., Kogler, C., & Kirchler, E. (2015). Tax policy and the news: An empirical analysis of taxpayers’ perceptions of tax-related media coverage and its impact on tax compliance. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics, 54, 58-63. doi: 10.1016/j.socec.2014.11.001

Kastlunger, B., Lozza, E., Kirchler, E., & Schabmann, A. (2013). Powerful authorities and trusting citizens: The slippery slope framework and tax compliance in Italy. Journal of Economic Psychology, 34, 36-45. doi: 10.1016/j.joep.2012.11.007

Kirchler, E., Hoelzl, E., & Wahl, I. (2008). Enforced versus voluntary tax compliance. The slippery slope framework. Journal of Economic Psychology, 29(2), 210–225. doi: 10.1016/j.joep.2007.05.004

Kirchler, E., & Wahl, I. (2010). Tax compliance inventory TAX-I: Designing an inventory for surveys of tax compliance. Journal of Economic Psychology, 31(3), 331-346. doi: 10.1016/j.joep.2010.01.002

Kogler, C., Batrancea, L., Nichita, A., Jozsef, P., Belianin, A., & Kirchler, E. (2013). Trust and power as determinants of tax compliance: Testing the assumptions of the slippery slope framework in Austria, Hungary, Romania and Russia. Journal of Economic Psychology, 34, 169-180. doi: 10.1016/j.joep.2012.09.010

Lemoine, J. & Roland-Lévy, C. (2012). From the slippery slope framework to responsive regulation. In P. Cunningham & N. Fretwell (eds.), Creating Communities: Local, National and Global (pp. 727 – 739). London: CiCe.

Lewis, A., Carrera, S., Cullis, J., & Jones, P. (2009). Individual, cognitive and cultural differences in tax compliance: UK and Italy compared. Journal of Economic Psychology, 30(3), 431-445. doi: 10.1016/j.joep.2008.11.002

Lisi, G. (2012). Testing the slippery slope framework. Economics Bulletin, 32(2), 1369-1377. http://www.accessecon.com/Pubs/EB/2012/Volume32/EB-12-V32-I2-P131.pdf

Masud, A., Abdul Manaf, N. A., & Saad, N. (2015). Testing assumptions of the slippery slope framework using cross-country data: Evidence from sub-saharan Africa. International Journal of Business and Society, 16(3), 408-40. doi: 10.33736/ijbs.576.2015

Montoro, A., Shih, P. C., Román, M., & Molina, A. M. (2014). Spanish adaptation of Yamagishi General Trust Scale. Anales de Psicología, 30(1), 302-307. doi: 10.6018/analesps.30.1.122471

Muehlbacher, S., Kirchler, E., & Schwarzenberger, H. (2011). Voluntary versus enforced tax compliance: Empirical evidence for the slippery slope framework. European Journal of Law and Economics, 32(1), 89–9. doi: 10.1007/s10657-011-9236-9

Niemirowski, P., Wearing, A. J., Baldwin, S., Leonard, B., & Mobbs, C. (2002). The influence of tax related behaviors, beliefs, attitudes and values on Australian taxpayer compliance. Is tax avoidance intentional and how serious an offence is it? Sydney: University of New South Wales.

Putnam, R. (1993). The prosperous community: social capital and public life. The american prospect, 13(4), 35-42. http://www. prospect. org/print/vol/13

Scholtz, J. T., & Lubell, M. (1998). Adaptive political attitudes: Duty, trust, and fear as monitors of tax policy. American Journal of Political Science, 42(3), 903-920.

Schweitzer, M. E., Ordóñez, L., & Douma, B. (2004). Goal setting as a motivator of unethical behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 47(3), 422-432. doi: 10.5465/20159591

Sheeran, P. (2001) Intention-behavior: A conceptual and empirical review. European review of Social Psychology, 12(1), 1-36. doi: 10.1080/14792772143000003

Slemrod, J., & Yitzhaki, S. (2002). Tax avoidance, evasion, and administration. In: A. J. Auerbach & M. Feldstein (eds.), Handbook of Public Economics (pp. 1423-1470). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science

Srinivasan, T. N. (1973). Tax Evasion: A Model. Journal of Public Economics, 2(4), 339-346. doi: 10.1016/0047-2727(73)90024-8

Tanos Robein, L., Saavedra, B., Mola, D., & Reyna, C. (2020). Diferencias transculturales en la declaración de impuestos antediferentes niveles de presión fiscal: Evidencia experimental conmuestras de Argentina y España. Revista de Investigación en Psicología, 23(1), 57-72. doi: 10.15381/rinvp.v23i1.18093

Tenbrunsel, A. E., & Messick, D. M. (1999). Sanctioning systems, decision frames, and cooperation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(4), 684–707. doi: 10.2307/2667052

Torgler, B. (2003). Tax morale, rule-governed behaviour and trust. Constitutional Political Economy, 14(2), 119-140. doi: 10.1023/A:1023643622283

Wahl, I., Kastlunger, B., & Kirchler, E. (2010). Trust in authorities and power to enforce tax compliance: An empirical analysis of the Slippery Slope Framework. Law & Policy, 32(4), 383-406. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9930.2010.00327.x

Yamagishi, T., & Yamagishi, M. (1994). Trust and commitment in the United States and Japan. Motivation and Emotion, 18(2), 129-166. doi: 10.1007/BF02249397

Zhang, N., Andrighetto, G., Ottone, S., Ponzano, F., & Steinmo, S. (2016). Willing to Pay? Tax compliance in Britain and Italy: An experimental analysis. PLOS ONE, 11(2), 1-14. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0150277