Hostname: page-component-7b9c58cd5d-9k27k Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-03-16T13:06:41.870Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

40 years of tax evasion games: a meta-analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2025

James Alm  and
Antoine Malézieux Open the ORCID record for Antoine Malézieux [Opens in a new window]
James Alm*
Affiliation:
Department of Economics, Tulane University, 208 Tilton Hall, New Orleans, LA 70118, USA
Antoine Malézieux*
Affiliation:
CEREN, EA 7477, Burgundy School of Business, Université Bourgogne Franche-Comté, 29 Rue Sambin, 21000 Dijon, France
*
jalm@tulane.edu
antoine.malezieux@bsb-education.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We collect individual participant data from 70 papers that use laboratory experiments to examine individual tax evasion behavior (or “Tax Evasion Games”), in order to use meta-analysis to estimate the impacts of different public policy, experimental design and individual level variables on tax evasion choices. Our results show that standard enforcement variables like audits (including audit rules) and fines perform differently on the extensive and intensive margins. We find that other fiscal variables like a flat tax system, tax rates, and tax amnesties have unambiguous negative impacts on tax compliance, and that specific features of the experimental setting, such as how subjects are directed to report income, or whether taxes are redistributed to the participants or to a real life public good, have significant impacts on tax compliance. Our results also indicate that the demographic characteristics of the subjects (e.g., gender, experimental income, occupation, risk attitude) affect compliance.

Keywords

Tax evasionTax complianceMeta-analysis

JEL classification

C9: Design of Experiments H3: Fiscal Policies and Behavior of Economic Agents
Type
Original Paper
Information
Experimental Economics , Volume 24 , Issue 3 , September 2021 , pp. 699 - 750
Copyright
Copyright © 2020 Economic Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abeler, J, Nosenzo, D, & Raymond, C (2019). Preferences for truth-telling. Econometrica, 87(4), 1115–1153. 10.3982/ECTA14673CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abraham, M, Lorek, K, Richter, F, & Wrede, M (2017). Collusive tax evasion and social norms. International Tax and Public Finance, 24(2), 179–197. 10.1007/s10797-016-9417-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adres, E, Vashdi, DR, & Zalmanovitch, Y (2016). Globalization and the retreat of citizen participation in collective action: A challenge for public administration. Public Administration Review, 76(1), 142–152. 10.1111/puar.12424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allingham, MG, & Sandmo, A (1972). Income tax evasion: A theoretical analysis. Journal of Public Economics, 1, 323–338. 10.1016/0047-2727(72)90010-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alm, J (1988). Uncertain tax policies, individual behavior, and welfare. The American Economic Review, 78(1), 237–245.Google Scholar
Alm, J (2014). Does an uncertain tax system encourage ”aggressive tax planning”?. Economic Analysis and Policy, 44(1), 30–38. 10.1016/j.eap.2014.01.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alm, J (2019). What motivates tax compliance?. Journal of Economic Surveys, 33(2), 353–388. 10.1111/joes.12272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alm, J, Bloomquist, KM, & McKee, M (2015). On the external validity of laboratory tax compliance experiments. Economic Inquiry, 53(2), 1170–1186. 10.1111/ecin.12196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alm, J, Jackson, B, & McKee, M (1992). Institutional uncertainty and taxpayer compliance. The American Economic Review, 82(4), 1018–1026.Google Scholar
Alm, J, McClelland, GH, & Schulze, WD (1992). Why do people pay taxes?. Journal of Public Economics, 48(1), 21–38. 10.1016/0047-2727(92)90040-MCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alm, J, McClelland, GH, & Schulze, WD (1999). Changing the social norm of tax compliance by voting. Kyklos, 52(2), 141–171. 10.1111/j.1467-6435.1999.tb01440.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alm, J, McKee, N, & Beck, M (1990). Amazing grace: Tax amnesties and compliance. National Tax Journal, 43(1), 23–37. 10.1086/NTJ41788822CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alm, J, Sanchez, I, & De Juan, A (1995). Economic and noneconomic factors in tax compliance. Kyklos, 48(1), 3–18. 10.1111/j.1467-6435.1995.tb02312.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alm, J, & Torgler, B (2011). Do ethics matter? Tax compliance and morality. Journal of Business Ethics, 101(4), 635–651. 10.1007/s10551-011-0761-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alstadsæter, A, Johannesen, N, & Zucman, G (2019). Tax evasion and inequality. The American Economic Review, 109(6), 2073–2103. 10.1257/aer.20172043CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andreoni, J, Erard, B, & Feinstein, J (1998). Tax compliance. The Journal of Economic Literature, 36(2), 818–860.Google Scholar
Andrighetto, G, Zhang, N, Ottone, S, Ponzano, F, D’Attoma, J, & Steinmo, S (2016). Are some countries more honest than others? Evidence from a tax compliance experiment in Sweden and Italy. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 472 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00472CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ariely, D, & Jones, S (2012). The (honest) truth about dishonesty, New York, NY: Harper Collins Publishers.Google Scholar
Baldry, JC (1986). Tax evasion is not a gamble: A report on two experiments. Economics Letters, 22(4), 333–335. 10.1016/0165-1765(86)90092-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baldry, JC (1987). Income tax evasion and the tax schedule: Some experimental results. Public Finance, 42(3), 357–383.Google Scholar
Balliet, D, Mulder, LB, & Van Lange, PA (2011). Reward, punishment, and cooperation: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 137(4), 594–615. 10.1037/a0023489CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bayer, RC, & Sutter, M (2009). The excess burden of tax evasion: An experimental detection-concealment contest. European Economic Review, 53(5), 527–543. 10.1016/j.euroecorev.2008.09.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bazart, C, & Bonein, A (2014). Reciprocal relationships in tax compliance decisions. Journal of Economic Psychology, 40, 83–102. 10.1016/j.joep.2012.10.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Becker, GS (1968). Crime and punishment: An economic approach. Journal of Political Economy, 76(2), 169–217. 10.1086/259394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Becker, W, Büchner, H-J, & Sleeking, S (1987). The impact of public transfer expenditures on tax evasion: An experimental approach. Journal of Public Economics, 34(2), 243–252. 10.1016/0047-2727(87)90022-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beer, S., Kasper, M., & Loeprick, J. (2016). Puzzling tax law—Behavioral responses to complexity. Working Paper.Google Scholar
Bernasconi, M, Corazzini, L, & Seri, R (2014). Reference dependent preferences, hedonic adaptation and tax evasion: Does the tax burden matter?. Journal of Economic Psychology, 40, 103–118. 10.1016/j.joep.2013.01.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackwell, C Alm, J, Martinez-Vazquez, J, & Torgler, B (2010). A meta-analysis of incentive effects in tax compliance experiments. Developing alternative frameworks for explaining tax compliance, New York, NY: Routledge Publishing 97–112.Google Scholar
Blackwell, C, & McKee, M (2012). Alchian and Allen visit the IRS: Costly audits and taxpayer compliance. Applied Economics Letters, 19(17), 1731–1734. 10.1080/13504851.2012.667541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blais, A-R (2006). A domain-specific risk-taking (DOSPERT) scale for adult populations. Judgment and Decision Making, 1(1), 33–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaufus, K, Braune, M, Hundsdoerfer, J, & Jacob, M (2015). Self-serving bias and tax morale. Economics Letters, 131, 91–93. 10.1016/j.econlet.2015.03.041CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borenstein, M, Hedges, LV, Higgins, JP, & Rothstein, HR (2011). Introduction to meta-analysis, Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
Borghans, L, Heckman, JJ, Golsteyn, BH, & Meijers, H (2009). Gender differences in risk aversion and ambiguity aversion. Journal of the European Economic Association, 7(2–3), 649–658. 10.1162/JEEA.2009.7.2-3.649CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bosco, L, & Mittone, L (1997). Tax evasion and moral constraints: Some experimental evidence. Kyklos, 50(3), 297–324. 10.1111/1467-6435.00018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boylan, SJ (2010). Prior audits and taxpayer compliance: Experimental evidence on the effect of earned versus endowed Income. Journal of the American Taxation Association, 32(2), 73–88. 10.2308/jata.2010.32.2.73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brockmann, H, Genschel, P, & Seelkopf, L (2016). Happy taxation: Increasing tax compliance through positive rewards?. Journal of Public Policy, 36(3), 381–406. 10.1017/S0143814X15000331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruner, DM, D’Attoma, J, & Steinmo, S (2017). The role of gender in the provision of public goods through tax compliance. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics, 71, 45–55. 10.1016/j.socec.2017.09.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruttel, L, & Friehe, T (2014). On the path dependence of tax compliance. European Economic Review, 65, 90–107. 10.1016/j.euroecorev.2013.11.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buckenmaier, J, Dimant, E, & Mittone, L (2018). Effects of institutional history and leniency on collusive corruption and tax evasion. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 175, 296 10.1016/j.jebo.2018.04.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bühren, C, & Kundt, TC (2014). Does the level of work effort influence tax evasion? Experimental evidence. Review of Economics, 65(2), 137–158. 10.1515/roe-2014-0203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cadsby, CB, Maynes, E, & Trivedi, VU (2006). Tax compliance and obedience to authority at home and in the lab: A new experimental approach. Experimental Economics, 9(4), 343–359. 10.1007/s10683-006-7053-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casal, S, Kogler, C, Mittone, L, & Kirchler, E (2016). Tax compliance depends on voice of taxpayers. Journal of Economic Psychology, 56, 141–150. 10.1016/j.joep.2016.06.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casal, S, & Mittone, L (2016). Social esteem versus social stigma: The role of anonymity in an income reporting game. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 124, 55–66. 10.1016/j.jebo.2015.09.014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castro, MF, & Rizzo, I (2014). Tax compliance under horizontal and vertical equity conditions: An experimental approach. International Tax and Public Finance, 21(4), 560–577. 10.1007/s10797-014-9320-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Charness, G., Garcia, T., Offerman, T., & Villeval, M. C. (2019). Do measures of risk attitude in the laboratory predict behavior under risk in and outside of the laboratory?. Working Paper.Google Scholar
Charness, G, & Gneezy, U (2010). Portfolio choice and risk attitudes: An experiment. Economic Inquiry, 48(1), 133–146. 10.1111/j.1465-7295.2009.00219.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Charness, G, Gneezy, U, & Imas, A (2013). Experimental methods: Eliciting risk preferences. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 87, 43–51. 10.1016/j.jebo.2012.12.023CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Choo, CL, Fonseca, MA, & Myles, GD (2015). Do students behave like real taxpayers in the lab? Evidence from a real effort tax compliance experiment. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 124, 102–114. 10.1016/j.jebo.2015.09.015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coricelli, G, Joffily, M, Montmarquette, C, & Villeval, M-C (2010). Cheating, emotions, and rationality: An experiment on tax evasion. Experimental Economics, 13(2), 226–247. 10.1007/s10683-010-9237-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coricelli, G, Rusconi, E, & Villeval, M-C (2014). Tax evasion and emotions: An empirical test of re-integrative shaming theory. Journal of Economic Psychology, 40, 49–61. 10.1016/j.joep.2012.12.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coursey, DL, Hovis, JL, & Schulze, WD (1987). The disparity between willingness to accept and willingness to pay measures of value. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 102(3), 679–690. 10.2307/1884223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crosetto, P, & Filippin, A (2013). The “bomb” risk elicitation task. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 47(1), 31–65. 10.1007/s11166-013-9170-zCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dai, Z. (2016). Endogenous crackdowns: Theory and experimental evidence. Working Paper.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
D’Attoma, J (2019). What explains the North–South divide in Italian tax compliance? An experimental analysis. Acta Politica, 54(1), 104–123. 10.1057/s41269-018-0077-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
D’Attoma, J, Volintiru, C, & Malézieux, A (2020). Gender, social value orientation, and tax compliance. CESifo Economic Studies, 66(3), 265–284. 10.1093/cesifo/ifz016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
D’Attoma, J, Volintiru, C, & Steinmo, S (2017). Willing to share? Tax compliance and gender in Europe and America. Research & Politics, 10.1177/2053168017707151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, J, Mengersen, K, Bennett, S, & Mazerolle, L (2014). Viewing systematic reviews and meta-analysis in social research through different lenses. SpringerPlus, 3(1), 511 10.1186/2193-1801-3-511CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
DeBacker, J, Heim, BT, Tran, A, & Yuskavage, A (2015). Legal enforcement and corporate behavior: An analysis of tax aggressiveness after an audit. The Journal of Law and Economics, 58(2), 291–324. 10.1086/684037CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doerrenberg, P (2015). Does the use of tax revenue matter for tax compliance behavior?. Economics Letters, 128, 30–34. 10.1016/j.econlet.2015.01.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doerrenberg, P, & Duncan, D (2014). Distributional implications of tax evasion: Evidence from the lab. Public Finance Review, 42(6), 720–744. 10.1177/1091142113499398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doerrenberg, P, & Duncan, D (2014). Experimental evidence on the relationship between tax evasion opportunities and labor supply. European Economic Review, 68, 48–70. 10.1016/j.euroecorev.2014.02.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doerrenberg, P, Duncan, D, & Zeppenfeld, C (2015). Circumstantial risk: Impact of future tax evasion and labor supply opportunities on risk exposure. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 109, 85–100. 10.1016/j.jebo.2014.11.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doerrenberg, P, & Peichl, A (2013). Progressive taxation and tax morale. Public Choice, 155(3–4), 293–316. 10.1007/s11127-011-9848-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dulleck, U, Fooken, J, Newton, C, Ristl, A, Schaffner, M, & Torgler, B (2016). Tax compliance and psychic costs: Behavioral experimental evidence using a physiological marker. Journal of Public Economics, 134, 9–18. 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2015.12.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Durham, Y, Manly, TS, & Ritsema, C (2014). The effects of income source, context, and income level on tax compliance decisions in a dynamic experiment. Journal of Economic Psychology, 40, 220–233. 10.1016/j.joep.2012.09.012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eisenhauer, JG, Geide-Stevenson, D, & Ferro, DL (2011). Experimental Estimates of taxpayer ethics. Review of Social Economy, 69(1), 29–53. 10.1080/00346760802714867CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engel, C (2011). Dictator games: A meta study. Experimental Economics, 14(4), 583–610. 10.1007/s10683-011-9283-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erard, B, & Slemrod, J (1990). The influence of tax audits on reporting behavior. Why people pay taxes: Tax compliance and enforcement, Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press 95–114.Google Scholar
Etchart-Vincent, N., & Taugourdeau, E. (2018). The influence of tax morality and others’ tax evasion on one’s fiscal behaviour. Working Paper.Google Scholar
Fisar, M., Reggiani, T., Sabatini, F., & Špalek, J. (2018). Media Bias and Tax Compliance: Experimental Evidence. Working Paper.Google Scholar
Fischbacher, U, & Föllmi-Heusi, F (2013). Lies in disguise: An experimental study on cheating. Journal of the European Economic Association, 11(3), 525–547. 10.1111/jeea.12014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fortin, B, Lacroix, G, & Villeval, M-C (2007). Tax evasion and social interactions. Journal of Public Economics, 91(11–12), 2089–2112. 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2007.03.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frey, B (1997). Not just for the money: An economic theory of personal motivation, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
Frey, R, Pedroni, A, Mata, R, Rieskamp, J, & Hertwig, R (2017). Risk preference shares the psychometric structure of major psychological traits. Science Advances, 3(10), e1701381 10.1126/sciadv.1701381CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Friedland, N (1982). A note on tax evasion as a function of the quality of information about the magnitude and credibility of threatened fines: Some preliminary research. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 12(1), 54–59. 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1982.tb00848.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedland, N, Maital, S, & Rutenberg, A (1978). A simulation study of income taxation. Journal of Public Economics, 10(1), 107–116. 10.1016/0047-2727(78)90008-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, D, Isaac, RM, James, D, & Sunder, S (2014). Risky curves: On the empirical failure of expected utility, New York, NY: Routledge 10.4324/9781315819891CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galizzi, M. M., Machado, S. R., & Miniaci, R. (2016). Temporal stability, cross-validity, and external validity of risk preferences measures: Experimental evidence from a UK representative sample. Working Paper.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gërxhani, K, & Schram, A (2006). Tax evasion and income source: A comparative experimental study. Journal of Economic Psychology, 27(3), 402–422. 10.1016/j.joep.2005.08.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glass, GV (1976). Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis of research. Educational Researcher, 5(10), 3–8. 10.3102/0013189X005010003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grosch, K, & Rau, HA (2017). Gender differences in honesty: The role of social value orientation. Journal of Economic Psychology, 62, 258–267. 10.1016/j.joep.2017.07.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grüner, S (2017). Correlates of multiple switching in the Holt and Laury procedure. Economics Bulletin, 37(1), 297–304.Google Scholar
Guerra, A, & Harrington, B (2018). Attitude-behavior consistency in tax compliance: A cross-national comparison. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 156, 184–205. 10.1016/j.jebo.2018.10.013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guth, W, & Sausgruber, R (2008). Voting between tax regimes to fund a public good. Economics of Governance, 9(4), 287–303. 10.1007/s10101-007-0044-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hartl, B, Hofmann, E, Gangl, K, Hartner-Tiefenthaler, M, & Kirchler, E (2015). Does the sole description of a tax authority affect tax evasion? The impact of described coercive and legitimate power. PLoS ONE, 10(4), e0123355 10.1371/journal.pone.0123355CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hashimzade, N, Myles, GD, & Tran-Nam, B (2013). Applications of behavioural economics to tax evasion. Journal of Economic Surveys, 27(5), 941–977.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heinemann, F, & Kocher, MG (2013). Tax compliance under tax regime changes. International Tax and Public Finance, 20(2), 225–246. 10.1007/s10797-012-9222-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henrich, J, Heine, SJ, & Norenzayan, A (2010). The weirdest people in the world?. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33(2–3), 61–83. 10.1017/S0140525X0999152XCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Holt, CA, & Laury, SK (2002). Risk aversion and incentive effects. The American Economic Review, 92(5), 1644–1655. 10.1257/000282802762024700CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hsu, L-C (2008). Experimental evidence on tax compliance and voluntary public good provision. National Tax Journal, 61, 205–223. 10.17310/ntj.2008.2.03CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hsu, L-C (2013). Tax auditing as a public good game: An experimental study on punishment and compliance. Pacific Economic Review, 18(4), 475–501. 10.1111/1468-0106.12034CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacobsen, C, Fosgaard, TR, & Pascual-Ezama, D (2017). Why do we lie? A practical guide to the dishonesty literature. Journal of Economic Surveys, 32(2), 357–387. 10.1111/joes.12204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacquemet, N, Luchini, S, Malézieux, A, & Shogren, J (2020). Who’ll stop lying under oath? Empirical evidence from tax evasion games. European Economic Review, 124, 103369 10.1016/j.euroecorev.2020.103369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacquemet, N, Luchini, S, Malézieux, A, & Shogren, JF (2019). A psychometric investigation of the personality traits underlying individual tax morale. The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, 19(3), 20180149 10.1515/bejeap-2018-0149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johns, A, & Slemrod, J (2010). The distribution of income tax noncompliance. National Tax Journal, 63(3), 397–418. 10.17310/ntj.2010.3.01CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahneman, D, & Tversky, A (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263–292. 10.2307/1914185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kastlunger, B, Dressler, SG, Kirchler, E, Mittone, L, & Voracek, M (2010). Sex differences in tax compliance: Differentiating between demographic sex, gender-role orientation, and prenatal masculinization (2D: 4D). Journal of Economic Psychology, 31(4), 542–552. 10.1016/j.joep.2010.03.015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kastlunger, B, Kirchler, E, Mittone, L, & Pitters, J (2009). Sequences of audits, tax compliance, and taxpaying strategies. Journal of Economic Psychology, 30(3), 405–418. 10.1016/j.joep.2008.10.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kastlunger, B, Muehlbacher, S, Kirchler, E, & Mittone, L (2011). What goes around comes around? Experimental evidence of the effect of rewards on tax compliance. Public Finance Review, 39(1), 150–167. 10.1177/1091142110376518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirchler, E (2007). The economic psychology of tax behaviour, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 10.1017/CBO9780511628238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirchler, E, Muehlbacher, S, Hoelzl, E, & Webley, P (2009). Effort and aspirations in tax evasion: Experimental evidence. Applied Psychology, 58(3), 488–507. 10.1111/j.1464-0597.2009.00403.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kogler, C, Mittone, L, & Kirchler, E (2016). Delayed feedback on tax audits affects compliance and fairness perceptions. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 124, 81–87. 10.1016/j.jebo.2015.10.014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lamberton, CP, De Neve, J-E, & Norton, MI (2018). The power of voice in stimulating morality: Eliciting taxpayer preferences increases tax compliance. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 28(2), 310–328. 10.1002/jcpy.1022CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lefebvre, M, Pestieau, P, Riedl, A, & Villeval, M-C (2015). Tax evasion and social information: An experiment in Belgium, France, and the Netherlands. International Tax and Public Finance, 22(3), 401–425. 10.1007/s10797-014-9318-zCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levitt, SD, & List, JA (2007). What do laboratory experiments measuring social preferences reveal about the real world?. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 21(2), 153–174. 10.1257/jep.21.2.153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
List, JA (2003). Does market experience eliminate market anomalies?. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118(1), 41–71. 10.1162/00335530360535144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lohse, T, & Qari, S (2014). Gender differences in deception behaviour-the role of the counterpart. Applied Economics Letters, 21(10), 702–705. 10.1080/13504851.2013.848020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luttmer, EFP, & Singhal, M (2014). Tax morale. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 28(4), 149–168. 10.1257/jep.28.4.149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maciejovsky, B, Kirchler, E, & Schwarzenberger, H (2007). Misperception of chance and loss repair: On the dynamics of tax compliance. Journal of Economic Psychology, 28(6), 678–691. 10.1016/j.joep.2007.02.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maki, A., Cohen, M. A., & Vandenbergh, M. P. (2018). Using meta-analysis in the social sciences to improve environmental policy. In Handbook of sustainability and social science research (pp. 27–43). Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malézieux, A. (2016). An investigation of the direct democracy effect of voting on tax fund destination. Working Paper.Google Scholar
Malézieux, A (2018). A practical guide to setting up your tax evasion game. Journal of Tax Administration, 4(1), 107–127.Google Scholar
Malik, S, Mihm, B, & Timme, F (2018). An experimental analysis of tax avoidance policies. International Tax and Public Finance, 25(1), 200–239. 10.1007/s10797-017-9448-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Masclet, D., Montmarquette, C., & Viennot-Briot, N. (2013). Comment réduire la fraude fiscale? une expérience sur le signalement [How to reduce tax fraud? An experiment on signaling]. Discussion paper, Centre interuniversitaire de recherche en analyse des organisations.Google Scholar
Mazar, N, Amir, O, & Ariely, D (2008). The dishonesty of honest people: A theory of self-concept maintenance. Journal of Marketing Research, 45(6), 633–644. 10.1509/jmkr.45.6.633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKee, M, Siladke, CA, & Vossler, CA (2018). Behavioral dynamics of tax compliance when taxpayer assistance services are available. International Tax and Public Finance, 25(3), 722–756. 10.1007/s10797-017-9466-zCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mendoza, JP, Wielhouwer, JL, & Kirchler, E (2017). The backfiring effect of auditing on tax compliance. Journal of Economic Psychology, 62, 284–294. 10.1016/j.joep.2017.07.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Menkhoff, L, & Sakha, S (2017). Estimating risky behavior with multiple-item risk measures. Journal of Economic Psychology, 59, 59–86. 10.1016/j.joep.2017.02.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mittone, L (2006). Dynamic behaviour in tax evasion: An experimental approach. Journal of Socio-Economics, 35(5), 813–835. 10.1016/j.socec.2005.11.065Google Scholar
Mittone, L, Panebianco, F, & Santoro, A (2017). The bomb-crater effect of tax audits: Beyond the misperception of chance. Journal of Economic Psychology, 61, 225–243. 10.1016/j.joep.2017.04.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mittone, L, & Saredi, V (2016). Commitment to tax compliance: Timing effect on willingness to evade. Journal of Economic Psychology, 53, 99–117. 10.1016/j.joep.2016.01.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muehlbacher, S, Hartl, B, & Kirchler, E (2017). Mental accounting and tax compliance: Experimental evidence for the effect of mental segregation of tax due and revenue on compliance. Public Finance Review, 45(1), 118–139. 10.1177/1091142115602063CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muehlbacher, S, & Kirchler, E (2016). About the external validity of laboratory experiments in tax compliance research. Die Betriebswirtschaft, 76(1), 7–19.Google Scholar
Muehlbacher, S, Mittone, L, Kastlunger, B, & Kirchler, E (2012). Uncertainty resolution in tax experiments: Why waiting for an audit increases compliance. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 41(3), 289–291. 10.1016/j.socec.2012.01.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mukaka, MM (2012). A guide to appropriate use of correlation coefficient in medical research. Malawi Medical Journal, 24(3), 69–71.Google ScholarPubMed
Ottone, S, Ponzano, F, & Andrighetto, G (2018). Tax compliance under different institutional settings in the EU: An experimental analysis. Economia Politica, 35(2), 367–402. 10.1007/s40888-018-0093-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Park, C-G, & Hyun, JK (2003). Examining the determinants of tax compliance by experimental data: A case of Korea. Journal of Policy Modeling, 25(8), 673–684. 10.1016/S0161-8938(03)00075-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pedroni, A, Frey, R, Bruhin, A, Dutilh, G, Hertwig, R, & Rieskamp, J (2017). The risk elicitation puzzle. Nature Human Behaviour, 1(11), 803–809. 10.1038/s41562-017-0219-xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peliova, J. (2015). Experimental investigation of factors influencing the willingness to pay taxes. In Proceedings of the 17th international scientific conference finance and risks 2015 (Vol. 1, pp. 228–232).Google Scholar
Rabin, M (2000). Risk aversion and expected-utility theory: A calibration theorem. Econometrica, 68(5), 1281–1292. 10.1111/1468-0262.00158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rechberger, S, Hartner, M, Kirchler, E, & Hämmerle, FK (2010). Tax amnesties, justice perceptions, and filing behavior: A simulation study. Law & Policy, 32(2), 214–225. 10.1111/j.1467-9930.2009.00316.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Riley, RD, Lambert, PC, Staessen, JA, Wang, J, Gueyffier, F, Thijs, L, & Boutitie, F (2008). Meta-analysis of continuous outcomes combining individual patient data and aggregate data. Statistics in Medicine, 27(11), 1870–1893. 10.1002/sim.3165CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Silverman, D, Slemrod, J, & Uler, N (2014). Distinguishing the role ofauthority “in” and authority ”to”. Journal of Public Economics, 113, 32–42. 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2014.02.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slemrod, J (2019). Tax compliance and enforcement. The Journal of Economic Literature, 57(4), 904–54 10.1257/jel.20181437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snow, A, & Warren, RS (2005). Ambiguity about audit probability, tax compliance, and taxpayer welfare. Economic Inquiry, 43(4), 865–871. 10.1093/ei/cbi066CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Špalek, J, & Špačková, Z (2016). Daňové úniky v laboratoři: vliv kontextu na ochotu platit daně [Tax evasion in the lab: How context affects tax compliance]. Politická ekonomie, 64(5), 524–540. 10.18267/j.polek.1086CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spicer, MW, & Becker, LA (1980). Fiscal inequity and tax evasion: An experimental approach. National Tax Journal, 33(2), 171–175. 10.1086/NTJ41862299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Srinivasan, T (1973). Tax evasion: A model. Journal of Public Economics, 2(4), 339–346. 10.1016/0047-2727(73)90024-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stewart, LA, Clarke, M, Rovers, M, Riley, RD, Simmonds, M, Stewart, G, & Tierney, JF (2015). Preferred reporting items for a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data: The PRISMA-IPD statement. Jama, 313(16), 1657–1665. 10.1001/jama.2015.3656CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tan, F, & Yim, A (2014). Can strategic uncertainty help deter tax evasion? An experiment on auditing rules. Journal of Economic Psychology, 40, 161–174. 10.1016/j.joep.2012.11.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tanaka, T, Camerer, CF, & Nguyen, Q (2010). Risk and time preferences: Linking experimental and household survey data from Vietnam. The American Economic Review, 100(1), 557–571. 10.1257/aer.100.1.557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Torgler, B (2002). Speaking to theorists and searching for facts: Tax morale and tax compliance in experiments. Journal of Economic Surveys, 16(5), 657–683. 10.1111/1467-6419.00185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Torgler, B (2003). Beyond punishment: A tax compliance experiment with taxpayers in Costa Rica. Revista de Análisis Económico, 18(1), 27–56.Google Scholar
Torgler, B (2016). Tax compliance and data: What is available and what is needed. Australian Economic Review, 49(3), 352–364. 10.1111/1467-8462.12158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Torgler, B, & Schaltegger, CA (2005). Tax amnesties and political participation. Public Finance Review, 33(3), 403–431. 10.1177/1091142105275438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trivedi, VU, & Chung, JO (2006). The impact of compensation level and context on income reporting behavior in the laboratory. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 18(1), 167–183. 10.2308/bria.2006.18.1.167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Von Gaudecker, H-M, Van Soest, A, & Wengstrom, E (2011). Heterogeneity in risky choice behavior in a broad population. The American Economic Review, 101(2), 664–694. 10.1257/aer.101.2.664CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vossler, CA, & Gilpatric, SM (2018). Endogenous audits, uncertainty, and taxpayer assistance services: Theory and experiments. Journal of Public Economics, 165, 217–229. 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2018.07.009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vossler, CA, & McKee, M (2017). Efficient tax reporting: The effects of taxpayer liability information services. Economic Inquiry, 55(2), 920–940. 10.1111/ecin.12425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
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. 10.1111/j.1467-9930.2010.00327.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wahl, I, Muehlbacher, S, & Kirchler, E (2010). The impact of voting on tax payments. Kyklos, 63(1), 144–158. 10.1111/j.1467-6435.2010.00464.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wakolbinger, F, & Haigner, SD (2009). Peer advice in a tax-evasion experiment. Economics Bulletin, 29(3), 1653–1669.Google Scholar
Wartick, ML, Madeo, SA, & Vines, CC (1999). Reward dominance in tax-reporting experiments: The role of context. Journal of the American Taxation Association, 21(1), 20–31. 10.2308/jata.1999.21.1.20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webley, P, & Halstead, S (1986). Tax evasion on the micro: Significant simulations or expedient experiments?. Journal of Interdisciplinary Economics, 1(2), 87–100. 10.1177/02601079X8600100204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yitzhaki, S (1974). A note on income tax evasion: A theoretical analysis. Journal of Public Economics, 3(2), 201–202. 10.1016/0047-2727(74)90037-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
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), e0150277 10.1371/journal.pone.0150277CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zhou, W, & Hey, J (2018). Context matters. Experimental Economics, 21(4), 723–756. 10.1007/s10683-017-9546-zCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed