Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Why Do People Pay Taxes? Prospect Theory Versus Expected Utility Theory

By Sanjit Dhami and Ali al-Nowaihi

Abstract

Tax evasion analysis is typically based on an expected utility theory (EUT) framework. However, this leads to several qualitative and quantitative puzzles. Given actual probabilities of audit and penalty rates the return on evasion ranges from 91-98 percent. So why don’t most of us evade? Furthermore, an EUT based analysis predicts that we should evade less as the tax rate increases (Yitzhaki puzzle). Intuition and the bulk of the evidence do not support this result. This paper analyzes tax evasion using, instead, Kahneman and Tversky’s cumulative prospect theory. Under prospect theory we show that (1) the calibration results predict empirically plausible magnitudes of tax evasion despite low audit probabilities and penalty rates, and (2) the Yitzhaki puzzle is easily explained. Thus, our paper argues that not only does prospect theory provide a satisfactory explanation of tax evasion, it also argues that the phenomenon of tax evasion provides independent confirmation of prospect theory

Topics: Reference Dependence, Loss Aversion, Decision Weights, Prospect Theory, Expected Utility Theory, Tax Evasion, Optimal taxation
Publisher: Dept. of Economics, University of Leicester
Year: 2006
OAI identifier: oai:lra.le.ac.uk:2381/4469

Suggested articles

Citations

  1. (1974). A note on income tax evasion: A theoretical analysis. doi
  2. (2006). A simple derivation of Prelec’s probability weighting function. Forthcoming in the doi
  3. (1978). A simulation study of income tax evasion. doi
  4. (2004). Advances in behavioral economics. doi
  5. (1992). Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty. doi
  6. (1991). An econometric analysis of income tax evasion and its detection. doi
  7. (1985). An economic perspective on tax evasion. doi
  8. (2000). Choices, values and frames. doi
  9. (2000). Developments in non-expected utility theory: The hunt for a descriptive theory of choice under risk. doi
  10. (1990). First order versus second order risk aversion. doi
  11. (1993). Generalized expected utility theory: The rank-dependent expected utility model. doi
  12. (1987). Income tax evasion and the tax schedule: some experimental results.
  13. (1972). Income tax evasion: A theoretical analysis. doi
  14. (2000). Income tax evasion: A theoretical analysis” doi
  15. (2000). Income tax evasion: An experimental approach. In: MacDonald A, Pyle D., Illicit activity: The economics of crime and tax fraud.
  16. (1989). Individual morality and reputation costs as deterrents to tax evasion. doi
  17. (1997). Influencing the prospects of tax evasion. doi
  18. (2001). Key issues in income tax: Challenges of tax administration and compliance.
  19. (2004). Moral hazard, income taxation and prospect theory. doi
  20. (1995). Myopic loss aversion and the equity premium puzzle. doi
  21. (2002). Near Zero Taxable Income Reporting by Nonprofit Organizations. Paper presented at the American Accounting Association Meetings. doi
  22. (1985). Optimal tax evasion policy: Behavioral aspects. doi
  23. (2000). Prospect theory in the wild: Evidence from the field. In: Kahneman D, Tversky A., Choices, values and frames,
  24. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. doi
  25. (2001). Rank dependent expected utility models of tax evasion. mimeo.,
  26. (2001). Reduction invariance and Prelec’s weighting functions. doi
  27. (2002). Tax avoidance, evasion and administration. In: doi
  28. (1999). Tax compliance and advance tax payments: A prospect theory analysis.
  29. (1998). Tax Compliance. doi
  30. (1998). Tax evasion and orders of risk aversion. doi
  31. (1983). Tax evasion and tax rates: An analysis of individual returns. doi
  32. (2004). Tax evasion, tax rates and reference dependence. doi
  33. (1991). The consumption of stockholders and non stockholders. doi
  34. (2002). The political economy background to the capitalist development of Canada. mimeo.
  35. (1998). The probability weighting function. doi
  36. (2003). The welfare cost of means-testing: pensioner participation. In: Income Support. Royal Economic Society Conference, doi
  37. (1992). Understanding welfare stigma: Taxpayer resentment and statistical discrimination. doi
  38. (1994). Violations of the betweenness axiom and nonlinearity in probability. doi
  39. (1992). Why do people pay taxes? doi
  40. (2005). Why do people pay taxes? Prospect theory versus expected utility theory. doi

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.