Preview

Russian Law Journal

Advanced search

Tax Compliance in the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the United States of America: Forcing and Encouraging Lawful Conduct of Taxpayers

https://doi.org/10.17589/2309-8678-2019-7-1-4-54

Full Text:

Abstract

The article is devoted to the consideration of the system for the tax authorities to assess tax risks and to prevent tax law violations. The work focuses on how the tax authorities affect the conduct of taxpayers through “soft law,” disclose information about their approach towards understanding tax risks and enforce a system of measures to ensure compliance. Tax compliance is analysed in the article as good-faith and lawful conduct of a taxpayer, which is formed under the influence of a system of, at the same time, preventive and incentive measures. This article considers tax compliance issues in Russia, the United Kingdom and the USA, not so much as a consequence of the voluntary actions of the taxpayer, but as a consequence of the conditions that are set for a taxpayer by the administrative action of tax authorities. To do this, the approaches of the tax authorities to defining the criteria for tax risks and the procedure for assessing them are analysed, as is the effect of these approaches on the subsequent implementation of tax control measures, while the system of enforcement measures and incentives for taxpayers to comply with tax legislation are examined. Tax compliance is the most desirable regime for the state, but in the entire history of taxation no jurisdiction has been able to achieve full tax collection solely based on a persuasive method. At the same time, owing to the limited resources of tax administrations, in practice there is no real opportunity to examine absolutely every taxpayer. For specifically this reason, a risk-based approach to carrying out tax control with a reasonable combination of both incentive measures and the enforcement of compliance with tax legislation is becoming increasingly relevant. The authors consider the implementation of a risk-based approach and its effect on tax compliance, on the choice of tax control measures, and on depth and scope in terms thereof, using the example of the experience of Russia, the United Kingdom and the USA. The article also pays special attention to an analysis of incentive measures and the enforcement of tax compliance in these jurisdictions.

About the Authors

Elena Ovcharova
Lomonosov Moscow State University
Russian Federation

Senior Lecturer, Department of Financial Law, Faculty of Law

1 Leninskie Gory, Bldg. 13–14, GSP-1, Moscow, 119991, Russia



Kirill Tasalov
Lomonosov Moscow State University
Russian Federation

PhD Student, Department of Financial Law, Faculty of Law

1 Leninskie Gory, Bldg. 13–14, GSP-1, Moscow, 119991, Russia



Dina Osina
MGIMO University
Russian Federation

Lecturer, Department of Legal Theory and Comparative Law, Faculty of International Law

76 Vernadskogo Av., Moscow, 119454, Russia



References

1. Шершеневич Г.Ф. О чувстве законности / Шершеневич Г.Ф. Избранное [Shershenevich G.F. On the Feeling of Lawfulnessin Shershenevich G.F. A Selection] 449–471 (P.V. Krasheninnikov (comp.), Moscow: Statut, 2016).

2. Bittker B.I. et al. Federal Income Taxation of Individuals (3rd ed., New York: Warren, Gorham & Lamont, 2003).

3. Branham E. Closing the Tax Gap: Encouraging Voluntary Compliance Through MassMedia Publication of High-Profile Tax Issues, 60(6) Hastings Law Journal 1507 (2009).

4. Brown R.E. & Mazur M.J. The National Research Program: Measuring Taxpayer Compliance Comprehensively, 51(5) University of Kansas Law Review 1255 (2003).

5. De Widt D. & Oats L. Risk Assessment in a Co-operative Compliance Context: A Dutch–UK Comparison, 2 British Tax Review 230 (2017).

6. Freedman J. et al. Corporate Tax Risk and Tax Avoidance: New Approaches, 1 British Tax Review 74 (2009).

7. Lang M.B. & Soled J.A. Disclosing Audit Risk to Taxpayers, 36(3) Virginia Tax Review 423 (2017).

8. Larson T.F. Corporate Tax Risks: A Call for Greater Audit Committee Involvement, 13 U.C. Davis Business Law Journal 39 (2012).

9. Lawsky S.B. Fairly Random: On Compensating Audited Taxpayers, 41(1) Connecticut Law Review 161 (2008).

10. Lederman L. Tax Compliance and the Reformed IRS, 51 University of Kansas Law Review 971 (2003).

11. Lee Y. Recidivism as Omission: A Relational Account, 87 Texas Law Review 571 (2009).

12. Loutzenhiser G. Tiley’s Revenue Law(8 th ed., Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2016)

13. Maas R.W. Guide to Taxpayer’s Rights and HMRC Powers(London: Bloomsbury Professional, 2017).

14. Madison A.D. The Futility of Tax Protester Arguments, 36(2) Thomas Jefferson Law Review 253 (2014).

15. Madison A.D. The Legal Consequences of Noncompliance with Federal Tax Laws, 70(1) Tax Lawyer 367 (2016).

16. Manhire J. What Does Voluntary Tax Compliance Mean?: A Government Perspective, 164(1) University of Pennsylvania Law Review Online 11 (2015).

17. McLaughlin M. HMRC Investigations Handbook 2016/17(London: Bloomsbury Professional, 2017).

18. Michaels M. & Gibson A. Voluntary Disclosure for People with Good Stories: Did Waiting Make Sense?, 27 Journal of International Taxation 55 (2016).

19. Oei S.-Y. The Offshore Tax Enforcement Dragnet, 67(4) Emory Law Journal 655 (2018).

20. Satterthwaite E. Can Audits Encourage Tax Evasion? An Experimental Assessment, 20(1) Florida Tax Review 1 (2016).

21. Thin Capitalization and Tax Avoidance, 55(7) Columbia Law Review 1054 (1955).


For citation:


Ovcharova E., Tasalov K., Osina D. Tax Compliance in the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the United States of America: Forcing and Encouraging Lawful Conduct of Taxpayers. Russian Law Journal. 2019;7(1):4-54. https://doi.org/10.17589/2309-8678-2019-7-1-4-54

Views: 636


ISSN 2309-8678 (Print)
ISSN 2312-3605 (Online)