Advertisement

Economics of Governance

, Volume 16, Issue 2, pp 101–123 | Cite as

Why so little revenues are obtained from a presumed large shadow economy?

  • Matti VirenEmail author
Original Paper
  • 232 Downloads

Abstract

This paper deals with the gap between very high estimates of the size of the shadow economy and the small amount of government revenue that is obtained by means of tax inspections and regulatory activities. We use Finland as an example of a country where substantial amounts of new resources have recently been devoted to shadow economy inspections at the same time as new regulations have been introduced to curtail shadow economy activities. Thus far, the fiscal results appear to be very modest. We use new micro data from the Finnish Tax Administration’s tax audits to examine the reasons for this disappointing result. It appears that, to a large extent, the explanation is related to the small size of the shadow economy firms, poor economic performance of the firms, the judicial forms of the firms, and to foreign ownership. Against this background it does not seem likely that much more revenue could be generated from the shadow economy activities in the future. It may also be that the result reflects the fact that the shadow economy is, after all, much smaller than what is argued in public debate.

Keywords

Shadow economy National accounts Taxation Tax audits 

JEL Classification

O5 O17 D78 H2 H11 H26 

References

  1. Ahumada H, Alverdo F, Canavese A (2007) The monetary method to measure the shadow economy: a critical assessment. Rev Income Wealth 53(2):363–371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahumada H, Alverdo F, Canavese A (2008) The monetary method to measure the shadow economy: the forgotten problem of initial conditions. Econ Lett 101:97–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Andreoni J, Erard B, Feinstein J (1998) Tax compliance. J Econ Lit 36(2):818–860Google Scholar
  4. Alm J, Erarnd B, Feinstein J (1996) The relationship between state and federal tax audits. In: Felstein M, Porteba J (eds) Empirical foundations of household taxation. National Bureau of Economic Research, University of Chicago Press, New York, pp 235–272Google Scholar
  5. Amaral P, Quintin E (2006) A competitive model of the informal sector. J Monet Econ 53(7):1541–1553CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Breusch T (2005) The Canadian underground economy: an examination of giles and tedds. Can Tax J 53(2):367–391Google Scholar
  7. Cebula R (1997) An empirical analysis of the impact of government tax and auditing policies on the size of the underground economy. Am J Econ Sociol 56(2):173–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gemmell N, Ratto M (2012) Behavioral responses to taxpayer audits: evidence from random taxpayer inquiries. Natl Tax J 65(1):33–58Google Scholar
  9. Heckman J (1979) Sample selection bias as a specification error. Econometrica 47(1):153–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hirvonen M, Lith P, Walden R (2010) Suomen kansainvälistyvä harmaa talous (An investigation of the Finnish shadow economy commissioned by the Finnish Parliament). Helsinki 2010Google Scholar
  11. Ingram B, Kocherlakota N, Savin N (1997) Using theory for measurement: an analysis of the cyclical behavior of home production. J Monet Econ 40:435–456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Juahir M-N, Norsiah A, Nornal NM-S (2012) Fraudulent financial reporting and companies’characteristics: tax audit evidence. J Financ Rep Account 8(2):128–142Google Scholar
  13. Kleven H, Knudsen M, Kreiner C, Pedersden S, Saez E (2010) Unwilling or unable to chaet: evidence from randomized tax audit experiment in Denmark. Econometrica 79(3):651–692Google Scholar
  14. Kleven H (2014) How can Scandinavians tax so much? J Econ Perspect 28(4):77–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lai M, Yaacob Z, Omar N, Aziz N, Yap B (2013) Examining corporate tax evaders: evidence from the finalized audit cases. Int J Soc Manag Econ Busin Eng 7(6):613–617Google Scholar
  16. La Porta R, Lopez-de-Silanes F, Shleifer A, Vishny R (1997) Legal determinants of external finance. J Financ 52(3):1131–1150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. McDonald R (1984) The “underground economy” and BLS statistical data. Mon Labor Rev 107(1):4–18Google Scholar
  18. Muttilainen V, Kankaanranta T (2011) Development trends of Finnish economic crimes in 2000–2009 (in Finnish). In: Poliisiammattikorkeakoulun raportteja 91Google Scholar
  19. Nurminen R (2010) The value of shadow economy is small in Finland (in Finnish). Tieto Trendit Stat Finl 2008(8):12–14Google Scholar
  20. OECD (2002) Measuring the non-observed economy: a handbook. OECD ParisGoogle Scholar
  21. OECD (2006) Reassessing the role of policies and institutions for labour market performance: a quantitative analysis. In: Chapter 7 in OECD employment outlook “Boosting Jobs and Incomes”. OECD, Paris, pp 207–231Google Scholar
  22. Pekkala T (2012) Cumulative results of deficiency notices caused by tax investigation (in Finnish). Finn Tax Auth (unpublished)Google Scholar
  23. Pickhardt M, Sarda J (2012) Cash, hoarding and the underground economy. CAWM discussion paper/Centrum fur Angewandte Wirtschaftsforschnung, No. 56. http://handle.net/10419/57172
  24. Renooy P (1990) The informal economy: meaning, measurement and social significance. Netherlands Geographical Studies, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  25. Schneider F (2000) Dimension of the shadow economy. Indep Rev 1:81–91Google Scholar
  26. Schneider F (2005) Shadow economies around the world: What do we know? Eur J Polit Econ 21:598–642CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Schneider F, Buehn A (2013) Shadow economies in highly developed OECD countries: What are the driving forces? Unpublished. http://www.business.otago.ac.nz/econ/seminars/Abstracts/2013/Schneider24May.pdf
  28. Slemrod J, Blumenthal M, Christian C (2001) Taxpayer response to an increased probability of audit: evidence from a controlled experiment in Minnesota. J Public Econ 79(3):455–483CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Stix H (2012) Why do people save in cash: Distrust, memories of banking crises, weak institutions and dollarization? Paper presented the international cash conference in Bunsdesbank with the title “The usage, costs and benefits of cash: Theory and evidence from macro and micro data”Google Scholar
  30. Takala K, Viren M (2010) Is cash used only in the shadow economy. Int Econ J 24(4):525–540CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Tanzi V (1999) Uses and abuses of estimates of the underground economy. Econ J 109:F338–F347CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Bank of FinlandHelsinkiFinland
  2. 2.University of TurkuTurkuFinland

Personalised recommendations