Skip to main content
Log in

A Cost-Benefit Analysis of the Thailand Taxpayer Survey

  • Published:
International Tax and Public Finance Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We investigate whether more resources should be devoted to a Thai tax enforcement program which is aimed at bringing small businesses into the tax system. We show that the appropriate criteria for determining whether more resources should be devoted to tax enforcement is whether the Atkinson–Stern condition for the optimal provision of a publicly-provided good is satisfied, or equivalently, whether the marginal cost of finds obtained through additional tax enforcement, SMCFp, is less than the marginal cost of funds obtained through raising tax rates, SMCFt. In our base case scenario, the SMCFp is 11.60 which exceeds our estimate of the SMCFt for an across-the-board increase in income tax rates on wage earners. The use of pro-poor distributional weights makes expanding the survey less attractive if the alternative way of obtaining additional tax revenue is an across-the-board income tax rate increase, while aversion to tax evasion makes it more attractive.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Atkinson, A. (1970). “On the Measurement of Inequality.” Journal of Economic Theory 2, 244-263.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson, A., and N. Stern. (1974). “Pigou, Taxation, and Public Goods.” Review of Economics Studies 41, 119-128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ballard, C. L. (1988). “The Marginal Efficiency Cost of Redistribution.” American Economic Review 78, 1019-1033.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ballard, C. L., and D. Fullerton. (1992). “Distortionary Taxation and the Provision of Public Goods.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 6, 117-131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Binswanger, H. (1980). “Attitudes toward Risk: Experimental Measurement in Rural India.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 62, 395-407.

    Google Scholar 

  • Binswanger, H., and D. Sillers. (1983). “Risk Aversion and Credit Constraints in Farmers' Decision-Making: A Reinterpretation.” Journal of Developmental Studies 20, 5-21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brownlee, O. (1972). “The Optimal Amount of Resources to Devote to Tax Collection.” Journal of Business 25, 14-17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cowell, F. A. (1990). Cheating the Government. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahlby, B. (1994). “The Distortionary Effect of Rising Taxes.” In R. Robson and W. Scarth (eds.), Deficit Reduction: What Pain; What Gain? Toronto: The C. D. Howe Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahlby, B. (1998). “Progressive Taxation and the Social Marginal Cost of Public Funds.” Journal of Public Economics 67, 105-122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fortin, B., and G. Lacroix. (1994). “Labour Supply, Tax Evasion, and the Marginal Cost of Public Funds: An Empirical Investigation.” Journal of Public Economics 55, 407-431.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fortin, B., M. Truchon, and L. Beauséjour. (1993). “On Reforming the Welfare System: Workfare Meets the Negative Income Tax.” Journal of Public Economics 51, 119-151.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goode, R. (1981). “Some Economic Aspects of Tax Administration.” IMF Staff Papers 28, 249-274.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grisley,W. (1980). “Effect of Risk and Risk Aversion on Farm Decision-Making: Farmers in Northern Thailand.” PhD. Thesis, University of Illinois.

  • Hansson, Ingemar, and Charles Stuart. (1985). “Tax Revenue and the Marginal Cost of Public Funds in Sweden.” Journal of Public Economics 27, 331-353.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplow, L. (1990). “Optimal Taxation with Costly Enforcement and Evasion.” Journal of Public Economics 43, 221-236.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayshar, J. (1991). “On Measuring the Marginal Cost of Funds Analytically.” American Economic Review 81, 1329-1335.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Statistical Office of Thailand. (1992). Report of the Labor Force Survey. Bangkok, Thailand.

  • Poapongsakorn, N. (1979). “Labor Supply, Demand for Children andWage Rates of Paid Employees in Thailand.” Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Economics, University of Hawaii.

  • Sandmo, A. (1981). “Income Tax Evasion, Labour Supply, and the Equity-Efficiency Tradeoff.” Journal of Public Economics 16, 265-288.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slemrod, J., and S. Yitzhaki. (1987). “The Optimal Size of a Tax Collection Agency.” Scandinavian Journal of Economics 89, 183-192.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snow, A., and R. Warren. (1996). “The MarginalWelfare Cost of Public Funds: Theory and Estimates.” Journal of Public Economics 61, 289-305.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tanzi, V., and P. Shome. (1993). “A Primer on Tax Evasion.” IMF Staff Papers 40, 807-828.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toma, E. F., and M. Toma. (1992). “Tax Collection with Agency Costs: Private Contracting or Government Bureaucrats?” Economica 59, 107-120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Timmons, J. A. (1994). New Venture Creation (4th edition). Boston, MA: Irwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Welch, R. B. (1954). “Measuring the Optimum Size of a Field Audit Staff.” National Tax Journal 7, 210-221.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yamada, M. (1990). “An Analysis of Optimal Tax Evasion.” Public Finance 35, 470-490.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yitzhaki, S., and Y. Vakneen. (1989). “On the Shadow Price of a Tax Inspector.” Public Finance 44, 492-505.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Poapongsakorn, N., Charnvitayapong, K., Laovakul, D. et al. A Cost-Benefit Analysis of the Thailand Taxpayer Survey. International Tax and Public Finance 7, 63–82 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008706113216

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008706113216

Navigation