Abstract
Levitt and List’s (2007) utility function relating to decisions with a moral dimension is adapted to offer insight into the moral costs associated with tax evasion and benefit fraud. Three questions are empirically explored: Are tax evasion and benefit fraud moral equivalents? Does an individual’s ‘moral hinterland’ associate with their intentions to commit fiscal crimes? What is the role of moral cues in informing public policy to reduce fiscal crimes? The econometric evidence employs 2942 questionnaire responses to a 2016 national (UK) survey. This paper contributes to the literature by offering insight into the way moral costs inform perceptions of the intrinsic value of ‘doing the right thing’ thereby offering a richer analysis of fiscal crimes. The account has particular relevance for policy prescriptions that involve aspects of ‘shame’.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | 421 |
| Journal | Humanities and Social Sciences Communications |
| Volume | 12 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| Early online date | 24 Mar 2025 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | E-pub ahead of print - 24 Mar 2025 |
Data Availability Statement
In this paper, the empirical analysis is based on a UK national survey conducted by the National Centre for Social Research (NatCen). Data refers to the British Social Attitudes Survey, 2016. The full dataset and documentation are provided by the UK Data Service and are available at: https://beta.ukdataservice.ac.uk/datacatalogue/studies/study?id=8252#!/details. Data can be accessed online and is available to users registered with the UK Data Service. During registration, researchers will be asked to provide information on their organization. The UK Data Service will contact researchers and grant access to the requested dataset. The analysis was carried out in Stata. Variables were recoded as described in the manuscript (please see also Table 1) and used for the relevant regression analyses in Tables 2 and 3 of the paper. All program (do) files and output files can be provided from the author(s) upon request.Acknowledgements
We would like to thank two anonymous reviewers and the Editors of the special issue for their valuable feedback and insightful suggestions, which greatly contributed to the improvement of this work.ASJC Scopus subject areas
- General Business,Management and Accounting
- General Arts and Humanities
- General Social Sciences
- General Psychology
- General Economics,Econometrics and Finance
