Volume 36, Issue 4 (Winter 2024)
JMDP 2024, 36(4): 3-33 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Khodabandeh R, Monavarian A, Nargesian A. A Model for Tax Evasion Prevention in Iran, Based on Preventive Network Governance Approach. JMDP 2024; 36 (4) :3-33
URL: http://jmdp.ir/article-1-4613-en.html
URL: http://jmdp.ir/article-1-4613-en.html
1- Department of Public Administration, Kish International Campus Tehran University, Kish Island, Iran.
2- Department of Public Administration And Policy Making, Faculty of Public Administration and Organization Science, Tehran University, Tehran, Iran. ,amonavar@ut.ac.ir
3- Department of Leadership and Human Capital, Faculty of Public Administration and Organization Science, Tehran University, Tehran, Iran.
2- Department of Public Administration And Policy Making, Faculty of Public Administration and Organization Science, Tehran University, Tehran, Iran. ,
3- Department of Leadership and Human Capital, Faculty of Public Administration and Organization Science, Tehran University, Tehran, Iran.
Abstract: (1935 Views)
Purpose: The purpose of this article was to present a preventive network governance model to meet tax evasion as a case study in Tax Affairs Organization of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Methodology: The statistical sample, consisting of thirty managers of the State Tax Affairs Organization, was selected through targeted and accessible method. Applying the Multiple Grounded Theory approach, the researchers designed a network governance model, containing 341 concepts summarized in 79 primary open codes which finally led to 12 dimensions.
Findings: The results of the research show that the identified dimensions fall into six groups: 1. The core category including the private sector governance network and civil institutions, 2. social contexts including economic and cultural issues, 3. results and outcomes including participative, structured and sound tax system, 4. support platforms including judicial issues, laws and regulations, 5. internal conditions including human capital and organizational-administrative issues, 6. external conditions including international, structural and organizing issues.
Methodology: The statistical sample, consisting of thirty managers of the State Tax Affairs Organization, was selected through targeted and accessible method. Applying the Multiple Grounded Theory approach, the researchers designed a network governance model, containing 341 concepts summarized in 79 primary open codes which finally led to 12 dimensions.
Findings: The results of the research show that the identified dimensions fall into six groups: 1. The core category including the private sector governance network and civil institutions, 2. social contexts including economic and cultural issues, 3. results and outcomes including participative, structured and sound tax system, 4. support platforms including judicial issues, laws and regulations, 5. internal conditions including human capital and organizational-administrative issues, 6. external conditions including international, structural and organizing issues.
Type of Study: Applicable |
Subject:
Governance
Received: Apr 14 2023 | Accepted: Nov 27 2023 | ePublished: May 06 2024
Received: Apr 14 2023 | Accepted: Nov 27 2023 | ePublished: May 06 2024
References
1. Abdel-Latif, H. M., Chaklader, M. R., Shukry, M., Ahmed, H. A., & Khallaf, M. A. (2023). A Multispecies Probiotic Modulates Growth, Digestive Enzymes, Immunity, Hepatic Antioxidant Activity, and Disease Resistance of Pangasianodon Hypophthalmus Fingerlings. Aquaculture, 563(1), 738948. [DOI:10.1016/j.aquaculture.2022.738948]
2. Acemoglu, D. (2012). Introduction to Economic Growth. Journal of Economic Theory, 147(2), 545-550. [DOI:10.1016/j.jet.2012.01.023]
3. Agranoff, R., & McGuire, M. (2003). Collaborative Public Management: New Strategies for Local Governments. Georgetown University Press. [DOI:10.1353/book13050]
4. Bird, A., & Karolyi, S. A. (2017). Governance and Taxes: Evidence from Regression Discontinuity (Retracted). The Accounting Review, 92(1), 29-50. [DOI:10.2308/accr-51520]
5. Bird, R. M., Martinez-Vazquez, J., & Torgler, B. (2008). Tax Effort in Developing Countries and High Income Countries: The Impact of Corruption, Voice and Accountability. Economic Analysis and Policy, 38(1), 55-71. [DOI:10.1016/S0313-5926(08)50006-3]
6. Carlsson, L., & Sandström, A. (2008). Network Governance of the Commons. International Journal of the Commons, 2(1), 33-54. [DOI:10.18352/ijc.20]
7. Danaeefard, H. (2013). Network Public Administration in Iran: Theoretical and Practical Rationales, and Requirements. Management Research in Iran, 17(2), 69-104. [In Farsi]
8. Fukuyama, F. (2013). What is Governance? Governance, 26(3), 347-368. [DOI:10.1111/gove.12035]
9. Ghouchani Khorasani, M. M., & Hosseinpour, D. (2017). Network Governance in Cyber Security Research Institutions. Management and Development Process, 30(1), 51-80. [In Farsi] [http://jmdp.ir/article-1-2798-fa.html]
10. Goldsmith, S., & Eggers, W. D. (2005). Governing by Network: The New Shape of the Public Sector. Rowman & Littlefield.
11. Hashemi, M., Etemadi, H., & Rezazadeh, J. (2022). Modeling Tax Evasion in Value Added Tax, A Game Theory Approach. Journal of Tax Research, 30(55), 7-51. [In Farsi] [DOI:10.52547/taxjournal.30.55.2]
12. Hertting, N., & Vedung, E. (2012). Purposes and Criteria in Network Governance Evaluation: How Far Does Standard Evaluation Vocabulary Takes Us? Evaluation, 18(1), 27-46. [DOI:10.1177/1356389011431021]
13. Huxham, C., & Vangen, S. (2005). Managing to Collaborate London. Routledge.
14. Imam, P. A., & Jacobs, D. (2014). Effect of Corruption on Tax Revenues in the Middle East. Review of Middle East Economics and Finance, 10(1), 1-24. [DOI:10.1515/rmeef-2014-0001]
15. Imperial, M. T. (2005). Using Collaboration as a Governance Strategy: Lessons from Six Watershed Management Programs. Administration & Society, 37(3), 281-320. [DOI:10.1177/0095399705276111]
16. Kapucu, N., Beaudet, S., Chang, N.-B., Qiu, J., & Peng, Z.-R. (2023). Partnerships and Network Governance for Urban Food-Energy-Water (FEW) Nexus. International Journal of Public Administration, 46(1), 18-31. [DOI:10.1080/01900692.2021.1967981]
17. Keast, R. (2022). Network Governance. In C. Ansell & J. Torfing (Eds.), Handbook on Theories of Governance (pp. 485-496). Edward Elgar Publishing. [DOI:10.4337/9781800371972.00052]
18. Khajeh Naeini, A. (2014). An Introduction to the Concept of Network Governance; Desires and Challenges. Political and International Approaches, 6(1), 129-157. [In Farsi]
19. Maturo, A. (2004). Network Governance as a Response to Risk Society Dilemmas: A Proposal from the Sociology of Health. Topoi, 23(2), 195-202. [DOI:10.1023/B:TOPO.0000046066.21486.82]
20. Motallebi, M., Alizadeh, M., & Faraji, S. (2018). Estimating Shadow Economy and Tax Evasion by Considering Behavioral Factors. Journal of Applied Economics Studies in Iran, 7(27), 141-167. [In Farsi] [DOI:10.22084/aes.2018.16132.2633]
21. Paidarmanesh, N., Mehrazeen, A., Abbaszadeh, M. R., & Masih Abadi, A. (2022). Interaction Motivation and Opportunity Action to Plan Tax Evasion and Present a New Model of Corporate Tax Evasion. Financial Accounting Knowledge, 9(2), 127-167. [DOI:10.30479/jfak.2021.15378.2853]
22. Sen Gupta, A. (2007). Determinants of Tax Revenue Efforts in Developing Countries. International Monetary Fund, Working Paper, No. 07/184. [DOI:10.2139/ssrn.1007933]
23. Steets, J., & Haver, K. (2018). Dealing with Challenges to Decisions Based on the Humanitarian Principles. In M. Quack (Ed.), Based on Need Alone? Impartiality in Humanitarian Action (pp. 19-23). Maecenata Institute, Opusculum No. 121.
24. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of Qualitative Research. Sage Publications.
25. Tanzi, V., & Davoodi, H. (2001). Corruption, Growth, and Public Finances. In The Political Economy of Corruption (pp. 101-122). Routledge. [DOI:10.4324/9780203468388.pt3]
26. Van Bueren, E. M., Klijn, E. H., & Koppenjan, J. F. (2003). Dealing with Wicked Problems in Networks: Analyzing an Environmental Debate from a Network Perspective. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 13(2), 193-212. [DOI:10.1093/jopart/mug017]
27. Van Duijn, S., Bannink, D., & Ybema, S. (2022). Working Toward Network Governance: Local Actors' Strategies for Navigating Tensions in Localized Health Care Governance. Administration & Society, 54(4), 660-689. [DOI:10.1177/00953997211033818]
28. Wang, H., & Ran, B. (2023). Network Governance and Collaborative Governance: A Thematic Analysis on Their Similarities, Differences, and Entanglements. Public Management Review, 25(6), 1187-1211. [DOI:10.1080/14719037.2021.2011389]
29. Zare Bahnamiri, M. J., Rahimian Amiri, M. H., & Tirgan, M. (2022). Prioritizing Factors Affecting Tax Evasion. Accounting and Auditing Research, 14(54), 187-202. [DOI:10.22034/iaar.2022.156652]
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. |
