MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3039057853 · doi:10.5430/ijfr.v11n4p52

Corruption and Tax Noncompliance Variables: An Empirical Investigation From Yemen

2020· article· en· W3039057853 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohammed Mahdi Obaid, Noraza Mat Udin

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Financial Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicTaxation and Compliance Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversiti Utara Malaysia
KeywordsLanguage changePublic economicsTax revenueDescriptive statisticsMulticollinearityRevenueBusinessIndirect taxGovernment (linguistics)State income taxEconomicsTax reformRegression analysisAccountingStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tax revenue is an important source of income for various governments around the world. However, challenges, as a result of corruption and tax noncompliance behaviour among the taxpayers, are hindering the adequate generation of such revenues for the government. The objective of this study is to investigate the effect of corruption and other tax noncompliance variables on tax revenue generation in Yemen. The study used survey research design via a questionnaire to collect data from 264 individual taxpayers in the Hadhramout Governorate. The collected data was analyzed using SPSS to perform reliability test, descriptive statistics, multicollinearity test, and regression analysis. The findings of the study show that corruption and tax rate are positively related to tax noncompliance; income level is negatively related to tax noncompliance; whereas penalty rate and education level are positive but not related to tax noncompliance. The implication of the study is that the government and the tax authority should update and institute new tax laws and policies that could minimize corruption among their officials and create more awareness among the taxpayers on the importance of paying tax to the government, so as to increase their compliance behaviour.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.334

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.252
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.141 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Financial ResearchSame topicTaxation and Compliance StudiesFrench-language works237,207