Soft Laws and Tax Conformity: 'We are Not Accusing You of Being Illegal, We are Accusing You of Being Immoral' (Normativités alternatives et conformité fiscale: 'We are Not Accusing You of Being Illegal, We are Accusing You of Being Immoral')
Bibliographic record
Abstract
English Abstract: The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), which creates tax norms often referred to as soft law, is at the center of tax normativity. Even without coercive force on the states, these rules have a considerable influence on their tax regimes. For this reason, these alternative normative processes could exert pressure on democratic theory. According to Habermas, it is precisely these democratic processes that allow the law to claim legitimacy. He argues that a legal norm will be valid if its addressees can also perceive themselves as its authors. This article nourishes the reflection on the democratic legitimacy of fiscal normalisation and the possible consequences in terms of tax compliance. In fact, research has shown that the appearance of justice in the tax system and the impression of compliance on the part of other taxpayers increase tax compliance behaviour. Thus, this article first outlines the “alternative” normative process of the OECD and its direct influence on state law. It then summarizes Habermas’ thought on the legitimacy of law. Finally, Habermas’ theory is used to highlight the influence of this “alternative” normativity on the states and the consequences on the democratic processes that can affect the legal legitimization. French Abstract: Le champ de la normalisation fiscale est largement occupe par l’Organisation de cooperation et de developpement economique (OCDE), qui cree des normes souvent qualifiees de soft law (ou droit mou). Sans avoir une force coercitive sur les Etats, les regles elaborees par l’OCDE exercent une influence considerable sur les regimes de droit fiscal des Etats. Ces processus normatifs alternatifs pourraient exercer des pressions sur la theorie democratique. Selon Habermas, ce sont justement ces processus democratiques qui permettent au droit de pretendre a la legitimite. Selon lui, une norme juridique sera valide si le destinataire du droit peut egalement se percevoir comme son auteur. Le texte alimente la reflexion sur la validite de cette normalisation fiscale et les possibles consequences en termes de conformite fiscale. En effet, des recherches ont etabli que l’apparence de justice du systeme fiscal et l’impression de conformite de la part des autres contribuables augmentaient les comportements de conformite fiscale. Cet article expose, tout d’abord, l’important processus normatif de l’OCDE et son influence directe sur le droit etatique. En seconde partie, il resume la pensee de Habermas sur la legitimite du droit. Enfin, cette reflexion de Habermas est utilisee pour mettre en lumiere l’influence de cette normativite «alternative» sur les Etats et les consequences sur les processus democratiques pouvant affecter la legitimation du droit.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".