Building Trust and Enhancing Tax Compliance: The Role of Authoritarian Procedures and Respectful Treatment in Indonesia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study delves into the impact of tax collection behavior on tax compliance among individual taxpayers in Indonesia, with a specific focus on two distinct behaviors: respectful treatment and authoritarian procedures. The research employs a cross-sectional survey method, targeting the population of individual taxpayers registered at the Regional Tax Office of East Java I. The sample size of 400 was selected through random sampling. Attitudes, opinions, and perceptions regarding tax collection behavior were measured using a Likert scale. Tax officials’ conduct was categorized as either respectful treatment or authoritarian procedures. The research employed Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) with the Partial Least Squares (PLS) software to assess the outer model. Hypothesis testing was conducted to scrutinize the relationship between tax collection behavior and taxpayer compliance. The study’s results indicate that respectful treatment positively influences compliance, whereas the utilization of authoritarian procedures leads to an increase in tax non-compliance. Notably, trust emerged as a mediating factor within this relationship. The findings underscore the crucial role of tax officials in cultivating trust with taxpayers by demonstrating respect, upholding integrity, and executing their responsibilities transparently and equitably. By fostering an environment of trust, tax compliance can be bolstered, fostering a collaborative approach that aids taxpayers in fulfilling their tax obligations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".