Institutions and Corporate Tax Evasion: A Review of the Literature and a Methodological Approach
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT We first review the recent research published in the Journal of International Accounting Research (JIAR) on the influence of international institutions on accounting practices. We follow this with a discussion of the literature by studying the influence of institutions on tax avoidance and tax evasion. We then propose a new methodological approach that draws on the theory of institutional hierarchy proposed by Williamson (2000) and examine the relative importance of three broad types of institutions (informal, formal, and media) in curtailing perceived tax evasion activities. We contribute to the international accounting literature by summarizing the recent research that addresses tax avoidance and tax evasion and by providing preliminary evidence on how employing an institutional hierarchy approach can address the interdependencies between commonly used institutional factors. Data Availability: Data are available from the public sources cited in the text. JEL Classifications: H26; G28; O16.
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.
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 | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it