MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412932053 · doi:10.3390/jrfm18080422

Evaluating the Implementation of Information Technology Audit Systems Within Tax Administration: A Risk Governance Perspective for Enhancing Digital Fiscal Integrity

2025· article· en· W4412932053 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Murat Umbet, Daulet Askarov, Kristina Rudžionienė, Česlovas Christauskas, Laura Alikulova

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicE-Government and Public Services
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAuditPerspective (graphical)BusinessCorporate governanceAccountingTax administrationAdministration (probate law)Information technology auditInformation technologyRisk analysis (engineering)Internal auditFinancePublic economicsPolitical scienceEconomicsTax reformComputer scienceJoint audit

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study evaluates the impact of digital systems and IT audit frameworks on tax performance and integrity within tax administrations. Using international data from organizations like the World Bank, OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development), and IMF (International Monetary Fund), the research examines the relationship between tax revenue as a percentage of GDP, digital infrastructure, corruption perception, e-government development, and cybersecurity readiness. Quantitative analysis, including correlation, regression, and clustering methods, reveals a strong positive relationship between digital maturity, e-governance, and tax performance. Countries with advanced digital governance systems and robust IT audit frameworks, such as COBIT, tend to show higher tax revenues and lower corruption levels. The study finds that e-government development and anti-corruption measures explain over 40% of the variance in tax performance. Cluster analysis distinguishes between digitally advanced, high-compliance countries and those lagging in IT adoption. The findings suggest that digital transformation strengthens fiscal integrity by automating compliance and reducing human contact, which in turn mitigates bribery risks and enhances fraud detection. The study highlights the need for adopting international best practices to guide the digitalization of tax administrations, improving efficiency, transparency, and trust in public finance.

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)0.002
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.668
Threshold uncertainty score0.297

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations9
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicE-Government and Public ServicesFrench-language works237,207