Evaluating the Implementation of Information Technology Audit Systems Within Tax Administration: A Risk Governance Perspective for Enhancing Digital Fiscal Integrity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.026 | 0.078 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".