What Tax Morale? A Moral Anthropological Stance on a Failed Cooperative Compliance Initiative

Lotta Björklund Larsen

Authors

Lotta Björklund Larsen Independent Scholar and Research Fellow, Tax Administration Research Centre, University of Exeter, Exeter, Devon, U.K.

Abstract

This article sheds light on why cooperative compliance initiatives can fail even when introduced in a country where tax compliance is deemed to be high and which has a “successful” tax administration that scores high on taxpayer trust surveys. The country in question is Sweden.

The Swedish Tax Agency aims to make taxpayers pay “the right tax”, not necessarily the maximum tax, in order to increase tax compliance and thus societal trust in the Agency. One way in which to work towards this goal is to work proactively with large businesses, i.e. Multinational Enterprises (MNEs), for example, through so-called cooperative compliance initiatives. These “modern, efficient and successful” ways of working are currently in fashion among the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) members’ revenue authorities. However, the Swedish version of such initiatives was met with strong resistance and, today, very few MNEs participate. How can we understand this resistance given the good standing the Swedish Tax Agency is said to have among the taxpayers it serves (Skatteverket, 2013a, 2013b)?

In order to illuminate the contradiction between this “successful” Agency and the “failure” of this cooperative compliance initiative, this article explores various stakeholders’ moral stances on the issue. The article obviously encompasses the views of the Agency, but also includes those of enrolled MNEs, as well as some that declined to participate and various other stakeholders, such as policymakers, tax scholars, tax advisors and corporate interest organisations. By borrowing from Didier Fassin’s moral anthropological approach—not a moralising account, but an examination of moral reasoning among all stakeholders in the Swedish tax arena—we can better understand why the initiative failed. This approach is also helpful as proponents and opponents of the initiative could be found in all stakeholder categories.

References

Arkhede, S., & Holmberg, S. (2015). Svenska folkets bedömning av offentliga myndigheters verksamhet. SOM institutets rapport 19.

Bernitz, U., & Reichel, J. (2015). Effektivitet eller legalitet? En bedömning av Skatteverkets nya samarbetsformer. Stockholm: Svenskt Näringsliv.

Björklund Larsen, L. (2015). Common Sense at the Swedish Tax Agency: Transactional boundaries that separate taxable and tax-free income.” Critical Perspectives on Accounting, Vol 31(September 2015), 75-89.

Björklund Larsen, L. (2018). Sweden: Failure of a Cooperative Compliance Project? In E. Mulligan & L. Oats (Eds.), Contemporary Issues in Tax Research: Volume 3 (pp. 7-50). Birmingham, UK: Fiscal Publications.

Björklund Larsen, L., Boll, K., Brøgger, B., Kettunen, J., Potka-Soininen, T. Pellinen, J., Brehm Johansen, M., & Aziz, K. (2018). Nordic Experiences of Co-operative Compliance Programmes: Comparisons and Recommendations. FairTax Working Paper Series 20: 1-135.

Boden, R., Killian, S., Mulligan, E., and Oats, L. (2010). Critical Perspectives on Taxation. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 21(7), 541-646

Boll, K. (2012). Ethnography and Tax Compliance. In L. Oats (Ed.), Taxation: A Fieldwork Research Handbook (pp. 50-58). Abingdon, UK: Routledge.

Boll, K. (2018) Securing Tax Compliance with Collaboration: The Case of Co-operative Compliance in Denmark. In N. Hashimzade & Y. Epifantseva (Eds.), The Routledge Companion to Tax Avoidance (pp. 212-224). Abingdon, UK: Routledge.

Boll, K., & Brehm Johansen, M. (2018). Tax Governance: Corporate experiences with Cooperative Compliance in Denmark. FairTax Working Paper Series 17.

Durkheim, E. (1984). The Division of Labour in Society. VAR. (Original work published 1893).

Ekonomistyrningsverket. (2012). Medborgares Syn På Myndigheter. Stockholm, Sweden: YouGov.

Fangen, K. (2005). Deltagande observation. Malmö, Sweden: Liber.

Fassin, D. (2011). A contribution to the critique of moral reason. Anthropological Theory, 11(4), 481–491.

Fassin, D. (Ed.). (2012). A Companion to Moral Anthropology. London, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.

Flyvbjerg, B. (2001). Making Social Science Matter: Why Social Inquiry Fails and How it Can Succeed Again. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Gusterson. (1997). Studying up revisited. PoLAR Political and Legal Anthropology Review, 20(1), 114–119.

Hambre, A-M. (2015). Tax Confidentiality: A Comparative Study and Impact Assessment of Global Interest (Doctoral dissertation). Örebro, Sweden: Örebro University.

Hambre, A-M. (2018). Fördjupad dialog: En studie av Skatteverkets arbetsform fördjupad dialog ur ett svenskt offentligrättsligt perspektiv. Uppsala, Sweden: Iustus.

International Fiscal Association (IFA). (2012, August 31). IFA Initiative on the Enhanced Relationship Key Issues Report (Version 3.3). n.p: IFA.

Kvale, S. (1997). Den Kvalitativa Forskningsintervjun. Lund, Sweden: Studentlitteratur.

Oats, L. (Ed.). (2012). Taxation: A Fieldwork Research Handbook. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2008). Monitoring Taxpayers’ Compliance: A Practical Guide Based on Revenue Body Experience. Paris, France: OECD Centre for Tax Policy and Administration.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2010). Overview: Evaluating the Effectiveness of Compliance Risk Treatment Strategies. Paris, France: OECD Centre for Tax Policy and Administration.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2013). Co-operative Compliance: A Framework. From Enhanced Relationship to Co-operative Compliance. Paris, France: OECD Centre for Tax Policy and Administration.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2014). Measures of Tax Compliance Outcomes: A Practical Guide. Paris, France: OECD Centre for Tax Policy and Administration.

Påhlsson, R. (2011, March 11). Ska Skatteverket bli en kompis? Dagens industri.

Påhlsson, R. (2012). SKV:s projekt fördjupad samverkan i svensk offentligrättslig miljö. Skattenytt, 831-849.

Riles, A. (Ed.). (2006). Documents: Artifacts of Modern Knowledge. Ann Arbor, USA.: University of Michigan Press.

Riles, A. (2011). Collateral Knowledge: Legal Reasoning in the Global Financial Markets. Chicago, USA: University of Chicago Press.

Runhage, L. (2012, May 21). Mys med storföretagen. Skatteverket intranet artikel.

Skatteverket. (2005). Right From The Start: 1. Solna, Sweden: Skatteverket.

Skatteverket. (2011). Fördjupad samverkan mellan Skatteverket och Sveriges största koncerner, dnr 480-698289-10/1211 1(13). Solna, Sweden: Skatteverket.

Skatteverket. (2013a). Företagens synpunkter på skattesystemet, skattefusket och Skatteverkets kontroll: 3. Solna, Sweden: Skatteverket.

Skatteverket. (2013b. Medborgarnas synpunkter på Skatteverkets sätt att arbeta “Brukarundersökningen”: 1. Solna, Sweden: Skatteverket.

Skatteverket. (2013c). Skatteverkets inriktning. 118. Solna, Sweden: Skatteverket.

Skatteverket. (2014). Riktlinje för fördjupad dialog, dnr 131-409414-13/111. Solna, Sweden: Skatteverket.

Spradley, J. P. (1979). Interviewing an Informant. In J. P. Spradley (Ed.), The Ethnographic Interview (pp. 55-68). Fort Worth, USA: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers.

Stridh, A., & Wittberg, L. (2015). Från fruktad skattefogde till omtyckt servicemyndighet. Stockholm, Sweden: Skatteverket.

Weber, M. (1949). Economy and society: An outline of interpretive sociology. (Original work published 1904).

Widlok, T. (2012). Virtue. In D. Fassin (Ed.) A Companion to Moral Anthropology (pp. 186-203). London, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.

Wästerfors, D. (2004). Berättelser Om Mutor: Det Korruptas Betydelse Bland Svenska Affärsmän I Öst-Och Centraleuropa. [Stories about Bribes: The Meaning of Corruption among Swedish Businessmen in Eastern Central Europe]. Stehag, Sweden: Symposion.

Wittberg, L. (2005). Right from the Start, Solna, Skatterverket.