ANU Centre for Tax System Integrity (CTSI)
Permanent URI for this collection
The Centre for Tax System Integrity (CTSI) ran from 1999 to 2005. The partnership of the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) and the Australian National University (ANU) produced ground-breaking research on how voluntary taxpaying cultures can be maintained and why cooperation and contestation occur within the tax system. The work of the Centre located tax systems and their administration within the context of democratic governance where the fair and reasonable treatment of citizens is understood to be a basic entitlement.
Browse
Browsing ANU Centre for Tax System Integrity (CTSI) by Subject "Australian Tax Office"
Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Open Access Cash economy: summary of CTSI research findings and questions for future research(Centre for Tax System Integrity (CTSI), Research School of Social Sciences, The Australian National University, 2003) Braithwaite, ValerieResearch on purchasers and suppliers of cash economy activity in Australia has been conducted in the Research School of Social Sciences at the ANU using two data sets the first from a national survey conducted in July 2000, the second from a follow-up survey conducted in January 2002. The data that have been analyzed so far provide the following insights into cash economy behaviour and raise a number of questions for further investigation.Item Open Access Championing the compliance model: From common sense to common action?(Centre for Tax System Integrity (CTSI), Research School of Social Sciences, The Australian National University) Hobson, Kersty; Australian National University. Centre for Tax System Integrity; Australian Taxation Office;The Compliance Model was introduced into the Australian Tax Office (Tax Office) as both a procedural and product-outcome innovation, where it has been met with varying degrees of acceptance and criticism. This paper analyses interviews with 22 Compliance Model ‘champions’, to examine what the Compliance Model meant to them and how they put it into practice. It shows how champions believed the Compliance Model was ‘common sense’. It represented and brought together various trains of thought and ideas they already had about how they wanted to work. Champions were able to put these thoughts into action, as the Model legitimised their beliefs and gave them a new language – or ‘discursive space’ – in which they could try and do things differently. Working from ‘within’ the Model, it became a new way of thinking. They were able to see the positive effects of using the Compliance Model and became committed to using it as a tool for encouraging sound working practices and greater taxation compliance. This suggests that the Compliance Model could be taken forward in the Tax Office by putting into action small, day-to-day, behavioural changes that exemplify the conceptual foundations of the Model, without having to change staff ‘values’ or ‘culture’. By bringing the Compliance Model gradually to life, Tax Office staff could experience first-hand the positive effects of the Model, which, for the champions at least, was the strongest factor in committing them to its validity as a worthwhile form of practice.Item Open Access Trusting the Tax Office: Does Putnam's thesis relate to tax?(Centre for Tax System Integrity (CTSI), Research School of Social Sciences, The Australian National University) Job, Jenny; Honaker, David; Australian National University. Centre for Tax System Integrity; Australian Taxation OfficeData from the Community Participation and Citizenship Survey are used to explore the factors that influence people to place trust in strangers and impersonal others. We use Putnams social capital thesis to explore whether civic engagement and associational membership are major factors in the development of generalised or social trust, and whether this kind of trust is generalisable to trust in government institutions, specifically the Australian Taxation Office. There is partial support for Putnams thesis that civic engagement develops social trust. More important is affective trust which is developed in the family and through familiar others. We find that trust is generalisable, being extended to strangers and to the impersonal others in government institutions. It is trust that builds trust and government institutions like the Tax Office begin their task with benefits accrued through generalised trust.