Journal of Tax Reform
Rationality of the Tax and Economic Behavior of Enterprises in the Russian Forestry Sector
Iulia E. Labunets 1, Igor A. Mayburov 2
1 Tomsk State University of Control Systems and Radioelectronics, Tomsk, Russian Federation
2 Ural Federal University named the first President of Russia B.N. Yeltsin, Yekaterinburg, Russian Federation
Abstract
The study focuses on the problem of rationality of economic entities, in particular the rationality of their tax and economic behavior in a given period. The data on enterprises in the Russian foreign sector are used to examine the relationship between the levels of rationality observed in their economic and tax behavior. The representative sample includes 1,206 micro-, small and medium-sized enterprises that specialize in logging, wood processing and wholesale timber trade and have forest lease agreements. The study covers the period from 2017 to 2021. Rationality of corporate behavior is understood as profit maximizing behavior or, in other words, as companies’ pursuit of maximum utility. Our theoretical review of the research on rationality in economic and tax behavior has led us to formulate the following assumptions. In economic behavior, rationality manifests itself primarily in companies’ efforts to improve the efficiency of resource use (labor, finance, and tangible assets). Rationality in tax behavior is associated with companies’ efforts to minimize their tax expenditures. Therefore, to assess the rationality of economic behavior, we used such indicators as labor productivity, return on own capital, return on borrowed capital, return on fixed assets, return on operating assets, business profitability, the stage of the lifecycle, and tax risk management. To assess rationality of tax behavior, we estimated the level of audit risk, that is, each company’s chances of being audited. Our study has confirmed the hypothesis that the rationality of tax and economic behavior has an inverse relationship. In other words, the more rational is the economic behavior of a firm, the less rational is its tax behavior. The strength of this relationship is impacted by three main factors: 1) the size of a business; 2) the level of opportunism; and 3) the type of activity. For the enterprises in the forestry sector covered by our analysis, we found that a change in the level of rationality of their tax behavior in 72.9% of cases leads to a change in the level of rationality of their economic behavior.
Keywords
tax behavior, economic behavior, rationality of behavior, economic entity, forestry sector, correlation, size of business, type of activity, opportunism
JEL classification
G40, L60References
1. Smith A. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. London: W. Strahan; 1776. Available at: https://books.google.ru/books?id=KpWg1DYxRTwC&q=editions:hdVgPAzxgfcC&pg=PP5&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=editions%3AhdVgPAzxgfcC&f=false
2. Walras L. Étude d’économie Politique Appliquée. Paris: chez Pichon; 1898. Available at: https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k113200v.texteImage
3. Marshall A. Industry and Trade: A Study of Industrial Technique and Business Organization; and of their Influences on the Conditions of Various Classes and Nations. Industry and Trade. London: Macmillan and Co., Limited; 1919. Available at: https://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/book/lookupid?key=ha100330930
4. von Neumann J., Morgenstern O. Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. 60th Anniversary Commemorative Edition. Princeton University Press; 2004. Available at: https://press.princeton.edu/books/paperback/9780691130613/theory-of-games-and-economic-behavior
5. Savage L.J. The Foundations of Statistics. New York: Dover Publications; 1954. Available at: https://gwern.net/doc/statistics/decision/1972-savage-foundationsofstatistics.pdf
6. Harstad R.M., Selten R. Bounded-Rationality Models: Tasks to Become Intellectually Competitive. Journal of Economic Literature. 2013;51(2):496–511. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.51.2.496
7. Simon H.A. A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice. The Quarterly Journal of Economics. 1955;69(1):99–118. https://doi.org/10.2307/1884852
8. Simon H.A. The New Science of Management Decision, Revised. New York: Harper & Brothers Publishers; 1817. Available at: https://ipwna.ir/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/THE-NEW-SCIENCE-OF-MANAGEMENT-DECISION-irpublicpolicy.pdf
9. Simon H.A. An Information Processing Theory of Intellectual Development. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development. 1962;27(2):150–161. https://doi.org/10.2307/1165536
10. Lichtenstein S., Slovic P. Reversals of Preference between Bids and Choices in Gambling Decisions. Journal of Experimental Psychology. 1971;89(1):46–55. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0031207
11. Kahneman D., Tversky A. Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk. Econometrica. 1979;47(2):263–292. https://doi.org/10.2307/1914185
12. Hayek F. The Fatal Conceit. The Errors of Socialism. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press; 1988. Available at: https://www.mises.at/static/literatur/Buch/hayek-the-fatal-conceit.pdf
13. Hayek F. The Road to Serfdom. London: Routledge; 2008. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315728124
14. Becker G.S. A Treatise on the Family. Cambridge (Mass.); London: Harvard University Press; 1991. Available at: https://brunofvieira.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/gary-becker-a-treatise-on-the-family.pdf
15. Zouboulakis M.S. On the social nature of rationality in Adam Smith and John Stuart Mill. Cahiers D’économie Politique. 2005;2(49):51–63. https://doi.org/10.3917/cep.049.0051
16. Zouboulakis M.S. The Varieties of Economic Rationality: from Adam Smith to Contemporary Behavioural and Evolutionary Economics. London: Routledge Tayler & Francis Group; 2014. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315818641
17. Jones M.K. The Concept of Rationality in Introductory Economics Textbooks. Citizenship, Social and Economic Education. 2021;20(1):37–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/2047173421994333
18. Cyert R.M., March J.G. A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. Prentice-Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ; 1963. Available at: https://oa.mg/work/2028436159
19. Nelson R.R., Winter S.G. An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 1982. Available at: http://inctpped.ie.ufrj.br/spiderweb/pdf_2/Dosi_1_An_evolutionary-theory-of_economic_change..pdf
20. Veblen T. The Theory of the Leisure Class: An econ. study of institutions. London: Unwin books; 1970. Available at: http://moglen.law.columbia.edu/LCS/theoryleisureclass.pdf
21. Knight F.H. Risk, Uncertainty and Profit. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company; 1921. Available at: https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/files/docs/publications/books/risk/riskuncertaintyprofit.pdf
22. Norton W.Jr., Moore W.T. Entrepreneurial Risk: Have We Been Asking the Wrong Question? Small Business Economics. 2002;18:281–287. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015231318265
23. Wiklund J., Shepherd D.A. Portfolio Entrepreneurship: Habitual and Novice Founders, New Entry, and Mode of Organizing. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice. 2008;32(4):701–725. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2008.00249.x
24. Chitsaz E., Tajpour M., Hosseini E., Khorram H., Zorrieh S. The efect of human and social capital on entrepreneurial activities: A case study of Iran and implications. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 2019;6(3):1393–1403. https://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2019.6.3(24)
25. Pokrovskaya N. Rationality of Economic Behaviour. Izvestia: Herzen University Journal of Humanities & Sciences. 2007;9(46):128–136. (In Russ.) Available at: https://lib.herzen.spb.ru/media/magazines/contents/1/9(46)/pokrovskaya_9_46_128_137.pdf
26. Yeşilyurt E., Türker M. Economic Rationality Analysis of Forestry Sector with Econometric Methods (The General Directorate of Forestry Case). Bartın Orman Fakültesi Dergisi. 2019:21(3):893–898. https://doi.org/10.24011/barofd.546172
27. Gavetti G., Levinthal D. Looking Forward and Looking Backward: Cognitive and Experiential Search. Administrative Science Quarterly. 2000;45(1):113–137. https://doi.org/10.2307/2666981
28. Huber G.P. Organizational Learning: The Contributing Processes and the Literatures. Organization Science. 1991;2(1):88–115. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2.1.88
29. Gavetti G., Levinthal D.A., Rivkin J.W. Strategy Making in Novel and Complex Worlds: The Power of Analogy. Strategic Management Journal. 2005;26(8):691–712. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.475
30. Miller K. Risk and Rationality in Entrepreneurial Processes. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal. 2007;1(1-2):57–74. https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.2
31. Aldrich H., Zimmer C. Entrepreneurship Through Social Networks. California Management Review. 1986;33:3–3. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Howard-Aldrich/publication/291165757_Entrepreneurship_Through_Social_Networks/links/569ea49a08ae2c638eb584d0/Entrepreneurship-Through-Social-Networks.pdf
32. Jia Y., Tsui A., Yu X. Beyond Bounded Rationality: CEO Reflective Capacity and Firm Sustainability Performance. Management and Organization Review. 2021:17(4):777–814. https://doi.org/10.1017/mor.2021.4
33. Hogarth R.M., Karelaia N. Simple Models for Multiattribute Choice with Many Alternatives: When It Does and Does Not Pay to Face Trade-offs with Binary Attributes. Management Science. 2005;51(12):1860–1872. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1050.0448
34. Littlechild S.C. Three types of market process. In: Langlois R.N. (ed.) Economics as a process: Essays in the new institutional economics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1986, pp. 27–29. Available at: https://assets.cambridge.org/97805213/78598/excerpt/9780521378598_excerpt.pdf
35. Alvarez S.A., Barney J.B. Discovery and Creation Alternative Theories of Entrepreneurial Action. Strategi Entrepreneurship Journal. 2007;1(1-2):11–26. https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.4
36. Hatchuel A. Towards Design Theory and Expandable Rationality: The Unfinished Program of Herbert Simon. Journal of Management and Governance. 2001;5:260–273. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014044305704
37. Agarwal R., Audretsch D., Sarkar, M.B. Knowledge Spillovers, Entrepreneurship and Economic Growth. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal. 2007;1(3–4):263–286. https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.36
38. Sarasvathy S.D. Causation and Effectuation: Toward a Theoretical Shift from Economic Inevitability to Entrepreneurial Contingency. Academy of Management Review. 2001;26(2):243–263. https://doi.org/10.2307/259121
39. Troise C., Matricano D., Candelo E., Schjoedt L. A ten-year cross-national examination of the dance between intuition and rationality in entrepreneurial processes. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal. 2021;18:663–692. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-021-00760-8
40. Allingham M.G., Sandmo A. Income Tax Evasion: A Theoretical Analysis. Journal of Public Economics. 1972;1(3-4):323–338. https://doi.org/10.1016/0047-2727(72)90010-2
41. Coricelli G., Joffily M., Montmarquette C., Villeval M.C. Cheating, Emotions, and Rationality: An Experiment on Tax Evasion. Experimental Economics. 2010;13(2):226–247. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10683-010-9237-5
42. Dabla-Norris E., Gradstein M., Miryugin F. Misch Productivity and Tax Evasion. IMF Working Papers 260. 2019. https://ideas.repec.org/p/imf/imfwpa/2019-260.html
43. Bachas P.J., Fattal Jaef R.N., Jensen A. Size-dependent Tax Enforcement and Compliance: Global Evidence and Aggregate Implications. Journal of Development Economics. 2019;140:203–222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2019.05.001
44. Blackburn K., Bose N., Capasso S. Tax Evasion, the Underground Economy and financial Development. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization. 2012;83(2):243–253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2012.05.019
45. Labunets Iu.E., Mayburov, I.A. The Impact of the Size of Enterprises on Tax Evasion in the Forestry Industry of Russia. Journal of Tax Reform. 2022;8(1):88–101. https://doi.org/10.15826/jtr.2022.8.1.110
46. Alm J., Liu Y. Zhang K. Financial Constraints and Firm Tax Evasion. International Tax and Public Finance. 2019;26;71–102. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10797-018-9502-7
47. Fajnzylber P., Maloney W., Montes-Rojas, G. Does formality Improve Micro-firm Performance? Evidence from the Brazilian SIMPLES program. Journal of Development Economics. 2011;94(2):262–276. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2010.01.009
48. Gordon R., Li W. Tax Structures in Developing Countries: Many Puzzles and a Possible Explanation. Journal of Public Economics. 2009;93(7-8):855–866. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2009.04.001
49. Sarte P.-D.,G. Informality and Rent-seeking Bureaucracies in a Model of Long-run Growth. Journal of Monetary Economics. 2000;46(1):173–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3932(00)00020-9
50. La Porta R., Shleifer A. Informality and Development. Journal of Economic Perspectives. 2014;23(3):109–126. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.28.3.109
About Authors
Iulia E. Labunets – PhD in Economic, Senior Lecturer, Department of Economic Security, Tomsk State University of Control Systems and Radioelectronics, Tomsk, Russia (40 Lenin Prospect, 634050, Tomsk, Russian Federation); ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8522-4115; e-mail: ulya.ev_84@mail.ru
Igor A. Mayburov – Doctor of Economics, Professor, Head of the Department of Financial and Tax Management, Ural Federal University named the first President of Russia B.N. Yeltsin, Yekaterinburg, Russia (19 Mira St., 620002, Yekaterinburg, Russian Federation); ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8791-665X; e-mail: mayburov.home@gmail.com
For citation
Labunets I.E., Mayburov I.A. Rationality of the Tax and Economic Behavior of Enterprises in the Russian Forestry Sector. Journal of Tax Reform. 2023;9(1):110–127. https://doi.org/10.15826/jtr.2023.9.1.132
Article info
Received January 12, 2023; Revised February 20, 2023; Accepted March 17, 2023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15826/jtr.2023.9.1.132
Download full text article:
~534 KB, *.pdf
(Uploaded
17.04.2023)
Created / Updated: 31 August 2015 / 3 July 2017
© Federal State Autonomous Educational Institution of Higher Education «Ural Federal University named after the first President of Russia B.N.Yeltsin»
Remarks?
select the text and press:
Ctrl + Enter
Portal design: Artsofte
ISSN 2414-9497 (online)