How Serious is Tax Evasion? An Empirical Legal Answer

• Author: Robert W.McGee - Wendy Gelman - Thomas J. Tarangelo
• Position: Fayetteville State University - Florida International University School of Accounting - Florida International University School of Accounting
• Pages: 218-259

e Indonesian Journal of International & Comparative Law

ISSN: 2338-7602; E-ISSN: 2338-770X

http://www.ijil.org

© 2014 e Institute for Migrant Rights

rst published online 25 November 2013

218

How Serious is Tax Evasion?:

An Empirical Legal Answer

ROBERT W. MCGEE

Fayetteville State University

WENDY GELMAN

Florida International University School of Accounting

THOMAS J. TARANGELO

Florida International University School of Accounting

E-mail: bob414@hotmail.com

Tax evasion has persistently carried severe penalties, although its intended deterrence

eect is highly doubtful. We can safely say that it is based on the widely shared as-

sumption among government ocials that tax evasion is among the more serious

crimes. In other words, the rationale of the current approach is that the punishment

should t the crime. By taking this into account, this empirical work sets out to

expand on previous studies by examining the relative seriousness of 75 crimes and

analyzing some demographic variables, including gender, age, marital status, religion

and others, to determine whether tax evasion is as serious a crime as some policy mak-

ers believe it to be, and to determine whether opinions dier based on demographics.

e study nding shows that tax evasion is deemed to be less serious than the average

crime. e article concludes that since tax evasion was deemed to be less serious than

most other oenses, one might reasonably conclude that the punishment for tax eva-

sion should be less than the punishment for most other oenses.

Keywords: Empirical Legal Studies, Tax Laws, Law and Morality, Crime and Punish-

ments, Criminal Legal eories, Jurisprudence, Legal eories.

How Serious is Tax Evasion?: An Empirical Legal Answer

McGee, Gelman & Tarangelo

219

I. Introduction

Empirical legal studies have been a part of legal scholarship for a long

time,1 but their importance and frequency have increased in recent years.2

Scholars have pointed out that there is a need for such research.3

One area where empirical research is especially helpful is the eld of

law and economics. If a judge wants to apply utilitarian ethics to a pend-

ing legal case, it would be benecial to know who the winners and losers

are, and the amount of damages that are caused by a particular event or

policy. Empirical research provides the information that judges and poli-

cy makers need to determine what the best policy or rule might be.

One valuable service empirical legal research provides is the testing

of assumptions. One may assume that a certain relationship exists, but

being able to prove or disprove the relationship by conducting an empiri-

cal investigation can be quite useful in the development of the law.

e following quotes by well-known legal scholars highlight the

benet of empirical analysis.

“For the rational study of the law[,] … the man of the future is the

man of statistics and the master of economics.”4

“[I]t is vitally important to determine whether the law is based on

sound assumptions about how the world works and to what extent a

particular law or process is achieving its stated objective and at what

cost.”5

1. For a brief intellectual history of empirical legal scholarship, see Tracey E. George,

An Empirical Study of Empirical Legal Scholarship: e Top Law Schools, 81 I. L.

J. 141-161 (2006), especially at 144-147.

2. eodore Eisenberg, Why Do Empirical Legal Scholarship? 41 S D L.

R. 1741-1746 (2004). Empirical legal studies is a growing eld. Until recently

there has been a paucity of empirical work by law professors. He cites a need for

sophisticated empirical legal analysts.

3. Elizabeth Chambliss, When Do Facts Persuade? Some oughts on the Market for

“Empirical Legal Studies”. 71 L.  C. P 17-39 (2008) (Discusses

the usefulness of empirical legal scholarship and provides examples.).

4. Oliver W. Holmes, Jr., e Path of the Law, 10 H. L. R. 457, 469 (1920), as

quoted in Tracey E. George, An Empirical Study of Empirical Legal Scholarship: e

Top Law Schools, 81 I. L. J. 141-161 (2006), at 141.

5. N. William Hines, President, AALS, Opening Speech at the AALS 2005 Annual

The Indonesian Journal of International & Comparative Law Volume I Issue 1 (2014) at 218–259

McGee, Gelman, Tarangelo

220

Harvard was the rst university to establish an Empirical Legal

Studies Program, in 1996.6 It provides assistance and guidance to both

students and faculty who want to design or conduct empirical legal stud-

ies. Numerous legal journals accept manuscripts in this subspecialty.7 At

least one journal is focused on publishing scholarship in this subeld.8

Although law schools in the United States are at the forefront of

empirical legal research, this subeld is not limited to the study of the

U.S. legal system. e eld of international law has also benetted by

empirical legal research.9

One of the most popular topics for empirical legal research is taxa-

tion, or, more specically, attitudes toward the various kinds of taxation,

and tax evasion.10 Studies on this subject prove useful to the legal profes-

sion in at least two ways. For one, they provide feedback to legislators,

policy makers and legal practitioners on the relative popularity and per-

ceived fairness of various taxes and the tax system in general. If a goal

of legislating and policy making is to increase fairness in the tax system,

knowing what the citizenry considers to be fair is valuable information.

Empirical legal studies can provide this information.

Meeting (Jan. 2005), as quoted in Tracey E. George, supra note 4, at 141.

6. Robert W. McGee & Robert F. van Brederode, Empirical Legal Studies and

Taxation in the United States, in SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND TAXATION  (R F.

 B, ., ).

7. Tracey E. George. supra note 4. [Provides a brief intellectual history of empirical

legal scholarship, then reports the results of an empirical study of empirical legal

scholarship at the top law schools.]

8. T J  E L S started publication in 2004. It is

published by the Society for Empirical Legal Studies, which also sponsors an

annual conference on this legal subspecialty. Robert W. McGee & Robert F. van

Brederode, supra note 6, at 11. It should be mentioned that other legal journals

had been publishing empirically-based legal studies prior to the founding of 

J  E L S. T J  L  E,

which began publication in the 1950s, is one such example, but it is not the only

one.

9. For a discussion of this issue, see Gregory Shaer & Tom Ginsburg, e Empirical

Turn in International Legal Scholarship, 106 A. J. I’ L. 1-46 (2012).

10. For summaries of more than 50 of these studies, see Robert W. McGee & Robert

F. van Brederode, supra note 6, at. 11-53; T E  T E: P-

  T  P (Robert W. McGee, Ed., 2012), especially Appen-

dices A, B & C, at 499-658 [hereinafter cited as T E  T E].