| Nome: | Descrição: | Tamanho: | Formato: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 783.37 KB | Adobe PDF |
Autores
Orientador(es)
Resumo(s)
The purpose of our study is to determine the depth of various
arguments that have emerged to justify tax evasion as an ethical
procedure considering several demographic variables. Data collection
was done using a questionnaire addressed to professors and students
of higher management and non-management courses. This instrument
was based on the 18 statements reflecting the three views of tax
evasion ethics used by McGee and Benk [1]. Using a 5-point Likert scale,
it is intended to evaluate whether the arguments contained in the
statements have an effect on the perception of tax evasion as an ethical
procedure and whether the previous effect varies according to age, sex,
bachelor degree and income level. A universe of 406,980 individuals
was determined using official information (sample: 384 individuals).
Principal Component Analysis was used, as well as the Kaiser-Meyer Olkin Statistics in order to measure the adequacy of the input matrix.
After the extraction of the components three variables were identified:
“Always Ethical”, “Waste, Corruption and Injustice” and
“Discrimination and Oppressive Regimes” (Cronbach's Alpha results:
0.887, 0.85 and 0.862). “Discrimination and Oppressive Regimes” is the
one that has values closest to “totally agree” that tax evasion is ethical.
In general, older men with higher incomes tend to disagree about the
ethics of tax evasion. The originality of the study is reflected in the
controversial relationship between Ethics and Evasion and the source
of the data collected. Interacting with professors and students allows
the business and academic components to be combined.
Descrição
Palavras-chave
Tax evasion, ethics, tax, management.
Contexto Educativo
Citação
Ribeiro, C., & Santos Pinho, C. (2020). The Ethics of Tax Evasion: Relevant Demographic Variables within the scope of Higher Education Students and Professors. Archives of Business Research, 8(10), 24–37. https://doi.org/10.14738/abr.810.9128
