“Ain’t that a shame”: moral costs and fiscal crimes

Lory Barile (), John Cullis and Philip Jones
Additional contact information
Lory Barile: University of Warwick
John Cullis: University of Bath, Claverton Down
Philip Jones: University of Bath, Claverton Down

Palgrave Communications, 2025, vol. 12, issue 1, 1-12

Abstract: Abstract Levitt and List’s (2007) utility function relating to decisions with a moral dimension is adapted to offer insight into the moral costs associated with tax evasion and benefit fraud. Three questions are empirically explored: Are tax evasion and benefit fraud moral equivalents? Does an individual’s ‘moral hinterland’ associate with their intentions to commit fiscal crimes? What is the role of moral cues in informing public policy to reduce fiscal crimes? The econometric evidence employs 2942 questionnaire responses to a 2016 national (UK) survey. This paper contributes to the literature by offering insight into the way moral costs inform perceptions of the intrinsic value of ‘doing the right thing’ thereby offering a richer analysis of fiscal crimes. The account has particular relevance for policy prescriptions that involve aspects of ‘shame’.

Date: 2025
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41599-025-04711-4 Abstract (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:pal:palcom:v:12:y:2025:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-025-04711-4

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://www.nature.com/palcomms/about

DOI: 10.1057/s41599-025-04711-4

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Palgrave Communications from Palgrave Macmillan
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().