Differences in Period I, Period II and Period III Tax Amnesty in Malang City


The level of taxpayer compliance in Indonesia in the last five years is quite alarming, taxpayer compliance has not reached the point expected by the government and is verysmallpercentageoftaxpayerswhofulfilltheirobligationstopaytaxes.Toincrease participation in tax payments, the government launched a tax amnesty program. This studyaimstodeterminethedifferencesinperiodI,periodII,andperiodIIItaxamnesty in Malang City. This research includes quantitative descriptive with data collection techniques in the form of a questionnaire method. The population of this study is an individual taxpayer in the Malang Tax Service Office. The sampling technique using purposive sampling method is a taxpayer registered at the Malang Tax Office. Data analysis using descriptive analysis and independent T Test. The results of this study indicate that the period I tax amnesty is more influential on taxpayer compliance than the period II tax amnesty and the period I tax amnesty is more influential on taxpayer compliance than the period III tax amnesty. Based on the results of this study, it is recommendedtoexaminethedifferencesinperiodI,IIandIIItaxamnestyinotherTax Service Offices as a basis for knowing the effectiveness of inter-office tax amnesty in the same region.

[1] Ahmed Aly Abdel-Mowla, S. (2012). The Egyptian tax system reforms, investment and tax evasion (2004-2008). Journal of Economic and Administrative Sciences, 28(1), 53–78. https://doi.org/10.1108/ 10264111211218522

[2] Bekoe, W., Danquah, M., & Senahey, S. K. (2016). Tax reforms and revenue mobilization in Ghana. Journal of Economic Studies, 43(4), 522–534. https://doi.org/10.1108/JES-01-2015-0007

[3] Ling, L. M., & Nawawi, N. H. A. (2010). Integrating ICT skills and tax software in tax education: A survey of Malaysian tax practitioners’ perspectives. Campus-Wide Information Systems, 27(5), 303– 317.

[4] Nguyen, M. T., Nguyen, T. H., & Le, T. T. V. (2017). Tax reform, sectoral restructuring and household welfare in Vietnam. International Journal of Economics and Management, 11(2), 371–391.

[5] Nkundabanyanga, S. K., Mvura, P., Nyamuyonjo, D., Opiso, J., & Nakabuye, Z. (2017). Tax compliance in a developing country. Journal of Economic Studies, 44(6), 931–957. https://doi.org/10.1108/jes-032016-0061

[6] PuiYee,C.,Moorthy,K.,&ChooKengSoon,W.(2017).Taxpayers’perceptionsontaxevasionbehaviour: anempiricalstudyinMalaysia. International Journal of Law and Man- agement, 59(3),413–429.https: //doi.org/10.1108/IJLMA-02-2016-0022

[7] Ritsatos, T. (2014). Tax evasion and compliance; From the neo classical paradigm to behavioural economics, a review. Journal of Accounting and Organizational Change, 10(2), 244–262. https: //doi.org/10.1108/JAOC-07-2012-0059

[8] Sadress,N.,Bananuka,J.,Orobia,L.,&Opiso,J.(2019).Antecedentsoftaxcomplianceofsmallbusiness enterprises: a developing country perspective. International Journal of Law and Management, 61(1), 24–44. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLMA-10-2017-0234

[9] Sari, R. I., & Nuswantara, D. A. (2017). The Influence of Tax Amnesty Benefit Perception to Taxpayer Compliance. Jurnal Dinamika Akuntansi, 9(2), 176–183. https://doi.org/10.15294/jda.v9i2.11991

[10] Stark, J. A., & Kirchler, E. (2017). Inheritance tax compliance – earmarking with normative value principles. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 37(7–8), 452–467. https://doi.org/10. 1108/IJSSP-07-2016-0086