Social inequity, taxes and welfare in Australasia

Author:

Marriott Lisa,Sim Dalice

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to highlight, challenge and explain the inequitable treatment of tax and welfare fraudsters in the criminal justice systems of Australia and New Zealand. The authors offer prejudice by way of explanation and suggest that it is also prejudice that restricts the implementation of more equitable processes. A second objective of the study is to highlight the importance of critical tax research as an instrument to agitate for social change. Design/methodology/approach A survey captures 3,000 respondents’ perceptions of the likelihood that different “types” of people will commit welfare or tax fraud. Using social dominance theory, the authors investigate the extent to which prejudice impacts on attitudes towards those engaged in these fraudulent activities. Findings The authors find the presence of traditional stereotypes, such as the perception that businessmen are more likely to commit tax fraud and people receiving welfare assistance are more likely to commit fraud. The authors also find strong preferences towards respondents’ own in-group, whereby businessmen, Maori and people receiving welfare assistance believed that their own group was less likely to commit either crime. Social implications Where in-group preference exists among those who construct and enforce the rules relating to investigations, prosecutions and sentencing of tax and welfare fraud, it is perhaps unsurprising that welfare recipients attract less societal support than other groups who have support from their own in-groups that have greater power, resources and influence. Originality/value The study highlights the difficulty of social change in the presence of strong in-group preference and prejudice. Cognisance of in-group preference is relevant to the accounting profession where elements of self-regulation remain. In-group preferences may impact on services provided, as well as professional development and education.

Publisher

Emerald

Subject

Economics, Econometrics and Finance (miscellaneous),Accounting

Reference87 articles.

1. Australian Council of Social Services (2014), “Social security trends - snapshot – 2014”, available at: http://acoss.org.au/images/uploads/Social_Security_Trends_ACOSS_policy_snapshot_April_2014.pdf (accessed 7 March 2015).

2. Australian Institute of Criminology (1986), “How the public sees crime: an Australian survey”, Trends & Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice, Vol. 2, Australian Institute of Criminology, Canberra, pp. 1-6.

3. Sexism in the code: a comparative study of income taxation of working wives and mothers;Buffalo Law Review,1971

4. Pride and prejudice: women, tax and citizenship;Critical Perspectives on Accounting,1995

Cited by 5 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. How tax administration influences social justice: The relational power of accounting technologies;Critical Perspectives on Accounting;2024-12

2. Accounting, inequality and COVID-19 in Australia;Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal;2021-04-29

3. Tax Credits as an accounting technology of government: “showing my boys they have to work, because that is what happens”;Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal;2021-01-28

4. Acting in the public interest: accounting for the vulnerable;Accounting and Business Research;2020-06-26

5. For emancipation: a Marxist critique of structure within critical realism;Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal;2020-01-16

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3