Analytic Hierarchy Process in Czech Taxpayers’ Decision-Making Regarding their Tax Liability

Michal Krajňák

Abstract


The article deals with taxation of the earned income of natural persons in the Czech Republic in 1993–2017. The goal is to select the year when the tax burden on the earned income of natural persons was the lowest depending on the taxpayers’ preferences, their income level and the number of tax deductions they were entitled to. Based on their income levels, taxpayers analyzed the elements constituting their tax liability and decided whether it became smaller or larger in the given periods. The research methodology includes methods of description, comparison, analysis and synthesis and methods of multi-criteria decision-making. The decision-making analysis focuses on model situations which differ from each other in terms of the amount of gross wage and the number of deductions applied. It is concluded that in most cases, the replacement of the progressive tax rate by the linear rate in 2008 lead to a reduction in the tax burden. The highest decrease of tax liability was observed among taxpayers with below-average incomes. Taxpayers with above-average incomes were subject to a higher tax liability when the nominal tax rate was progressive. Tax credit is yet another factor that influences tax liability; for taxpayers whose income is less than average it takes a form of tax bonus. The most significant change in the legislation regulating income taxation occurred between 2007 and 2008. According to the evaluated criteria weights, the most import criterion for Czech taxpayers is the effective tax rate. The weights of criteria in multi-criteria decision-making analysis were established by using the results of the questionnaire survey conducted by the author among 189 respondents at a manufacturing company in Zlin region.

For citation

Krajňák M. Analytic Hierarchy Process in Czech Taxpayers’ Decision-Making Regarding their Tax Liability. Journal of Tax Reform. 2020;6(2):142–156. DOI: 10.15826/jtr.2020.6.2.079.

Article info

Received May 8, 2020; Revised May 22, 2020; Accepted June 2, 2020


Keywords


analytic hierarchy process, AHP, consistency, personal income tax, effective tax rate, variant, social security contribution

References


Aronson J.R., Johnson P., Lambert P.J. Redistributive Effect and Unequal Tax Treatment. Economic Journal. 1994;104(423):262–270. DOI: 10.2307/2234747.

Aidt T.S., Jensen P.S. The Taxman Tools Up: an Event History Study of the Introduction of the Personal Income Tax. Journal of Public Economics. 2009;93(1-2):160–175. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2008.07.006.

Musgrawe R.A., Thin T. Income Tax Progression 1929–48. Journal of Political Economy. 1948;56(6):498–514. DOI: 10.1086/256742.

Milligan K., Smart M. An Estimable Model of Income Redistribution in a Federation: Musgrave Meets Oates. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy. 2019;11(1):406–434. DOI: 10.1257/pol.20160600.

akobsson U. On the Measurement of the Degree of the Progression. Journal of Public Economics. 1976;5(1-2):161–168. DOI: 10.1016/0047-2727(76)90066-9.

Kakwani N.C. Measurement of Progressivity: an International Comparison. The Economics Journal. 1977;87(345):71–80. DOI: 10.2307/2231833.

Suits D.B. Measurement of Tax Progressivity. American Economics Review. 1977;67(4):747–752.

Kiefer D.W. Distributional Tax Progressivity Indexes. National Tax Journal. 1984;37(4):497–513.

Castanheira M., Nicodeme G., Profeta P. On the Political Economics of Tax Reforms: Survey and Empirical Assessment. International Tax and Public Finance. 2012;19(4):598–624. DOI: 10.1007/s10797-012-9226-z.

Peter K.S., Buttrick S., Duncan D. Global Reform of Personal Income Taxation, 1981–2005: Evidence from 189 Countries. National Tax Journal. 2010;63(3):447–478. DOI: 10.17310/ntj.2010.3.03.

Feldstein M. The Effect of Marginal Tax Rates on Taxable Income – A Panel Study of the 1986 Tax-Reform Act. Journal of Political Economy. 1995;103(3):551–572. DOI: 10.1086/261994.

Lindsey L.B. Individual Taxpayer Response to Tax Cuts-1982–1994-with Implications for the Revenue Maximizing Tax Rate. Journal of Public Economics. 1987;33(2):173–206. DOI: 10.1016/0047-2727(87)90073-9.

Morini M., Pellegrino S. Personal income Tax Reforms: A Genetic Algorithm Approach. European Journal of Operational Research. 2018;264(3):994–1004. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2016.07.059.

Večerník J. Income Taxes and Benefits among Czech Employees: Changes since 1989 and a Cross-national Comparison. Finance and Úvěr. 2006;56(2):2–17.

Pestel N., Sommer E. Shifting Taxes From Labor to Consumption: More Employment and More Inequality? Review of Income and Wealth. 2017;63(3):542–563. DOI: 10.1111/roiw.12232.

Friedrich V., Maková K., Široký J. Testing the Predicative Ability of the Tax Progressiveness Indicies. E+M Ekonomika a management. 2012;15(1):4–16.

Gencev M., Musilová D., Široký J. A Mathematical Model of the Gini Coefficient and Evaluation of the Redistribution Function of the Tax System in the Czech Republic. Politicka ekonomie. 2018;66(6):732–750. DOI: 10.18267/j.polek.1232.

Schneider O., Jelínek T. Czech Social Security and Tax System and their Impact on the Income Distribution. Finance a Úvěr. 2001;51(12):639–657. Available at: http://journal.fsv.cuni.cz/storage/882_639_657.pdf.

Lykova L.N. A Return to Progressive Personal Income Tax in the Russian Federation: Some Estimations. Journal of Tax Reform. 2018;4(2):174–187. DOI: 10.15826/jtr.2018.4.2.051.

Yilmazkuday H. Individual Tax Rates and Regional Tax Revenues: A Cross-State Analysis. Regional Studies. 2017;51(5):701–711. DOI: 10.1080/00343404.2015.1119266.

Vlachý J. An Analysis of Central European Tax Systems Using Statistical Simulation. Politicka ekonomie. 2017;65(4):410–423. DOI: 10.18267/j.polek.1152.

Nerudová D., Dobranschi M. Double Dividend Hypothesis: Can it Be Validated By Carbon Taxation Swap With Payroll Taxes? Inzinerine Ekonomika-Engineering Economics. 2015;26(1):23–32. DOI: 10.5755/j01.ee.26.1.8399.

Dušek L., Kalíšková K., Munich D. The Impacts of the 2015 Reform of Direct Taxation: Evaluation with a TAXBEN Model. Politická ekonomie. 2014;62(6):749–768. DOI: 10.18267/j.polek.980.

Kuznetsova S., Krzikallová K., Kuznetsov A. Performance Indicators for Management Control of Direct Taxes: Evidences from the Czech Republic and Ukraine. Financial and Credit Activity-Problems of Theory and Practice. 2017;1(22):189–198. DOI: 10.18371/fcaptp.v1i22.109947.

Potúček M. Accession and Social Policy: The Case of the Czech Republic. Journal of European Social Policy. 2004;14(3):253–256. DOI: 10.1177/0958928704044623.

Pavelka T., Skála M., Čadil J. Selected Issues of the Minimum Wage in the Czech Republic. E+M Ekonomika a management. 2014;17(4):30–45. DOI: 10.15240/tul/001/2014-4-003.

Euzeby A. Reduce or Rationale Social-Security Contribution to Increase Employment. International Labour Review. 1995;134(2):227–241.

Nielsen I., Smyth R. Who Bears the Tax Burden of Employer Compliance with Social Security Contributions? Evidence from Chinese Firm Level Data. China Economics Review. 2008;19(2):230–244. DOI: 10.1016/j.chieco.2007.06.002.

Vlachý J. A Dynamic Model of Personal Income Tax. E+M Ekonomika a Management. 2008;11(3):85–93.

Komamura K., Yamada A. Who Bears the Burden of Social Insurance? Evidence from Japanese Health and Long-Term Care Insurance Data. Journal of the Japanese and International Economics. 2004;18(4):565–581. DOI: 10.1016/j.jjie.2004.08.004.

Bosch N., Micevska-Scharf M. Who Bears the Burden of Social Security Contributions in the Netherlands? Evidence from Dutch Administrative Data. Economicst-Netherlands. 2017;165(2):205–224. DOI: 10.1007/s10645-017-9296-5.

Müller K.U., Neumann M. Who Bears the Burden of Social Security Contributions in Germany? Evidence from 35 Years Old Administrative Data. Economist-Netherlands. 2017;165(2):165–179. DOI: 10.1007/s10645-017-9298-3.

Feldstein M. Structural Reforms of Social Security. Journal of Economics Perspectives. 2005;19(2):33–55. DOI: 10.1257/0895330054048731.

Dušek L., Kalíšková K., Munich D. Distribution of Average, Marginal and Participation Tax Rates among Czech Taxpayers: Results from a TAXBEN Model. Finance a úvěr– Czech Journal of Economics and Finance. 2013;63(6):474–504. Available at: http://journal.fsv.cuni.cz/storage/1287_dusek.pdf.

Turner T.M., Blagg B. The Short-term Effects of the Kansas Income Tax Cuts on Employment Growth. Public Finance Review. 2018;46(6):1024–1043. DOI: 10.1177/1091142117699274.

Valasquez M., Hester P.T. An Analysis of Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods. International Journal of Operation Research. 2013;10(2):56–66. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/275960103_An_analysis_of_multi-criteria_decision_making_methods.

Saaty L.T. The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Planning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocation. Columbus: McGraw-Hill; 1980.

Široký J., Krajčová J., Hakalová J. The Taxation of Agricultural Land with the Use of Multi-Criteria Analysis. Agricultural Economics-Zemedelska Ekonomika, 2016;62(5):197–204. DOI: 10.17221/183/2015-AGRICECON.

Tošenovský F. Multi-criteria Decision-making Weights and a Competitive Product Design. E&M Ekonomie a Management. 2015;18(1):84–94. DOI: 10.15240/tul/001/2015-1-007.

Alonso A.J., Lamana M. Consistency in the Analytic Hierarchy Process: a New Approach. International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based System. 2006;14(4):445–459. DOI: 10.1142/S0218488506004114.

Neumann W.L. Social Research Methods. Boston: Allyn and Bacon; 2000.

Newbold P., Carloson W., Thorme B. Statistics for Business and Economics. Harlow: Pearson; 2013.

Katriak M., Milly S. Metody a techniky sociologického výzkumu. Praha: Vysoká škola ekonomická; 1978.




Copyright (c) 2020 Michal Krajňák

eLibrary logoeLibrary logo  DOAJ logo ERIH PLUS logo 

© Journal of Tax Reform : ISSN 2414-9497 (online), ISSN 2412-8872 (print)