Abstract

This paper extends our previous study by discussing in more details the composition and functions of the Board of Review in Hong Kong. We conduct a trend analysis on the Board’s decisions by examining three recent informal tax cases relating to compliance behavior for individual taxpayers in Hong Kong. We find that the more recent Board’s decisions are quite consistent with our previous findings. The level of penalty tax levied increases with the intention of the taxpayers to avoid tax, the magnitude of tax undercharged and the poor attitude of taxpayers. Despite the regular changes in the composition of the Board members, consistency in the Board’s decisions may be explained by the following reasons: there is no change in principle or in spirit in making decisions, there is no new development in the penalty policy and the Board has been adopting the decisions of precedent Board cases in similar situations.

Highlights

  • When faced with tax moral dilemmas, it is generally believed that ethics can serve as guidelines for taxpayers on how to act rightly and justly

  • We conduct a trend analysis on the Board’s decisions by examining another three recent informal tax cases relating to compliance behavior for individual taxpayers in Hong Kong

  • The section describes and discusses the composition and functions of the Board in Hong Kong. This is followed by a section which critically examines three informal tax cases related to compliance behavior of individual taxpayers in Hong Kong

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The Board of Review (Inland Revenue Ordinance) is an independent statutory body constituted under section 65 of the Inland Revenue Ordinance (the IRO) to determine tax appeals. The Board consists of a chairman and ten deputy chairmen, who are persons with. 2009 legal training and experience, and not more than 150 other members, all of whom are appointed by the Chief Executive of Hong Kong. The second author of this paper was appointed by the Chief Executive of the Hong Kong government as a member to the Board for a period of three years up to 31 December 2007

Functions and Procedures
Composition and Functions of the Hearing Panel
Attending Board of Review Hearing
Delivery of Board of Review Decisions
Trend Analysis on Real-life Perspectives
Case One
Case Two
Case Three
The Analysis
Findings
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.