Mazur, M. .J. & Plumley. A. (2007), “Understanding the Tax Gap”,Journal. Vol. LX No. 3, pp. 569-576National TaxMcGowan, J.R. (2000), “The Effect of Political Affiliation on Taxpayers’ AttitudesTowards Alternative Tax System”, Journal of the American Taxation Association, Vol 22No. 1, pp. 111-128Metrejean, C., & Cassidy, J. (2000), “Federal Taxes: Taxpayer Understanding andPerceptions of Fairness”, Paper presented at the Southwest Region of the AmericanAccounting Association Workshop, San Antonio, Texas, America.Motiakavandar,R., Ramayah, T., Haron, H. & Jili, A. (2003), “Factors influencingcompliance behaviour of small business entrepreneurs”, Tax National, Vol 1, pp. 20-26Milliron, V.C. (1985), “An Analysis of the Relationship Between Tax Equity and TaxComplexity” Journal of the American Taxation Association, Fall, pp. 19- 32Murphy, K. (2005), “Regulating More Effectively: The Relationship between ProceduralJustice, Legitimacy, and Tax Non-compliance”, Journal of Law & Society, Vol. 32 No. 4,pp. 562-589Murphy, K.( 2003), “An Examination of Taxpayers’ Attitudes Towards the AustralianTax System: Findings from a survey of tax scheme investors”, Australian Tax Forum,Vol 18 No. 2, pp. 209-241Nunnally, J, 1967, Psychometrics theory, McGraw-Hill, New York.Nunnally, J, 1978, Psychometrics theory, McGraw-Hill, New York.Pallant, J. (2005), “SPSS Survival Manual , A step by step guide to data analysis usingSPSS for windows”, (version 12),Allen & Unwin, Crows Nest NSW 2065,Australia.90
Palil, M. R. (2005), “Does Tax Knowledge Matters In Self-Assessment Systems?Evidence from Malaysian Tax Administrative”, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia,Bangi,Selangor, Malaysia, The Journal of American Academy of Business, Cambridge. No. 2Porcano, T. M. (1984), “Distributive Justice and Tax Policy” The Accounting Review Vol59 (Oct), pp. 619 – 636Porcano T M & Price C. E. (1992), “Some evidence on the association between judgmentcriteria and fairness perception”, Advances in Taxation, Vol 4 pp. 183 – 210Richardson, G. (2005), “A Preliminary Study of the Impact of Tax Fairness PerceptionDimensions on Tax Compliance Behaviour in Australia”, Australia Tax Forum, pp. 407-434Richardson, G. (2006), “The Impact of Tax Fairness Dimensions on Tax ComplianceBehaviour in an Asian Jurisdiction: The Case of Hong Kong”, The International TaxJournal, Vol 32 No. 1, pp. 29-42Richardson, M., and Sawyer, A.J. (2001), “A taxonomy of the tax compliance literature:Further findings, problems and prospects”, Australian Tax Forum 16, pp. 137 -320Roberts M.L.(1994), “An Experimental Approach to Changing Taxpayers’ AttitudesTowards Fairness and Compliance via Television”, Journal of the American TaxationAssociation, Vol 16 No. 1, pp. 67-86Schisler, D.L. (1995), “Equity, Aggressiveness, Consensus: A Comparison of Taxpayersand Tax Preparers”, American Accounting Association, Vol 9 No 4, pp. 76-87Scott, W.J., & Grasmick, H.G. (1981), “Deterrence and income tax cheating: Testinginteraction hypotheses in utilitarian theories”, Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, Vol17, pp. 395-40891
- Page 4:
noncompliance which means not repor
- Page 10 and 11:
individuals that push for tax fairn
- Page 12 and 13:
Following from hypothesis H1 - H5,
- Page 14 and 15:
1.6 Limitations of the StudyThe fin
- Page 16 and 17:
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW2.0 Cha
- Page 18 and 19:
compliance research and numerous ta
- Page 20 and 21:
stated crime is an industry where m
- Page 22 and 23:
2.2 Definition of Tax FairnessThe l
- Page 24 and 25:
Distribution in tax fairness refers
- Page 26 and 27:
elief, and evaluation between pragm
- Page 28 and 29:
elief that unfairness in the tax sy
- Page 30 and 31:
elevance of knowing the attitudes o
- Page 32 and 33:
It has been admitted by many resear
- Page 34 and 35:
significant results. The reasons gi
- Page 36:
unfair and also their exchange with
- Page 39 and 40: (vertical equity) or in other words
- Page 41 and 42: Jackson & Milliron (1986) found tha
- Page 43 and 44: differences. Therefore the findings
- Page 45 and 46: study education which is a noncompl
- Page 47 and 48: CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY3.0 Chapter O
- Page 49 and 50: Table 3.1: Reversed Coded Items on
- Page 51 and 52: 3.2 Sampling DesignA non probabilit
- Page 53 and 54: correlations and multiple regressio
- Page 55 and 56: the four Federal Territory IRB bran
- Page 57 and 58: analysis was carried out. Firstly,
- Page 59 and 60: Table 4.3: Mean and Standard Deviat
- Page 61 and 62: factor analysis was considered appr
- Page 63 and 64: paid is fair to himself). Based on
- Page 65 and 66: dependent variables but having the
- Page 68 and 69: 4.5.2 Correlation Matrix 2 between
- Page 70 and 71: 4.6.1 H1: There is a positive assoc
- Page 72 and 73: The second predictor which was sign
- Page 74 and 75: analyzed in Model 3a and 3b to know
- Page 76 and 77: Model 3a band 3b was specifically t
- Page 78 and 79: CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMEN
- Page 80 and 81: taxes they pay, and may not be payi
- Page 82 and 83: in the pay statements and they have
- Page 84 and 85: service announcements such as, tele
- Page 86 and 87: BIBLIOGRAPHYAllingham, M., & Sandmo
- Page 88 and 89: Fallan, L. (1999), “Gender, expos
- Page 92 and 93: Singh, V. (2003), “Tax Compliance