Search results
1 – 2 of 2Arshad Hasan, Naeem Sheikh and Muhammad Bilal Farooq
This study aims to examine why tax reforms fail and explores how tax collection can be improved within a developing country context.
Abstract
Purpose
This study aims to examine why tax reforms fail and explores how tax collection can be improved within a developing country context.
Design/methodology/approach
Data comprise 28 semi-structured interviews with taxpayers, tax experts and tax authority personnel based in Pakistan. The results are analysed using a combined lens of taxpayer trust and tax agencies’ capabilities.
Findings
Tax reforms failed to build taxpayers’ trust and tax agencies’ capabilities. Building trust is challenging and demands extensive ongoing engagement with taxpayers while yielding gradual permanent results. This requires enhancing confidence in government; educating taxpayers; removing complexities; introducing transparency and accountability in tax agencies’ operations and the tax system; promoting procedural and distributive justice; and reversing perceptions of corruption through reconciliation and stakeholder inclusivity. Developing tax agencies’ capabilities requires upgrading outdated technologies, systems and processes; implementing governance and organisational reforms; introducing an oversight board; and recruiting and training skilled professionals.
Practical implications
The findings can assist policymakers and tax collection authorities in understanding why tax reforms fail and identifying potential solutions.
Originality/value
This study contributes to the emerging literature by exploring tax administration failures in developing countries. It contributes to the literature by engaging stakeholders to understand why reforms fail and potential solutions to stimulate tax revenues.
Details
Keywords
Bahareh Golkar, Siew Hoon Lim and Fecri Karanki
A major source of external funding for US airports comes from issuing municipal bonds. Credit rating agencies evaluate the bonds using multiple factors, but the judgments behind…
Abstract
Purpose
A major source of external funding for US airports comes from issuing municipal bonds. Credit rating agencies evaluate the bonds using multiple factors, but the judgments behind the ratings are not well understood. This paper examines if airport rate-setting methods affect the bond ratings of US airports.
Design/methodology/approach
Using a set of unbalanced panel data for 58 hub airports from 2010 to 2019, we examine the effect of the rate-setting methods and other airport characteristics on Fitch’s airport bond rating.
Findings
We find that compensatory airports consistently receive a very high bond rating from Fitch. The probability of getting a very high Fitch rating increases by ∼28 percentage points for a compensatory airport. Additionally, the probability of getting a very high rating is about 33 percentage points higher for a legacy hub.
Research limitations/implications
The study uses Fitch bond ratings. Future studies could examine if S&P’s and Moody’s ratings are also influenced by airport rate-setting methods and legacy hub status.
Practical implications
The results uncover the linkage between bond ratings and their determinants for US airports. This information is important for investors when assessing airport creditworthiness and for airport operators as they manage capital project financing.
Originality/value
This is the first study to evaluate the effects of rate-setting methods on airport bond rating and also the first to document a statistically significant relationship between airports’ legacy hub status and bond ratings.
Details