Prosocial perceptions of taxation predict support for taxes

PLoS One. 2019 Nov 26;14(11):e0225730. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0225730. eCollection 2019.

Abstract

Many people report disliking taxes despite the fact that tax funds are used to provide essential services for the taxpayer and fellow citizens. In light of past research demonstrating that people are more likely to engage in prosocial action when they recognize how their assistance positively impacts the recipient, we examine whether recognition of how one's tax contributions help other citizens-perceived prosocial taxation-predicts more supportive views of taxation and greater engagement. We conducted three correlational studies using North American samples (N = 902, including a nationally representative sample of over 500 US residents) in which we find that perceived prosocial taxation is associated with greater enjoyment paying taxes, willingness to continue paying taxes, and larger financial contributions in a tax-like payment. Findings hold when controlling for several demographic variables, participants' general prosocial orientation, and the perception that tax dollars are being put to good use. In addition, we examined data from six waves of the World Values Survey (N > 474,000 across 107 countries). We find that people expressing trust in their government and civil service-thereby indicating some confidence that their taxes will be used in prosocial ways-are significantly more likely to state that it is never justifiable to cheat on taxes. Together, these studies offer a new and optimistic perspective on taxation; people may hold more positive views and be more willing to contribute if they believe their contribution benefits others.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Adult
  • Age Factors
  • Aged
  • Educational Status
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Income
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Public Policy
  • Surveys and Questionnaires
  • Taxes*
  • Young Adult

Grants and funding

This work was generously supported by funds granted to the second author (LBA) from the Canadian Institute for Advanced Research (CIFAR; SIW-AKNI-131632; https://www.cifar.ca/). The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.