THE IMPACT OF ADMINISTRATIVE SANCTION AND UNDERSTANDING OF INCOME
TAX LAW ON CORPORATE TAXPAYER’S COMPLIANCE
Yanah
Faculty of Shariah, Bandung Islamic University (UNISBA)
Jl. Rangga gading No.8 Bandung
yanah_cirebon@yahoo.co.id
Abstract
Tax is a source of potential revenue for the state in supporting economic development. But it
is not easy to impose taxes on the people because if too high then people will be reluctant to
pay taxes. Conversely, if too low it will be short of funds so that construction will not run.
Therefore, the taxpayer voluntary compliance is the key to success in tax collection. Based on
attribution theory taxpayer behavior can be caused by internal factors, external factors or a
combination of internal-external factors in compliance paying income tax. Research purposes
to determine the impact of the implementation of administrative sanctions and
understanding of tax laws on corporate taxpayer’s compliance. The method used was a
survey method, kind of explanatory research. Sampling technique used is cluster sampling
with a sample of corporate taxpayers as much as 30 respondents consisting of 11 state and
19 private enterprises. Instrument research using questionnaires. The analysis used is
multiple linear regression. Hypothesis testing using the F test and t test. The results showed
that there is a positive correlation between attitude taxpayer on the implementation of
administrative sanctions and understanding of tax laws on taxpayer’s compliance. This
suggests that compliance of corporate taxpayers may be caused by external factors, namely
the implementation of administrative sanctions, and is caused by internal factors, namely an
understanding of the taxpayer's income tax laws. Thus, the higher the administrative penalty
imposed the tax payers will respond by increasing compliance in paying income tax as if the
violation is detected then the penalty to be paid is much greater than the income that was
not reported. The higher understanding of the corporate taxpayer’s income tax laws, then
the taxpayer’s compliance will increase because taxpayers can fill out, calculate and report
tax return correctly, complete and timely.
Keywords: Administrative Penalties, Attribution Theory, Taxpayer Compliance,
Understanding of Income Tax Laws
I.
INTRODUCTION
Taxes have a very important role in the
implementation of development as a source of
revenue to finance all expenditures including
construction spending, however, is not easy to
impose taxes on the people because if too high
then people will be reluctant to pay taxes, on the
contrary, if too low , it will be short of funds so
that construction will not run. There is consensus
in the literature that the public finances in
developing countries many cases of tax evasion.
This is done by not reporting or reporting, but not
according to the actual situation on the income
that can be taxed. This tax evasion has caused so
much loss of potential tax revenue that could be
used to reduce the burden on the state budget
deficit. This is reinforced by evidence that the
January 2010 announced the list of 100 largest tax
delinquent by the Directorate General of Taxation
(www.pajak.go.id) Changes in the tax system of
self assessment official assessment to which the
taxpayer was entrusted to register, calculate, pay
and report tax obligations taxpayers make
55
voluntary compliance as the key to the success of
tax collection. For more data on tax receipts from
2009-2010 in detail can be seen in Figure 1.
Evaluation of Tax Revenue
Period 2009-2010
% Growth
18.71
19.49
PBB
BPHTB
16.89
12.97
PPh Non migas PPN & PPnBM
Source: The weekly report DJPb tax revenue through www.pajak.go.id
(processed data) (accessed 20/12/2010)
Figure 1. Evaluation of Tax Revenue Period 2009-2010
Taxpayers reduce their tax liability in two
ways, namely legal and illegal. As proposed by
Alm, Bahl and Murray (1990:605) ;
Tax avoidance is legal any activity that
lowers taxes, worker such as substitution
between
wage
and
nonwage
compensation. Tax evasion is the
reduction in tax liabilities by illegal means,
such as underreporting income on tax
returns.
According Milack cited by Santoso
(2008:86), there are three functions of tax
administration in the self-assessment system,
namely:
1. Education (counseling)
2. Services (customer service)
3. Supervisory (enforcement)
To improve tax compliance, tax administration
need to approach or treatment (compliance
strategies) are different to the taxpayer by
taxpayer's behavior towards compliance based on
risk level. Compliance strategies that can be done
to taxpayers based on risk level, can be seen in
Table 1.
Table 1.
Risk level, Behavioral Compliance and Compliance Strategies
Risk Level Behavioral Compliance
Compliance Strategies
High
Tax payer’s intention to deliberately disobey
Full Enforcement (Inspection)
Tax payers who do not comply but would
Obey if any supervision
Medium
Taxpayer attempted to comply but
Assistance to be obedient
have not been successful
(Counseling)
Low
Taxpayers who voluntarily obey
Easements in the implementation
Of tax obligations (Servicing)
Source : Santoso, 2008
Attribution theory is a theory that
describes the behavior of a person. A person's
behavior may be caused by dispositional factors
(factors within / internal), such as the nature,
56
character, attitude and so on, or caused by
external circumstances, such as pressure situations
or circumstances that force someone to do a
particular act. According to Santrock (2003:647),
“attribution theory is views people as
motivated to discover to the underlying
causes of behavior as part of their effort
to make sense of the behavior”.
According to Sparkman & Locander (1980:220),
attribution theory is divided into two, namely
correspondent inference and dimension four
models, derived from the concept of Heider (1958)
in explaining the causal relationship. This theory
was developed with different objectives, namely;
1. Correspondent inference theory deals with
inferences that are made about the actor
whose behavior is observed.
2. The four dimension model deals with the
inferences made about the environment in
which the actor is behaving”.
According to Jones (1998) cited by Santrock
(2003:647), human attribution divides into three
dimensions, namely:
1. Internal or external causes
Internal attribution includes all causes
that are internal to a person, such as
personality traits, intelligence, attitude
and health. External attributions while
covering all external causes of a person,
such as social pressure, social aspects of
the situation, money, weather and luck.
Heider (1958) argued that the internal or
external dimensions are key issues in
attribution.
2. Stable or unstable causes
The cause is stable or unstable is also
involved in attribution. Whether it causes
relatively enduring and permanent or
temporary.
3. Controllable or uncontrollable causes
Cause perceived as something that can be
controlled or can not be controlled by
another causality dimension, for example
mood as a controllable while luck as a
uncontrollable.
According to Simon James et al cited by
Santoso (2008:88), the notion of tax compliance
(tax compliance) is a taxpayer has a willingness to
meet its tax obligations in accordance with
applicable rules without the need for the holding
of the examination, thorough investigation,
warning or threat and application of either legal or
administrative sanctions. According to Santoso
(2008:88), tax compliance is a state where the
taxpayer meets all tax obligations and exercise the
right of taxation.
In the Practice Note on Compliance
Measurement published by the OECD (2001),
compliance is divided into two categories, namely:
1. Administrative compliance
Includes compliance reporting and
procedural compliance.
2. Technical compliance
Includes compliance in calculating the
amount of tax that would be paid by the
taxpayer.
Based on these two definitions of
compliance, we can conclude that the
administrative compliance is formal
compliance, the compliance associated
with the general provisions and
procedures of taxation. While the
technical
compliance
is
material
compliance, ie compliance related to the
accuracy of SPT in determining the
amount of tax to be paid.
In a study of tax compliance, there are two main
models that describe the level of tax compliance,
namely:
1. Conventional models (first generation
model)
This model emphasizes the issue of tax
evasion from the taxpayer (Taxpayers) and
the factors that influence behavior.
2. The second generation model
In this model problem taxpayers also
determined by the behavior of others,
namely the tax man (tax collector). In
second generation models, the analysis is
done on the behavioral patterns of both
parties together to determine their
response in the event of a change in tax
rates, the probability of being detected, the
level of penalty and bonus system for the
tax man (Santoso, 2008:88).
In this study, the authors use the conventional
model approach is the development of models to
determine the risk of non-compliance based on
the taxpayer's tax reporting behavior by the
taxpayer. Authors assume that the taxpayer is
57
rational so that the report will take into account
the tax obligations of things that might be posed
by reporting that he did, because basically all
taxpayers objected to paying tax on earned
income, but will have to consider the
consequences of actions in the aftermath of the
accomplishments.
There are several studies conducted to
determine the level of tax compliance, the studies
that have been conducted by Tarjo and
Kusumawati (2006), the survey results revealed
that the self assessment system has not done well
in Bangkalan because taxpayers are still many who
do not do their own payment obligations tax
payable, but for the level of tax compliance is
pretty good but not for the taxpayer awareness
but because of penalties. Feildstein Research,
(1999), the traditional analysis tends to
underestimate the deadweight losses. There are
several reasons persistence on the compliance
puzzle, but the most important reason for the lack
of individual data in detail that provides a
complete empirical specification of all the factors
that affect adherence. This difficulty is evident
when looking for a lot of data about individual
decision-compliance evasion.
Research conducted by Erard and
Feinstein (1994), indicates that the taxpayer
reporting behavior is strongly influenced by the tax
system. Taxpayers choose how much income
reported on their tax return by way of saving tax is
by reporting earnings that are lower than actual
income. Thus, although the taxpayer honesty
there, but not the factor that most significantly
affect tax compliance system. Research conducted
by
Ansori (2005), showed that compliance
corporate taxpayers to comply with tax obligations
in measuring the size of the tax savings that aims
to minimize the tax burden. Done legally tax
savings through tax avoidance which must be
understood by both the provisions of the tax laws
and changes and development. The study says that
the understanding of corporate taxpayers
regarding financial accounting and tax laws
positively correlated to income tax savings, and
from the results of analysis show that 90.80%
corporate tax payers to save income tax.
Research conducted by Irmadariyani
(1999) attempt to obtain empirical evidence about
the effect of understanding of financial accounting
and tax law to corporate taxpayer’s compliance in
the town of Jember. The survey results revealed
that the independent variables used in the study
have a significant effect on corporate taxpayer’s
compliance. Based on research conducted by
Jatmiko (2006) using the independent variable on
the implementation of the attitude of taxpayers
subject to a fine, the service tax authorities and tax
consciousness, the individual taxpayer compliance
as the dependent variable. It is known that the
taxpayer attitudes towards the implementation of
the penalty, the taxpayer attitudes towards service
tax authorities and the taxpayer attitudes towards
awareness of taxation has a significant positive
effect on tax compliance. In addition, although the
number of taxpayers from year to year, but there
are increasing constraints that can hamper efforts
to increase the tax ratio, the constraint is tax
compliance.
Based on research conducted by
Allingham and Sandmo (1972), it is known that the
level of sanctions (penalties) affect taxpayer
compliance because, according to the concept of
expected utility, the taxpayer will do
underreporting penalty when the expected value is
lower than the expected value of income that was
not reported. To make the taxpayers are willing to
report all of their income, the penalty should be
set such that the expected value of the sanction
(penalty) is greater than the expected value of
income that is not reported so that when the
penalty is set high, then the taxpayer will comply
because if detected, fines have paid much greater
than income that is not reported. This study aims
to
determine
how
much
impact
the
implementation of administrative sanctions and
understanding of tax laws on corporate taxpayer’s
compliance either partially or simultaneously.
II.
as proposed by Singarimbun and Effendi (2006:3).
In addition, the survey method is also useful for
the investigation conducted to obtain the facts of
the existing symptoms and seek factual particulars,
METHODOLOGY
This study uses survey research for this
study took a sample of the population and the use
of questionnaires as the main data collection tool
58
both about social institutions, economics, or
politics of a group or a region as described by Nazir
( 2009:56). Source of data obtained by the authors
in this study consisted of primary data obtained
through questionnaires by corporate taxpayers in
the Cirebon Small Tax Office , and secondary data
obtained from the Directorate General of Taxes
through www.pajak. go.id, and Cirebon Small Tax
Office.
The population in this study, i.e all
corporate taxpayers registered in Cirebon Small
Tax Office. Based on information from the Cirebon
Small Tax Office that not all corporate taxpayers
domiciled in the city of Cirebon registered in
Cirebon Small Tax Office due to changes in the
status of the company that resulted in the Tax
Office where registered taxpayer must change, so
that about 74% as many as 371 corporate
taxpayers are housed position in the city of
Cirebon registered in Large Tax Office listed
companies. Until the end of 2009, there were 130
WP Board consisting of 46 state enterprises and 84
private enterprises. Not all corporate taxpayers
became the object of this research by the sheer
numbers and the limitations of time and cost.
Therefore samples were taken. The sample is part
of the number and characteristics possessed by
the population (Sugiyono, 2002: 73). Limitations in
this study, the authors found difficulty in getting
complete information on the individual taxpayer
who is a population, because based on the tax
code, Cirebon Small Tax Office is not willing to
give data on the identity of the taxpayer, so it
affects the sampling technique used by the writer .
Sampling technique in this study is Cluster
Sampling. This technique is used to determine the
sample when the object to be examined or the
source data is very extensive and complete record
of the elementary unit in the population is not
obtained, as stated by Sugiyono (2009:65). Cluster
sampling technique is used in two stages, the first
stage determines the sample area, and the second
stage determines the people that exist in the
sampling area. Population of the cluster is a
subpopulation of the total population. Elements in
nature are not homogeneous cluster, which is
different from the elementary units in the strata.
Each cluster member has a heterogeneous
population resembles itself, as described by Nazir
(2009:311), the sampling is done by using the
formula:
where :
N = Large of Population
Ni = Large of Sub Population Strata-i
n = Large of Samples
ni = Large of Samples Strata-i (Sugiyono, 2009:81).
Sample size determination based on the
table in Sugiyono (2009:71), to determine the
sample size in stratified populations with N = 130
and standard error 10%, then the required sample
size is n = 30,
(
(
done by documentary study conducted by
collecting data at department / institution relevant
to the focus of research, and used questionnaires,
the authors asked respondents who have been
determined to fill out a questionnaire that has
been made to inform the truth conditions and
perceived by the respondents. Questionnaire form
used is the Likert scale to answer questions with
alternative answers 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5.
Operationalization of the variables in this study are
shown in Table 2
)
)
Thus, the required samples in this study were 11
+19 = 30 enterprises
To obtain the necessary data, then the data
collection. In this study, data collection techniques
59
Table 2. Operationalization of Variables
Variable
Dimension
Indicator
Scale
Taxpayer’s Attitude Penalties
On Implementation Interest
Of Administrative
Increase
Sanction (X1)
Refuse to pay tax
Illegal tax evasion
Avoid taxes legally
Forced to obey
Obidient voluntarys
Understanding of
Tax calculation
Understand how the calculation
Income tax laws
method
of income tax
Understanding the classification
Taxable
of taxable income
Tax rate
Applied for TIN
Reported efforts to be
registered as a taxable
Fill out a tax return correctly
Corporate
Implementation of
Paying taxes on time
Taxpayer’s
Self Assessment
Reported a tax return on time
Compliance
System
Provide data relating to
(Y)
taxation
Based on the operationalization of the
variables, it can be seen that the form of ordinal
scale data measurement, while necessary for the
purposes of regression analysis interval
measurement scale, the ordinal measurement
scales need to be transformed into interval scale
measurement. Step-by-step transformation of
ordinal data to interval data is as follows:
1. Look at each item respondents of a
questionnaire distributed.
2. At each point determined how many
people who got a score of 1,2,3,4 and 5
are referred to as frequency.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Determine the value of transformation by
the formula : Y = NS + 1+  NS min
(Riduwan & Kuncoro, 2009:30).
60
Ordinal
Ordinal
11-20
21-30
Each frequency is divided by the number
of respondents and the result is called
proportion.
Determine the value of the cumulative
proportion by summing value proportions
sequentially perkolom score.
Use the Normal Distribution table,
calculate the value of Z for each
cumulative proportion obtained.
Determine the high density values for
each value of Z obtained (by using High
density tables).
Determine the value of scale by using the
formula:
NS = (Density at Lower Limit) – (Density at Upper Limit)
(Area Below Upper limit) – (Area below Lower Limit)
8.
No
Questionnaire
Ordinal
1-10
In this study, validity and reliability tests
conducted by One Shot method using SPSS
software version 19. Analysis of data using multiple
linear regression because the author intends to
predict how the state (rise and fall) dependent
variable (criterion), when two or more
independent variables as factors predictor
manipulated (dinaik lower value). Considerations
in selecting authors as a method of multiple
regression analysis because the variables X 1 and X
2 in this study are independent (not related), as the
assumption in the use of regression proposed by
Gujarati (2009:203), namely
“To Operate within the framework of the
linear regression model, specifically we
assume the following: (1) Zero mean value of
U i (2) No serial correlation (3)
homoscedasticity (4) Zero covariance between
U i and each X variable (5 ) No Specification
bias (6) No exact collinearity between the X
variables”.
To ensure that the variables are normally
distributed and there are no stochastic
disturbances or stochastic error term, it is
necessary to test the normality of the data,
multikoleniaritas,
heteroscedasticity
and
autocorrelation.
III.
Variable Data Testing of Taxpayer Attitude at the
implementation of administrative sanctions (X 1)
translated is “ Legally Avoid” in paying income tax
means tax payers avoid the boundary -limit
allowed and does not violate the law. As can be
seen in Table 3.
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
Having tested the validity and reliability of
the questionnaire variable X 1, it can be seen in the
table Item Statistics that whole grains have an
answer statement averaging around 3 or when
Table 3
Item Statistics
Mean
Std. Deviation
N
item1
3.23
.858
30
item2
3.23
.817
30
item3
3.13
.730
30
item4
3.23
.774
30
item5
3.23
.898
30
item6
3.20
.761
30
item7
3.13
.819
30
item8
3.20
.761
30
item9
3.13
.819
30
item10
3.30
.750
30

Corrected Item-Total Correlation is the correlation
between the item score with total score of items
that can be used to test the validity of the
instrument. Correlation score of item 1 to the
total score was 0.507, the correlation score point 2
with a total score is 0.570 and so on. Furthermore,
to determine whether or not the statement is valid
should be compared with the r table.
With n = 30, 5% error level obtained table
r = 0.361
 For the 1% error level obtained table r =
0.463
Decision-making
 If r count is a positive and r count > r
table, then the item is valid
 If r count is negative or r count < r table,
then the item is not valid.
61
R count can be seen in column Corrected ItemTotal Correlation contained in Table 4, because the
r count is positive and r is greater than the r table
it can be concluded that all the statements of the
variables X 1 are valid.
Table 4
Item-Total Statistics
Scale Mean if
Item Deleted
Scale Variance if Corrected ItemItem Deleted Total Correlation
Cronbach's
Alpha if Item
Deleted
item1
28.80
23.683
.507
.856
item2
28.80
23.476
.570
.850
item3
28.90
24.162
.551
.852
item4
28.80
24.166
.511
.855
item5
28.80
22.717
.600
.848
item6
28.83
23.247
.658
.843
item7
28.90
23.472
.568
.850
item8
28.83
23.592
.606
.847
item9
28.90
23.266
.597
.848
item10
28.73
23.857
.578
.849
After all the statement is valid, then the next test
is to test the realibility of questionnaire. Way of
decision-making :
 If r Alpha is positive and Alpha> r table,
then reliable.
 If r Alpha is negative or r Alpha <r table,
it is not reliable.
R Alpha (Cronbach alpha) can be seen in the table
that is score Reliability Statistics is 0863, while we
have r tables previous search is equal to 0.361 for
a significance level of 5% and 0.463 for the
significant level of 1% Cronbach's alpha is a
measure of reliability, especially lower limit of
reliability
acceptable
in
the
survey.
Mathematically, reliability is defined as the
proportion of respondents that heterogeneity will
generate
different
responses
from
the
respondents. Response from respondent answers
will vary because each has a different opinion, not
because questionnaires were confusing and multiinterpretation. Based on Table 5 Reliability
Statistics, can be seen that r Alpha > r table,
means that the X1 questionnaires are reliable. Once
the questionnaire has been declared valid and
reliable, it has been worth the questionnaire
distributed to the respondents to conduct
research.
Table 5
Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's
Alpha
N of Items
.863
10
62
Testing variable data of Understanding Income Tax Act (X 2)
Based on the results of testing the validity
grains have an answer statement averaging around
and reliability of the questionnaire variables X 2, it
3 or when translated is “quite understand” Income
can be seen in the table Item Statistics that whole
Tax Act. As can be seen in Table 6.
Table 6
Item Statistics
Mean
Std. Deviation
N
item1
3.27
.785
30
item2
3.13
.819
30
item3
3.20
.761
30
item4
3.13
.819
30
item5
3.20
.761
30
item6
3.23
.898
30
item7
3.23
.774
30
item8
3.63
.490
30
item9
3.23
.817
30
item10
3.23
.858
30
count in table 7 contained
in the column Corrected Item-Total Correlation
with r table.
To test the validity of the
instrument variable X 2 done by comparing the r
Table 7
Item-Total Statistics
Scale Mean if
Item Deleted
Scale Variance if Corrected ItemItem Deleted Total Correlation
Cronbach's
Alpha if Item
Deleted
item1
29.23
21.978
.564
.841
item2
29.37
21.413
.614
.836
item3
29.30
22.010
.581
.839
item4
29.37
21.826
.554
.842
item5
29.30
21.252
.700
.829
item6
29.27
21.237
.568
.841
item7
29.27
22.547
.489
.847
item8
28.87
24.189
.480
.849
item9
29.27
22.064
.522
.845
item10
29.27
21.582
.555
.842
After than, apparently r count > r table, so it can
be concluded that all the statement in the
questionnaire variables X 2 are valid. After all the
statement is valid, then the next test is to test the
reliability of questionnaire the variable X 2. Based
on Table 8 Reliability Statistics, can be seen that r
63
Alpha> r table, then the questionnaires X 2 are
reliable. Once the questionnaire has been declared
valid and reliable, it has been worth the
questionnaire distributed to the respondents to
conduct research.
Table 8
Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's
Alpha
N of Items
.855
10
3.
Testing Data of Variabel Taxpayer’s Compliance (Y)
Based on the results of testing the validity
grains have an answer statement averaging around
and reliability of the questionnaire variable Y, can
3 or when translated is “reasonable wee behaved “
be seen in Table 9. Item Statistics, that whole
in pay income tax.
Table 9
Item Statistics
Mean
Std. Deviation
N
item1
3.27
.785
30
item2
3.13
.819
30
item3
3.20
.761
30
item4
3.13
.819
30
item5
3.20
.761
30
item6
3.23
.898
30
item7
3.23
.774
30
item8
3.63
.490
30
item9
3.23
.817
30
item10
3.23
.858
30
To test the validity of the instrument variable Y
done by comparing the r count in Table 10
contained in the column Corrected Item-Total
Correlation with r table.
64
Table 10
Item-Total Statistics
Scale Mean if
Item Deleted
Scale Variance if Corrected ItemItem Deleted Total Correlation
Cronbach's
Alpha if Item
Deleted
item1
28.83
28 .075
.617
.884
item2
28.90
27.955
.653
.882
item3
28.90
28.438
.674
.880
item4
28.93
27.857
.720
.877
item5
28.93
28.133
.685
.879
item6
28.87
28.464
.657
.881
item7
28.67
29.057
.574
.887
item8
28.83
28.420
.650
.882
item9
28.83
30.213
.463
.894
item10
28.90
28.231
.658
.881
After than, apparently r count r> r table, so it can
be concluded that all the statement in the
questionnaire variable Y is valid.
After all the statement is valid, then the
next test is to test the reliability of questionnaire
the Y variables. Based on Table 11 Reliability
Statistics, can be seen that r Alpha > r table, then
the Y questionnaires are reliable. Once the
questionnaire has been declared valid and reliable,
it has been worth the questionnaire distributed to
the respondents to conduct research.
Table 11
Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's
Alpha
N of Items
.893
10
Testing of Normality Data
Data normality test to know that the data
were normally distributed or not. Normality test
data using the standardized residual histogram and
PP plot of standardized residuals. If the data are
normally distributed histogram otherwise normal,
and if the PP plot forming a diagonal line then the
data is normal. In figure 2 and 3 can be
standardized residual histogram and PP plot the
standardized residuals.
65
Figure 2. Histogram Standardized Residual
Figure 3. PP plot Standardized Residual
Based on Figure 2 and 3 it can be seen that the
standardized residual histogram and PP plot
shows the pattern of standardized residuals
normally distributed data. Based on this it was
concluded that the data were normally distributed
Testing of Regression Problems
variable (criterion), when two independent
variables as predictors manipulated (hung upside
down in value). The model equation is as follows:
some serious problems encountered in regression
analysis, so the authors tested the assumptions
made on the methodology to determine these
The model is used to analyze the multiple
linear regression model, as the authors intend to
predict how state (rise and fall) dependent
However, regression analysis is not
always smooth analysis can be used, there are
66
assumptions are met or not. Tests performed are
as follows:
are very large, if the independent variables
correlated with each other, these variables explain
the same variance in estimating the dependent
variable. Thus, the addition of independent
variables does not affect anything.
Regression
free
multikoleniaritas
characterized by:
 VIF values ranged from number 1
 Tolerance values ranged from number 1
In table 12, we can see the value of VIF for
both independent variables ranged from number
1, which is 1,024 respectively. as well as the
tolerance value of each variable rate ranging from
1, which is 0.976.
Multikoleniaritas
Multikoleniaritas is a condition in which the
independent variables in the regression equation
had a correlation (relationship) are close to each
other. The characteristics of the multikoleniaritas
2
i.e if the regression equation has the value of R is
high or very high, F count is also high but lower tcounted.
The existence multikoleniaritas causing the
problem: the regression coefficient is positive in
the simple regression could turn negative in
multiple regression or otherwise, fluctuations in
the value of the estimated regression coefficients
Table 12. Collinerity Statistics
Collinearity
Statistics
Tolerance
VIF
Model
1
(Constant)
The Attitude of
Taxpayer on
implementation
.976
1.024
administrative
sanction
Understanding of
.976
1.024
Income tax laws
a. dependent variable : Taxpayer’s compliance
It can be concluded
that the regression model is not impaired
multikoleniaritas
disturbances can make
the results of the analysis biased and incorrect
statistical test and confidence
Heteroscedasticity
Heteroscedasticity occurs because of changes
in circumstances that are not reflected in the
specification of the regression model. For example,
changes in the economic structure and
government policy which may result in changes in
the level of accuracy of the data. In other words,
heteroscedasticity occurs if the residuals do not
have constant variance. Heteroscedasticity
intervals for the parameter estimates are also less
precise.
Detection
of
the
symptoms
of
heteroscedasticity is to look at the pattern of the
scatter diagram, namely the difference between
the predicted value of Y observations.
 If the scatter diagram that there are
certain patterns to form a regular,
impaired regression heteroscedasticity
67

impaired heteroscedasticity
If the scatter diagram does not establish a
pattern or random, regression is not
Figure 4. Scatterplot Standardized Predicticted Value
Scatter diagram above was not a pattern
or random. Thus, it can be said that the regression
is not impaired heteroscedasticity
coefficients assessing variability of the regression
coefficients are underestimated.
The approach used to test for
autocorrelation writer or not is the Durbin Watson
test, with the provision of decision-making:
 If DW > upper limit (d U), then there is no
autocorrelation
 If DW < lower limit (d L), then the
autocorrelation
 If d L <DW <D U can not or are not known
to occur autocorrelation
In Table 13, note that the value of Durbin
Watson = 2.174, with DW tables at  = 0.05, n =
30, k = 2, then dL = 1,284 and dU = 1,567.
Accordingly, because DW count> d U it does not
happen autocorrelation interference.
Autocorrelation
Autocorrelation is the main cause of the error
specification, such as neglect of an important
variable or incorrect functional form. If the
residuals in the regression equation contains
autocorrelation, then use the least squares
method raises several issues, namely: the standard
error estimates assess a lower error variability,
confidence intervals and testing using t and F
distributions can no longer be applied
appropriately, the standard error of regression
Table 13
b
Model Summary
Model
1
R
.903
R Square
a
Adjusted R
Square
.815
.801
Std. Error of the
Estimate
Durbin-Watson
1.576
2.174
a. Predictors: (Constant), Understanding of Income tax laws, Taxpayer’s attitude on
Implementation of Administrative Sanction
b. Dependent Variable: Taxpayer’s Compliance
(2009:203), that a regression equation should have
free data of multikoleniaritas, heteroscedasticity
and autocorrelation in order to obtain a good
Accordance with the rules in the multiple
regression analysis as suggested by Gujarati
68
regression equation and not biased. From the test
results it can be seen that the classical assumption
of independent variables free from interfence
multikoleniaritas,
heteroscedasticity
and
autocorrelation. Thus, all of the variable X can be
used in the regression analysis.
Discussion of Result of Statistical Analysis
After analysis using multiple linear regression
method, the obtained regression equation
Where:
Y = Taxpayer Compliance
X 1 = Taxpayer Attitude at The implementation of
Administrative Sanctions
X 2 = Understanding Income Tax Act
Table 14
a
Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
Unstandar
Model
1
(Constant)
a.
Std.
Error
B
5.947
3.533
Taxpayer’s attitude on
Implementation of
Administrative sanction
.621
.063
Understanding of Income
tax laws
.315
.097
Beta
T
Sig.
1.684
.104
.820
9.782
.000
.271
3.234
.003
Dependent Variable:Taxpayer’s Compliance
direction
of
correlation
influences
the
understanding of income tax law is positive,
meaning that if the taxpayer understanding of the
income tax law increased the tax compliance will
increase because taxpayers know the correct
regarding general provisions and procedures of
taxation so as to fill tax form and reported
correctly and on time.
In Table 13, note that the correlation
coefficient (R) = 0.903, close to the value 1. It
means that the relationship between the
independent variable (X 1.2) and dependent (Y) very
closely. Correlation between the dependent and
independent variables are positive, meaning: if the
value of X increases, the increase will be
responded with Y. This suggests that, if the value
of the taxpayer’s attitudes on the implementation
of the administrative sanction and the value of
understanding of the income tax law to increase
the tax compliance will increase. Thus, one
hypothesis is proven true. Therefore it can be
concluded that H 0 = rejected.
Discussion of Hypothesis 1
Regression analysis was conducted to
determine the relationship between the
independent variable (X) with the dependent
variable (Y). Hypotheses used in this study is
H0:βx1≤βx2≤0, the independent variable is less than
or equal to zero
Ha:βx1> βx2>0, the independent variable is greater
than zero
Based on Table 14, it is known that the
independent variable the attitude of taxpayer on
the implementation of administrative sanctions
have regression coefficients with positive signs for
0.621. This shows that the direction of correlation
influences the attitude of the taxpayer on the
implementation of administrative penalties is
positive., Meaning that if the enhanced
administrative sanctions taxpayers will respond by
increasing compliance in paying income tax.
Independent variable understanding of
the income tax law has a regression coefficient of
0.315 with a positive sign. This shows that the
69
Discussion of Hypothesis 2
To find out how much the independent
variables affect the dependent variables
simultaneously and partial and independent
variables to determine which one is more
significant in influencing the dependent variable,
the authors test the hypothesis. Hypotheses used
in this study is
H0:β1≤β2, variable X 1 significantly less or
equal to the variable X 2
Ha:β1>β2, variable X 1 is more significant
than the variable X 2
Statistical F test is performed to
determine that all the independent variables were
entered into the model have an influence
simultaneously on the dependent variable. If the
probability value < significance level (α = 0.05),
then the model can be accepted and vice versa if
the probability value > significance level (α = 0.05),
then the model is rejected. Table 15 shown that
the value of the probability is (Sig = 0.000) <0.05
then the model equation
used, acceptable, means that the variable attitude
taxpayer on the implementation of administrative
sanctions and understanding of tax laws
simultaneously affect the compliance of corporate
taxpayers.
Table 15
b
ANOVA
Model
1
Sum of Squares
Regression
Residual
Total
Df
Mean Square
294.915
2
147.458
67.085
27
2.485
362.000
29
F
59.348
Sig.
a
.000
a. Predictors: (Constant), Understanding of income tax act, Taxpayer’s attitude on the
implementation of administrative sanction
b. Dependent Variable: Taxpayer’s Compliance
understanding of income tax laws on corporate
taxpayer’s compliance is a partial (Sig = 0.003)
<significance level (α = 0.05), means that the
model is acceptable, then in partial understanding
of the income tax laws affect compliance
corporate taxpayers. Therefore, it can be
concluded that the variables taxpayer’s attitude on
the implementation of administrative penalty is
more significant than the variable understanding
of income tax laws in influencing corporate
taxpayer’s compliance. So hypothesis 2 proven
true, therefore it can be concluded that H 0 =
rejected.
Statistical t-test performed to prove that
the partial independent variables (X 1) has a
significant effect on the dependent variable (Y).
Based on Table 14, note that the probability value
for variable the taxpayer’s attitude on the
implementation of administrative penalties on
corporate taxpayer’s compliance is a partial (Sig =
0.000) <significance level (α = 0.05), meaning that
the model can be accepted in partial taxpayer’s
attitudes on implementation of administrative
sanction effect on corporate taxpayer’s
compliance. Probability value for the variable
Influence of the taxpayer’s attitude on implementation of Administrative Sanction and Understanding of
Income Tax Act Against Corporate Taxpayer’s Compliance
Allingham and Sandmo (1972) suggest that
entire income tax, penalties should be set higher
underreporting taxpayers will perform if expected
then the taxpayer will comply because if detected
value of administrative penalties is still lower than
by the tax officers to pay administrative penalties
the expected value of income that was not
more greater than the income that is not reported.
reported, so as to make it mandatory to report the
Moreover, Alm & McKee (1998) also suggested
70
that the increased penalties would increase tax
compliance for substantially increasing the level of
sanctions to eliminate evasion. Likewise Andreoni,
Erard and Feinstein (1998) says that there is a
significant relationship between the level of
financial penalties and tax compliance, so as to
increase tax compliance should be enforced severe
penalties for any noncompliance.
The study of authors found that the more
positive attitude of the taxpayer on the
implementation of administrative penalties also
increase taxpayer compliance. The results support
the research Andreoni, Erard and Feinstein (1998),
Alm & McKee (1998), Alm, Bahl and Murray
(1990), Jatmiko (2006), Allingham and Sandmo
(1972), Dubin, Graetz and Wilde ( 1987), which
also shows that the attitude of the taxpayer on the
implementation of administrative penalties in a
positive effect on tax compliance.
Andreoni, Erard and Feinstein (1998),
stated that the understanding of the tax laws had
significant relationship to tax compliance, because
if taxpayers understand the tax laws that taxpayers
can comply with their tax obligations correctly, so
that tax laws should be made as simple as possible
in order not to complicate the taxpayer in the
study. In the opinion Krause cited Santoso (2008)
that the taxpayer's knowledge or understanding of
the tax laws may affect whether or not abiding
taxpayers. Krause opinion is in line with the OECD
(2001) which states that understanding the
taxpayer will determine the level of tax
compliance. The results Ansori (2005) states that
the taxpayer understanding of the tax law
positively correlated to income tax savings,
because the savings tax is legal, tax evasion
through the course should understand well about
the provisions of tax laws and changes and
development.
Results of the study authors found that a
higher understanding of the taxpayer's income tax
laws, it is also increasing taxpayer compliance.
Thus, the results are consistent with the results of
the research the author conducted by Andreoni,
Erard and Feinstein (1998), Ansori (2005),
Irmadariyani (1999) and Reinganum & Wilde
(1988) which shows that the understanding of the
income tax law affects on tax compliance.
Based on attribution theory proposed by
Kelley (1973), it can be concluded that most
corporate taxpayers pay income tax caused by
external factors, namely the administrative penalty
by 62%, and tax compliance is caused by internal
factors, namely taxpayer’s understanding of the
income tax laws by 32%.
Testing of Feasibility Model
Based on Table 15, note that the probability
value of F count is (Sig = 0.000) <0.05 significance
level, it can be concluded that the model equation
used was appropriate. The coefficient of
2)
determination (R
indicates the percentage of
variation in the dependent variable that can be
explained by the variation of the independent
2
variable. R value is small, means the ability of the
independent variables in explaining the variation
in the dependent variable is very limited. Value
close to one, means that the independent
variables provide almost all the information
needed to predict the variation in the dependent
variable. In Table 13, note that the coefficient of
2)
determination (R = 0.815. However, in this study
the authors use the adjusted R square is the value
2
of R is adjusted so that the picture quality is
closer assessment of the model in the population.
From Table 13, note that the value of adjusted R
square = 0.801, meaning that 80.1% compliance
corporate taxpayers affected by attitudinal factors
taxpayer on the implementation of administrative
sanctions and understanding of tax laws, while
19.9% (100% - 80.1%) affected by other factors
that are not described in this regression equation,
such as the service provided by the tax authorities
to taxpayers.
IV.
administrative sanctions, the corporate taxpayers
will respond by increasing compliance in paying
income tax. Understanding of the income tax law
is a positive
CONCLUSSION
Based on the description that has been
said, it can be concluded that the attitude of the
taxpayer on the implementation of administrative
sanctions have a positive and significant impact on
corporate taxpayer’s compliance. This suggests
that, if the implementation of enhanced
and significant effect on corporate
taxpayr’s compliance. This means that, if the
71
taxpayer understanding of the income tax laws
improved, it will increase taxpayer’s compliance
because taxpayers know the correct regarding
general provisions and procedures of taxation so
V.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
as to fill up, calculating and reporting tax form with
true, complete and timely.
The authors wish to thank the reviewers who have
reviewed this article.
REFERENCES
Allingham, Michael.G & Sandmo, Agnar, 1972,
Income Tax Evasion : A Theoritical
Analysis,
Journal
of
Public
Economics, 1, 323-338
Alm James, Bahl Roy& N Murray, Mathew, 1990,
Tax Structure and Tax Compliance,
The Review of Economics and
Statistics, 72 (4), 603-613
Alm, James and McKee, Michael, 1998, Extending
the
Lessons
of
Laboratory
Experiments on Tax Compliance to
Managerial and decision Economics,
John Wiley & Sons, 19 (4/5), 259-275
Andreoni James, Erard Brian & Feinstein Jonathan,
1998, Tax Compliance, Journal of
Economic Literature, 36 (2), 818-860
Ansori, Surya, 2005, Dampak Pemahaman Wajib
Pajak Badan Mengenai Akuntansi
Keuangan dan Undang-Undang
Perpajakan
Terhadap
penghematan Pajak penghasilan,
Jurnal Riset Akuntansi, 7 (1), 95149
Dubin, A, Jeffrey, Graetz, Michael J. & Wilde, Louis
L 1987, Are We a Nation of Tax
Cheaters?
New
Econometric
Evidence on Tax Compliance, The
American Economic Review, 77 (2),
240-245
Erard, Brian & Feinstein, Jonathan S 1994, Honesty
and Evasion in The Tax Compliance
Game, The RAND Journal of
Economics, 25 (1), 1-19
Feildstein , Martin 1999, Tax Avoidance and The
Deadweight Loss of The Income Tax,
The RAND Journal of Economics,
19(1), 25-36
Gujarati , N. Damodar 2009, Basic Econometrics,
th
5 edition, New York : The McGraw
Hill Companies
Irmadariyani, Ririn, 1999, Pengaruh Pemahaman
Akuntansi Keuangan dan UndangUndang
Perpajakan
Terhadap
Kepatuhan Wajib Pajak Badan
Dalam
Membayar
Pajak
Penghasilan, Bandung : Universitas
Padjadjaran
Jatmiko, Nugraha, Agus, 2006, Pengaruh Sikap
Wajib Pajak Pada Pelaksanaan
Sanksi Denda, Pelayanan Fiskus dan
Kesadaran Perpajakan Terhadap
Kepatuhan Wajib Pajak Orang
Pribadi, Semarang : Universitas
Diponegoro
Nazir, 2009, Metode Penelitian, Bogor : Ghalia
Indonesia.
Organization For Economic and Corporation
Development
(OECD),
2001,
Compliance Measurement, Practice
Note :1-23
Reinganum Jennifer F & Wilde Louis L, 1988, A
Note on Enforcement Uncertainty
and Taxpayer Compliance, The
Quarterly Journal of Economis, 103
(4), 793-798
Riduwan & Kuncoro, Achmad, Engkos, 2009, Cara
Menggunakan & Memaknai Analisis
Jalur (Path Analysis), Bandung :
Alfabeta
Santoso,
Wahyu,
2008,
Analisis
Risiko
Ketidakpatuhan Wajib Pajak Sebagai
Dasar peningkatan Kepatuhan Wajib
Pajak, Jurnal keuangan Publik, 5 (1),
85-137
th
Santrock, W, John, 2003, Psychology, 7 edition,
International Edition, New
York:
McGraw Hill
72
Singarimbun, Masri & Effendi, Sofian, 2006,
Metodologi Penelitian Survai, Edisi
Revisi, Jakarta : LP3ES
Sparkman,Jr, M, Richard & Locander, B, William,
1980, Attribution Theory and
Advertising Effectiveness, Journal of
Consumer Research, 7(2), 219-223
Sugiyono, 2009, Statistik Penelitian, Bandung : CV.
Alfabeta.
Tarjo & Kusumawati, Indra, 2006, Analisis Wajib
Pajak Terhadap Pelaksanaan Self
Assessment System, JAAI, 10(1), 73131
Undang-Undang No.36 Tahun 2008 Tentang Pajak
Penghasilan
www. pajak. go.id accessed on dated December,
20, 2010
Attachment 1 : Questionnaire
General Statement :
Business Type
: BUMS/BUMN
(*Pick up as required)
Special Statement :
Instructions for Filing :
1. Please choose the answer that you think Mr/Mrs appropriate, by way of give check the mark
() in the field provided.
2. Description : 1. I had never done
2. I’ve done
3. Sometimes I do
4. I often do
5. I always do
3. Example :
No
Item Statement
Choice
1 2 3 4 5
1
I comply with the tax laws, even when I see

others break
Please check the tick () in the fields according to the choice of Mr/Ms
Description : 1: I’ve never done 2: I’ve done 3: I sometimes do 4: I often do 5: I always do
No
Item Statement
Choice
1
2
3
4
5
1
SPT late because I do not necessarily obtain financial
penalties from the tax man
2
I check the completeness and correctness oftaxreturns to
report to the tax office before being exposed to financial
penalties
3
When there is an error in filing tax return, I did not fix tax
return because rarely inspected by the tax man
4
I pay taxes on installment due interest pinalties should I pay
light enough
5
I pay annual and period taxes on time in order not to be
interest penalized by the taxman
6
I calculate taxes with caution so as not to be sanctioned
interest
73
7
Although sanctions increase of 50% given the revelations
untruth after over 2 years of tax returns. It did not cause me
to be more careful in filling SPT
8
Sanctions increase of 100% is imposed on tax deficiencies on
SKPKBT makes me feel scared violation
9
Although many people violations of taxation because do not
necessarily administrative sanction, I do not want to take the
risk of administrative penalties
10
The more often given administrative sanctions by the tax
man, the more compelled I am to learn the rules and apply
sanctions for violations of taxation
Description: 1: It is not true 2: Not True 3: Do not Know 4: True 5: Very True
No
Item Statement
Choice
1
2
3
4
11 Taxpayer code entity in an annual tax return is 1771 and
1771S tax returns
12 Income tax rate for corporate taxpayers by 25%
13 Donations including taxable income
14 Subject to income tax when business activities have
benefited
15 Tax payments can only be made at the office of the tax
16 SPT is a letter by the time the taxpayer is used to report the
calculation and / or payment of tax payable in a tax year
17 Interest income in the form of deposits and other savings
may be subject to final tax
18 Insurance premiums including taxable income
19 Share of profits received or accrued by a member of a limited
partnership whose capital is not divided into shares,
fellowship associations, firms and joint venture investments,
including holders of units of collective investment contracts
not including taxable
20 To calculate the amortization of intangible assets that the
group has a useful life of 8 years, the rate is based on the
declining balance amortization amounted to 25%
Description: 1: Do not ever do 2: Once I did 3: I sometimes do 4: Often I do 5: I always do
No
Item Statement
Choice
1
2
3
4
21 I register with the Tax Office when my income exceeded
exemption (PTKP)
22 I reported my efforts in order confirmed as a Taxable Person
(PKP)
23 If there is a mistake in filing tax return, I filed a written
application and fill in the new SPT correction
24 In completing the annual tax return, once the correction by
the tax man
25 My actions towards the correction is filling SPT re-fit the data
I have
26 I reported to the tax office when I know there is a difference
between the actual tax payable by the tax credit (less pay)
74
5
5
27
I pay taxes after the due date
28
29
I reported SPT accordance with the specified time
I provide data relating to taxation when requested by the tax
man
30 I just reported one type of business alone although I have
other types of business
Signature filler (the respondent)
……………………………………
Thank you for your willingness to help me in filling out this questionnaire.
Yours sincerely
Yanah
75