Tax Uncertainty as a Mediator in Audit Advice Dynamics
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22219/jrak.v15i3.41574Keywords:
Aggressive Tax Advice, Joint Audit-Tax, Tax UncertaintyAbstract
Purpose: This study investigates the effect of joint provision of audit and tax services on aggressive tax advice, with tax uncertainty assessment as a mediating variable. This research emphasizes individual professional judgment within integrated service structures a perspective that remains underexplored in current literature.
Methodology/approach:A quantitative associative approach was employed, with data collected through questionnaires from 100 auditors and tax professionals working in Public Accounting Firms (KAP) in Medan. Data analysis was conducted using Structural Equation Modeling with the Partial Least Squares (SEM-PLS) approach.
Findings:The results indicate that joint provision of audit and tax services significantly influences both tax uncertainty assessment and aggressive tax advice. Moreover, tax uncertainty assessment significantly affects aggressive tax advice and mediates the relationship between joint service provision and aggressive tax recommendations.
Practical implications:These findings have practical implications for public accounting firm management to ensure effective cross-functional collaboration while maintaining professional standards and tax advice quality.
Originality/value: This study extends the literature by introducing a behavioral perspective on tax professionals’ decision-making in joint audit–tax environments. By integrating ingroup–outgroup theory and tax uncertainty frameworks, it provides novel evidence from the Indonesian context, addressing a gap in existing research that has largely overlooked the psychological and organizational mechanisms shaping aggressive tax advice
Downloads
References
Becker, G.S. (2018). Neutral theory of organizational behavior. Oxford University Press. Blaufus, K., Cool, C., & Smith, P. (2016). Tax uncertainty and financial reporting: Evidence from IFRIC 23 adoption. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 62(3), 476–495.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2016.06.002
Brody, R.G. (2023). Regulatory complexity and auditor influence on tax advice. Accounting Review, 98(1), 112–130.https://doi.org/10.2308/accr-52418
Bush, A., & Savescu, L. (2022). Integrated firm reporting and tax compliance in the healthcare sector. Journal of Accounting in Emerging Economies, 11(2), 145–162.https://doi.org/10.1108/JAEE-12-2021-0291
Cook, S., D'Silva, M., & Narendra, R. (2008). Tax audit and taxpayer behavior: An experimental study. Public Finance Review, 36(2), 201–222.https://doi.org/10.1177/1091142107309354
Dos Santos, P., Almeida, F., & Oliveira, T. (2021). Audit–tax service provision and corporate tax avoidance: Evidence from Brazil. Journal of International Accounting Research, 20(1), 47–66.https://doi.org/10.2308/jiar-18-026
Drake, Y., Gupta, S., & Underwood, B. (2019). Risk perceptions and tax advice: The moderating effect of firm structure. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 75, 101–115.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2019.07.001
Dyreng, S., Hanlon, M., & Maydew, E. (2019). Financial constraints and audit-tax synergy. Review of Accounting Studies, 24(3), 789–822.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11142-019-09507-3
Fernandez, L., Hernandez, R., & Soto, M. (2023). Integrated audit policies and tax litigation: Evidence from Mexican firms. Accounting in Latin America, 8(1), 33–50.
Hair, J.F., Hult, G.T.M., Ringle, C.M., & Sarstedt, M. (2019). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Hux, C.T., Andiola, L.M., & Noga, T. (2024). Auditors' and tax specialists' interprofessional collaboration during audit engagements: Implications for audit production and audit quality. Journal of the American Taxation Association, 45(1), 77–103.https://doi.org/10.2308/JATA-19-031
Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs, and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360.https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (2018). Prospect theory: An analysis of decisions under risk. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 5(4), 297–323.
Kartadjumena, E., & Nuryaman, A. (2024). The effect of company characteristics, ownership structure, and auditor reputation on tax avoidance in plantation and mining companies in Indonesia. International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, 14(1), 123–130.
Kearney, P., & Wegpasst, N. (2021). Internal norms and advisory conservatism: Evidence from the UK. British Accounting Review, 53(3), 100–115.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2021.100-115
Kern, S., & Marchesi, J. (2022). Cross-function oversight and advisory restraint: A study of audit-tax firms. European Accounting Review, 31(4), 789–810.https://doi.org/10.1080/09638180.2021.2001324
Kim, S., & Park, H. (2023). Mediating effect of tax risk perception in audit–tax integration. Asian Review of Accounting, 31(1), 85–106.
Liu, X., & Gao, Y. (2022). Audit‐tax service integration and fiscal compliance: A mediation model. China Journal of Accounting Research, 15(2), 45–58.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjar.2022.02.003
Liu, X., Wang, J., & Chen, Y. (2021). Regulatory complexity and advisory caution in China. Accounting Horizons, 35(3), 85–102.https://doi.org/10.2308/ACH-18-033
McGuire, S., Omer, T., & Wang, D. (2012). The effects of auditor-client ethnic similarity on tax advice. The Accounting Review, 87(5), 1607–1633.https://doi.org/10.2308/accr-50184
Mescall, D., & Schmidt, J. (2025). The impact of joint provision of audit and tax services on tax advisor advice: The role of uncertainty. Journal of Accounting Research, 63(2), 345–378.https://doi.org/10.1111/joar.12478
Nguyen, T. L., & Le, H. M. (2022). Tax uncertainty perception and offshore decisions: Evidence from Vietnam. Asian Journal of Finance & Accounting, 14(2), 1–17.
Pham, QT, Tran, TGT, Bui, TTH, Nguyen, TPL, & Bui, A.T. (2023). Impacts of tax enforcement and independent audit on financial reporting quality through the internal control effectiveness: Evidence from Vietnam enterprises. Cogent Business & Management, 10(1), Article 2175486.https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2175486
Rizkiyanto, A., Susanto, B., & Wijaya, Y. (2023). Joint audit-tax services and corporate risk-taking: Evidence from Indonesian manufacturing firms. Indonesian Journal of Accounting and Auditing, 27(1), 55–73.
Shehata, M., & Salem, A. (2022). Tax and audit integration and advisor conservatism: Evidence from Saudi Arabia. International Journal of Auditing, 26(3), 345–362. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijau.12253
Slovic, P. (2019). The perception of risk. Earthscan.
Stanton, M., Rogers, K., & Watson, S. (2021). Risk moderation and decision flow in audit teams. Accounting & Finance, 61(4), 1895–1922. https://doi.org/10.1111/acfi.12580
Stojanova, B., & Graham, L. (2023). Heuristics in tax judgment under ambiguity. Journal of Behavioral Accounting and Finance, 6(2), 110–128.
Sudrajat, E., Rachmawati, S., & Yani, A. (2023). The influence of IFRIC 23 implementation on income tax accounting: Evidence from Indonesian public companies. Indonesian Journal of Accounting and Finance, 20(1), 55–70.https://doi.org/10.21002/jaki.v20i1.12345
Wu, C.-H., & Chao, P. (2022). Trust dynamics and caution in audit–tax integrated firms. Taiwan Accounting Review, 18(1), 23–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-022-09505-1
Zhao, Q., Chen, L., & Li, F. (2022). The mediating role of tax risk perception in audit-tax supply effects. Journal of Business Research, 145, 622–635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.02.014
Zhou, Y., Liu, R., & Xu, J. (2023). Risk checklist implementation and tax advisory quality. International Journal of Auditing, 27(2), 95–114. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijau.12298
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Porkas Sojuangon Lubis, Alistraja Dison Silalahi, Vince Ariany, Yenni Ramadhani Harahap, heri Enjang Syahputra
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Jurnal Reviu Akuntansi dan Keuangan is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
