Legal regulation of the activities of tax informants: protection, limitations, and motivation
https://doi.org/10.52468/2542-1514.2025.9(3).74-83
Abstract
The article discusses the issues of protection of informants, the experience of which in the future may be in demand in the process of integrating the legal regulation systems of the Eurasian Economic Union member states when developing issues of countering tax crimes. Using a systematic and logical method, modern law enforcement practice is analyzed, which indicates that due to the increasing complexity of forms of tax evasion and concealment of actual financial and business transactions, traditional tax control verification practices are becoming insufficient to limit tax violations in an acceptable manner. The historical and legal approach allows us to come to the conclusion that the activities of informants over the centuries could have various results - beneficial when they act out of patriotic or other disinterested motives, or destructive if denunciation is used as a means of enriching or settling personal accounts. The author substantiates the expediency of state support for tax informants, which objectively contributes to the protection of public interests by strengthening guarantees of transparency and accountability, and eliminating violations and mismanagement in the public and private sectors at the national and cross-border levels.
About the Author
D. G. Bachurin
University of Tyumen
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Dmitry G. Bachurin, Doctor of Law, Leading Researcher
Institute of State and Law
625003; 6, Volodarskogo ul.; Tyumen
References
1. Demin A.V. Tax informers. Heroes or traitors?. Nalogoved, 2021, no. 6, pp. 64–75. (In Russ.).
2. Stiglitz J., Alstadsæter A., Godar S., Nicolaides P., Zucman G. Global Tax Evasion Report. EU Tax Observatory Publ., 2024. 90 p.
3. Kiser E., Karceski S.M. Political Economy of Taxation. Annual Review of Political Science, 2017, vol. 20, pp. 75–92. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-polisci-052615-025442.
4. La Feria R. de. Tax Fraud and Arbitrary Law Enforcement. Journal of Law and Society, 2020, vol. 47, iss. 2, pp. 240–270.
5. Durado A. R. Whistle-Blowers in Tax Matters: Not Public Enemies. Intertax, 2018, vol. 46, iss. 5, pp. 422–426.
6. Krokhina Yu.A. Means of countering VAT fraud in the European Union and the possibility of their application in the supranational legislation of the EAEU. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 26. Gosudarstvennyi audit = Bulletin of Moscow University. Series 26. State Audit, 2020, no. 2, pp. 40–48. (In Russ.).
7. Jones B.W. The Emperor Domitian. London, Routledge Publ., 1992. 304 p.
8. Booth J. Tax informers: the immunity issue. Amicus Curiae, 1999, iss. 16, pp. 8–11. DOI: 10.14296/ac.v1999i16.1486.
9. Yeo P. Whistleblowing: Motivations, Corporate Self-Regulation, and the Law. International Journal of Law and Management, 2014, vol. 56, iss. 6, pp. 459–474. DOI: 10.1108/ijlma-06-2013-0027.
10. Turksen U., Vozza D., Kreissl R., Rasmouki F. (eds.). Tax Crimes and Enforcement in the European Union: Solutions for law, policy and practice. Oxford University Press, 2023. 384 p. DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780192862341.001.0001.
11. PROTAX. Report on comparative legal and institutional analysis, 787098 PROTAX EU H2020 Project. 2020. 631 p. Available at: https://protaxwebtoolkit.eu/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/PROTAX-3-D3.1__CH.pdf.
12. Emelyanov A.S. Public Interest and Genesis of Administrative Law. Pravo. Zhurnal Vysshei shkoly ekonomiki = Law. Journal of the Higher School of Economics, 2021, vol. 14, no. 5, pp. 48–76. (In Russ.).
13. Yadrikhinskiy S.A. The Proportionality Principle as a Tool for Achieving Balance of Interests in Tax Relations: Theory and Law Enforcement in Russia and abroad. Pravo. Zhurnal Vysshei shkoly ekonomiki = Law. Journal of the Higher School of Economics, 2021, no. 3, pp. 82–105. (In Russ.).
14. Kenny K. Whistleblowing: Towards a New Theory. Harvard University Press, 2019. 296 p.
15. Svenkerud P.J., Sørnes J.-O., Browning L. (eds.). Whistleblowing, Communication and Consequences: Lessons from The Norwegian National Lottery. New York, London, Routledge Publ., 2021. xviii + 247 p.
16. Perez F.M., Brada J.C., Drabek Z. Illicit Money Flows as Motives for FDI. Journal of Comparative Economics, 2012, vol. 40, iss. 1, pp. 108–126. DOI: 10.1016/j.jce.2011.03.007.
17. Pieth M. The Harmonization of Law against Economic Crime. European Journal of Law Reform, 1999, vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 527–545.
18. Bachurin D.G. Countering VAT violations in the European Union. Finansovoe pravo = Financial law, 2017, no. 10, pp. 23–26. (In Russ.).
19. Gerdemann S., Colneric N. The EU Whistleblower Directive and its Transposition: Part 2. European Labor Law Journal, 2021, vol. 12, iss. 3, pp. 253–265. DOI: 10.1177/2031952520969096.
20. Gerdemann S. The European Court of Human Rights’ Effects on the Transposition of the Whistleblowing Directive, in: Gerdemann S. (ed.). Europe’s New Whistleblowing Laws, Research Papers from the 2<sup>nd</sup> European Conference on Whistleblowing Legislation, Göttingen, Universitätsverlag Göttingen University Publ., 2023, pp. 135–168. DOI: 10.17875/gup2023-2390.
Review
For citations:
Bachurin D.G. Legal regulation of the activities of tax informants: protection, limitations, and motivation. Law Enforcement Review. 2025;9(3):74-83. https://doi.org/10.52468/2542-1514.2025.9(3).74-83
Views:
30
Email this article 