Automating Tax Administration Functions And Procedures To Support Decision Making System Pdf
File Name: automating tax administration functions and procedures to support decision making system .zip
This Directive takes effect on April 1, , with compliance required by no later than April 1, This Directive will have an automatic review process planned every 6 months after the date it comes into effect.
- How to regulate?
- Tax compliance and privacy rights in profiling and automated decision making
- Directive on Automated Decision-Making
Global Perspectives 11 May ; 1 1 : This article uses the sociolegal perspective to address current problems surrounding data protection and the experimental use of automated decision-making systems. This article outlines and discusses the hard laws regarding national adaptations of the European General Data Protection Regulation and other regulations as well as the use of automated decision-making in the public sector in six European countries Denmark, Sweden, Germany, Finland, France, and the Netherlands. Despite its limitations, the General Data Protection Regulation has impacted the geopolitics of the global data market by empowering citizens and data protection authorities to voice their complaints and conduct investigations regarding data breaches.
How to regulate?
Governments are increasingly looking towards automated decision-making systems ADS , including algorithms to improve the delivery of public administration. This raises issues in administrative law around legality, transparency, accountability, procedural fairness and natural justice.
The provision of public services and government decision-making are regulated by legislation that protect administrative public law principles and permit affected persons to seek judicial review of that decision. However, the government use and deployment of ADS has, in many jurisdictions, preceded any prudent analysis of how the ADS fits within the broader administrative legal framework.
This howtoregulate article outlines a regulatory framework for the automation of public administration. Questions of substance for regulating the government use of ADS. However, public administration is a special situation where the individual does not have choice in service delivery in the same way as choice is offered in the private sphere. Therefore, it merits particular care and attention. ADS use in the judicial sector also merits attention but is outside of the scope of this howtoregulate article.
Identifying the policy goals for automating public administration. Many jurisdictions have identified digital government , e-government and automation of public administration as important policy goals of the modern state. This is evidenced by the number of states that have developed digital strategies and the investment they have put into supporting digital infrastructure. The Handbook: How to regulate? The goals which do not depend on other goals, at the end of the chains, shall be called primary goals…goals which are between the primary goals and the officially set goals shall be called intermediate goals.
The below illustration from the Handbook, using the example of the policy goal to reduce tobacco smoking, shows that other goals could include: to reduce casualties and to reduce illness. These two goals could be intermediate. For example behind the intermediate goal to reduce sickness another intermediate goal could be identified: to reduce spending and to reduce spending in the health budget.
Taking a look now at the policy goal to automate public administration we can see that automation is itself an intermediate goal to the primary goal of an efficient and effective public administration system:. We should keep this primary goal in mind when developing ADS regulation, and thus also in the following. But it is not the only one. It is recommended in the report that, instead of obsessing about fraud, cost savings, sanctions, and market-driven definitions of efficiency, the starting point should be on how welfare budgets could be transformed through technology to ensure a higher standard of living for the vulnerable and disadvantaged.
In investigating the human rights issues around digital government the UN suggests that the policy goal should not be automating public administration. Administrative public law principles also govern such policy goals and so worthwhile objectives should include:. Clear goals and objectives help drive good design of ADS in public administration but are insufficient on their own. Regulating the automation of public administration needs to have robust measures that test the extent to which the goals and objectives have been met, including how any potential conflicts between goals are resolved.
The examples of governments abandoning deployed ADS eg. Hence we strongly recommend establishing a map of primary goals, intermediate goals and objectives before even designing ADS regulation. ADS regulation requires further decisions on a range of aspects or parameters.
We list them in the following, together with a few generic recommendations:. Deciding which public administrative acts to automate. Irrespective of how sophisticated the technology has progressed there may be decisions that would not be appropriate to remove the human decision-maker from the process. For example some legislation permits discretion to be used either by the minister or senior public servant and it is suggested that this is not an appropriate administrative act to automate.
The success and in particular the acceptance of ADS depends on avoiding evident or frequent mistakes — mistake tolerance might even be lower than for human decisions.
This objective can only be reached by properly limiting the scope of ADS to aspects and situations where it is very well performing.
Requiring impact assessments. By requiring impact assessments to decide which public administrative acts to automate is a useful exercise to determine the appropriateness of automation or the degree to which automation may be useful. However, such an assessment may be based on a short term understanding of costs. The illustrative case of Robodebt highlights how an automated system that initially saved money in recovering overpayments of welfare benefits turned out to be more expensive because its design was based on flawed rules found to be unlawful.
Although some jurisdictions require impact assessment as part of the design phase, we suggest this may be too late in the process as the decision to automate has already been made. The principles outlined above consider the degree to which automation is used in the decision-making process. Regulation could include requirements around the degree to which an ADS may be used and the circumstances.
In circumstances where a human is to make the final decision, it may be appropriate to outline a series of tests the human should make in understanding the information and analysis provided by the ADS. Learning from pioneering sectors. ADS has been used in some national tax administrations both for income tax and value added tax in the eighties already. Most of the issues of ADS are not artificial intelligence specific.
Hence, it might make sense to study the pioneer sectors, their difficulties and how they overcame the difficulties. It might also make sense for officials to tap into the knowledge of their colleagues from these pioneering sectors, the more so as quite some legal and practical issues might be specific to the respective jurisdiction.
The introduction of ADS is mostly a complicated undertaking which merits being planned carefully, meaning applying principles of project management, change management or even both. We assume that a part of the failure stories could have been avoided by better management. Adapting regulation to ADS needs. We cannot assess, however, whether adapting regulation to ADS is on average worthwhile or not.
We suppose that it depends on the case and that the utility of such adaptation will decrease over time. Goals that touch on ADS in public administration, include:. The UN e-government digital index EGDI is a survey with 11 iterations that ranks UN Member States in terms of digital government — capturing the scope and quality of online services, status of telecommunication infrastructure and existing human capacity.
Before starting any automation process institutions and organisations need to be reorganised to establish appropriate horizontal and vertical workflows.
Organisational culture in the public service is important to foster collaboration and innovation within public administration. New attitudes, skills and behaviours are needed for interaction with vulnerable groups and to engage individuals and administrators at various levels of government in the localisation of the SDGs.
In engaging personnel for digital government transformation, excessive reliance on vendors or private sector expertise should be avoided, as the Government might lack the capacity to follow up on problems that arise in the implementation phase.
Although international cooperation and support are desirable and often necessary, skills and knowledge should be locally sourced whenever possible.
It is crucial to secure a high ratio of IT specialists to other types of expertise in government and to take on quality personnel.
In developing a comprehensive institutional and regulatory framework that allows countries to deliver digital services in a convenient, reliable, secure and personalised manner, it is necessary to take stock of what laws and regulations exist and how they are interrelated in order to identify gaps and establish a point of departure for the adoption and harmonisation of legislation fully supportive of digital government transformation. When developing legislation, regulations and strategies for digital government transformation, it is essential to take the needs of vulnerable groups into account from the start, with emphasis given to safety, availability, affordability and access to services.
A thorough understanding of the potential positive and negative effects of existing policies on the use of new and emerging technologies such as AI and a comprehensive understanding of the technologies themselves are necessary to formulate relevant new laws and policies.
Partnerships among public and private sector actors, universities and think tanks can help build the necessary understanding of the impacts of new technologies, how they can benefit societies, the risks they pose in terms of safety and security, and the ethical issues that must be addressed in their design and use.
Trust in government is integral to the success of government digital transformation. Governments need to show that they are credible in terms of providing safe and consistent access to services, promoting digital literacy, and enabling the participation of all groups in society, particularly the most vulnerable.
Older persons must be given careful consideration in the design of public service delivery models and the provision of government services. The lack of convenient access to social services through online portals or service centres can reinforce their exclusion and keep them on the wrong side of the digital divide.
Governments need to identify and address the specific challenges faced by older persons so that no one is left behind. Since digital government is a journey and not a final destination, the continuous monitoring and evaluation of digital services is essential. Performance indicators can comprise both quantitative and qualitative measures that assess variables such as user uptake, user satisfaction, and the share of automated customer service generated by the digital government system.
Some countries have adopted a digital government implementation index to establish benchmarks for public institutions and monitor progress. The basis of the Recommendation is that digital technologies contribute to:. The Recommendation, which is the first international legal instrument on digital government, offers a whole-of-government approach that addresses the potential cross-cutting role of digital technologies in the design and implementation of public policies, and in achieving policy outcomes.
The principles outlined in the Recommendation for capturing the value of digital technologies for more open, participatory and innovative governments, include:. The OECD have developed a Going Digital Toolkit , which helps countries assess their state of digital development and formulate policy strategies and approaches in response. The Toolkit is structured along the 7 policy dimensions of the Going Digital Integrated Policy Framework : access; use; innovation; jobs; society; trust; market openness; and growth and well-being.
Article 22 of the GDPR permits a decision solely by automated means without human involvement only where the decision is:. Additional Article 22 rules protect individuals where automated decision-making has legal or similar significant effect, where such decision-making occurs, the Member State must ensure that:.
Article 35 7 ] outlines the minimum criteria that the impact assessment must consider and assess, such as describing the processing operations, assessing the necessity and proportionality etc. Article 52 requires the supervisory authority to act with independence in completing its tasks and exercising its powers. Specific characteristics of independence is characterised as:. Nevertheless, some jurisdictions seek to regulate ADS use via directives, principles and policies, some of which carry non-compliance measures from the primary legislation eg.
We start our analysis with legislation that regulates particular aspects of ADS use. Legislative safeguards regulating automated decision-making.
Using online translation from Slovenian to English, Article 27 states:. Article 27 is unique as it proposes an ex ante safeguard where a bill relating to public sector processing of data involving the use of new technologies must include a completed impact assessment on human rights and fundamental freedoms of individuals. This suggests that should the impact assessment show a disproportionate infringement on human rights and fundamental rights, the bill will not be passed into law. The next level of protection is ex post in that where an automated decision, duly authorised by law is made, the following safeguards aim to protect the rights of individuals affected by such decisions [ UK Data Protection Act Section 14 and Ireland Data Protection Act Section 57 ]:.
Both the UK and Ireland Data Protection Acts require an impact assessment before the processing of personal data operations, but not before the law permitting such processing of personal data, is enacted. Fully automated decisions are prevented in actions brought to the administrative court and other kinds of administrative decisions are permitted either semi-automated or fully automated under specific conditions where:.
The Explanatory Memorandum to the bill that amended the Migration Act making Section A law noted that it foresees the use of computer programmes in:. There is no intention for complex decisions, requiring any assessment of discretionary criteria, to be made by computer programmes.
Those complex decisions will continue to be made by persons who are delegates of the Minister. To illustrate this, it may never be appropriate for computer programmes to make decisions on visa cancellations. Computer-based processing is not suitable in these circumstances because these decisions require an assessment of discretionary factors which do not lend themselves to automated assessment. Regulations for ADS subject to legislation. The consequences of non-compliance can include any measure allowed by the FDA that the Treasury Board would determine as appropriate and acceptable.
The Directive commenced on 1 April and will be automatically reviewed every 6 months.
Tax compliance and privacy rights in profiling and automated decision making
Governments are increasingly looking towards automated decision-making systems ADS , including algorithms to improve the delivery of public administration. This raises issues in administrative law around legality, transparency, accountability, procedural fairness and natural justice. The provision of public services and government decision-making are regulated by legislation that protect administrative public law principles and permit affected persons to seek judicial review of that decision. However, the government use and deployment of ADS has, in many jurisdictions, preceded any prudent analysis of how the ADS fits within the broader administrative legal framework. This howtoregulate article outlines a regulatory framework for the automation of public administration. Questions of substance for regulating the government use of ADS.
Nowadays, almost everything is automated; most IT organizations use multiple automation technologies. An automated system is composed of elements designed to perform a set of tasks that have been programmed. Operational and repetitive tasks become less of a burden and makes your life simpler and easier. When talking about efficiency in the workplace, it is useful to start looking at which tasks could be better managed using an automated system in a cloud-based software. Organizations using automated IT processes are 1. Many entrepreneurs, mostly owners of small businesses, find it hard to delegate tasks to their employees, and even more to automated systems.
Directive on Automated Decision-Making
Various due process provisions designed for use by civil servants in administrative decision-making may become redundant when automated decision-making is taken into use in public administration. Problems with mechanisms of good government, responsibility and liability for automated decisions and the rule of law require attention of the law-maker in adapting legal provisions to this new form of decision-making. Although the general data protection regulation of the European Union is important in acknowledging automated decision-making, most of the legal safeguards within administrative due process have to be provided for by the national law-maker. It is suggested that all countries have a need to review their rules of administrative due process with a view to bringing them up to date regarding the requirements of automated decision-making.
Sap Tax Reporting. Every country follow its own sales tax, purchase tax procedure. You can also enter additional filtering options, such as the submission due date, the reporting year, or the country. The digitisation of VAT and sales tax is raising the stakes for tax compliance solutions.
The use of information technology is vital for the effective administration of tax systems and in recent years, tax administrations around the world have increasingly invested in information technology tools OECD, a; OECD, b; OECD, Due to the high number of taxpayers that need to be effectively and efficiently assessed, the support offered by new technologies has represented an opportunity for tax administration. At the same time, while the digital economy imposes new challenges to tax authorities and efficient tax law enforcement OECD, , the evolution of the digital world including new cross-border business practices required revenue administrations to keep pace with new technologies themselves Ehrke-Rabel, a.