Combating tax aggressiveness: Evidence from Indonesia’s tax amnesty program

Figures & data

Figure 1. Research framework.

Table 1. Data sample

Description	Total
Initial sample	174
Manufacturing companies (2013–2018)
Companies with missing data	5
Companies that suffered losses in the period 2013–2018	99
Total sample	70
Outlier data	3
Final sample	67
Total observation (67 × 6 years)	402

Source: Processed Author 2021

Table 2. Descriptive statistics

Variable	Min	Max	Mean	Std.dev
Leverage	0.01	0.94	0.43	0.18
Profitability	0.0013	0.8849	0.1180	0.1139
Firm size	11.18	29.34	20.76	2.97
Independent commissioner	0.0	0.75	0.377	0.204
Institutional ownership	0.0	0.99	0.62	0.27
ETR (tax aggressiveness)	0.124	0.929	0.261	0.988
Observation		402

Table 3. Regression tests

Independent variables	Expected signs	Tax aggressiveness			Collinearity statistics
		Unstandardized	Standardized	Sig
		(B)	(β)		Tolerance	VIF
Tax amnesty	+	0	−0.003	0.953	0.969	1.032
Leverage	+	0.077	0.173	0.001***	0.923	1.084
Profitability	-	−0.005	−0.166	0.001***	0.892	1.122
Independent commissioner	-	0.072	0.112	0.025**	0.947	1.057
Institutional ownership	+	0.026	0.085	0.09*	0.946	1.057
Firm size (Ln total asset)	+	−0.147	−0.025	0.616	0.929	1.076
Constant	−0.066
R^2	0.078
Adj R^2	0.064
F	5.861
Sig	0

Notes: *= significant at p < 0.1, **= significant at p < 0.05, ***= significant at p < 0.01.

Table 4. t-Test

		Paired differences					t	df	Sig (2-tailed)
		Mean	Std. deviation	Std. error mean	95% Confidence interval of the difference
					Lower	Upper
Pair 1	Before tax–after tax	0.000442	0.115516	0.008148	−0.01563	0.016509	0.054	200	0.957