Beyond Digitalization: Understanding Taxpayer Adaptation, Compliance Costs, and Voluntary Compliance in Indonesia’s Coretax Reform

Vol 9 No 8 (2026): Volume 09 Issue 08 August 2026

Article Date Published : 20 August 2026 | Page No.: 4590-4603 | Google Scholar | Crossref doi for this article

Abstract :

Indonesia’s implementation of the Core Tax Administration System (Coretax) represents a major shift toward integrated digital tax administration. This study examines how taxpayers and tax professionals adapt to Coretax, how the transition reshapes compliance costs, and how these experiences relate to voluntary tax compliance. A qualitative case study approach was employed involving 100 participants from Jakarta, Bandung, Surabaya, and Malang, including corporate taxpayers, tax and accounting staff, tax consultants, tax practitioners, academics, and tax administration officials. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. The findings reveal that Coretax implementation is experienced not merely as technological change, but as an administrative transformation requiring procedural relearning, internal workflow adjustment, cross-functional coordination, and the development of new administrative capabilities. Six dimensions of compliance costs emerged: learning, time, monetary, organizational, technological, and psychological costs. These burdens were most pronounced during the early transition period, although some declined as users developed familiarity and administrative routines. The findings further show that digitalization alone does not automatically strengthen voluntary compliance. Participants associated willingness to comply more closely with procedural clarity, system reliability, accessible support, and trust in tax administration. The study contributes to digital tax administration literature by integrating taxpayer adaptation, administrative burden, compliance costs, and voluntary compliance within a single qualitative framework. Practically, it highlights the importance of user-centered implementation strategies that reduce transition burdens while strengthening taxpayers’ confidence in digital tax administration.

Keywords :

Administrative Burden, Compliance Costs, Coretax, Digital Tax Administration, Voluntary Tax Compliance.

References :

  1. Abu Bakar, M. A. A., Palil, M. R., Maelah, R., & Ali, M. H. (2022). Power of tax authorities, tax morale, and tax compliance: A mediation analysis in East Malaysia. Asian Journal of Business and Accounting, 15(2), 281–309. https://doi.org/10.22452/ajba.vol15no2.10
  2. Arianty, F. (2024). Implementation challenges and opportunities Coretax Administration System on the efficiency of tax administration. Jurnal Vokasi Indonesia, 12(2). https://doi.org/10.7454/jvi.v12i2.1227
  3. Barnes, C. Y. (2021). It takes a while to get used to: The costs of redeeming public benefits. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 31(2), 295–310. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muaa042
  4. Bassey, E., Mulligan, E., & Ojo, A. (2022). A conceptual framework for digital tax administration: A systematic review. Government Information Quarterly, 39(4), 101754. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2022.101754
  5. Belahouaoui, R., & Attak, E. H. (2024). Digital taxation, artificial intelligence and Tax Administration 3.0: Improving tax compliance behavior – A systematic literature review using textometry (2016–2023). Accounting Research Journal, 37(2), 172–191. https://doi.org/10.1108/ARJ-12-2023-0372
  6. Bellon, M., Dabla-Norris, E., Khalid, S., & Lima, F. (2022). Digitalization to improve tax compliance: Evidence from VAT e-invoicing in Peru. Journal of Public Economics, 210, 104661. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2022.104661
  7. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2019). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 11(4), 589–597. https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806
  8. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis? Qualitative Research in Psychology, 18(3), 328–352. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238
  9. Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. Harper & Row.
  10. Chayati, N., Sangka, K. B., & Probohudono, A. N. (2026). Trust as the bridge: Unpacking the impact of perceptions of corruption on voluntary tax compliance. International Journal of Social Economics. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSE-12-2025-1196
  11. Christensen, J., Aaroe, L., Baekgaard, M., Herd, P., & Moynihan, D. P. (2020). Human capital and administrative burden: The role of cognitive resources in citizen-state interactions. Public Administration Review, 80(1), 127–136. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13134
  12. Darmayasa, I. N., & Hardika, N. S. (2024). Core tax administration system: The power and trust dimensions of slippery slope framework tax compliance model. Cogent Business & Management, 11(1), 2337358. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2024.2337358
  13. Darono, A., & Panggabean, T. (2026). From compliance to adoption: A theory-building study of technology implementation gaps in tax administration. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 19(4), 237. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm19040237
  14. Doring, M., & Madsen, J. K. (2022). Mitigating psychological costs—The role of citizens’ administrative literacy and social capital. Public Administration Review, 82(4), 671–681. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13472
  15. Ferry, F., Evans, C. C., & Tran-Nam, B. (2023). Presumptive income taxes and tax compliance costs: Policy implications for small and medium-sized enterprises in emerging economies. Journal of Tax Administration, 8(1), 6–44.
  16. Halling, A., & Baekgaard, M. (2024). Administrative burden in citizen–state interactions: A systematic literature review. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 34(2), 180–195. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muad023
  17. Heinrich, C. J. (2016). The bite of administrative burden: A theoretical and empirical investigation. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 26(3), 403–420. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muv034
  18. Li, J., Wang, X., & Wu, Y. (2020). Can government improve tax compliance by adopting advanced information technology? Evidence from the Golden Tax Project III in China. Economic Modelling, 93, 384–397. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2020.08.009
  19. Madsen, C. O., Lindgren, I., & Melin, U. (2022). The accidental caseworker—How digital self-service influences citizens’ administrative burden. Government Information Quarterly, 39(1), 101653. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2021.101653
  20. Mascagni, G., Mengistu, A. T., & Woldeyes, F. B. (2021). Can ICTs increase tax compliance? Evidence on taxpayer responses to technological innovation in Ethiopia. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 189, 172–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2021.06.007
  21. Masood, A., & Nisar, M. A. (2021). Administrative capital and citizens’ responses to administrative burden. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 31(1), 56–72. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muaa031
  22. Matarirano, O., Chiloane-Tsoka, G. E., & Makina, D. (2019). Factors driving tax compliance costs of small businesses in the South African construction industry. Acta Commercii, 19(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.4102/ac.v19i1.687
  23. Musimenta, D. (2020). Knowledge requirements, tax complexity, compliance costs and tax compliance in Uganda. Cogent Business & Management, 7(1), 1812220. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2020.1812220
  24. Nguyen, T. H. (2022). The impact of non-economic factors on voluntary tax compliance behavior: A case study of small and medium enterprises in Vietnam. Economies, 10(8), 179. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies10080179
  25. Night, S., & Bananuka, J. (2020). The mediating role of adoption of an electronic tax system in the relationship between attitude towards electronic tax system and tax compliance. Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative Science, 25(49), 73–88. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEFAS-07-2018-0066
  26. Nowell, B., & Albrecht, K. (2019). A reviewer’s guide to qualitative rigor. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 29(2), 348–363. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muy052
  27. Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847
  28. Peeters, R. (2023). Digital administrative burdens: An agenda for analyzing the citizen experience of digital bureaucratic encounters. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance, 6(1), 7–13. https://doi.org/10.1093/ppmgov/gvac024
  29. Saptono, P. B., Hodžić, S., Khozen, I., Mahmud, G., Pratiwi, I., Purwanto, D., Aditama, M. A., Haq, N., & Khodijah, S. (2023). Quality of e-tax system and tax compliance intention: The mediating role of user satisfaction. Informatics, 10(1), 22. https://doi.org/10.3390/informatics10010022
  30. Satyadini, A., & Rosid, A. (2024). Does tax simplification motivate small businesses to be more compliant? Evidence from a regression discontinuity in Indonesia. Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies, 60(2), 217–238. https://doi.org/10.1080/00074918.2023.2252746

How to Cite :

Beyond Digitalization: Understanding Taxpayer Adaptation, Compliance Costs, and Voluntary Compliance in Indonesia’s Coretax Reform. Kadarisman Hidayat, Azzahra Rismarini Zayyan, Hefry Johan Ferdhianzah, 9(8), 4590-4603. Retrieved from https://ijcsrr.org/single-view/?id=27308&pid=27136

Most read articles by the same author(s)

Kadarisman Hidayat, Azzahra Rismarini Zayyan, Hefry Johan Ferdhianzah,

View

17

Citation

Downloads

Article Details