Levitt and List’s (2007) utility function relating to decisions with a moral dimension is adapted to offer insight into the moral costs associated with tax evasion and benefit fraud. Three questions are empirically explored: Are tax evasion and benefit fraud moral equivalents? Does an individual’s ‘moral hinterland’ associate with their intentions to commit fiscal crimes? What is the role of moral cues in informing public policy to reduce fiscal crimes? The econometric evidence employs 2942 questionnaire responses to a 2016 national (UK) survey. This paper contributes to the literature by offering insight into the way moral costs inform perceptions of the intrinsic value of ‘doing the right thing’ thereby offering a richer analysis of fiscal crimes. The account has particular relevance for policy prescriptions that involve aspects of ‘shame’.
