B. F.

Arianti/Journal of Accounting and Business Education, 4 (2), March 2020

JOURNAL OF ACCOUNTING AND BUSINESS EDUCATION

P-ISSN 2528-7281 E-ISSN 2528-729X
E-mail: [email protected]
http://journal2.um.ac.id/index.php/jabe/

The Effect of Independent Commissioner’s Moderation of CSR and

Institutional Ownership on Tax Avoidance

Baiq Fitri Arianti

Accounting Undergraduate Study Program, Faculty of Economics, Universitas Pamulang, Indonesia
email: [email protected]

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.26675/jabe.v4i2.8271

Abstract: This research aims at providing empirical evidence of the effects of corporate social responsibility (CSR)
and institutional ownership on tax avoidance with independent commissioner as the moderator. The study’s
population is 66 mining and agricultural companies listed in the Indonesia Stock Exchange from 2013 - 2017.
Employing a purposive sampling technique, 10 mining and agricultural companies are taken as the samples out of 50
annual reports from 2013 - 2017 observed. The research employs the Moderated Regression Analysis (MRA) as the
data analysis technique. The research results indicate that corporate social responsibility (CSR) variable does not
influence tax avoidance and institutional ownership variable influences tax avoidance. Independent commissioner
may weaken the effect of corporate social responsibility (CSR) on tax avoidance and strengthen the effect of
institutional ownership on tax avoidance. The implication of this research is to examine the importance of tax payment
and expectedly increase the community’s awareness, especially related parties, of the obligation to pay their taxes
appropriately and, with the research’s results, the public is expected to be aware of the importance of paying taxes,
especially large companies, so as not to take tax avoidance measures for Indonesia’s improved and stable economy.

Keywords: Corporate Social Responsibility, Institutional Ownership, Tax Avoidance, Independent Commissioner

INTRODUCTION

Tax is the most potential source of state revenue occupying the highest percentage in the State
Budget (APBN) compared with any other sources. In this regard, the government, particularly the
Directorate General of Taxes (DJP), is expected to optimize state revenue through its functions in driving
sustainable and equitable economic growth. Companies also tend to search for a way to reduce the amount
of tax they have to pay (Ngadiman & Puspitasari, 2014). To reduce the amount of tax they should pay,
company may reduce the tax value in compliance with prevailing tax regulation (tax avoidance) or reduce
the tax value by committing unlawful act (tax fraud) (Maraya & Yendrawati, 2016).
The existing field facts show that until now state tax-revenue is not maximal yet. Minister of
Finance, Sri Mulyani, acknowledges that the trend of tax receipt in Indonesia has declined. Current
realization of tax receipt is lower than target state budget (Apriliyana & Suryarini, 2018).
 B. F. Arianti/Journal of Accounting and Business Education, 4 (2), March 2020

Table 1. Realization of State Revenue in 2016 – 2018 (in Trillion Rupiahs)

Year APBN Target APBN Realization Decline Percentage
2016 Rp 1,355 Rp 1,141.45 Rp 213.55 118.7 %
2017 Rp 1,284 Rp 770,7 Rp 513.3 166.6%
2018 Rp 1,350 Rp 1,424.00 Rp 74 94.8 %
Source: Ministry of Finance (2019)
Table 1 above shows that the declining amount of realization indicates that tax receipt is not optimal yet,
causing a presumption that the tax payers avoid taxes.
In addition, tax also contributes the highest proportion to the state revenue in APBN. However,
Indonesia is classified into a state with mid-lower revenue with an average tax ratio of 19% -26% from
Gross Domestic Product (GDP). The Budget Analysis Bureau and Secretary General of Implementation of
DPR-RI state that according to the data issued by the National Public Procurement Agency (LKPP), the
Indonesia’s tax ratio increases in the period 2002-2012 from 11.5% to 13.3% in 2009. The tax ratio
declines to 11.1% in 2009 and consistently increases to 11.9% in the period 2011-2012. IMF explains that
Indonesia’s actual tax revenue relatively to GDP is the lowest among the G-20 countries, including other
developing countries. Sri Mulyani, Minister of Finance of the Republic of Indonesia, explains that
Indonesia’s tax ratio is still lower than 11% in 2016, the world’s lowest tax ratio (Aini & Sutejo, 2017).
Based on the foregoing phenomena, there is clearly an indication of tax avoidance by individual
and corporation taxpayers. However, this research focuses on corporation taxpayer. According to the
research conducted by Apriliyana & Suryarini (2018), companies in Indonesia indicate that they avoid tax,
as may be observed with the existence of tax amnesty program policy starting from July 1, 2016 to March
31, 2017. Meanwhile, according to the research conducted by Lin, Cheng & Zhang (2015), companies tend
to view tax payment as an important social obligation in regions without advanced market economy, law
infrastructure and lacking professional mediator, unethical awareness of and commitment to social
obligation, lack of trust in the government, and consequence of low cost from customer. However, these
companies may be involved more in other low cost CSR activities in balancing negative view related to
their aggressive tax reporting.
Companies’ good corporate governance mechanism is directly proportional to their compliance
with fulfillment of tax obligation (Sandy & Lukviarman, 2015). Another form of the implementation of the
Good Corporate Governance (GCG) concept is to apply the Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR).
Corporate social responsibility is a phenomenon of company’s strategy to accommodate its stakeholders’
needs and interests (Maraya & Yendrawati, 2016).
Bigger proportion of independent commissioners in the structure of board of commissioners will
present better supervision and may limit management’s chances of fraud (Raharjo, 2014). Independent
commissioner in a company may also give instructions and directions in managing the company and
formulating corporate strategy better, including in determining policies related to effective tax rate to be
paid by company. This is different from the research conducted by Meila & Devi (2018) which states that
independent commissioner significantly influences tax avoidance.
Institutional ownership indicates a comparative ownership. Institutional ownership in a company
will drive more optimal supervision of management’s performance, since shareholding represents a source
of power which may be exercised in support of the management or otherwise. The higher the investment
value placed in an organization, the higher the monitoring system in the organization is, thus institutional
ownership influences tax avoidance (Diantari & Ulupui, 2016).
Company’s involvement in tax avoidance practice becomes something common and legal to be
performed by companies, but is not desired by the government (Budhi & Noviari, 2017). The government
expect companies to pay their taxes without tax avoidance mechanism. Company’s effort to optimize
corporate profit remains company’s reason for performing tax avoidance, which is deemed bad for the
society. Many CSR researches on tax avoidance have been conducted, such as that conducted by Ningrum
et al., (2018) which discusses relationship between CSR disclosure on tax avoidance and ETR (Effective
Tax Rates) proxy. Another research conducted by Muzakki (2015) shows that Corporate Social

99
 B. F. Arianti/Journal of Accounting and Business Education, 4 (2), March 2020

Responsibility (CSR) significantly influences tax avoidance. Higher disclosure of Corporate Social
Responsibility (CSR) will reduce company’s tax avoidance practice. Therefore, the higher the CSR
disclosure, the higher the tax avoidance is conducted. In the context of Indonesia, there is no research
conducted related to CSR and institutional ownership on tax avoidance, especially in connection with
independent commissioner. The indication of tax avoidance practice in foreign investment company sector,
Indonesia’s low tax ratio compared to that of some ASEAN countries and mining sector’s low tax ratio
compared to the national tax ratio as well as the tax audit findings on some mining companies leading to
tax deficiency notice are phenomena which represent tax avoidance attempts (Hidayat et al., 2016).
From the perspective of psychological theory, namely the theory of planned behavior, in relation to
tax avoidance, companies should be willing to pay their taxes, thus this variable also influences the three
variables: CSR, institutional ownership and independent commissioner. Meanwhile, according to the
Agency Theory and the stakeholder theory, in relation to CSR, independent commissioner and institutional
ownership on tax avoidance, every company should perform their activities not only for the sake of
shareholders, but also all stakeholders, including the government through compliance with tax obligation
and non-performance of tax avoidance.
The phenomena and research above encourage the author to perform a research on the topic of tax
avoidance and use the Effective Taxes Rate (ETR) proxy. ETR is the effectiveness of corporate tax
payment which reflects the amount of tax avoidance on the calculated tax rate on corporate profit. ETR
represents the percentage of company’s actual tax payment from its commercial profit. The lower the ETR
value, the higher the tendency of a company to perform tax avoidance. This research is conducted aiming at
empirically describing and explaining the influence of CSR and institutional ownership on tax avoidance as
well as the influence of independent commissioner.
This research is regarding the moderation effect of independent commissioner of CSR and
institutional ownership on tax avoidance and supports the research conducted by Amalia (2019) proving
that there is positive correlation of CSR disclosure with tax avoidance, differently from the researches
conducted by Jamei (2017), Gulzar et al., (2018) and Apriliyana & Suryarini (2018) showing that there is
no significantly correlation between the number of board members, proportion of non-assigned members,
institutional ownership and tax avoidance or institutional ownership and CSR quality does not influence
corporate tax avoidance with tax rate as the indicator.

LITERATURE REVIEW AND HYPOTHESES

CSR is important to company, and the Government, serving as the regulator, is one of company’s
stakeholders. Therefore, company should regards the government’s interest. The theory of planned
behavior in relation to tax avoidance behavior in this research states that companies are to abide by and
comply with all regulations established by the government, fulfill tax payment and not perform tax
avoidance (Ningrum et al., 2018). The agency theory in relation to institutional ownership also separates
management and shareholders. The purpose of this separation is for effective and efficient corporate
management in employing the best agent to manage the company. Meanwhile, according to the Stakeholder
Theory in relation to Corporate Social Responsibility, it is a form of corporate social responsibility to all of
its stakeholders. Therefore, Corporate Social Responsibility is important to company.

Corporate Social Responsibility

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is a mechanism in company aiming at integrating
company’s concern about or care of surrounding environments and company’s interaction with
stakeholders more than social responsibility, particularly in law. Corporate social responsibility is based on
the idea that company does not only have economic and legal responsibilities, but also responsibilities to
other concerned parties (stakeholders) (Purnomo & Widianingsih, 2012). In Indonesia, corporate social
responsibility is regulated in Law No. 40 of 2007 on Limited Liability Company article 74 that “Company
operating in business activities in the field of and/or related to natural resources is obliged to perform social
and environmental responsibilities”.

100
 B. F. Arianti/Journal of Accounting and Business Education, 4 (2), March 2020

Institutional Ownership
Institutional Ownership is institution with big interest in share investment in a company (Laily,
2017). Existing institutional ownership in a company results in supervision by the institution with
shareholding in the company by monitoring the management’s performance, including tax avoidance
practice.
The research conducted by Ngadiman & Puspitasari (2014) states that institutional ownership is
shareholding percentage by institution party. Dewi & Jati (2014) supportively argue that institutional
ownership is the party to monitor company with big institutional ownership (more than 5%), identifying its
high capability to monitor the management. The institution may be in the form foundation, bank, insurance
company, investment company, pension fund, limited liability company (PT) and other institution. Existing
institutional ownership in a company will encourage more optimal supervision over the management’s
performance. Because of corporate responsibility to shareholders, institutional owner has incentive to
ensure that corporate management makes decision which will maximize shareholder’s welfare.

Independent Commissioner
Independent commissioner is defined as an individual unaffiliated in any regards to controlling
shareholders, unaffiliated to any director or board of commissioners, and not assuming director position in
related company. In Indonesia Stock Exchange, there is a regulation that a company must have independent
commissioners at least 30% of the board of commissioners, thus the supervision may be performed in such
a way (Annisa & Kurniasih, 2012).
Board of commissioners may consist of one or more person. Board of commissioners is an
assembly, that in case the board of commissioners consists of more than 1 (one) member, each member of
board of commissioners cannot act individually, but under board of commissioners’ decision. The number
of members of board of commissioners may be regulated in company’s Articles of Association. In addition,
company may regulate 1 (one) or more independent commissioners and 1 (one) delegated commissioner.

Tax Avoidance
Laily (2017) defines tax avoidance as taxpayer’s act to unclearly violate the law, although it is
sometimes clearly interpreted as law not according to law makers’ purposes and objectives. Tax Avoidance
is a tax avoidance activity while abiding by prevailing rules, which means that tax avoidance is performed
under corridor of tax laws and regulations. Tax avoidance or tax resistance is a constraint in tax collection,
causing state treasury’s reduced revenue (Bachtiar, 2015). Tax avoidance is company’s attempt to
minimize the amount of tax it have to pay by lowering corporate profit.
Tax avoidance means tax avoidance attempt legally and safely performed by taxpayer since it is not
contradictory to tax provisions, in which the method and technique used tends to utilize existing
weaknesses (grey area) in tax laws and regulations, in order to minimize the amount of payable tax
(Agustina & Aris, 2017). Company which performs tax avoidance is deemed socially irresponsible. The
correlation between independent variable (Corporate Social Responsibility and institutional ownership),
independent commissioner moderation variable and dependent variable is that tax avoidance may be
described in the following research model:

101
 B. F. Arianti/Journal of Accounting and Business Education, 4 (2), March 2020

Corporate Social H1
Responsibility (X1)
Tax Avoidance (Y)

Institutional H2
Ownership (X2) H4
H3

Independent
Commissioner (Z)

Figure 1. The Correlation between Independent and Dependent Variable

Corporate Social Responsibility on Tax Avoidance

CSR is a form of company’s responsibility to all of its stakeholders. Tax is one form of corporate
social responsibilities to stakeholders through the government. When company performs tax avoidance, its
reputation will be prejudiced in the society’s and stakeholders’ perspective. Company’s decision to reduce
its tax rate or perform tax avoidance is influenced by its attitude towards CSR. Company performs CSR for
the society’s positive support in maintaining its survival. Company is demanded to perform its activities
pursuant to prevailing values and norms in the society. Company with good reputation will maintain its
reputation by performing responsibility for its activities and not performing tax avoidance practice or in
case company is involved in tax avoidance, it is socially irresponsible. This shows that the more a company
discloses its CSR, the lower its tax avoidance level is. The research conducted by Ningrum et al., (2018)
shows correlation or CSR with tax avoidance, in which the higher a company’s CSR disclosure level, the
lower its tax avoidance level is. Based on the explanation, this research takes the following hypothesis:

H1: Corporate social responsibility influences tax avoidance

Institutional Ownership on Tax Avoidance

Institutional ownership is shareholding by the government, foreign investor, insurance company or
bank with bigger role in supervision over corporate management (Dewi & Jati, 2014). Corporate
management, besides fulfilling company’s interest, must also consider institutional parties’ interest. This is
supported by the stakeholder theory, that the existence of company is determined by stakeholders.
Company will consider shareholders’ interest because of company management’s moral commitment to
stakeholders, and this moral commitment will encourage company to formulate corporate strategy (taking
stakeholders’ interest into account), in which corporate strategy will influence corporate financial
performance (Indriawati, 2017). Tax avoidance is an example of strategies used by corporate management
in improving corporate profit. Institutional ownership should be able to prevent corporate management
from performing tax avoidance since it plays an important role in controlling and influencing managers, but
pressure from institutional parties not to fulfill its interest may cause corporate management to perform tax
avoidance to improve the profit. This research supports the research conducted by Mahdi & Fariba (2013)
that institutional ownership positively influences tax avoidance. Based on the explanation, this research
takes the following hypothesis:

H2: Institutional Ownership influences tax avoidance

Independent Commissioner Moderates Corporate Social Responsibility on Tax Avoidance

Independent Commissioner is part of Board of Commissioners derived from independent party
(unaffiliated to company). There is a tendency that the higher the ratio of independent commissioners, the

102
 B. F. Arianti/Journal of Accounting and Business Education, 4 (2), March 2020

lower the tax avoidance is performed by corporate management. Bapepam regulation requires the
proportion of independent commissioner of only 30%. The more the number of independent
commissioners, the higher its influence in supervision over management’s performance is. This supervision
may reduce any arising agency issues like management’s opportunistic attitude towards tax burden
reduction. With stronger supervision, management will more carefully make decision and transparently
operate the company, thus tax avoidance may be minimized for the company to maintain its survival.
The research conducted by Simorangkir et al., (2018) states that it is important for independent
commissioner to monitor corporate behaviors or attitudes and decisions in consideration of the needs of the
society and in compliance with prevailing regulations where company operates its business. Therefore,
independent commissioner must be able to monitor management’s attitudes, behaviors, decisions and acts
so that they will not perform any act which may threaten company’s legitimacy, such as tax aggressiveness.
This research supports the research conducted by Lanis & Richardson (2012) wjocj finds that board of
independent commissioners is able to reduce tax avoidance. Company which performs tax avoidance is
deemed socially irresponsible and in contrary to the Corporate Social Responsibility principle. Based on
the explanation, this research takes the following hypothesis:

H3: Independent commissioner may moderate the influence of corporate social responsibility on tax
avoidance

Independent Commissioner Moderates Institutional ownership on Tax Avoidance

Board of independent commissioner is member of commissioners derived from outside the
company and unaffiliated to controlling shareholder, member of directors and other board of commissioner
(Diantari & Ulupui, 2016). The agency theory states that the higher the number of board of independent
commissioners, the better they supervise and control executors’ acts and directors’ acts, with regard to
opportunistic behavior. Institutional Ownership will influence corporate management’s tax avoidance
policy. In case of the higher the concentration of institutional short-term shareholding, the higher the tax
avoidance is, but the higher the concentration of long-term shareholding, the more reduced the tax
avoidance policy is. On the contrary, bigger proportion of Independent Commissioner may improve
shareholder’s shareholders’ performance and wealth (Santoso & Muid, 2014). The existence of board of
independent commissioner strengthens correlation between institutional ownership and tax avoidance, thus
it may reduce tax avoidance performed by corporate management (Kholbadalov, 2012). Based on the
explanation, this research takes the following hypothesis:

H4: Independent commissioner may moderate the influence of institutional ownership on tax
avoidance

METHODS
This quantitative research employs a descriptive method. The research location is mining and
agricultural companies listed at the Indonesia Stock Exchange (BEI) in the period 2013 – 2017 (5 years)
obtained by accessing BEI website (www.idx.co.id). The research aims at testing the influence of CSR and
institutional ownership on tax avoidance with independent commissioner as the moderator. The population
is 66 mining and agricultural companies but not all of them are taken as the research objects in adaptation
to the sampling method, purposive sampling method, with 10 companies are meeting certain criteria
pursuant to the sampling method, which are:

103
 B. F. Arianti/Journal of Accounting and Business Education, 4 (2), March 2020

Table 2. Sampling Criteria

Criteria Samples meeting the criteria
Manufacturing companies registered at BEI 66
Companies which issues complete annual report from 2013-2017 (20)
Companies which have not suffer loss during observation (10)
Companies with annual report containing information (data) needed in the (26)
research
Total observation 10

In control of the influence of independent variable (CSR) on dependent variable (tax avoidance)
not to be influenced by any other non-studied factors and in control of the influence of moderating variable
(independent commissioner), this research employs each variable so as to strengthen the research model,
with an explanation that Tax Avoidance is any efforts performed to reduce tax burden with comparison
between tax burden and profit before tax as the indicator (Dyreng et al., 2017). Corporate Social
Responsibility is company’s commitment to participating in sustainable economic development in
improving the quality of life and environment beneficial to the company itself and the society with an
indicator that in case of CSR disclosure, the score is 1 and if otherwise, the score is 0 (Apriliyana, 2018;
Jessica, 2014). Institutional ownership is the number of shareholders from out of the company, particularly
institution, either financial or non-financial (Putra et al., 2018) with comparison between the amount of
institutional shares and the amount of issued shares as the indicator (Dewi & Jati, 2014; Diantri & Ulupui,
2016; Putra et al., 2018). Independent commissioner variable is defined as individual unaffiliated in any
regards to controlling shareholder, without affiliated relationship with directors or board of commissioners,
not assuming position as director of a company related to measurement instrument, which is comparison
between the number of independent commissioners and number of all members of board of commissioners
(Annisa & Kurniasih, 2012).
This research employs Moderate Regression Analysis (MRA) to analyze the data and an interaction
test instrument of special application of multiple linear regression, of which regression equation contains
interaction element (two or more multiplication of independent variable). The interaction test is conducted
by multiplying the variables hypothesized as moderating variable by the independent variable. One of the
characteristics to note in the calculation in regression analysis is the moderating effect or interaction effect,
which is the existing condition when a variable influences the form of relationship between other
independent variable and dependent variable (Sugiyono, 2016).

RESULTS
Hypothesis test is conducted using the Moderated Regression Analysis model or interaction test in
examining whether a variable taken as the moderation variable may strengthen or otherwise (weaken) the
relationship between independent variable and dependent variable. Below is the result of moderation test of
each variable.

104
 B. F. Arianti/Journal of Accounting and Business Education, 4 (2), March 2020

Table 3. Result of Moderated Regression Analysis Test

Unstandardized Standardized
Variable Sig
coefficient coefficient
B Beta
CSR 0.453 0.557 0.360
Institutional Ownership 1.206 2.154 0.025
Independent Commissioner 4.392 2.324 0.001
CSR* Independent 0.000 -1.165 0.201
Commissioner
IO* Independent Commissioner 0.000 -3.953 0.005

In the result of MRA on interaction above, the significance value of t test of CSR variable is 0.360.
This value is higher than 0.05, showing that CSR variable does not influence tax avoidance and
institutional ownership variable is 0.025. The value is lower than 0.05, showing that institutional ownership
variable influences tax avoidance. The interaction value test result shows that moderating variable X1*Z
has t count value of -1.298  t table 2.000 with significance level of 0.201, higher than 0.05. This means
that independent commissioner variable is moderation variable which weakens the relationship of CSR
variable with tax avoidance. Furthermore, X2*Z has t count of -2.924  t table 2.000 with significance
level of 0.005, lower than 0.05. This means that independent commissioner variable is moderation variable
which strengthens the relationship of institutional ownership variable with tax avoidance. The result may
be observed in the following table:

Table 3. Recapitulation of Data Analysis Result

Hypothesis Criteria Interpretation Conclusion
CSR 0.925  = 0.925  Hypothesis is CSR does not
2.000, Level over 5% rejected influence Tax
Avoidance
IO 2.313 ≥ = 2.313 ≥ Hypothesis is Institutional
2.000, Level 5% accepted ownership
influence tax
avoidance
CSR* Independent -1.298  = -1.298  Hypothesis is Independent
Commissioner 2.000, Level over 5% rejected commissioner
weakens the
influence of CSR
on tax avoidance
IO* Independent -2.924  = -2.924  Hypothesis is Independent
Commissioner 2.000, Level 5% accepted commissioner
strengthen the
influence of
institutional
ownership on tax
avoidance

DISCUSSION
CSR’s Influence on Tax Avoidance
The result of the first hypothesis test (H1) shows that CSR does not significantly influences tax
avoidance. The lower the CSR value, the lower the ETR value is, in which lower ETR value shows high tax
avoidance level. This explains that the lower a company performs CSR activity, the lower its responsibility
in performing its tax obligations is, or the lower a company’s CSR, the higher it performs tax avoidance.
CSR is the form of accountability to the society (environment, customer, employee, supplier and other

105
 B. F. Arianti/Journal of Accounting and Business Education, 4 (2), March 2020

community). Tax compliance is the form of taxpayer’s accountability to the government. CSR is negatively
correlated with tax compliance. Therefore, CSR is not inversely proportional to tax avoidance.
This research result supports the research conducted by Permata & Adiwibowo (2017), that
companies with socially irresponsible CSR activity has higher involvement in tax avoidance. Meanwhile,
other researches show that CSR variable does not significantly influences tax avoidance practice proxied
with ETR. Therefore, the first hypothesis is unacceptable (rejected) (H Lionita & Kusbandiyah, 2017;
Ayufa et al., 2018). This shows that the extent of CSR disclosure a company makes in its annual report
does not influence its tax avoidance practice, which means that in case CSR disclosure level is higher, the
company does not necessarily perform tax avoidance. In addition, CSR has become an obligation in some
companies and CSR application positively influences company, environment and surrounding society,
helping company smoothen its operational processes and free of any disturbance.

Institutional Ownership’s Influence on Tax Avoidance

The result of the second hypothesis test (H2) shows that institutional ownership significantly
influences tax avoidance. This research result conforms to the agency theory which explains there is
relationship between shareholders (principal) and managers (agent), in correlation with tax avoidance’s
influence on institutional ownership, when the relationship between shareholders and managers in a
company is good, the company will not perform tax avoidance. On the contrary, when there is bad
relationship in the company or there is asymmetry of information between shareholders and managers, it
will cause tax avoidance act. This research result conforms to the research conducted by Prasetyo &
Bambang (2018), that institutional ownership influences tax avoidance. In addition, the research conducted
by Meila (2018) shows that institutional ownership influences tax avoidance, which means that institutional
ownership is important in improving and optimizing supervision, since it is deemed able to control any
decision made by managers effectively. With higher institutional ownership, the better the supervision over
manager is and it may reduce conflict of interest between the management, thus agency issue is reduced,
and reduce the chance of tax avoidance or the higher the institutional ownership, the stronger the control of
external party over the company is, allowing tax avoidance practice.

Independent Commissioner Weakens Corporate Social Responsibility on Tax Avoidance

The result of the third hypothesis test (H3) may be concluded that board of independent
commissioner cannot moderate or weaken CSR’s influence on tax avoidance. Board of independent
commissioner is derived from out of the management, thus board of independent commissioner tends not to
be influenced by management’s act, but they tend to encourage corporate management to disclose wider
information to shareholders and stakeholders. Board of independent commissioner plays a role in
supervising management’s act in CSR disclosure. With board of commissioner’s supervision, CSR
disclosure may be improved appropriately without certain purpose to be achieved by the management. This
research supports the research conducted by Christina et al., (2019), that independent commissioner cannot
moderate the relationship between Corporate Social Responsibility and Tax Avoidance, which means that
when independent commissioner finds improved CSR disclosure, tax avoidance practice will be reduced,
thus bigger proportion of commissioners in company may prevent tax avoidance practice.

Independent Commissioner Strengthen Institutional Ownership’s Influence on Tax Avoidance

The result of the fourth hypothesis test (H4) may be concluded that independent commissioner may
strengthen institutional ownership’s influence on tax avoidance. This hypothesis supports the agency
theory, that institutional ownership has the capability to monitor the management effectively, as shown
with the amount of shares owned by institutional investor, which encourages the management to focus their
concern more on corporate performance, reducing opportunistic behavior and selfish behavior (Oktaviani,
2019). In case shareholding cannot become a monitoring mechanism over corporate managers, causing it
unable to reduce the management’s opportunistic behavior, it is likely that the institutional party does not
perform its supervisory duty well. Board of independent commissioner is a part derived from out of the
management, board of commissioners tends not to be influenced by management’s act, but they tend to

106
 B. F. Arianti/Journal of Accounting and Business Education, 4 (2), March 2020

encourage corporate management to disclose CSR more widely to shareholders (Prasetyo & Bambang,
2018). The existence of board of independent commissioner may reduce tax avoidance practice and is
expected to strengthen the relationship between institutional ownership and tax avoidance which will thus
reduce tax avoidance act by the management. Therefore, it is likely that institutional party’s supervision in
prevention of tax avoidance does not run well as expected, since institutional ownership is of shares of
minority.

CONCLUSION
Based on the result of data analysis and discussion as described above, we may conclude that CSR
does not influence tax avoidance. The second hypothesis shows that institutional ownership influences tax
avoidance. Furthermore, independent commissioner weakens CSR’s influence on tax avoidance and
independent commissioner may strengthen institutional ownership’s influence on tax avoidance. This
research is still bound by limitation and needs development in further research, that this research only
employs 4 variables, namely CSR, institutional ownership, independent commissioner and tax avoidance
variables, is conducted in a limited period from 2013-2017 and is only conducted with companies operating
in manufacturing sector only. Besides, the tax rate of each of sample companies is not known, thus the
researcher cannot categorize whether or not the sample companies perform tax avoidance. In addition, CSR
disclosure is also not classified based on indicator group. Further research is expected to take longer period
and classify CSR disclosure based on indicator group, thus it may identify which indicator group
dominantly reduces tax avoidance. In consideration of some existing limitations, the research suggests
further research to add other variables to detect company’s tax avoidance activity, such as audit quality,
GCG mechanism and others and add other measurement model approach to proxy tax avoidance act
measurement to strengthen further research’s findings. Based on the research result, the research
implication is that it has social impact of examining the importance of tax payment and is expected to
enhance the society’s willingness, especially related parties, to pay their tax in the appropriate amount,
which will have impact on Indonesia’s economy. In economic perspective, the research impact is that it
discusses tax, especially tax avoidance which causes tax receipt to never reach target rate. With this
research, the society is expected to be aware of the importance of tax payment, especially big parties, so
that they will not perform such act, for Indonesia’s stable economy and its improvement and achieved
target, since tax is the biggest support of the state revenue used for the development and the people’s
welfare.

REFERENCES

Agustina, Tika Nur, & Mochammad Abdul Aris (2016). Tax Avoidance : Faktor-Faktor Yang
Mempengaruhinya (Studi Empiris Perusahaan Manufaktur Yang Terdaftar Di Bursa Efek Indonesia
Periode 2012-2015 ), Seminar Nasional Dan The 4th Call for Syariah Paper, 295–307
Amalia, Firda Ayu. (2019). Pegungkapan Corporate Social responsibility (CSR) Dan Penghindaran Pajak :
Kepemilikan Insitusional Sebagi Variabel Moderasi. JURNAL AKUNTANSI & EKONOMI FE. UN
PGRI Kediri, ISSN: 2541-0180, 4 (2) : 14 - 23
Annisa, Nuralifmida Ayu. (2012). Pengaruh Corporate Governance Terhadap Tax Avoidance. Jurnal
Akuntansi & Auditing, 8 (2): 95-189
Aini, Nurul, & Soegeng Sutejo. (2017). The Role of Corporate Social Responsibility in Mediating the
Effects of Foreign Operation on Tax Aggressiveness. International Journal of Scientific and
Research Publications, 7 (12) : 200–209
Apriliyana, Nining, & Trisni Suryarini. (2018). Accounting Analysis Journal The Effect Of Corporate

107
 B. F. Arianti/Journal of Accounting and Business Education, 4 (2), March 2020

Governance and the Quality of CSR to Tax Avoidation. Accounting Analysis Journal, 7 (3) : 159–67
<https://doi.org/10.15294/aaj.v7i3.20052>
Ayufa, Della, M. Rafki Nazar, & Djusnimar Zultilisna. (2018). Pengaruh Leverage, Corporate Social
Responsibility (CST), Dan Ukuran Perusahaan Terhadap Tax Avoidance (Studi Empiris Perusahaan
Sektor Pertambangan Yang Terdaftar Di Bursa Efek Indonesia (Bei) Tahun 2011-2016). Kajian
Akuntansi, 19 (1) : 104–110.
Bachtiar, Mohammad, Danu. (2015). Pengaruh Struktur Kepemilikan, Ukuran Perusahaan Dan Capital
Intensity Terhadap Effective Tax Rate (ETR). Fakultas Ekonomika dan Bisnis Universitas
Diponegoro, 1–52
Budhi, Nyoman, Setya Dharma, & Naniek, Noviari. (2017). Pengaruh Corporate Social Responsibility Dan
Capital Intensity Terhadap Tax Avoidance. E-Jurnal Akuntansi Universitas Udayana, 18 (1) : 529–
56
Christina, Amelia, Yana Ulfah, & Zaki Fakhroni. (2018). Corporate Social Responsibility , Leverage Dan
Tax Avoidance : Efek Moderasi Komisaris Independen Corporate Social Responsibility , Leverage
and Tax Avoidance : The Effect of Moderation of Independent Commissioners. Seminar Nasional
Fakultas Ekonomi dan Bisnis Universitas Mulawarman
Diantari, Putu, & IGK Ulupui. (2016). Pengaruh Komite Audit, Proporsi Komisaris Independen, Dan
Proporsi Kepemilikan Institusional Terhadap Tax Avoidance. E-Jurnal Akuntansi, 16 (1) : 702–32
Dyreng, Scott, Martin Jacob, Xu Jiang, & Maximilian A. MMller. (2017). Tax Avoidance and Tax
Incidence. SSRN Electronic Journal, <https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3070239>
Gulzar, M. A., Jacob Cherian, Muhammad Safdar Sial, Alina Badulescu, Phung Anh Thu, Daniel
Badulescu, & others. (2018). Does Corporate Social Responsibility Influence Corporate Tax
Avoidance of Chinese Listed Companies?. Sustainability (Switzerland), 10 (12)
<https://doi.org/10.3390/su10124549>
H, Lionita Adinda & Ani Kusbandiyah. (2017). Pengaruh Corporate Social Responsibility, Profitabilitas,
Leverage Dan Komisaris Independen Terhadap Praktik Penghindaran Pajak Pada Perusahaan Yang
Terdaftar Di BEI. Kompartemen XV (1) :1–11.
Hidayat, Kholid, Arles P Ompusunggu, H Suratno. (2016). Pengaruh Corporate Social Responsibility
Terhadap Agresivitas Pajak Dengan Insentif Pajak Sebagai Pemoderasi. Jurnal Ilmiah Akuntansi, 2
(2) : 39–58
Indriawati, Welly Florentia. (2017). Pengaruh Dewan Komisaris Independen, Komite Audit, Kepemilikan
Institusional Dan Ukuran Perusahaan Terhadap Penghindaran Pajak Dengan Profitabilitas Sebagai
Variabel Moderating. Skripsi, 1–81
Jamei, Reza. (2017). Intellectual Capital and Corporate Governance Mechanisms: Evidence from Tehran
Stock Exchange. International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, 7 (5) : 86–92
Jessica & Agus Arianto Toly. (2014). Pengaruh Pengungkapan Corporate Social Responsibilty Terhadap
Agresivitas Pajak. Tax & Accounting Review, 4 (1) : 222
Kholbadalov, Utkir. (2012). The Relationship of Corporate Tax Avoidance, Cost of Debt and Institutional
Ownership: Evidence from Malaysia, 2 (1) :1–1.
Lanis, Roman, & Grant Richardson. (2012). Corporate Social Responsibility and Tax Aggressiveness: An
Empirical Analysis. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 31 (1) : 86–108
<https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2011.10.006>
Laily, Nur. (2012). Pengaruh Kepemilikan Insititusional, Proposi Dewan Komisaris, Leverage, Ukuran
Perusahaan, Dan Return On Asset Terhadap Penghindaran Pajak Pada Perusahaan Manufaktur’,

108
 B. F. Arianti/Journal of Accounting and Business Education, 4 (2), March 2020

Artikel Ilmiah, 1–17

Lin, Kenny Z., Suwina Cheng, & Fang Zhang. (2017). Corporate Social Responsibility, Institutional
Environments, and Tax Avoidance: Evidence from a Subnational Comparison in China.
International Journal of Accounting, 52 (4) : 303–18 <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intacc.2017.11.002>
Mahdi, M., & Fariba, K. (2013). An Investigation On Impact Of Institutional Ownership and Company
Proprietorship On Tax Aggresive Policy. Journal of American Sciences, 9 (5) : 54 - 60.
Maraya, Amila Dyan, & Reni Yendrawati. (2016). Pengaruh Corporate Governance Dan Corporate Social
Responsibility Disclosure Terhadap Tax Avoidance: Studi Empiris Pada Perusahaan Tambang Dan
CPO. Jurnal Akuntansi & Auditing Indonesia, 20 (2) : 147–59
<https://doi.org/10.20885/jaai.vol20.iss2.art7>
Meila Sari, Heidy Paramitha Devi. (2013). Pengaruh Corporate Governance Dan Karakteristik Eksekutif
Terhadap Tax Avoidance. Jurnal Akuntansi Universitas Telkom, 2 (3) : 17–25
Muzakki, Muadz Rizki. (2015). Pengaruh Corporate Social Responsibility Dan Capital Intensity Terhadap
Penghindaran Pajak. Diponegoro Journal Of Accounting, 4 : 1–8
Ngadiman, & Christiany Puspitasari. (2017). Pengaruh Leverage, Kepemilikan Institusional, Dan Ukuran
Perusahaan Terhadap Penghindaran Pajak (Tax Avoidance) Pada Perusahaan Sektor Manufaktur
Yang Terdaftar Di Bursa Efek Indonesia 2010-2012. Jurnal Akuntansi, 18 (3) : 408–421
<https://doi.org/10.24912/ja.v18i3.273>
Ningrum, Aprilian Kusuma, Eny Suprapti, & Achmad Syaiful Hidayat Anwar. (2018). Pengaruh
Pengungkapan Corporate Social Responsibility Terhadap Tax Avoidance Dengan Gender Sebagai
Variabel Moderasi (Studi Empiris Pada Perusahaan Manufaktur Yang Terdaftar Di Bursa Efek
Indonesia Tahun 2016). BALANCE : Economic, Business, Management and Accounting Journal, 15
(01), <https://doi.org/10.30651/blc.v15i01.1260>
Dewi, Kristiana Ni Nyoman, & I Ketut Jati. (2014). Pengaruh Karakter Eksekutif Karakteristik Perusahaan,
Dan Dimensi Tata Kelola Yang Baik Pada Tax Avoidance. E-Jurnal Akuntansi Udayana, 6 (2) :
249–60
Oktaviani, Dwi. (2019). Peran Kepemilikan Institusional Dalam Memoderasi Faktor - Faktor Yang
Mempengaruhi Tax Avoidance. Akuntansi Dewantara, 3 (2) : 169–78.
Putra, Pasca Dwi, Dedy Husrizal Syah, & Baginda Halim Simatupang. (2019). Institutional Ownership and
Tax Avoidance : A Review Agency Theory, <https://doi.org/10.4108/eai.18-10-2018.2287316>
Permata Sari, Lie Liana. (2017). Pengaruh Corporate Social Responsibility Terhadap Penghindaran Pajak
Perusahaan. Diponegoro Journal of Accounting, 6 (4) : 11–23.
Purnomo, Karin & Luky Patricia Widianingsih. (2012). The Influence of Environmental Performance on
Financial Performance with Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Disclosure as a Moderating
Variable: Evidence from Listed Companies in Indonesia’, Review of Intergrative Business and
Economics, 1 (1) : 57–69
Prasetyo, Irwan, & Bambang, Agus Pramuka. (2013). Pengaruh Kepemilikan Institusional, Kepemilikan
Manajerial Dan Proporsi Dewan Komisaris Independen Terhadap’, Jurnal Universitas Jenderal
Soedirman, 20.(2) : 1–15
Sandy, Syeldila, & Niki Lukviarman. (2015). Pengaruh Corporate Governance Terhadap Tax Avoidance:
Studi Empiris Pada Perusahaan Manufaktur. Jurnal Akuntansi & Auditing Indonesia, 19 (2) : 85–98,
<https://doi.org/10.20885/jaai.vol19.iss2.art1>
Santoso, T. B., & Muid, D. (2014). Pengaruh Corporate Governance Terhadap Penghindaran Pajak
Perusahaan. Diponegoro Journal of Accounting, 3 (4) : 1–12

109
 B. F. Arianti/Journal of Accounting and Business Education, 4 (2), March 2020

Simorangkir, Yanti Nova Lita, Bambang Subroto, & Wuryan Andayani. (2018). Pengaruh Corporate Social
Responsibility Dan Komisaris Independen Terhadap Agresivitas Pajak. Jurnal Manajemen Dan
Kewirausahaan, 6 (2) : 225–39, <https://doi.org/10.26905/jmdk.v6i2.2277>
Sugiyono. (2016). Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitatif danR & D. Bandung: Alfabeta.

110