Developing a Proposed Model of Professional Judgment among Tax Auditors in Iran

Saeed  Akbari; Rezvan Hejazi; Iraj  Noravesh

Authors

Saeed Akbari Ph.D. Student, Department of Accounting, Kish International Campus, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran Author https://orcid.org/0009-0006-6822-4918
Rezvan Hejazi Professor, Department of Accounting and Auditing, Faculty of Management and Financial Sciences, Khatam University, Tehran, Iran https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0626-8457
Iraj Noravesh Professor, Department of Accounting, Faculty of Management and Accounting, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran Author https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6157-2980

Keywords:

Professional Judgment, Tax Auditing, Grounded Theory, Accountability, Tax Fairness, Technology Governance

Abstract

The objective of this study was to develop a model of professional judgment among tax auditors in Iran. The study was applied in terms of purpose and qualitative in nature and was conducted using a systematic grounded theory approach. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with 13 tax auditors, managers, tax adjudication experts, tax consultants, and academics and were analyzed through open, axial, and selective coding. Purposive, snowball, and theoretical sampling continued until theoretical saturation was achieved. Data analysis resulted in the extraction of 108 open codes, 18 conceptual clusters, and 16 axial categories. The core category was identified as “institutionalizing accountable professional judgment to transform law and evidence into fair and defensible tax assessments.” The findings indicated that auditor competencies and case characteristics shape both the capacity for and necessity of professional judgment, while legal, organizational, technological, and professional conditions, along with cognitive biases, influence its exercise. Decision structuring, multisource evidence evaluation, documentation, consultation, independent review, and technology governance enhance accuracy, defensibility, fairness, and trust in the tax system.

References

[1] R. Mala and P. Chand, "Judgment and Decision-Making Research in Auditing and Accounting: Future Research Implications of Person, Task, and Environment Perspective," Accounting Perspectives, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 1-50, 2015, doi: 10.1111/1911-3838.12040.

[2] S. A. Hosseini and N. Rasouli, "Professional Judgment in Auditing and Its Measurement: Concepts, Theories, and Theoretical Perspectives," Management Accounting and Auditing Knowledge, vol. 8, no. 31, pp. 155-168, 2019.

[3] M. Shahbazi and K. Mehrani, "Developing a Professional Judgment Model for Independent Auditors," Accounting and Auditing Review, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 60-86, 2020.

[4] M. Ebrahimi, M. R. Vatanparast, F. Rezaei, and F. Mohammadi Nodeh, "Factors Affecting Tax Auditors' Bias in Professional Judgments," Accounting and Auditing Review, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 181-205, 2021.

[5] N. C. Goldman, M. K. Harris, and T. C. Omer, "Does Task-Specific Knowledge Improve Audit Quality? Evidence from Audits of Income Tax Accounts," Accounting, Organizations and Society, vol. 99, p. 101320, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.aos.2021.101320.

[6] M. A. Siglé, S. Muehlbacher, L. E. C. J. M. van der Hel, and E. Kirchler, "Tax Audit Quality: The Role of Experience and Technology Readiness in a Digital World," Journal of Tax Administration, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 7-39, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://jota.website/jota/article/view/170.

[7] A. International and B. Assurance Standards, "How the IAASB's Revised Going Concern and Fraud Standards Reinforce Professional Skepticism," 2025. [Online]. Available: https://www.iaasb.org/publications/how-iaasb-s-revised-going-concern-and-fraud-standards-reinforce-professional-skepticism.

[8] K. Hardies, S. Janssen, A. Vanstraelen, and K. M. Zehms, "Using Field-Based Evidence to Understand the Antecedents to Auditors' Skeptical Actions," Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 105-135, 2025, doi: 10.2308/AJPT-2021-141.

[9] R. Adikaram and J. Higgs, "Cognitive Dissonance and Auditor Professional Skepticism," Managerial Auditing Journal, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 71-110, 2024, doi: 10.1108/MAJ-08-2022-3653.

[10] J. S. B. T. Evans and K. E. Stanovich, "Dual-Process Theories of Higher Cognition: Advancing the Debate," Perspectives on Psychological Science, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 223-241, 2013, doi: 10.1177/1745691612460685.

[11] D. R. Lombardi, J. C. Sipior, and S. J. Dannemiller, "Auditor Judgment Bias Research: A 50-Year Trend Analysis and Emerging Technology Use," Journal of Information Systems, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 109-141, 2023, doi: 10.2308/ISYS-2020-079.

[12] J. M. Vinson, B. J. Pike, L. Chui, and M. Zhou, "The Influence of Audit Evidence Framing on Auditors' Judgment," Behavioral Research in Accounting, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 105-120, 2024, doi: 10.2308/BRIA-2020-055.

[13] N. Muñoz-Izquierdo, M. D. M. Camacho-Miñano, M. P. Sánchez-Martín, and D. Pascual-Ezama, "Is Auditor Financial Decision-Making Affected by Prior Audit Report Information? A Behavioral Approach," Heliyon, vol. 10, no. 10, p. e30971, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e30971.

[14] A. M. Rose, J. M. Rose, K. Rotaru, I. Suh, J. C. Thibodeau, and A. K. D. Schulz, "Can Thinking about Alternative Explanations Promote Professional Skepticism?," Accounting Horizons, vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 191-206, 2024, doi: 10.2308/HORIZONS-2021-092.

[15] N. H. Khalid, Z. M. Sanusi, M. M. Rafidi, N. A. Shafie, and S. M. Roni, "Tax Officers' Scepticism and Professional Judgment: The Mediation of Client Fraud Indicators Intensity," European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences, vol. 131, pp. 739-754, 2023, doi: 10.15405/epsbs.2023.11.62.

[16] Ciat, F. International Monetary, Iota, and Oecd, "VITARA Reference Guide: The Audit Program," International Monetary Fund, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://www.imf.org/en/publications/manuals-guides/issues/2025/01/28/vitara-reference-guide-the-audit-program-555888

[17] L. Liao, D. S. Sharma, V. D. Sharma, and M. K. Singh, "The Role of IT Infrastructure in Remote Audits: Evidence from Audits Completed during the Pandemic," Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, vol. 45, no. 2, pp. 121-150, 2026, doi: 10.2308/AJPT-2023-064.

[18] S. E. Bibler, "Auditor Judgments and Decisions in the Digital Era: The Role of Mindset, Medium, and Mode," Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.5463/thesis.1526

[19] A. Azimi, F. Rezaei, and M. A. Zakizadeh, "Presenting a Professional Judgment Model for Tax Auditors Using a Grounded Theory Approach," Tax Research Journal, vol. 32, no. 63, pp. 220-256, 2024.

[20] M. Q. Patton, Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods: Integrating Theory and Practice, 4 ed. Sage, 2015.