Do impartial tax law experts exist? Legal academics’ restricted autonomy in a crowded field of experts

In tax policy, expert advice abounds, often aligned with either state or market interests – but can there be impartial experts in tax law, and can academics play that role? Drawing on the sociology of expertise and domination, we examine the practices, valuation, and institutional autonomy of Norwegian tax law academics. We find no clear distinction between academics and other professionals in knowledge production or arenas of influence, and limited institutional support for autonomy. However, an analysis of expert statements in the debate on the ‘exit tax’ reform reveals diverse academic arguments and no systematic alignment with one type of interests, which indicate that the academic field is not uniformly dominated by either the state or the market. We propose that boundary blurring and maintenance by actors across the state, the market, and academia legitimize an expert discourse that serves academics and state and market actors alike.