Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This study examined the impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on tax compliance of listed manufacturing companies in Nigeria. Drawing on panel data from 34 firms over a multi-year period, the study decomposes AI technological intensity into AI-enabled ICT intensity, AI software intensity, and AI capital investment, while controlling for firm size. The analysis used fixed effects (FE), random effects (RE), and two-step difference generalised method of moments (GMM) to account for unobserved heterogeneity, simultaneity, and dynamic endogeneity. The study revealed that AI software intensity had a coefficient of -1.6129 with a p-value of 0.622, indicating an insignificant negative relationship. The coefficient for AI capital investment is positive at 0.5511, but statistically insignificant (p = 0.340), and AI ICT intensity has a negative coefficient of -5.7525 with a p-value of 0.213, suggesting a non-significant inverse relationship between AI-enabled ICT deployment and tax compliance at the 5% level, thereby concluding that AI technology had no statistically significant effects on corporate tax compliance. The study revealed that tax compliance is not driven by technological investment in artificial intelligence infrastructure, software deployment, and AI-related capital assets. The study recommended placing greater emphasis on strengthening audit monitoring, tax enforcement, and transparent reporting obligations
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Adeusi et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: