Adoption of AI-Based Tax Filing Systems among Indian Taxpayers

The growing integration of artificial intelligence (AI) in public sector governance has significantly transformed tax administration by enhancing efficiency, accuracy, and taxpayer engagement. In India, the adoption of AI based tax filing systems marks a shift toward automated, data-driven compliance mechanisms aimed at reducing errors and administrative burden. However, taxpayer acceptance of such systems depends on multiple technological and behavioral factors. This study examines the determinants influencing the adoption of AI-based tax filing systems among Indian taxpayers using an extended Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) framework.
A quantitative, cross-sectional research design was employed, with primary data collected from 300 Indian taxpayers through a structured questionnaire. Key constructs analyzed include performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, facilitating conditions, and trust in AI-based tax systems, with behavioral intention as the dependent variable. Data analysis was conducted using SPSS and AMOS, applying reliability analysis, exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, and structural equation modeling.
The results indicate that performance expectancy and trust in AI systems are the most significant predictors of behavioral intention, followed by facilitating conditions and effort expectancy. Social influence also shows a positive but comparatively weaker effect. The proposed model explains 68 percent of the variance in behavioral intention. The study highlights that effective implementation of AI-based tax filing systems requires not only technological sophistication but also institutional trust, transparency, and digital readiness. The findings offer valuable implications for policymakers and tax authorities in designing inclusive, citizen-centric AI-enabled tax governance frameworks.

AI-Based Tax Filing, E-Governance, Technology Adoption, TAUT, Trust in AI, Indian Taxpayers, Behavioral Intention.

1. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Alalwan, A. A., Dwivedi, Y. K., Rana, N. P., & Williams, M. D. (2016). Consumer adoption of mobile banking in Jordan: Examining the role of usefulness, ease of use, perceived risk, and trust. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 29(1), 118–139. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEIM-04-2015-0035 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Belanche, D., Casaló, L. V., & Flavián, C. (2019). Artificial intelligence in public services: Citizens’ perceptions and trust. Government Information Quarterly, 36(4), 101395. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2019.101395 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Carter, L., & Bélanger, F. (2005). The utilization of e‐government services: Citizen trust, innovation, and acceptance factors. Information Systems Journal, 15(1), 5–25. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.13652575.2005.00183.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Dwivedi, Y. K., Hughes, L., Ismagilova, E., Aarts, G., Coombs, C., Crick, T., … Williams, M. D. (2021). Artificial intelligence (AI): Multidisciplinary perspectives on emerging challenges, opportunities, and agenda for research, practice, and policy. International Journal of Information Management, 57, 101994. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.08.002 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Floridi, L., Cowls, J., Beltrametti, M., Chatila, R., Chazerand, P., Dignum, V., Vayena, E. (2018). AI4People—An ethical framework for a good AI society. Minds and Machines, 28(4), 689–707. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-018-9482-5 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Glikson, E., & Woolley, A. W. (2020). Human trust in artificial intelligence: Review of empirical research. Academy of Management Annals, 14(2), 627–660. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2018.0057 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Heeks, R. (2006). Implementing and managing e-government: An international text. Sage Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Kassen, M. (2018). Understanding transparency of government from a Nordic perspective: Open government and open data movement as a multidimensional collaborative phenomenon in Sweden. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Journal of Global Information Technology Management, 21(4), 236–275. https://doi.org/10.1080/1097198X.2018.1548698 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. OECD. (2020). Tax administration 3.0: The digital transformation of tax administration. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264300264-en [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Raisch, S., & Krakowski, S. (2021). Artificial intelligence and management: The automation– [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. augmentation paradox. Academy of Management Review, 46(1), 192–210. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2018.0072 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Siau, K., & Wang, W. (2018). Building trust in artificial intelligence, machine learning, and robotics. Cutting-Edge Technologies and Social Challenges, 15–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74718-1_2 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. L., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157–178. https://doi.org/10.2307/41410412 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. World Bank. (2020). GovTech maturity index: The state of public sector digital transformation. World Bank Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• What the Desert Fathers Teach Data Scientists: Ancient Ascetic Principles for Ethical Machine-Learning Practice
• Comparative Analysis of Some Machine Learning Algorithms for the Classification of Ransomware
• Comparative Performance Analysis of Some Priority Queue Variants in Dijkstra’s Algorithm
• Transfer Learning in Detecting E-Assessment Malpractice from a Proctored Video Recordings.
• Dual-Modal Detection of Parkinson’s Disease: A Clinical Framework and Deep Learning Approach Using NeuroParkNet