Policy Statement

Journal of Tax Policy, Economics, and Accounting (TAXPEDIA), published by MUC Tax Research Institute, is committed to maintaining the accuracy, reliability, transparency, and ethical integrity of published scholarly research.

The journal establishes clear procedures for Retraction, Correction, Withdrawal, and Expressions of Concern to address significant errors, unreliable findings, ethical violations, and other concerns affecting manuscripts or published articles.

Editorial action is guided by evidence, proportionality, procedural fairness, transparency, and internationally recognized publication-ethics principles, including the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Retraction Guidelines.

This policy applies to manuscripts submitted to TAXPEDIA and articles published through its official journal platform. The objectives of this policy are to:

• Protect the validity and reliability of published scientific findings.
• Correct material errors in the scholarly record.
• Establish procedures for manuscript withdrawal before publication.
• Provide a transparent mechanism for addressing serious publication-integrity concerns.
• Ensure that readers are informed of relevant corrections, retractions, or Expressions of Concern.
• Maintain accurate publication records and related bibliographic metadata.
• Protect the legitimate rights and interests of authors, readers, reviewers, and the publisher.

The primary purpose of retraction is to correct the scholarly record and protect academic integrity, not to punish authors. Honest errors and substantiated misconduct must be distinguished accurately.

A retraction is a formal editorial notice indicating that a published scholarly article is materially unreliable or has other serious defects justifying its retraction. Retraction may be considered in the following circumstances:

A correction is appropriate when a published article contains an error that can be rectified without invalidating its principal findings or overall scholarly conclusions. Corrections may address:

• Incorrect numerical values, calculations, or statistical descriptions.
• Errors in tables, figures, graphs, or supporting explanations.
• Incorrect citations, quotations, references, or bibliographic information.
• Errors in legal or regulatory references that do not invalidate the central analysis.
• Incorrect author names, affiliations, or contribution statements.
• Incomplete funding information or competing-interest declarations.
• Significant editorial or production errors.
• Methodological descriptions requiring clarification.

A formal correction may be designated an Erratum or Corrigendum in accordance with the journal's editorial practice.

A correction notice should identify the original article, explain the error, provide the corrected information, and indicate whether the scientific conclusions are affected.

Withdrawal refers to discontinuing the editorial consideration or production of a manuscript before it has been formally published. An author may request manuscript withdrawal for legitimate reasons, including:

• Discovery of substantial errors before publication.
• Unresolved authorship or research-integrity concerns.
• The authors' collective decision to discontinue submission.
• Other justified circumstances affecting continuation of the publication process.

Withdrawal Request Requirements A request should include:

1. The manuscript title and OJS submission identification.
2. The corresponding author's full name and contact details.
3. A written explanation of the withdrawal request.
4. Confirmation that the co-authors have agreed to the withdrawal, where applicable.
5. Any relevant supporting documentation.

The Editorial Office reviews the request and records the outcome in the manuscript management system. The journal may retain confidential editorial records required for ethical accountability and administrative purposes.

The Editorial Team may discontinue consideration of an unpublished manuscript when it becomes evident that the manuscript cannot proceed under the journal's editorial or ethical requirements. Such circumstances may include:

• Verified simultaneous submission or serious redundant publication.
• Significant plagiarism or research-integrity concerns.
• Misleading or fraudulent authorship information.
• Material failure to comply with ethical or legal obligations.
• Unresolved concerns that make continuation of editorial processing inappropriate.

Where appropriate, the authors should be informed and given an opportunity to clarify the circumstances. Administrative returns, ordinary editorial rejection, author-requested withdrawal, and termination due to misconduct should be distinguished in the journal's records.

An Expression of Concern is a public editorial notice issued when serious questions about a published article remain unresolved. It may be appropriate when:

• Substantial concerns exist regarding the reliability of published findings.
• Evidence of possible research misconduct is inconclusive.
• An institutional or editorial investigation is ongoing.
• Significant concerns require readers to be informed before a final determination is available.

The notice should identify the affected article, describe the concerns objectively, and explain the unresolved status without treating unverified allegations as established facts. An Expression of Concern should be reviewed when new material evidence or institutional findings become available. The journal may subsequently withdraw the notice, publish a correction, or retract the article as warranted.

Concerns may be submitted by authors, editors, reviewers, readers, academic institutions, research organizations, or other parties possessing relevant information. A report should contain:

• The article or manuscript title.
• The author names and relevant publication details.
• The DOI or permanent article URL, where available.
• A clear explanation of the concern.
• Supporting evidence, relevant documents, or verifiable references.
• Contact information for possible follow-up, where appropriate.

Reports should be submitted through the journal's official Editorial Office. Anonymous allegations may be assessed when they contain sufficiently credible and verifiable evidence.

TAXPEDIA applies an evidence-based procedure for considering possible correction, withdrawal, Expression of Concern, or retraction.

Formal post-publication notices must be clear, accessible, accurate, and identifiable. A notice should include:

1. The notice type: Retraction, Correction, or Expression of Concern.
2. The original article title and author names.
3. The original publication year, volume, issue, and relevant bibliographic details.
4. The DOI or permanent URL of the affected article.
5. A clear statement of the relevant error, concern, or reason for editorial action.
6. Identification of the issuing editorial authority or relevant party.
7. The notice publication date.
8. An accessible link to the original publication.

The notice should distinguish between honest error, established misconduct, and unresolved allegations. The wording must be factual and proportionate, avoid unnecessary personal accusations, and make clear which aspects of the publication are affected.

Retracted articles should ordinarily remain accessible as part of the scholarly record, accompanied by a prominent notice of their retracted status. Where technically feasible, TAXPEDIA should:

• Display a clear retraction label on the article landing page.
• Link the original article and the retraction notice in both directions.
• Mark the published PDF or other full-text versions as retracted.
• Maintain the article's bibliographic record and DOI.
• Clearly distinguish retracted material from valid published research.
• Update relevant publication metadata and indexing records where supported.

Retraction does not ordinarily require deletion of the original article. Preserving a clearly marked record helps readers recognize its status and prevents misleading scholarly use.

Removal or restriction of a published article's full text is an exceptional measure and must be distinguished from ordinary retraction. Such action may be considered when there are compelling circumstances involving:

• Applicable legal obligations or court orders.
• Serious threats to personal safety.
• Unauthorized disclosure of highly sensitive personal or confidential taxpayer information.
• Substantial privacy or intellectual property violations requiring content restriction.
• Other exceptional circumstances supported by adequate legal or ethical justification.

Where legally permissible, the journal should preserve the article's bibliographic identification and publish an explanatory notice indicating the reason for the access restriction or removal. Published articles must not be silently deleted merely to avoid criticism or obscure editorial problems.

When a formal post-publication action is issued, TAXPEDIA should ensure that the article's status is accurately represented across its available publication infrastructure. Where supported by OJS, Crossref, and relevant metadata services, the journal should:

• Publish a dedicated correction, retraction, or Expression of Concern notice.
• Provide links between the notice and original article.
• Register or update relevant DOI relationships and publication status metadata.
• Reflect the article's current status on its OJS landing page.
• Maintain clear labeling in available full-text formats.
• Communicate relevant status changes to indexing and archiving services.
• Preserve accurate article identification and historical publication information.

The original DOI should remain associated with its published scholarly record and must not be reassigned to unrelated content. Consistent metadata allows readers and bibliographic systems to recognize a correction or retraction without relying solely on a separately published notice.

Editorial actions under this policy must be based on the available evidence and the potential impact on the reliability of the scholarly record. The Editor-in-Chief or another authorized independent editor is responsible for determining appropriate editorial measures. Editors with relevant conflicts of interest must not independently adjudicate cases in which they are involved. The publisher supports necessary administration, technical implementation, correspondence, and the maintenance of publication records without improperly influencing scholarly judgments. When a concern extends beyond the journal's investigative authority, the Editorial Team may refer the matter to relevant institutions or competent authorities.

Authors should ordinarily receive an opportunity to respond to serious concerns before a final editorial decision is made. Authors may provide:

• Clarification of the disputed findings or procedures.
• Relevant original data, research records, or supporting evidence.
• Corrected calculations, source documents, or methodological explanations.
• Information concerning possible honest error or misunderstandings.
• Other evidence relevant to the editorial assessment.

The journal may proceed with a justified correction or retraction when reliable evidence establishes that the scholarly record requires action, even where author agreement cannot be obtained. Affected parties may submit a reasoned complaint or appeal based on material new evidence, procedural irregularity, or a potential conflict of interest.

The Editorial Team must handle sensitive allegations and supporting materials with appropriate confidentiality. Relevant records should be maintained, including:

• Reports and supporting evidence.
• Author explanations and relevant correspondence.
• Independent assessments or institutional findings.
• Editorial deliberations and decisions.
• Formal notices and publication dates.
• Relevant OJS and DOI metadata updates.

Concerns should be addressed without unnecessary delay, while allowing adequate time for evidence gathering and fair consideration. Where serious unresolved issues may mislead readers, the journal may consider issuing an Expression of Concern while an investigation is continuing.

This RCW Policy is informed by international guidance on responsible scholarly publishing and communication of post-publication changes.

Reference to COPE, NISO, and Crossref guidance does not imply that TAXPEDIA is a member of, accredited by, or formally endorsed by these organizations.

Scholarly Record Integrity Commitment TAXPEDIA is committed to maintaining trustworthy scholarly publications through transparent corrections, evidence-based retractions, responsible manuscript withdrawal, and proportionate editorial action. All decisions under this policy are intended to protect the reliability of scientific knowledge, preserve appropriate publication records, and maintain fairness to authors, readers, reviewers, and other stakeholders.

Publication Ethics Plagiarism Policy Contact Editorial Office

Journal of Tax Policy, Economics, and Accounting (TAXPEDIA)