Author Guidelines
Journal of Tax Policy, Economics, and Accounting (TAXPEDIA), published by MUC Tax Research Institute, welcomes original academic manuscripts addressing taxation, tax policy, economics, accounting, public finance, governance, business regulation, and related interdisciplinary fields.
The journal seeks manuscripts that demonstrate a relevant research problem, critical engagement with scholarly literature, a well-defined research gap, an appropriate methodological or analytical approach, reliable evidence, and a meaningful contribution to scholarship or evidence-based policymaking.
All submitted manuscripts are subject to initial editorial screening, originality assessment, and the journal's single-blind peer-review process where selected for external review. Authors must prepare their manuscripts in accordance with these guidelines, the official article template, and the journal's publication-ethics policies.
- Originality: The manuscript presents original scholarly work and has not been published in substantially the same form elsewhere.
- Exclusive Consideration: The manuscript must not be simultaneously submitted to another journal or publication outlet.
- Scope: The research must fall within TAXPEDIA's Aim and Scope.
- Scholarly Contribution: The article must identify a research problem, scholarly gap, objective, and meaningful contribution.
- Methodological Integrity: Research methods and analytical procedures must accurately reflect activities undertaken.
- Evidence: Research findings and conclusions must be supported by sufficient and verifiable evidence.
- Formatting: The manuscript must follow the official journal template and relevant article-type requirements.
- Referencing: Citations and references must follow APA 7th edition and appropriate conventions for legal and regulatory sources.
- Ethics: Authors must comply with applicable research ethics, intellectual property, confidentiality, and publication-integrity requirements.
- Declarations: The manuscript must include accurate declarations concerning author contributions, funding, competing interests, research ethics, data availability, and AI use, as applicable.
- Author Approval: All listed authors must approve the submission and agree to be accountable for their scholarly contributions.
- Online Submission: The manuscript and required supporting documents must be uploaded through the journal's official OJS platform.
Interdisciplinary research is welcome when the relationship between the research question and TAXPEDIA's scope is clearly established.
| Article Type | Expected Scholarly Content |
|---|---|
| Original Research Article | Original research questions, appropriate methods, verifiable findings, scholarly discussion, and meaningful contribution. |
| Literature Review Article | Critical synthesis of previous studies through a transparent review or analytical procedure. |
| Conceptual or Theoretical Paper | Critical development, comparison, evaluation, or reconstruction of concepts and theoretical frameworks. |
| Policy or Regulatory Analysis | Evidence-based examination of fiscal policies, legislation, regulations, institutional implementation, or public-policy implications. |
| Case Study | Systematic analysis of a defined organization, case, program, jurisdiction, or institutional practice. |
| Short Communication or Scholarly Commentary | Focused scholarly findings or critical contributions, where supported by an approved journal submission category. |
The standard full-length article requirements apply to original research articles. Adjustments for other article types must be academically justified and consistent with the officially approved submission categories.
| Component | Requirement |
|---|---|
| Language | Bahasa Indonesia or English. |
| Manuscript Length | Approximately 4,000–8,000 words for full research articles. |
| Article Title | Specific and concise; a maximum of 16 words is recommended. |
| Abstract | English and Indonesian, each containing 200–250 words. |
| Keywords | 4–5 relevant keywords or phrases. |
| Font and Spacing | Follow the official journal template. The submission checklist provides for 12-point text and single spacing. |
| Page Layout | Page size, margins, headings, tables, and other layout settings must follow the template. |
| Submission File | An editable file format supported by the journal's OJS submission system. |
| References | APA 7th edition, with accurate treatment of legal and regulatory sources. |
| Author Identity | Full names, institutional affiliations, countries, email addresses, corresponding author, and ORCID identifiers where available. |
The official template takes precedence for detailed typography and layout. Authors should avoid unnecessary decorative formatting, inconsistent heading levels, and illegible images.
Authors must organize their articles logically, ensuring consistency between the research problem, scholarly literature, objectives, methods, findings, conclusions, and declarations.
- Use clear and specific academic terminology.
- Preferably limit the title to 16 words.
- Avoid excessive abbreviations and vague wording.
- Ensure the title accurately represents the manuscript's content.
- Provide the full names of all authors without academic titles.
- Provide accurate institutional affiliations, country, and email addresses.
- Identify the corresponding author.
- Provide ORCID iDs where available.
Author information must be consistent with the metadata submitted through OJS.
- Research Context: The issue, problem, or scholarly background.
- Research Objective: The central question or purpose of the study.
- Research Method: The research design or principal analytical approach.
- Principal Findings: The most important evidence-based findings or analytical conclusions.
- Research Contribution: The significance of the results for scholarship, policy, or practice.
The abstract should communicate the research gap or novelty where relevant and feasible within the word limit.
Avoid references, footnotes, tables, figures, excessive abbreviations, and conclusions not supported by the main text.
carbon taxation; fiscal policy; regulatory compliance; public revenue; sustainable development
Use semicolons to separate keywords and maintain terminology consistency between language versions.
- Present the general background and specific research problem.
- Explain the academic, economic, accounting, taxation, legal, or policy context.
- Provide credible supporting evidence concerning the problem.
- Critically discuss relevant findings from previous research.
- Identify inconsistencies, unresolved questions, or limitations in existing scholarship.
- Clearly articulate the research gap.
- Explain the novelty and potential contribution of the study.
- State the research questions or objectives explicitly.
- Explain the theoretical, methodological, practical, or policy significance of the research.
- Define the study's central concepts and theoretical constructs.
- Identify and explain relevant theories, models, or analytical frameworks.
- Compare findings and interpretations from previous studies.
- Discuss scholarly disagreements, limitations, or unresolved issues.
- Identify how previous research supports the present study.
- Explain the relationships among relevant variables or concepts.
- Develop hypotheses, propositions, or analytical categories where applicable.
- Establish a clear conceptual foundation for the selected research method.
The literature review must synthesize and critically evaluate scholarship, not merely list article summaries.
Relevant primary legislation, official policy documents, accounting standards, and authoritative institutional materials may be incorporated according to the research design.
- The research type, approach, and design.
- The research setting, jurisdiction, period, or institutional context.
- The study population, sample, participants, cases, documents, or units of analysis.
- Sampling procedures or source-selection criteria.
- The origin and characteristics of primary or secondary data.
- Data collection instruments and procedures.
- Variables, measurement indicators, conceptual categories, or documentary criteria.
- Statistical models, qualitative analytical procedures, comparative methods, or legal reasoning techniques.
- Validity, reliability, credibility, robustness, or relevant quality-assurance procedures.
- Applicable ethics approval, consent, research permissions, or confidentiality arrangements.
The selected methodology must correspond to the research objectives and type of evidence.
- Organize findings according to the research questions, hypotheses, cases, or analytical themes.
- Present relevant quantitative, qualitative, conceptual, documentary, or regulatory evidence.
- Report statistical results correctly, where applicable.
- Explain the contents and significance of tables and figures.
- Identify relevant patterns, relationships, differences, or analytical conclusions.
- Avoid selective reporting that misrepresents the research evidence.
- Interpret the findings in relation to the research questions.
- Compare the results with previous relevant scholarship.
- Explain agreements, differences, contradictions, and alternative interpretations.
- Relate the findings to the theoretical or analytical framework.
- Clarify the study's contribution to existing knowledge.
- Discuss evidence-based tax, economic, accounting, institutional, or policy implications.
- Acknowledge important limitations, uncertainties, and contextual constraints.
Results and Discussion may be presented together or separately according to the official template and the nature of the research.
- Present the main answers to the research questions.
- Summarize the most important findings without merely repeating the Results section.
- Explain the study's scholarly contribution.
- Identify relevant theoretical, regulatory, institutional, or practical implications.
- Acknowledge significant limitations.
- Offer justified recommendations or future research directions where appropriate.
The conclusion should not introduce new empirical findings, unsupported claims, or evidence not discussed in the manuscript.
The Acknowledgments section must be positioned immediately after Conclusion and before Declarations when acknowledgment is applicable.
This section may recognize individuals or institutions providing assistance that does not qualify for authorship, including:- Technical or administrative assistance.
- Institutional cooperation in research activities.
- Assistance with access to research documents or data.
- Non-author scholarly advice or research support.
- Language-editing or other legitimate manuscript assistance.
Acknowledged individuals should be named with appropriate permission where necessary. Acknowledgments must not conceal legitimate authorship or imply unauthorized institutional endorsement.
The Acknowledgments section may be omitted when no acknowledgment is applicable. Funding must still be disclosed accurately in the Funding Statement.
The Declarations section must be placed after Acknowledgments, when present, and immediately before References.
This section provides transparency regarding author responsibilities, financial support, competing interests, ethics approval and consent, research data, and the use of artificial intelligence. Each declaration must reflect the actual circumstances of the study.
A.B.: Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing – Original Draft. C.D.: Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Investigation. E.F.: Supervision, Validation, Writing – Review & Editing. All authors reviewed and approved the final manuscript.
This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
The authors declare that they have no known financial or non-financial competing interests relevant to this research.
Research involving human participants, personal information, confidential business or taxpayer records, or restricted institutional data must comply with applicable ethical and legal requirements.
Authors must identify relevant ethics approval, consent arrangements, research permissions, or legitimate exemptions. Ethics approval must not be falsely claimed.
This study used publicly available secondary data and did not involve direct human participation or identifiable private information. Formal research ethics approval was not required under the applicable institutional requirements.
The data supporting the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request, subject to applicable legal and confidentiality restrictions.
Substantive use of generative AI tools in manuscript preparation, research analysis, coding, content generation, or similar scholarly activities must be disclosed.
The declaration should identify the tool, purpose, extent of use, and human verification of the resulting output.
The authors used [tool name] for [specific purpose]. All AI-assisted outputs were independently reviewed and verified by the authors, who remain fully responsible for the final manuscript.
The authors declare that no generative artificial intelligence tools were used in the preparation of this manuscript.
The References section must be the final principal section of the manuscript and must appear immediately after Declarations.
All bibliographic entries must comply with APA 7th edition, taking into account source-specific conventions for legal, regulatory, and official institutional documents. Authors must ensure that:- Sources cited in the manuscript are represented accurately in the reference list, subject to applicable APA exceptions.
- References are arranged alphabetically as required by APA 7.
- Author names, publication years, titles, journal information, and publication details are accurate.
- DOIs are included as valid DOI URLs when available.
- Relevant primary legal and regulatory sources are identified correctly.
- No fabricated, irrelevant, misleading, or unverifiable bibliographic references are included.
Mendeley, Zotero, EndNote, or equivalent reference management software may assist preparation, but authors are responsible for verifying every reference.
| Research Design | Expected Methodological Information |
|---|---|
| Quantitative Research | Population or dataset, sampling, variables, measurement, research period, model specification, statistical procedures, assumptions, and relevant robustness checks. |
| Qualitative Research | Research setting, case or participant selection, data collection, coding or interpretation, ethical safeguards, and credibility procedures. |
| Mixed-Methods Research | Quantitative and qualitative components, sequencing, integration procedures, and interpretation of combined results. |
| Policy and Regulatory Analysis | Policy problem, relevant regulations or official sources, jurisdiction, analytical criteria, implementation context, and assessment of implications. |
| Doctrinal Legal Research | Legal questions, primary and secondary legal materials, interpretive approach, statutory analysis, relevant case law, and legal reasoning. |
| Systematic or Scoping Review | Review questions, databases or information sources, search strategy, eligibility criteria, selection, appraisal where relevant, and synthesis approach. |
| Conceptual or Theoretical Study | Conceptual problem, scope and selection of materials, analytical perspective, theory comparison, and procedures used to construct an original argument or framework. |
| Case Study | Case boundaries, case-selection rationale, evidence sources, contextual information, analysis, and limitations of generalization or transferability. |
No single research method is mandatory for all article types. Authors must explain the procedures relevant to the design actually employed.
Novelty must be substantiated through engagement with relevant scholarly literature and should not be exaggerated.
| Aspect | Editorial Recommendation |
|---|---|
| Reference Quantity | A benchmark of approximately 25 or more relevant references is recommended for full-length scholarly research or review articles. |
| Peer-Reviewed Sources | Aim for a substantial proportion of peer-reviewed journal literature, with approximately 80% as a quality target where suitable. |
| Recency | Prioritize relevant recent scholarship, generally from the preceding 10 years, while retaining authoritative foundational works. |
| Primary Sources | Use official regulations, judicial decisions, government statistics, accounting standards, and institutional reports where appropriate. |
| Reference Verification | Check accuracy, source authenticity, DOI resolution, relevance, and consistency with the manuscript. |
| Citation Type | Example |
|---|---|
| One Author | (Santoso, 2024) |
| Two Authors | (Rahman & Putri, 2023) |
| Three or More Authors | (Santoso et al., 2024) |
| Narrative Citation | Santoso (2024) explains that ... |
| Direct Quotation | (Santoso, 2024, p. 15) |
The names and dates in these examples are illustrative and do not represent verified bibliographic sources.
APA 7 does not normally require the publication city for books. DOI URLs should be used where available. Legal materials should follow applicable source-specific conventions while preserving accuracy and consistency.
- Identify the official title, number, and issuing institution of relevant laws or regulations.
- Specify the applicable jurisdiction, analytical period, and relevant legal status.
- Distinguish current regulations from amended, repealed, or historical provisions.
- Prioritize authoritative official documents for legal and regulatory claims.
- Identify data sources, collection periods, measurement units, and responsible institutions.
- Verify the applicable version of accounting standards or technical guidance.
- Distinguish legal requirements from scholarly interpretations or policy recommendations.
- Correctly identify official court decisions, taxation rulings, and administrative decisions where applicable.
Statements concerning current law must be consistent with the legal framework relevant to the period under examination.
- Number tables and figures sequentially.
- Use informative titles and explanatory notes.
- Refer to each table and figure in the manuscript text.
- Use appropriate statistical symbols and measurement units.
- Identify the source of data and indicate original or adapted materials.
- Present numerical values consistently in the text and tables.
- Use readable graphs, diagrams, and images.
- Disclose the use of estimates, simulations, or hypothetical examples.
- Provide supporting data, instruments, or analytical code where relevant and legally permissible.
- Obtain permissions for copyrighted third-party materials where required.
Figures, financial statements, or numerical outputs must not be manipulated to misrepresent findings or conceal material information.
- Obtain the required approval from a competent research ethics body.
- Secure informed consent from research participants.
- Obtain permission for restricted institutional, taxpayer, or commercial data.
- Protect the identity and confidential information of research participants.
- Explain legitimate restrictions on the use or sharing of research data.
- Use appropriate anonymization or de-identification measures.
- Disclose ethical exemptions accurately.
The journal does not require authors to disclose protected taxpayer records or confidential business information unlawfully.
Where formal ethics review was not required, authors should provide an accurate explanation when relevant.
- Properly cite borrowed ideas, quotations, data, figures, and arguments.
- Disclose substantial reuse of their previously published work.
- Avoid fabricated or unverifiable references.
- Ensure that the manuscript is not simultaneously submitted to another journal.
- Disclose relevant prior preprints or working-paper versions.
- Comply with applicable third-party intellectual property rights.
- Generative AI systems cannot be listed as authors.
- Substantive AI assistance must be disclosed.
- AI-generated references, findings, and legal claims must be independently verified.
- AI must not be used to fabricate research evidence.
- Confidential research materials must not be disclosed to unauthorized AI services.
Routine spelling, punctuation, and basic formatting checks do not normally require separate disclosure.
- Manuscript Submission: The author uploads the manuscript and enters required metadata.
- Administrative Screening: The Editorial Office checks formatting, completeness, and relevant supporting documents.
- Initial Editorial Evaluation: Editors assess scope, scholarly quality, originality, and research integrity.
- Reviewer Assignment: Suitable manuscripts are referred to qualified reviewers.
- Peer-Review Assessment: Reviewers evaluate the contribution, methodology, evidence, analysis, and writing quality.
- Editorial Decision: The editor determines the appropriate outcome.
- Revision: Authors address comments and submit revised material where required.
- Final Evaluation: Editors verify whether the manuscript meets publication standards.
- Production: Accepted articles proceed through the applicable editing and publication procedures.
- Prepare a point-by-point response to editorial and reviewer comments.
- Identify relevant changes made in the manuscript.
- Provide academic justification for suggestions not adopted.
- Check that revisions do not introduce inconsistencies.
- Submit the revised manuscript by the communicated deadline.
A revision request does not guarantee acceptance. The final decision remains the responsibility of the authorized editor.
The CC BY-SA 4.0 license permits sharing and adaptation, including commercial reuse, subject to attribution, ShareAlike, and applicable third-party rights.
Publication is determined by scholarly merit, editorial assessment, research integrity, and peer review. Free publication does not guarantee acceptance.
☐ The manuscript falls within the journal's Aim and Scope.
☐ The article is original and is not simultaneously submitted elsewhere.
☐ The manuscript complies with the official article template.
☐ The article title is academically clear and accurately represents the research.
☐ Author names, affiliations, email addresses, and OJS metadata are complete.
☐ English and Indonesian abstracts each contain 200–250 words.
☐ Four or five relevant keywords are provided.
☐ The Introduction identifies the problem, research gap, novelty, and objectives.
☐ The Literature Review critically discusses relevant previous research.
☐ The Research Method accurately describes the procedures undertaken.
☐ Results and Discussion are supported by reliable evidence.
☐ The Conclusion directly addresses the research objectives.
☐ Acknowledgments appear after Conclusion when applicable.
☐ Declarations appear after Acknowledgments, or directly after Conclusion when Acknowledgments are omitted.
☐ Author Contributions, Funding, Conflict of Interest, Ethics, Data Availability, and AI statements are accurate and complete where applicable.
☐ References are positioned after Declarations and constitute the final principal manuscript section.
☐ All citations and references follow APA 7th edition.
☐ Legal, taxation, economic, accounting, and statistical sources have been verified.
☐ Tables and figures are numbered, clear, relevant, and properly attributed.
☐ Research confidentiality, ethical approvals, and necessary permissions have been addressed.
☐ Relevant previous versions or preprints have been disclosed.
☐ The manuscript has been checked for academic language, originality, and bibliographic accuracy.
☐ All authors have approved the submission and the corresponding author has prepared the required files.
- The manuscript file is complete and readable.
- All required author metadata have been entered accurately.
- The appropriate manuscript category has been selected.
- The title, abstracts, and keywords match the submitted manuscript.
- Required supplementary declarations and documents are provided.
- Editorial correspondence is monitored and addressed.
Before submitting, ensure that the manuscript follows the journal's official structure and template, includes the necessary declarations, and complies with all relevant scholarly and ethical requirements.


