Peer Review Process

PEER REVIEW PROCESS

Journal of Tax Policy, Economics, and Accounting

TAXPEDIA applies a rigorous editorial screening and single-blind peer review system to ensure the quality, originality, relevance, and academic integrity of every manuscript submitted to the journal.

Review Model

Single-Blind Review

Initial Screening

Scope, format, plagiarism, quality

Reviewers

Relevant field experts

Decision

Editorial Board

Editorial Screening

 

All articles submitted to Journal of Tax Policy, Economics, and Accounting (TAXPEDIA) must conform to the focus and scope of the journal as well as the journal’s in-house style and submission guidelines.

Before entering the review stage, the editorial team evaluates manuscript completeness, relevance to the journal discipline, structure, writing quality, citation consistency, and plagiarism screening results.

Peer Review Stages

 
1. Submission Check
The manuscript is checked for completeness, formatting, authorship information, and compliance with journal policies. 		2. Scope Assessment
Editors assess whether the article is relevant to taxation, economics, accounting, finance, regulation, or related policy studies.
3. Similarity Screening
The manuscript is screened to detect plagiarism, duplication, or unethical use of sources before review. 		4. Reviewer Assignment
Qualified reviewers with expertise relevant to the manuscript topic are invited to evaluate the paper.
5. Independent Review
Reviewers assess originality, methodology, argument quality, relevance of data, contribution, and references objectively. 		6. Editorial Decision
The editor decides whether the manuscript is accepted, requires revision, resubmission, or rejection.

Review Criteria

 
  • Relevance to the journal focus and scope
  • Originality and novelty of the topic
  • Clarity of research objectives and argumentation
  • Methodological soundness and data quality
  • Quality of discussion and contribution to knowledge
  • Use of recent and relevant references
  • Academic writing quality and ethical compliance

Possible Editorial Decisions

 
Accept Accepted for publication with minor editorial adjustment if needed.
Minor Revision Requires limited correction before final acceptance.
Major Revision Requires substantial revision and may undergo re-review.
Reject Not suitable for publication or does not meet journal standards.

Editorial Integrity

The review process is conducted independently, objectively, and confidentially with due regard to the academic substance of each manuscript. Editors and reviewers are expected to avoid conflicts of interest and uphold publication ethics at all stages.