Welcome to the PIRI Survey towards European Tax and Customs Regulation.

  1. My name is Andreas Korger and i am currently finishing my Phd work in Computer Science at the University of Würzburg – Germany. My supervisor is Prof. Dr. Joachim Baumeister.
  2. I am a member of the special interest group “Knowledge Management” of the German Association of Computer Science (GI-Gesellschaft für Informatik).
  3. The title of my work is “PIRI, An Approach Towards Regulatory Knowledge Management”.
  4. This survey is to evaluate my case study towards “Knowledge Management in the Domain of European Regulation, Customs, and Taxation” with a focus on VAT tax gaps.
  5. Feel free to be critical in your elaborations!
  6. Please take 5 minutes to read the following, to understand underlying concepts:
  • Regulatory knowledge management has the goal to organize, discover, utilize, and learn (new) regulatory knowledge.
  • PIRI stands for Prevent-Incident-React-Interrelation
  • The PIRI Approach applies a particular strategy to facilitate and standardize regulatory knowledge management.
  • The focus lies on incidents, measures, and their context to represent regulatory scenarios.
  • Incidents disturb systems and can be prevented by preventive measures and reacted to by reactive measures.
  • The relations between incidents, measures, and context code worthy knowledge.
  • Such relations can be:
    tax fraud is related to VAT tax fraud,
    inspection is a measure for fraud
    tax fraud fines depend on the country like germany and france
  • Regulatory concepts depend on the context:
    For a state, fines are measures,
    for a company, fines are incidents.
  • The regulatory concepts and their relations are united in a PIRI Knowledge Graph.
  • Regulatory concepts can be:
    domain specific like sophisticated tax fraud in spanish fish trading company.
    domain independent/abstract like carousel tax fraud.
  • Abstraction enables transfer of regulatory knowledge.

The PIRI Snippet

A PIRI Snippet represents the relation of incidents and measures for a particular reference frame of contextual elements. A reference frame would be for instance a spanish fish trading company from the perspective of a tax fraud investigator. The contextual elements would be location: spain, business: fishing, trade, actor: investigator. Incidents would be fraud and measures would be inspection and fine. The reference frame from the company perspective would be location: spain, business: fishing, trade, actor: fisher. Incidents would be investigation and fine and measures would be fraud, disguise, flee.

The following survey asks you to evaluate the PIRI approach in general and its application to the regulatory domain of tax and customs using the example of the European Union and its regulatory documents.

PIRI European Tax Regulation
Personal Information

Which country are you working in?

What is your profession / education?

What is your experience in business?

How often is "Knowledge Management" part of your work?

What is your expert level regarding "Regulation"?

What is your expert level regarding European Taxation and Regulation?

PIRI General
Please evaluate the PIRI approach in general

Is the concept of using incidents and measures to model regulatory scenarios clear for you?

Is this model understandable for you?

Do you have comments? What is missing in the PIRI approach?

PIRI Knowledge Organization
Please evaluate how to represent and organize regulatory knowledge with PIRI

Do you already use a system to organize regulatory knowledge?

Which capabilities of your system do you use?

What are you missing in the system you use?

Which kind of knowledge representation do you prefer?

The following hierarchical structures were derived from expert interviews in context with the document "The concept of Tax Gaps - ReportIII: MTIC Fraud Gap estimation methodologies" by the European Commission.

Could a tree structure of incidents like in the following overview represent and aid your particular working scenarios?

The following shows a detailed excerpt of the previous overview.
Please give your thoughts about this way of knowledge structuring.

The following hierarchical structures were derived from expert interviews in context with the document "The concept of Tax Gaps - ReportIII: MTIC Fraud Gap estimation methodologies" by the European Commission.

Could a tree structure of measures like in the following overview represent and aid your particular working scenarios?

The following shows a detailed excerpt of the previous overview.
Please give your thoughts about this way of knowledge structuring.

Could this way of representing regulatory knowledge help to collaborate with other actors, teams, and customers?

PIRI Knowledge Extraction
How to find regulatory knowledge with PIRI. This section presents textual passages of official regulatory documents provided by the European Union. The highlighted textual passages were created on the base of the PIRI system and assisted by language models similar to chatGPT. Please note: the highlighted text triggers could be reduced to simple red and green highlights to not overwhelm the reader.

Would the discovery of incidents and measures in texts support your work?

Document: Tax gap Methodologies
Incidents and measures automatically detected.
(Other objects explicitly NOT matched, like locations, persons, paragraphs, etc.)

 

Document: Tax gap Methodologies
Incidents and measures automatically detected.
(Other objects explicitly NOT matched, like locations, persons, paragraphs, etc.)

 

Document: Tax gap Methodologies
Incidents and measures automatically detected.
(Other objects explicitly NOT matched, like locations, persons, paragraphs, etc.)

 

Document: Tax gap Methodologies
Incidents and measures automatically detected.
(Other objects explicitly NOT matched, like locations, persons, paragraphs, etc.)

 

Document: Tax gap Methodologies
Incidents and measures automatically detected.
(Other objects explicitly NOT matched, like locations, persons, paragraphs, etc.)

 

Do you have comments or suggestions?
Document: Tax gap Methodologies

Document: Case Report - Energy Products and Electricity in Spain
Incidents and measures automatically detected.
(Other objects explicitly NOT matched, like locations, persons, paragraphs, etc.)

 

Do you have comments or suggestions?
Document: Case Report - Energy Products and Electricity in Spain

Document: Regulations on Agriculture and Forrest Aid
Incidents and measures automatically detected.
(Other objects explicitly NOT matched, like locations, persons, paragraphs, etc.)

 

Do you have comments or suggestions?
Document: Regulations on Agriculture and Forrest Aid

Document: Regulations on Import and Export Tariff Quotas
Incidents and measures automatically detected.
(Other objects explicitly NOT matched, like locations, persons, paragraphs, etc.)

 

Document: Regulations on Import and Export Tariff Quotas
Incidents and measures automatically detected.
(Other objects explicitly NOT matched, like locations, persons, paragraphs, etc.)

 

Do you have comments or suggestions?
Document: Regulations on Import and Export Tariff Quotas

Document: Regulations on Ship Recycling
Incidents and measures automatically detected.
(Other objects explicitly NOT matched, like locations, persons, paragraphs, etc.)

 

Document: Regulations on Ship Recycling
Incidents and measures automatically detected.
(Other objects explicitly NOT matched, like locations, persons, paragraphs, etc.)

 

Document: Regulations on Ship Recycling
Incidents and measures automatically detected.
(Other objects explicitly NOT matched, like locations, persons, paragraphs, etc.)

 

Do you have comments or suggestions?
Document: Regulations on Ship Recycling

PIRI Knowledge Utilization
Please evaluate how to utilize regulatory knowledge with PIRI.

Which would be the most convenient way to use regulatory knowledge?

Would a structured search support you?
(Example: Search for related measures applied to tax fraud incidents.)

Would you manually annotate the texts you use?
(Example: To leave comments for later use, other projects, and colleagues.)

Do you face (technical) problems in exchanging regulatory knowledge with colleagues and customers?
(Example: Summerize previous work, explain what is planned, and highlight possible scenarios.)

What causes the problems?
(Example: Customer compliance regulations do not allow this kind of information processing.)

Would you use AI support to calculate a budget planning for a project?
(Example: How to distribute 100 working hours on different teams like tax, customs, product design, and compliance.)

PIRI Knowledge Learning
How to learn new regulatory knowledge with PIRI.

Do you capture potential improvements in regulatory knowledge?
(Example: writing down "lessons learned" from a project, problems that occurred, etc.)

How much time do you invest to suggest improvements of regulatory knowledge for future work?
(Example: writing down "lessons learned" from a project, problems that occurred, etc.)

Is the focus on incidents, measures and their context capable to capture lessons learned in your daily working environment?

Given the scenario of the introduction of a fishing company trying to evade taxation.
Would a simulation of such scenarios be helpful to generate new regulatory knowledge?

Given the scenario of the introduction of a fishing company trying to evade taxation.
Which parameters need to be part of such a simulation from your perspective?

Thank You
Thank you for your participation in this survey.

To thank you for your help, I want to offer you a little gift. My hobby is a wine comic named Korki & Flaschi (www.korkiandflaschi.com) If you leave your address, I will send you a T-Shirt. The data is kept private and only for delivery.