E-Government Application: The Challanges in Malaysia

The changing trend to electronic device instead of manual filing system could enhance the collection of revenue and expedite the process. In fact it could help in reducing the burden and time of routine task i.e. checking and processing. However the acceptance level yet to be concern in certain area in government applications particularly in Malaysia. The idea of moving towards e-government in Malaysia as an alternative of the existing manual system started with the vision to be achieved in year 2020 in becoming a fully developed country. In rationalizing the vision, the Malaysian Government since then continuously spends a huge amount. Unfortunately, the huge amount of investment in upgrading the technology is seems to be wasted as there are certain operations not fully utilized the resources provided by the government. The evidence of low acceptance level in particular the e-filing system introduced by the Inland Revenue Board of Malaysia which is less than four per cent in year 2009 is one of the concern. Hence, the big question mark at this point is how could such situation turns out when the time for Malaysian government trying to achieve to the stage of developed nation is yet less than 10 years. The main objective of this study is to gain understanding on the gaps existed in the e-filing among the tax preparer. In seeking for the imperative answers, this research is design for the following objectives to determine the level of acceptance of tax e-filing; and to identify the determinants of tax e-filing acceptability.

[1]  Chang Liu,et al.  Mobile Data Service Demographics in Urban China , 2009, J. Comput. Inf. Syst..

[2]  Zahir Irani,et al.  E-government adoption: architecture and barriers , 2005, Bus. Process. Manag. J..

[3]  Fred D. Davis,et al.  User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models , 1989 .

[4]  Barbara M. Byrne,et al.  Structural equation modeling with AMOS , 2010 .

[5]  Viswanath Venkatesh,et al.  Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions , 2008, Decis. Sci..

[6]  Gordon B. Davis,et al.  User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View , 2003, MIS Q..

[7]  Majed Al-Mashari,et al.  A benchmarking study of experiences with electronic government , 2007 .

[8]  Paul T. Jaeger,et al.  E-government around the world: lessons, challenges, and future directions , 2003, Gov. Inf. Q..

[9]  Alok Mishra,et al.  E-Government: A global view and an empirical evaluation of some attributes of citizens , 2005, Gov. Inf. Q..

[10]  Rolph E. Anderson,et al.  Multivariate Data Analysis (7th ed. , 2009 .

[11]  Fred D. Davis,et al.  Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field : . , 2000 .

[12]  John Carlo Bertot,et al.  E-Government: initiatives, developments, and issues , 2002, Gov. Inf. Q..

[13]  Ali M. Al-Khouri.  Global e-Government: What needs to be Learned? A Reflection on UN e-Government Survey 2014 , 2014 .

[14]  Zahir Irani,et al.  Electronic transformation of government in the U.K.: a research agenda , 2007, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[15]  M. Gupta,et al.  Antecedents of paperless income tax filing by young professionals in India: an exploratory study , 2009 .

[16]  Viswanath Venkatesh,et al.  Determinants of Perceived Ease of Use: Integrating Control, Intrinsic Motivation, and Emotion into the Technology Acceptance Model , 2000, Inf. Syst. Res..

[17]  Patrick Y. K. Chau,et al.  An evaluative framework for analysing e-government convergence capability in developing countries , 2004, Electron. Gov. an Int. J..

[18]  Donald R. Cooper,et al.  Business Research Methods , 1980 .

[19]  R. V. Krejcie,et al.  Determining Sample Size for Research Activities , 1970 .