The Impact of Analytic-Based Core Tax System Implementation ‎in The Public Sector: An Innovation Resistance Theory (IRT)‎ approach from the greater Jakarta area ‎

  • Authors

    • Kiagus Muchtar Accounting Department, School of Accounting, Master of Accounting, Bina Nusantara University, Jakarta, Indonesia,11480‎
    • Arta Moro Sundjaja Accounting Department, School of Accounting, Master of Accounting, Bina Nusantara University, Jakarta, Indonesia,11480‎
    https://doi.org/10.14419/y7j3qg31

    Received date: February 4, 2026

    Accepted date: March 4, 2026

    Published date: March 19, 2026

  • Coretax; Innovation Resistance Theory (IRT); Taxpayers; Innovation Barriers; Technology Adoption

  • Abstract

    This study focuses on the Coretax system analysis using the Innovation Resistance Theory (IRT) framework. In contrast to the dominant ‎research stream that examines acceptance (TAM/UTAUT), this study emphasizes resistance barriers values, traditions, risks, complexity, ‎and image as determinants of intention and actual use. Innovation Resistance Theory (IRT) is used to analyze five types of barriers: values, ‎traditions, risks, complexity, and image. Data were collected through a survey of 155 registered Coretax taxpayers and analyzed using ‎Structural Equation Modeling–Partial Least Squares (SEM-PLS). Theoretically, this study extends the application of IRT to the digital pub-‎lic sector, specifically analytics-based tax technology. The findings confirm that risk and tradition Barriers are more dominant than risk or ‎Image Barriers are more dominant in explaining user resistance to technology adoption, while value, complexity, and image barriers do not ‎show a significant influence, thus providing empirical enrichment to the technology adoption literature in the public sector‎.

  • References

    1. AlHujran, O., Al-Debei, M. M., Chatfield, A., & Migdadi, M. (2015). The imperative of influencing citizen attitude toward e-government adoption and use. Computers in Human Behavior, 53, 189–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.06.025.
    2. Barclay, D., Higgins, C., & Thompson, R. (1995). The partial least squares (PLS) approach to causal modeling: Personal computer adoption and use as an illustration. Technology Studies, 2(2), 285–309.
    3. Claudy, M. C., Garcia, R., & O’Driscoll, A. (2015). Consumer resistance to innovation: A behavioral reasoning perspective. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(4), 528–544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0399-0.
    4. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
    5. Direktorat Jenderal Pajak. (2020). Laporan tahunan Direktorat Jenderal Pajak 2020. https://www.pajak.go.id/
    6. Direktorat Jenderal Pajak. (2024). Coretax system and tax administration. https://www.pajak.go.id/
    7. Dwivedi, Y. K., Rana, N. P., Jeyaraj, A., Clement, M., & Williams, M. D. (2019). Re-examining the unified theory of acceptance and use of tech-nology (UTAUT): Toward a revised theoretical model. Information Systems Frontiers, 21(3), 719–734. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-017-9774-y.
    8. Fitriani, F., Nurmandi, A., Lawelai, H., Kasiwi, A. N., & Younus, M. (2025). Trends and challenges of digital transformation in the public sector: Policy implications for improving public services in Indonesian. Jurnal Aristo (Social, Politic, Humaniora), 13(2), 681–705. https://doi.org/10.24269/ars.v13i2.11288
    9. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Pearson.
    10. Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2014). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). SAGE Publications.
    11. Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (2nd ed.). Sage Publications Inc.
    12. Heidenreich, S., & Handrich, M. (2015). What about passive innovation resistance? Investigating adoption-related behavior from a resistance per-spective. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 32(6), 878–903. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12161.
    13. Heidenreich, S., & Kraemer, T. (2016). Innovations: Doomed to fail? Investigating strategies to overcome passive innovation resistance. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 33(3), 277–297. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12273.
    14. Hsieh, J. J. P.-A., Rai, A., & Keil, M. (2011). Addressing digital inequality for the socioeconomically disadvantaged through government initiatives: Forms of capital that affect ICT utilization. Information Systems Research, 22(2), 233–253. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1090.0256.
    15. Laukkanen, P., Sinkkonen, S., & Laukkanen, T. (2008). Consumer resistance to Internet banking: Postponers, opponents and rejectors. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 26(6), 440–455. https://doi.org/10.1108/02652320810902451.
    16. Laukkanen, T. (2016). Consumer adoption vs. rejection decisions in seemingly similar service innovations: The case of the Internet and mobile bank-ing. Journal of Business Research, 69(7), 2432–2439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.01.013.
    17. OECD. (2020). Tax administration 2020: Comparative information on OECD and other advanced and emerging economies. OECD Publishing.
    18. Peters, B. G., & Pierre, J. (2018). The next public administration: Debates and dilemmas. SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473920569.
    19. Plekhanov, D., Franke, H., & Netland, T. H. (2023). Digital transformation: A review and research agenda. European Management Journal. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2022.09.007.
    20. Ram, S., & Sheth, J. N. (1989). Consumer resistance to innovations: The marketing problem and its solutions. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 6(2), 5–14. https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000002542.
    21. Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R. (2016). Research methods for business: A skill-building approach (7th ed.). Wiley.
    22. Talukder, M. S., Quazi, A., & Dzulkifli, M. (2020). Examining the role of perceived usefulness, ease of use and user acceptance in adoption of in-novation: A study of the innovation resistance model. Journal of High Technology Management Research, 31(2), 100391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hitech.2020.100391.
    23. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quar-terly, 27(3), 425–478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540.
    24. Yoon, K., Hoogduin, L., & Zhang, L. (2015). Big data as complementary audit evidence. Accounting Horizons, 29(2), 431–438. https://doi.org/10.2308/acch-51068.

  • Downloads

  • How to Cite

    Muchtar , K. ., & Sundjaja, A. M. . (2026). The Impact of Analytic-Based Core Tax System Implementation ‎in The Public Sector: An Innovation Resistance Theory (IRT)‎ approach from the greater Jakarta area ‎. International Journal of Accounting and Economics Studies, 13(2), 526-539. https://doi.org/10.14419/y7j3qg31