




































 

151 

 

Finance, Accounting and Business Analysis 
Volume 7 Issue 2, 2025 

http://faba.bg/       
ISSN  2603-5324 

DOI: https://doi.org/10.37075/FABA.2025.2.02 

 

Tax Avoidance: CSR and Capital Intensity with Firm Size as a Moderating 

Variable  

 

Muhammad Nugraha Agengsriwardana1 , Dwi Septa Aryani 2 , Sasiska Rani3* , 

Kusminaini Armin4  

  
Faculty of Economics and Business, Tridinanti University, Palembang, Indonesia1 

Faculty of Economics and Business, Tridinanti University, Palembang, Indonesia2  

Faculty of Economics and Business, Tridinanti University, Palembang, Indonesia3* 

Faculty of Economics and Business, Tridinanti University, Palembang, Indonesia4  

* Corresponding author 

 

Info Articles   Abstract 
 

History Article: 

Submitted 29 January 2025 

Revised 29 May 2025 

Accepted 16 July 2025 
 

 Purpose: This study aims to analyze the effect of Corporate Social 

Responsibility and Capital Intensity on Tax Avoidance, moderated by Firm 

Size, in energy sector companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange for 

the 2021–2023 period. 

Design/Methodology/Approach: The research population consists of 87 

companies, and using the purposive sampling method, 18 companies were 

selected as samples. The research method employed is Moderated 

Regression Analysis. 

Findings: The results of this study indicate that Corporate Social 

Responsibility affects Tax Avoidance, while Capital Intensity does not affect 

Tax Avoidance. Firm Size is unable to moderate the effect of Corporate 

Social Responsibility and Capital Intensity on Tax Avoidance. 

Practical Implications: This study provides valuable insights for 

companies, especially in the energy sector, regarding the relationship 

between Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), capital intensity, and tax 

avoidance. The findings suggest that CSR activities can significantly 

influence tax avoidance practices, highlighting the importance of 

incorporating social responsibility into corporate strategies to build public 

trust and minimize reputational risks associated with aggressive tax 

planning. 

Originality/Value: This study provides a unique focus on the energy sector, 

which is highly regulated and scrutinized for its environmental and 

economic impacts. It explores firm size as a moderating variable, offering 

new insights into whether firm size influences the relationship between 

CSR, capital intensity, and tax avoidance. These findings enhance our 

understanding of how various internal and external factors of firms interact 

to shape tax decisions, particularly in an industry that is critical to national 

development and global sustainability. 

Paper Type:  Research Paper.  

 

Keywords:  

Tax Avoidance. Corporate 

Social Responsibility, 

Capital Intensity, Firm Size  
 

 

JEL: G2, G3, M0, M1  

* Address Correspondence:   

E-mail: mnugrahaagengs12@gmail.com 1 

dwi_septa_aryani09@univ-tridinanti.ac.id  2 

sasiska_rani@univ-tridinanti.ac.id 3* 

kusminaini_armin@univ-tridinanti.ac.id 4 

 

 

  

http://faba.bg/
https://doi.org/10.37075/FABA.2025.2.02
mailto:mnugrahaagengs12@gmail.com
mailto:dwi_septa_aryani09@univ-tridinanti.ac.id
mailto:sasiska_rani@univ-tridinanti.ac.id
mailto:kusminaini_armin@univ-tridinanti.ac.id
https://orcid.org/0009-0003-3856-4135
https://orcid.org/0009-0006-2794-605X
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8859-8363
https://orcid.org/0009-0001-3313-8108


Agengsriwardana, Aryani, Rani, Armin / Finance, Accounting and Business Analysis, Volume 7 Issue 2, 2025. 

152 

 

INTRODUCTION 
 

Taxes are considered an expense that reduces net profit, which contradicts the primary goal of every 

business entity that strives to maximize profit (Oktavia et al. 2020). Therefore, companies tend to seek ways 

to minimize their tax burdens. Tax avoidance is one of the issues that often draws attention in the fields of 

taxation and corporate management. Tax avoidance is a strategy employed by companies to legally 

minimize their tax burdens by exploiting loopholes or uncertainties in tax regulations. Although legal, this 

practice often raises ethical debates as it can harm the state in terms of tax revenue and affect public trust in 

companies. The state suffers significant losses in tax revenue due to tax avoidance practices (Lolana and 

Dwimulyani 2019). 

To measure the tax performance of a country, the tax ratio can be used. The tax ratio is an indicator 

that measures the comparison between tax revenue and total gross income. However, interpreting a low tax 

ratio solely as a reflection of poor tax compliance may be misleading. In reality, the tax ratio is influenced 

by various macroeconomic and policy-related factors. These include the size and role of the public sector in 

the economy, the overall tax burden imposed on economic agents, the extent of tax incentives provided, the 

breadth of the tax base, and other legislative measures that affect tax collection. Therefore, a low tax ratio 

does not automatically indicate low levels of compliance with tax laws (Septiani and Sastradipraja 2023).  

According to the Ministry of Finance, Indonesia’s tax ratio was 9.76% in 2019, dropped to 8.33% in 

2020 at the height of the pandemic, rose to 9.11% in 2021, increased further to 10.38% in 2022, and slightly 

declined to 10.32% in 2023. These fluctuations underscore the complexity of interpreting tax ratio trends 

and the necessity of considering macroeconomic contexts when analyzing tax performance. Moreover, the 

tax ratio is determined by two key components: total tax revenue and GDP. While tax revenues may be 

affected by legal or illegal tax avoidance behavior, the size of GDP is influenced by broader economic 

conditions, which are not necessarily tied to tax compliance. For instance, during the 2019–2023 period, 

Indonesia experienced several extraordinary events, most notably the COVID-19 pandemic, which had a 

significant impact on both tax revenues and GDP growth. The economic slowdown and fiscal relief policies 

implemented during the pandemic likely affected the overall tax ratio, making it an unreliable standalone 

indicator of tax compliance during this time. 

Tax avoidance carried out by companies can be influenced by several factors. Nabila and Kartika 

(2023) and Hasanah and Febriyanto (2024) use Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and Capital Intensity 

as models in tax avoidance. In the context of companies, CSR is often seen as an effort for companies to 

demonstrate their commitment to social responsibility and environmental sustainability. However, there are 

differing views on the relationship between CSR and tax avoidance. On one hand, companies committed to 

CSR tend to have more transparent tax practices to maintain their reputation. On the other hand, there is 

also a view that CSR can be used as a tool to cover up tax avoidance practices. 

There is an inconsistency in the research results regarding the effect of CSR on tax avoidance. 

Research conducted by Setiawati and Adi (2020) and Putri and Lastanti (2024) suggests that Corporate 

Social Responsibility (CSR) influences tax avoidance. On the other hand, studies by Ardini (2023) and 

Lestari et al. (2024) indicate that CSR has no effect on tax avoidance. 

In addition to CSR, another factor influencing tax avoidance is capital intensity (Nabila and Kartika, 

2023). Capital intensity refers to the amount of capital used to support operational activities with the aim of 

generating revenue (Hutabarat and Yuliati 2023). Capital intensity can be measured through a ratio that 

reflects the amount of investment in fixed assets. Fixed assets, such as buildings and equipment (excluding 

land), can be recognized as a deduction in value through depreciation (Agustyo and Arianti 2024). 

Companies with high capital intensity tend to have large amounts of fixed assets, which can be used to 

benefit from tax depreciation. The higher the capital intensity a company has, the greater the tendency for 

the company to engage in tax avoidance, as companies with fixed assets have depreciation expenses that 

reduce pre-tax profits (Kurniawati 2023). This can become a strategy to reduce the company's tax burden. 

There is an inconsistency in the research results regarding the effect of capital intensity on tax 

avoidance. Research conducted by Agustyo and Arianti (2024) and Nabila and Kartika (2023) suggests that 

capital intensity influences tax avoidance. However, studies by Putra et al. (2025) and Agustina and Arisanti 

(2020) indicate that capital intensity has no effect on tax avoidance. 

Firm size is another factor that is believed to play a role in moderating the relationship between CSR, 

capital intensity, and tax avoidance. Firm size reflects a company's ability to influence tax-related decisions 

(Rani et al. 2023). Large companies tend to attract more attention from the public and regulators, which 

may make them more cautious in applying tax avoidance strategies. In contrast, smaller companies may 

have greater flexibility in adopting such strategies due to lower levels of oversight. 

The energy sector is one of the strategic sectors that makes a significant contribution to the national 

economy, but it also faces intense scrutiny regarding its environmental impact. Companies in this sector 

often have high capital intensity and are involved in CSR programs as part of efforts to comply with 



Agengsriwardana, Aryani, Rani, Armin / Finance, Accounting and Business Analysis, Volume 7 Issue 2, 2025. 

153 

 

regulations and improve their public image. Therefore, it is important to analyze how CSR and capital 

intensity affect tax avoidance in energy companies, and whether firm size can moderate this relationship. 

This study focuses on energy companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange (IDX) during the period of 

2021-2023. By using this approach, the study aims to contribute to understanding the dynamics between 

CSR, capital intensity, firm size, and tax avoidance, particularly within the context of energy companies in 

Indonesia. 

 

LITERATURE REVIEW 

 

Agency Theory 

Agency theory was first introduced by two economists, Michael Jensen and William Meckling, in 
their article titled "Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure", published in 

1976. They developed this theory to explain the relationship between principals (owners) and agents 

(managers) within a company, as well as how conflicts of interest between the two can affect the decisions 

made, including in tax management. 

In the context of tax avoidance, agency theory is used to understand how conflicts of interest between 

company owners and managers can influence tax-related decisions. The owners of the company (principals) 

aim to maximize the firm's value, including optimizing after-tax profits. However, managers (agents) may 

have different personal interests, such as reducing tax burdens to increase net income or improve short-term 

financial ratios that benefit them. Managers may use tax avoidance strategies to reduce the company's tax 

liabilities, which in turn can increase reported profits and bonuses. However, this may not always be 

beneficial for the owners in the long term, especially if the consequences of tax avoidance harm the 

company’s reputation or trigger penalties from tax authorities. 

 

Legitimacy Theory 
Legitimacy theory was first proposed by Dowling and Pfeffer (1975). This theory explains that 

organizations seek to gain social legitimacy by aligning their practices and values with the expectations and 

norms that prevail in society. Legitimacy is crucial for the survival and stability of an organization because 

society, stakeholders, and the government are more likely to support companies that are considered to meet 

social expectations. Legitimacy theory is related to a company's efforts to enhance public trust in its 

operations (Rani et al. 2024). 

Legitimacy theory helps explain how companies strive to maintain or gain legitimacy by 

demonstrating that they are acting in accordance with accepted social norms, including in terms of tax 

compliance. Aggressive tax avoidance risks damaging a company's legitimacy, as society and governments 

increasingly demand companies to be responsible in fulfilling their tax obligations. Therefore, companies 

that want to maintain their reputation and legitimacy are likely to avoid tax avoidance practices that could 

decrease public trust. 

 

Tax avoidance 

Tax avoidance reflects a company's efforts to manage its tax obligations efficiently by exploiting 

existing legal loopholes. According to Firmansyah and Triastie (2021), tax avoidance is a series of tax 

planning actions taken by a company to reduce its tax burden by utilizing opportunities or gaps in the 

applicable laws and regulations. In this study, tax avoidance is measured using CETR (Cash Effective Tax 

Rate). A high CETR percentage indicates that the company has a low level of tax avoidance, and conversely, 

if the CETR percentage is low, it suggests a higher potential for tax avoidance practices by the company 

(Dewinta and Setiawan 2016). The CETR formula is as follows (Amiah 2022): 

CETR =
Cash tax paid

Pre − tax income
 (1) 

 

Corporate Social Responsibility 
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) represents the deep commitment of the business world to 

sustainability and ethics. According to Rosyati et al. (2023), "Social responsibility (CSR) is an organization's 

business operation that not only aims to generate financial profit but also demonstrates a commitment to 

social, economic, and environmental development, as well as to the surrounding community, in a holistic, 

institutionalized, and sustainable manner." 

CSR disclosure is guided by applicable standards, namely the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI). In 

this study, the researcher used the GRI Standards 2021 guidelines as a reference for CSR reporting 

disclosure. The sustainability report encompasses economic, social, and environmental aspects, while 



Agengsriwardana, Aryani, Rani, Armin / Finance, Accounting and Business Analysis, Volume 7 Issue 2, 2025. 

154 

 

highlighting performance and activities related to sustainable product development. Corporate Social 

Responsibility (CSR) disclosure is measured by assigning a score of 1 for each CSR disclosure item that 

meets the specified criteria. The scores for each item are then summed to obtain the total score for each 

company. The formula for calculating CSR is as follows (Ardini 2023): 

CSRIj =
∑ Xij

nj
 (2) 

Explanation: 

CSRIj - Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure Index-j 

ΣXij - A dummy variable assigns a value of 1 if an item is disclosed and a value of 0 if the item is not disclosed.  

nj - The number of items per indicator disclosed by company j 

 

Capital Intensity 
According to Wardila et al. (2023), capital intensity refers to the capital investment activities 

undertaken by a company, which are then associated with investments in fixed assets. Meanwhile, 

Firmansyah et al. (2021) describe capital intensity as a representation of the proportion of fixed asset 

investment relative to the company's total assets. Capital intensity reflects how effectively a company utilizes 

its assets to generate revenue. With high profitability, a company can implement tax management strategies 

to reduce its tax liabilities, including leveraging assets to enhance corporate earnings (Marsahala et al.2020). 

The formula for capital intensity used in this study (Amiah 2022) is as follows: 

CI =
Fixed assets

Total assets
 (3) 

  

Firm Size 

Samhuri et al. (2023) define firm size as the representation of a company's size, referring to the criteria 

or specific factors used to assess the scale or magnitude of an organization or corporate entity. Similarly, 

Hery (2017) defines firm size as a measure of a company's scale, which can be classified based on total assets, 

market capitalization, share value, and other factors. The formula for firm size in this study (Amiah 2022) 

is as follows:  

SIZE = Ln (Total Assets)  (4) 

Hypothesis 

The Effect of Corporate Social Responsibility on Tax Avoidance 
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is a concept in which organizations, especially companies, 

have an obligation to be responsible to various parties involved, such as consumers, employees, 

shareholders, society, and the environment. This obligation covers various aspects of the company's 

operations, including economic, social, and environmental dimensions (Zoebar and Miftah 2020). 

Companies that are active in CSR activities tend to be more transparent in their business practices, 

thus having an incentive to comply with tax obligations and reduce tax avoidance in order to maintain a 

good image in the eyes of the public and stakeholders. The study conducted by Mardianti and Ardini (2020), 

Setiawati and Adi (2020), and Putri and Lastanti (2024) states that there is an influence between Corporate 

Social Responsibility and tax avoidance. 

H₁: Corporate Social Responsibility influences tax avoidance. 

 

The Effect of Capital Intensity on Tax Avoidance 
Companies with a high level of capital intensity tend to have large fixed assets, which can be used to 

reduce tax liabilities through depreciation or other tax deductions. This provides an incentive for companies 

to engage in tax avoidance by optimally utilizing their fixed assets. The study conducted by Hutabarat and 

Yuliati (2023), Putri and Lastanti (2024), and Nabila and Kartika (2023) states that there is an influence 

between capital intensity and tax avoidance. 

H₂: Capital intensity influences tax avoidance. 

 

The Effect of Firm Size on Tax Avoidance  
Larger companies may have more opportunities to engage in tax avoidance because they often have 

access to more complex tax planning strategies and can exploit existing tax loopholes. Additionally, larger 



Agengsriwardana, Aryani, Rani, Armin / Finance, Accounting and Business Analysis, Volume 7 Issue 2, 2025. 

155 

 

companies tend to have more tax consultants and resources to minimize their tax liabilities. The company 

size attracts significant attention from the government regarding its compliance with the appropriate tax 

obligations (Aryani and Crystha 2024). Studies by Hutabarat and Yuliati (2023), Putri and Lastanti (2024), 

and Nabila and Kartika (2023) show that firm size influences tax avoidance. 

H3: Firm size influences tax avoidance 

 

The Effect of Corporate Social Responsibility on Tax Avoidance with Firm Size as a Moderating 

Variable 
Firm size refers to the dimensions of a company, whether small or large, and can be measured in 

various ways, such as annual revenue, number of employees, market value, and total assets (Hasanah and 

Febriyanto 2024). Companies classified as large typically have significant total assets and are more likely to 

generate profits (Putra et al. 2025). In general, higher corporate profits result in a greater nominal tax liability 

when a proportional or progressive tax system is applied. However, this does not necessarily indicate a 

higher effective tax burden, especially if companies implement various tax planning strategies to manage 

their taxable income. High profits often prompt companies to take steps toward engaging in tax avoidance 

practices. Firm size may moderate the relationship between CSR and tax avoidance. In large companies, 

which have more resources to manage regulations and tax avoidance, the effect of CSR on tax avoidance 

may be weaker due to stricter oversight and more opportunities to utilize tax avoidance strategies. In 

contrast, smaller companies may be more susceptible to tax avoidance despite their involvement in CSR, as 

they lack sufficient resources to effectively manage taxes. The study conducted by Azis et al. (2024) and 

Ulinuha and Nurdin (2024) states that firm size can strengthen the effect of Corporate Social Responsibility 

on tax avoidance. 

H4: Firm size moderates the effect of Corporate Social Responsibility on tax avoidance 

 

The Effect of Capital Intensity on tax avoidance with Firm Size as a Moderating Variable 
The capital intensity ratio describes how a company finances its activities, including through fixed 

assets (capital intensity) and inventory intensity. Depreciating fixed assets are often used by managers as a 

component of business expenses, which can ultimately reduce the amount of tax the company has to pay. 

Firm size can moderate the relationship between capital intensity and tax avoidance. In large companies, 

which have more resources and tighter oversight, the effect of capital intensity on tax avoidance may be 

weaker, even though they have large fixed assets. On the other hand, smaller companies may be more 

susceptible to tax avoidance despite having high capital intensity, as they may lack the capacity to effectively 

manage their tax obligations. Research conducted by Nabila & Kartika (2023) and Amiah (2022) suggests 

that firm size can strengthen the effect of capital intensity on tax avoidance. 

H5: Firm size moderates the effect of Capital Intensity on tax avoidance 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 1. Conceptual framework 

 

METHODS 

 

This study employs a quantitative approach with a causal-comparative design. The researcher will 

analyze the relationship between independent variables (CSR and capital intensity), moderating variables 

(firm size), and dependent variables (tax avoidance). The population of this study was 87 energy sector 

companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange (IDX). The sampling technique used was purposive 

sampling with the following criteria: 

1. Energy sector companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange consecutively during the 2021-

2023 period. 

2. Energy sector companies that present complete annual reports and sustainability reports 

Firm Size (Z) 

Corporate Social 

Responsibility (X1) 

Capital Intensity (X2) 

Tax Avoidance (Y) 



Agengsriwardana, Aryani, Rani, Armin / Finance, Accounting and Business Analysis, Volume 7 Issue 2, 2025. 

156 

 

consecutively during the 2021-2023 period. 

This study analyzed 18 energy sector companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange (IDX) during 

the 2021–2023 period. The sample selection was conducted using purposive sampling based on the criteria 

previously described. For transparency and replicability, the full list of analyzed companies is provided in 

Appendix 1.  

This study employs annual panel data from 2021 to 2023. The three-year period was selected based 

on the availability of sustainability and financial reports following the updated GRI Standards 2021 and the 

economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, which significantly influenced corporate tax behavior and 

disclosures in the energy sector. While the selected period captures recent and relevant dynamics, the limited 

timeframe results in a smaller number of data points (three observations per company). As such, the findings 

should be interpreted with caution and considered as an initial exploration into the relationship between 

CSR, capital intensity, firm size, and tax avoidance. Future research is encouraged to extend the observation 

period to enhance the robustness of the model and allow for more generalizable conclusions 

Data analysis will be conducted using multiple regression analysis, and to test the moderating effect 

of firm size, the researcher will use the moderated regression analysis technique. The model in this study is 

as follows: 

Model 1: TA = α + β₁CSR + β₂CI + β3FS + e (5) 

Model 2: α + β₁CSR + β₂CI + β₃FS + β₄(CSR*FS) + β₅(CI*FS) + e (6) 

 

Explanation: 

TA - tax avoidance 

α - Constant 

β - Regression Coefficient 

CSR - Corporate Social Responsibility 

CI- Capital Intensity 

FS - Firm Size 

e - Error 

 

In addition to regression analysis, this study also conducted a descriptive analysis of the evaluation 

indicators, including the mean, median, standard deviation, minimum, and maximum values for the key 

variables: CETR (Cash Effective Tax Rate), CSR Index, Capital Intensity, and Firm Size. The results of the 

descriptive statistics provide insights into the distribution and variability of each variable before inferential 

testing. To ensure the adequacy of the regression model, classical assumption tests were conducted. These 

include: Normality test, Homoscedasticity test, Multicollinearity test, and Autocorrelation test. 

 

RESULT AND DISCUSSION 

 

Descriptive Statistics Test Result 

Here are the results of the Descriptive Statistics test in this study:  

 

Table 1. Descriptive Statistics Test 

 N Min Max Mean Std. Deviation 

Tax Avoidance 54 0.02 0.88 0.2481 0.20876 

CSR 54 0.08 0.97 0.4324 0.24223 

Capital Intensity 54 0.01 0.83 0.3077 0.25758 

Firm Size 54 18.90 31.45 23.5601 4.09120 

Source: Data is processed (2025) 

 
The average tax avoidance (CETR) value of 0.2481 indicates that the companies in the sample tend 

to engage in relatively high levels of tax avoidance (since a lower CETR implies higher tax avoidance). The 

minimum value of 0.02 suggests that some companies pay only 2% of their cash-based income in taxes, 

reflecting aggressive tax avoidance practices. In contrast, a maximum CETR of 0.88 demonstrates that some 

companies demonstrate high tax compliance. The standard deviation of 0.20876 reflects considerable 

variation among firms in terms of their tax behavior.  

The mean CSR disclosure index of 0.4324 indicates a moderate level of CSR reporting. A minimum 



Agengsriwardana, Aryani, Rani, Armin / Finance, Accounting and Business Analysis, Volume 7 Issue 2, 2025. 

157 

 

score of 0.08 implies that some companies disclose only 8% of the CSR indicators, highlighting significant 

inconsistency in sustainability reporting. Companies with a CSR score of 0.97 disclose almost all required 

CSR items, suggesting strong compliance. These findings reveal heterogeneous CSR engagement within the 

energy sector.  

The average capital intensity of 0.3077 suggests that fixed assets account for roughly 30% of total 

assets. A maximum value close to 0.83 indicates that some companies are highly capital-intensive, which is 

typical for the energy sector that relies heavily on physical infrastructure. Conversely, the minimum value 

of 0.01 demonstrates that certain companies have minimal fixed assets. This variation is important in 

understanding depreciation strategies and potential for tax planning. 

Firm size varies widely. The mean logarithm of assets is 23.56. The minimum and maximum values 

indicate the presence of small to very large firms in the sample, reflecting the diversity of operating scales in 

the energy sector. The high standard deviation value (4.09) indicates substantial variation in firm size. 

 

Results of the Coefficient of Determination Test. 

Here are the results of the coefficient of determination test in this study: 

 

Table 2. Determination Coefficient Test 

 R2 

Model 1 0.432 

Model 2 0.445 

Source: Data is processed (2025) 

 

The first model, which tests the influence of CSR, Capital Intensity, and Firm Size on tax avoidance, 

explains 43.2% of the variation in tax avoidance. The remaining 56.8% is influenced by other factors not 

explained by this model. In the second model, which modifies the relationship by adding firm size as a 

moderating variable, the R-Square increases to 44.5%. This indicates that the second model can explain 

44.5% of the variation in tax avoidance, with firm size serving to enhance the explanation of the observed 

phenomenon. 

 

Normality Test Result 

The results of the normality test in this study: 

 

Table 3. Normality Test Result 

  Unstandardized Residual 

N  54 

Normal Parametersa,b Mean 0.0000000 

 Std. Devation 0.15852029 

Most Extreme Differences Absolute 0.093 

 Positive 0.093 

 Negative -0.054 

Test Statistic  0.093 

Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed)  0.200c,d 

Notes: 
a Test distribution is Normal 
b Calculated from data 
c Lilliefors Significance Correction 
d This is a lower bound of the true significance 

Source: Data is processed (2025) 

 

The results of the Normality Test using Kolmogorov-Smirnov have a p-value of 0.200 > 0.05, so it it 

can be concluded that the residual data is normally distributed. This demonstrates that the regression model 

meets the normality assumption. 

 

Multicollinearity Test Result 
The results of the multicollinearity test in this study: 

 

 



Agengsriwardana, Aryani, Rani, Armin / Finance, Accounting and Business Analysis, Volume 7 Issue 2, 2025. 

158 

 

Table 4. Multicollinearity Test Result 

Model Collinearity Statistics 

 Tolerance VIF 

CSR 0.929 1.076 

Capital Intensity 0.931 1.074 

Firm Size 0.998 1.002 

Source: Data is processed (2025) 

 
There is no multicollinearity problem because all VIF values are <10 and tolerance >0.1. This means 

that the independent variables in the model are not highly correlated with each other, and the regression 

results can be interpreted well individually. 

 

Heteroscedasticity Test Result 
The results of the heteroscedasticity test in this study: 

 
Figure 2. Heteroscedasticity Test Result 

 

The test was conducted using the visual method (scatterplot/Glejser), but no distinct pattern was 

observed, based on the graph in Figure 2. Because there is no systematic pattern visible between the residual 

and the predicted Y value, it can be concluded that there is no heteroscedasticity. 

 

Autocorrelation Test Result 
The results of the autocorrelation test in this study: 

 

Table 5. Autocorrelation Test Result (Runs Test) 

 Unstandardized Residual 

Test Valuea -0.01022 

Cases < Test Value 27 

Cases >= Test Value 27 

Total Cases 54 

Number of Runs 26 

Z -0.550 

Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) 0.583 

Source: Data is processed (2025) 

 



Agengsriwardana, Aryani, Rani, Armin / Finance, Accounting and Business Analysis, Volume 7 Issue 2, 2025. 

159 

 

The results of the Runs Test show a p-value of 0.583 > 0.05, so there is no autocorrelation in the 

residual data. This means that the error (residual) in one observation is not correlated with the error in other 

observations, and the model does not violate the assumption of residual independence. 

 

F-Test Results 
The F-test is also known as the Model Suitability Test. This test is used to assess whether the 

regression model used is feasible or acceptable, by testing whether the independent variables jointly affect 

the dependent variable. F-Test Results in this study: 

 

Table 6. F-Test Result 

 F Sig. Description 

Model 1 12.238 0.000 Fit Model 

Model 2 7.697 0.000 Fit Model 

Source: Data is processed (2025) 

 

The F-test results for both model 1 and model 2 show a p-value (Sig.) of 0.000 < 0.05. This model 

collectively explains the variation in tax avoidance and indicates that CSR, Capital Intensity, and Firm Size 

have a significant effect on tax avoidance. Therefore, the relationship between these variables is valid, and 

the regression model used can be accepted as an appropriate model to describe this phenomenon. 

 

Multiple Linear Regression Analysis Results  
The following are the results of the Multiple Linear Regression Analysis in this study: 

 

Table 7. Multiple Linear Regression Analysis Results (Model 1) 

 Coefficient 

Constant -0.273 

CSR 0.509 

Capital Intensity 0.003 

Firm Size 0.013 

Source: Data is processed (2025) 

 

The regression equation obtained in Model 1 is: 

 

TA = -0.273 + 0.509CSR + 0.003 CI + 0.013 FS + e (7) 

 

Table 8. Multiple Linear Regression Analysis Results (Model 2) 

 Coefficient 

Constant 0.196 

CSR -0.242 

Capital Intensity -0.521 

Firm Size -0.007 

CRS*Firm Size 0.031 

Capital Intensty*Firm Size 0.022 

Source: Data is processed (2025) 

 

The regression equation obtained in Model 2 is: 

 

TA = -0.196 – 0.242CSR – 0.521CI – 0.007FS + 0.031CSR*FS + 0.022CSR*FS + 𝜀 (8) 

 

t-Test Results 
Here are the results of the t-test in this study: 

 

 

 

 

 



Agengsriwardana, Aryani, Rani, Armin / Finance, Accounting and Business Analysis, Volume 7 Issue 2, 2025. 

160 

 

Table 9. t-Test Results (Model 1) 

 t Sig Hypothesis 

Constant    

CSR 5.301 0.000 Accepted 

Capital Intensity 0.003 0.974 Rejected 

Firm Size 2.319 0.025 Accepted 

Source: Data is processed (2025) 

 

Based on the t-test results, it was found that CSR and Firm Size have an effect on tax avoidance (0.000 

< 0.05 and 0.025 < 0.05), while Capital Intensity has no effect (0.945 > 0.05). 

 

Table 7. t-Test Results (Model 2) 

 t Sig Hypothesis 

CRS*Firm Size 1.275 0.209 Rejected 

Capital Intensty*Firm Size 0.924 0.360 Rejected 

Source: Data is processed (2025) 

 

Based on the t-test results in Model 2, firm size does not strengthen or weaken the influence of CSR 

and Capital Intensity on tax avoidance. This means that the company size does not have a significant 

moderating effect on the relationship between CSR and Capital Intensity with tax avoidance (0.209 > 0.005 

and 0.360 > 0.005). 

 

The Effect of Corporate Social Responsibility on Tax Avoidance  

Based on the t-test results, it was found that CSR influences tax avoidance. These research results are 

consistent with studies conducted by Mardianti and Ardini (2020), Setiawati and Adi (2020), and Putri and 

Lastanti (2024), which concluded that corporate social responsibility partially affects tax avoidance. The 

coefficient from the t-test results shows a positive influence. This means that the higher the CSR value, the 

higher the CETR value, which serves as a proxy for tax avoidance. A high CETR value indicates a lower 

level of tax avoidance. Based on these findings, it is concluded that the higher the company's involvement 

in CSR activities, the lower the level of tax avoidance undertaken by the company. 

Based on agency theory, CSR can function as a mechanism to reduce agency costs and improve tax 

compliance. Managers committed to CSR tend to focus more on long-term sustainability and transparency, 

which aligns with the interests of shareholders. Therefore, companies with a higher level of CSR tend to 

avoid tax avoidance due to reputational risks, social compliance, and increased agency costs. 

This finding is also supported by legitimacy theory. According to legitimacy theory, companies strive 

to align their business practices with social norms and public expectations in order to maintain operational 

legitimacy (Suchman 1995). Although the statistical analysis in this study does not show a moderating effect 

of firm size, companies that are strongly committed to CSR may still perceive aggressive tax avoidance as 

misaligned with principles of transparency and accountability. This indicates a potential reputational 

concern rather than a consistent behavioral outcome across all firms. 

Companies with higher CSR levels tend to have a higher Cash Effective Tax Rate (CETR), indicating 

better tax compliance (Dwilopa and Jatmiko 2023; Lanis and Richardson 2012). Companies engaged in 

social activities are more likely to pay taxes fairly, compared to companies that are less focused on CSR. 

Hoi et al. (2013) found that companies with low CSR are more likely to engage in aggressive tax avoidance 

practices. This is because companies without a social orientation tend to focus more on short-term financial 

gains, including reducing their tax burden through tax avoidance strategies. 

On the other hand, governments and society are increasingly paying attention to tax transparency as 

part of their evaluation of corporate sustainability. Therefore, companies that implement CSR as a business 

strategy are likely to avoid tax avoidance practices to maintain public trust and mitigate reputational risks. 

CSR plays a role in reducing tax avoidance, as companies that care about social responsibility are more 

focused on tax compliance than companies that only focus on short-term profits. 

 

The Effect of Capital Intensity on tax avoidance 

Based on the t-test results, it was found that Capital Intensity does not have an impact on tax 

avoidance. This is in line with the research conducted by Ulinuha and Nurdin (2024) and Sobarudin and 

Ruhiyat (2022), which concluded that capital intensity does not affect tax avoidance.  

According to agency theory, companies consist of two parties with different interests, namely 

shareholders (principals) and managers (agents). Managers may have incentives to pursue tax avoidance 



Agengsriwardana, Aryani, Rani, Armin / Finance, Accounting and Business Analysis, Volume 7 Issue 2, 2025. 

161 

 

through the use of fixed assets to reduce tax burdens, but this does not always occur. Companies may tend 

to focus more on long-term investments in capital-intensive assets and concentrate more on business 

operations and growth rather than tax avoidance. 

This finding also aligns with legitimacy theory, which suggests that companies seek to obtain and 

maintain social legitimacy by acting in accordance with accepted social norms. Companies with many fixed 

assets may use depreciation as a tool for tax avoidance, but they are less likely to engage in aggressive tax 

avoidance due to potential reputational risks and stricter regulations (Sikka et al. 2009). Companies with 

high capital intensity tend to avoid tax avoidance practices because it can damage their reputation in the 

eyes of the public and the government. Companies that have substantial fixed assets and operate in sectors 

such as energy, which rely heavily on physical infrastructure, may prefer to comply with their tax obligations 

transparently in order to maintain their legitimacy. 

 

The Effect of Firm Size on tax avoidance 

Based on the results of the t-test, it was found that firm size has an impact on tax avoidance. The t-

test results show that firm size has a positive coefficient. This means that the larger the company, the higher 

its CETR value, indicating that the company is more compliant with its tax obligations. This finding is 

supported by agency theory and legitimacy theory. Larger companies typically have more stakeholders and 

higher external oversight, both from regulators and the public. Larger companies are more likely to avoid 

aggressive tax avoidance and focus on transparent tax compliance. This is because larger companies are 

more concerned with reputational risks and government oversight, which motivates them to maintain a 

higher CETR (Boni and Levendis 2023; Hassan and Jha 2021; Lanis and Richardson 2012). Furthermore, 

larger companies are not only subject to greater scrutiny but also have the financial capacity to meet their 

tax obligations in a legal manner, which enhances tax transparency and reduces tax avoidance (Nugroho 

and Rachmawati 2022). Larger companies are better able to manage efficient tax planning legally, without 

resorting to aggressive tax avoidance strategies. 

 

The Effect of Corporate Social Responsibility on tax avoidance with Firm Size as a Moderating Variable 

The results of the t-test indicate that firm size does not moderate the effect of CSR on tax avoidance. 

These findings are consistent with the research conducted by Komara et al. (2022), and Sulaeman and 

Surjandari (2024). The level of CSR disclosure activity does not indicate a direct relationship between the 

company size and the level of tax avoidance, whether the company is large or small. Both large and small 

companies with good CSR disclosure do not necessarily show a lower or higher level of tax avoidance. This 

suggests that firm size does not play a significant role in strengthening or weakening the relationship between 

CSR and tax avoidance. 

Firm size is not able to moderate the relationship between CSR and tax avoidance because managers 

in larger companies, who have greater power, tend to prioritize financial gains, which may lead to more 

aggressive tax avoidance, even if they are involved in CSR. This indicates that the company size does not 

always ensure that compliance with CSR will directly correlate with lower tax avoidance. This aligns with 

agency theory, which explains the relationship between the principal (shareholders) and the agent 

(managers), where managers may act in their own interests, which can sometimes conflict with the interests 

of the shareholders. Although larger companies have more stakeholders and oversight, their influence on 

CSR and tax avoidance does not always show a strong relationship, as managers in large companies may 

still focus on short-term profitability rather than considering the long-term impacts of CSR on taxes.  

Legitimacy theory suggests that companies strive to gain and maintain social legitimacy by aligning 

their business practices with societal norms and expectations. While large companies often engage in CSR 

to maintain their reputation and legitimacy in the eyes of the public, this does not always directly influence 

tax avoidance, especially if the company believes that tax avoidance can enhance its financial gains in the 

short term. Although CSR can enhance tax compliance, firm size may not serve as a strong moderating 

factor. This can occur because, in some large companies, the goal of maximizing profits may be more 

dominant, meaning aggressive tax avoidance may still occur despite their participation in CSR activities. 

Even large companies with robust CSR programs may engage in tax avoidance strategies that are legal but 

still within legal boundaries. Companies, even large ones involved in CSR and more closely monitored by 

the public, are not guaranteed to have lower tax avoidance. They argue that large companies may manage 

tax avoidance in more subtle ways that are harder to detect (Sikka et al. 2009). 

 

The Effect of Capital Intensity on Tax Avoidance with Firm Size as a Moderating Variable 
Based on the t-test results, it was found that firm size is insufficient to moderate the effect of capital 

intensity on tax avoidance. This finding aligns with the research conducted by Azis et al. (2024), Andoko 

and Prabowo (2024), and Ulinuha and Nurdin (2024), which states that firm size cannot moderate the 

relationship between capital intensity and tax avoidance. Firm size may not be able to moderate this effect 



Agengsriwardana, Aryani, Rani, Armin / Finance, Accounting and Business Analysis, Volume 7 Issue 2, 2025. 

162 

 

because larger companies often have more complex policies related to tax planning, as well as a greater focus 

on legal compliance and legitimate tax avoidance, even with substantial fixed assets. The company size is 

not sufficient to moderate the relationship between capital intensity and tax avoidance, because larger firms 

may still engage in more subtle tax avoidance practices despite having significant fixed assets (Boni and 

Levendis 2023). 

Large companies may prioritize tax compliance and transparency, as aggressive tax avoidance risks 

damaging the company’s legitimacy in the eyes of the public and regulators. However, in terms of 

moderation, firm size does not always play a role in strengthening or weakening the relationship between 

capital intensity and tax avoidance. This is because large companies with high capital intensity may focus 

more on efficient tax planning and regulatory compliance, meaning that capital intensity is not fully linked 

to tax avoidance, even for large firms. Although larger firms have greater potential to use fixed assets for tax 

planning, they are more likely to adopt legitimate and transparent tax strategies due to stricter oversight from 

the public and government (Sobarudin and Ruhiyat 2022). 

 

CONCLUSION 

 

The conclusion of this study demonstrates that Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and Firm Size 

have an influence on tax avoidance, while Capital Intensity does not have a significant effect on tax 

avoidance. The findings indicate that companies with higher CSR levels tend to engage less in tax avoidance, 

as they are more concerned with their reputation and social compliance, which enhances tax transparency. 

On the other hand, larger companies tend to be more compliant with their tax obligations, possibly due to 

greater scrutiny from stakeholders and regulators. 

However, this study also finds that firm size does not moderate the effect of CSR and Capital Intensity 

on tax avoidance. Although larger companies have more resources and tend to focus more on lawful tax 

compliance, firm size is insufficient to weaken or strengthen the relationship between CSR and tax 

avoidance, nor between Capital Intensity and tax avoidance. This suggests that other factors, such as internal 

company policies and external oversight, may be more influential in determining the level of tax avoidance 

practiced by companies, regardless of their size. 

Thus, larger companies and those with high CSR involvement tend to be more compliant with their tax 

obligations, while companies with high capital intensity do not necessarily engage in lower levels of tax 

avoidance. Firm size, although influencing tax avoidance, does not serve as a strong moderating variable in 

the relationship between CSR, Capital Intensity, and tax avoidance. 

One of the limitations of this study lies in the short research period (2021–2023), which provides only 

three years of data per company. Although this period captures critical post-pandemic financial behavior 

and aligns with the implementation of updated sustainability reporting standards, the small time dimension 

limits the ability to draw broader generalizations. Panel regression models generally benefit from longer time 

series to improve statistical power and reduce the influence of year-specific anomalies. Therefore, the results 

of this study should be seen as indicative rather than definitive. Further research using extended time frames 

is recommended to validate and deepen these findings. 

 

REFERENCE 

 

Agustina, Zubaidah, S., and I. Arisanti. 2020. Pengaruh Corporate Social Responsibility dan Capital 

Intensity terhadap Penghindaran Pajak (Studi Empiris Pada Perusahaan yang Terdaftar Di BEI) [The 

Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility and Capital Intensity on tax avoidance (Empirical Study 
on Companies Listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange)]. Jurnal Akuntansi Indonesia [Indonesian 

Accounting Journal], 16(2): 79–86. 

Agustyo, B. A., and B.F. Arianti. 2024. Pengaruh Corporate Social Responsibility, Kepemilikan Manajerial, 

dan Capital Intensity Terhadap tax avoidance [The Effect of Corporate Social Responsibility, 
Managerial Ownership, and Capital Intensity on tax avoidance]. Gorontalo Accounting Journal, 7(1): 1–

11. https://doi.org/10.32662/gaj.v7i1.3168  

Amiah, N. 2022. Profitabilitas, Intensitas Modal Dan Penghindaran Pajak: Ukuran Perusahaan Sebagai 

Variabel Pemoderasi [Profitability, Capital Intensity and tax avoidance: Firm Size as a Moderating 
Variable]. Jurnal Literasi Akuntansi [Journal of Accounting Literacy], 2(1): 63–73. 

https://doi.org/10.55587/jla.v2i1.13  

Andoko, A. A., and T.J.W. Prabowo. 2024. Pengaruh Capital Intensity dan Leverage Terhadap tax avoidance 

Dengan Ukuran Perusahaan sebagai Variabel Moderasi [The Effect of Capital Intensity and Leverage 

on tax avoidance with Company Size as a Moderating Variable]. Diponegoro Journal of Accounting, 

13(4). 

Ardini, L. 2023. Pengaruh Corporate Social Responsibility, Leverage, Dan Kompensasi Rugi Fiskal 

https://doi.org/10.32662/gaj.v7i1.3168
https://doi.org/10.55587/jla.v2i1.13


Agengsriwardana, Aryani, Rani, Armin / Finance, Accounting and Business Analysis, Volume 7 Issue 2, 2025. 

163 

 

Terhadap tax avoidance dengan Komite Audit Sebagai Pemoderasi [The Effect of Corporate Social 

Responsibility, Leverage, and Fiscal Loss Compensation on tax avoidance with the Audit Committee 
as Moderation]. Jurnal Ilmu Dan Riset Akuntansi (JIRA) [Journal of Accounting Science and Research], 

12(12). 
Aryani, D. S., and C. Armereo. 2024. Tax avoidance of Companies in The Sri Kehati Index. Finance, 

Accounting and Business Analysis (FABA), 6(2): 99–108. https://doi.org/10.43193/faba.v6i2.397  

Azis, C. A. P., M. Suwandi and R. Aditiya. 2024. Pengaruh Corporate Social Responsibility Dan Capital 

Intensity Terhadap Penghindaran Pajak Dengan Ukuran Perusahaan sebagai Variabel Moderasi [The 

Effect of Corporate Social Responsibility and Capital Intensity on tax avoidance with Company Size 
as a Moderating Variable]. ISAFIR: Islamic Accounting and Finance Review, 5(1): 10–22. 

https://doi.org/10.24252/isafir.v5i1.48845  
Boni, L., and J. Levendis. 2023. Firm Size and The Role of tax avoidance in Corporate Governance. Journal 

of Business Ethics, 175(3): 571-589. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-022-05277-5  

Dewinta, I. A. R., and P. E. Setiawan. 2016. Pengaruh Ukuran Perusahaan, Umur Perusahaan, 

Profitabilitas, Leverage, dan Pertumbuhan Penjualan Terhadap tax avoidance [The Effect of 

Company Size, Company Age, Profitability, Leverage, and Sales Growth on tax avoidance]. E-Jurnal 
Akuntansi Universitas Udayana [Udayana University Accounting E-Journal], 14(3): 1584–1613. 

Directorate General of Taxes. 2023. Laporan Kinerja Direktorat Jenderal Pajak 2019–2023. Jakarta: 

Kementerian Keuangan Republik Indonesia. Retrieved from https://www.pajak.go.id 

Dowling, J. and Pfeffer, J. 1975. Organizational Legitimacy: Social Values and Organizational Behavior. 

Pacific Sociological Review, 18: 122-136. https://doi.org/10.2307/1388226 
Dwilopa, A., and Y. Jatmiko. 2023. The Effect of Corporate Social Responsibility on tax avoidance: 

Evidence from Indonesia. International Journal of Accounting and Finance Studies, 18(2): 112-130. 

Firmansyah, A., and R. S. Estutik. 2021. Kajian akuntansi keuangan: Peran tata kelola Perusahaan dalam 

Kinerja Tanggung Jawab Lingkungan, Pengungkapan Tanggung Jawab Sosial, Agresivitas Pajak 

[Financial accounting study: The role of corporate governance in environmental responsibility 
performance, social responsibility disclosure, tax aggressiveness]. Penerbit Adab [Adab Publisher]. 

Firmansyah, A., and G. A. Triastie. 2021. Bagaimana Peran Tata Kelola Perusahaan  dalam Penghindaran 

Pajak, Pengungkapan Tanggung Jawab Sosial Perusahaan, Pengungkapan Risiko, Efisiensi Investasi? 

[What is the Role of Corporate Governance in tax avoidance, Corporate Social Responsibility 

Disclosure, Risk Disclosure, Investment Efficiency?]. Penerbit Adab [Adab Publisher] 

Global Reporting Initiative. 2021. GRI Standards 2021: Consolidated Set of Standards. Amsterdam: GRI. 

Retrieved from https://www.globalreporting.org 

Hassan, M. K., and A. Jha. 2021. Corporate governance, firm size, and tax avoidance. Research in 
International Business and Finance, 54: 101300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ribaf.2020.101300 

Hasanah, I. R., and F. C. Febriyanto. 2024. Pengaruh CSR, Ukuran Perusahaan, dan Kepemilikan 

Institusional Terhadap tax avoidance [The Effect of CSR, Company Size, and Institutional 

Ownership on tax avoidance]. Musytari: Neraca Manajemen, Akuntansi, Dan Ekonomi [Musytari: 

Management Balance, Accounting, and Economics], 7(8): 21–30. 

https://doi.org/10.8734/musytari.v7i8.5144  

Hery. 2017. Analisis Laporan Keuangan-(Integrated And Comprehensive Edition) [Financial Statement 
Analysis-(Integrated And Comprehensive Edition)]. Penerbit Grasindo [Grafindo Publisher] 

Hoi, C. K., Q. Wu, and H. Zhang. 2013. Is Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Associated with tax 
avoidance? Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 32(6): 77-92. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2013.05.009  

Hutabarat, E. T. R., and A. Yuliati. 2023. Pengaruh Capital Intensity dan Leverage Terhadap tax avoidance 

Pada Perusahaan Sektor Property Dan Real Estate Yang Terdaftar Di Bursa Efek Indonesia (BEI) 

Pada Tahun 2019-2021 [The Effect of Capital Intensity and Leverage on tax avoidance in Property 

and Real Estate Sector Companies Listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange (BEI) in 2019-2021]. 
Journal of Economic, Bussines and Accounting (COSTING), 7(1): 1007–1016. 

Jensen, C. Michael. and W.H. Meckling. 1976. “Theory of The Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Cost 
and Ownership Structure”. Journal of Financial Economics. 305-360. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-

405X(76)90026-X  

Komara, V., K. Kurniawan, and H. Yonata. 2022. Pengaruh Transfer Pricing, Corporate Governance, 

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), Dan Capital Intensity Terhadap Penghindaran Pajak dengan 

Ukuran Perusahaan Sebagai Variabel Moderasi [The Effect of Transfer Pricing, Corporate 

Governance, Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), and Capital Intensity on tax avoidance with 

Company Size as a Moderating Variable]. Jurnal Kewarganegaraan [Journal of Citizenship], 6(2): 4900–

4916 

Kurniawati, D. 2023. Pengaruh Thin Capitalization, Capital Intensity Terhadap Penghindaran Pajak 

https://doi.org/10.43193/faba.v6i2.397
https://doi.org/10.24252/isafir.v5i1.48845
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-022-05277-5
https://www.pajak.go.id/
https://doi.org/10.2307/1388226
https://www.globalreporting.org/
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ribaf.2020.101300
https://doi.org/10.8734/musytari.v7i8.5144
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2013.05.009
https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X
https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X


Agengsriwardana, Aryani, Rani, Armin / Finance, Accounting and Business Analysis, Volume 7 Issue 2, 2025. 

164 

 

Dengan Variabel Pemoderasi Kepemilikan Institusional [The Effect of Thin Capitalization, Capital 
Intensity on tax avoidance  with the Moderating Variable of Institutional Ownership]. Jurnal Akuntansi 

Edukasi Nusantara [Nusantara Educational Accounting Journal], 1(1): 44–50. 
https://doi.org/10.61754/jadura.v1i1.14 

Lanis, R., and G. Richardson. 2012. Corporate Social Responsibility and Tax Aggressiveness: An Empirical 
Analysis. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 31(1): 86-108. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2012.06.006  

Lestari, N. M., M.A. Sudrajat, and M. Novitasari. 2024. Analisis Financial Distress Memediasi Pengaruh 

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) terhadap tax avoidance [Analysis of Financial Distress 
Mediating the Effect of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) on tax avoidance]. SIMBA: Seminar 

Inovasi Manajemen, Bisnis, Dan Akuntansi [SIMBA: Seminar on Innovation in Management, Business and 

Accounting], 6 

Lolana F. L., and S. Dwimulyani. 2019. Pengaruh Good Corporate Governance Terhadap Manajemen 

Laba dengan tax avoidance sebagai Variabel Intervening [The Influence of Good Corporate 
Governance on Profit Management with tax avoidance as an Intervening Variable]. Prosiding Seminar 

Nasional [Proceedings of the National Seminar]. Universitas Trisakti [Trisakti University] 

Mardianti, I. V., and L. Ardini. 2020. Pengaruh Tanggung Jawab Sosial Perusahaan, Profitabilitas, 

Kepemilikan Asing, dan Intensitas Modal terhadap Penghindaran Pajak [The Effect of Corporate 
Social Responsibility, Profitability, Foreign Ownership and Capital Intensity on tax avoidance]. Jurnal 

Ilmu Dan Riset Akuntansi (JIRA) [Journal of Accounting Science and Research (JIRA)], 9(4): 1 – 17. 

Marsahala, Y. T., D. Arieftiara, and N. Lastiningsih. 2020. Profitability, Capital Intensity And tax 
avoidance In Indonesia: The Effect Board Of Commissioners’ Competencies. Journal of Contemporary 

Accounting, 2(3): 129–140. https://doi.org/10.20885/jca.vol2.iss3.art2 

Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Indonesia. 2023. Statistik APBN dan Rasio Pajak Tahun 2019–2023. 

Jakarta: Kementerian Keuangan RI. Retrieved from https://www.kemenkeu.go.id 

Nabila, K., and A. Kartika. 2023. Pengaruh Capital Intensity dan Komisaris Independen terhadap 

Penghindaran Pajak dengan Ukuran Perusahaan sebagai Variabel Moderasi [Effect of Capital 

Intensity and Independent Commissioners on tax avoidance [with Company Size as a Moderating 
Variable]. Ekonomis: Journal of Economics and Business, 7(1): 591–597. 

http://dx.doi.org/10.33087/ekonomis.v7i1.724 

Nugroho, A., and N. Rachmawati. 2022. Firm size, corporate governance, and tax avoidance in Indonesia. 
Asian Economic Policy Review, 17(2): 213-230. https://doi.org/10.1111/aepr.12267 

Oktavia, V., J. Ulfi, and J.W. Kusuma. 2020. Pengaruh Good Corporate Governance dan Ukuran 

Perusahaan terhadap tax avoidance (Pada Perusahaan Properti dan Real Estate yang Terdaftar di BEI 

Periode 2015 - 2018) [The Effect of Good Corporate Governance and Company Size on tax avoidance 

(In Property and Real Estate Companies Listed on the BEI for the 2015 - 2018 Period)]. Jurnal Revenue 

[Revenue Journal], 01(02): 143–151. https://doi.org/10.46306/rev.v1i2.16 

Putra, F. H., M. Yusuf,  and G. M. Zairin. 2025. Pengaruh Capital Intensity, Inventory Intensity, dan 

Ukuran Perusahaan Terhadap tax avoidance Pada Emiten Sektor Peroperty Dan Real Estate yang 

Terdaftar di BEI [The Effect of Capital Intensity, Inventory Intensity, and Company Size on tax 
avoidance in Property and Real Estate Sector Issuers Listed on the IDX]. Jurnal Revenue: Jurnal Ilmiah 

Akuntansi [Revenue Journal: Scientific Journal of Accounting], 5(2): 1351–

1362.  https://doi.org/10.24843/eja.2020.v30.i07.p05 

Putri, K. D., and H. S. Lastanti. 2024. Independent Commissioners Memoderasi Pengaruh Corporate Social 
Responsibility, Capital Intensity Dan Thin Capitalization Terhadap tax avoidance. Action Research 

Literate, 8(9): 2494–2503. 

Rani, S., A. Rakhmawati, and Wulandari. 2024. Effect Of Environmental Performance and Capital 
Structure on Financial Performance: Evidence from Mining Sector Companies Listed on IDX. New 

Applied Studies in Management, Economics & Accounting, 7(2): 32-43. 

https://doi.org/10.22034/nasmea.2024.182733  

Rani, S., M. Zuliyana, and R. Effendi. 2023. The Effect of Profitability and Leverage on tax avoidance 
Moderated by Firm Size: Evidence from Property and Real Estate Companies in Indonesia. Finance, 

Accounting and Business Analysis (FABA), 5(2): 147–158. https://doi.org/10.43193/faba.v5i2.292  

Rosyati, T., H. Suripto, and D. Purwasih. 2023. Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). Unpam Press  

Samhuri, R., N. Ahmar, and Mulyadi. 2023. Strategi Inovasi dalam Perspektif CEO Overconfidence dan 

CEO Power [Innovation Strategy in the Perspective of CEO Overconfidence and CEO Power]. 
Penerbit CV. Mega Press Nusantara [CV Mega Press Nusantara Publisher] 

Septiani, A. S., and U. Sastradipraja. 2023. Pengaruh Pendapatan Perkapita, Pertumbuhan Ekonomi Dan 

Tarif Pajak Terhadap Tax Ratio Negara Asean 2015-2021 [The Influence of Per Capita Income, 
Economic Growth and Tax Rates on the Tax Ratio of ASEAN Countries 2015-2021]. Oikos: Jurnal 

https://doi.org/10.61754/jadura.v1i1.14
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2012.06.006
https://doi.org/10.20885/jca.vol2.iss3.art2
https://www.kemenkeu.go.id/
http://dx.doi.org/10.33087/ekonomis.v7i1.724
https://doi.org/10.1111/aepr.12267
https://doi.org/10.46306/rev.v1i2.16
https://doi.org/10.24843/eja.2020.v30.i07.p05
https://doi.org/10.22034/nasmea.2024.182733
https://doi.org/10.43193/faba.v5i2.292


Agengsriwardana, Aryani, Rani, Armin / Finance, Accounting and Business Analysis, Volume 7 Issue 2, 2025. 

165 

 

Kajian Pendidikan Ekonomi Dan Ilmu Ekonomi [Oikos: Journal of Economic Education and Economic 

Studies], 8(1): 199 – 215.  

Setiawati, F., and P.H. Adi. 2020. Pengaruh Corporate Social Responsibility Terhadap tax avoidance pada 

Perusahaan Manfaktur yang Terdaftar pada Bursa Efek Indonesia Tahun 2014-2017 [The Effect of 

Corporate Social Responsibility on tax avoidance in Manufacturing Companies Listed on the 
Indonesian Stock Exchange 2014-2017]. Jurnal Ilmiah Akuntansi Dan Keuangan [Scientific Journal of 

Accounting and Finance], 9(2): 105–116 

Sikka, P., T. Puxty, and H. Willmott. 2009. The dark side of transfer pricing: Its role in tax avoidance and 
wealth retentiveness. Accounting Forum, 33(2): 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accfor.2009.02.003  

Sobarudin, A., and E. Ruhiyat. 2022. Firm Size and Its Moderating Effect on Capital Intensity and tax 
avoidance. International Journal of Accounting and Finance, 19(1): 88-101. 

Suchman, M. C. 1995. Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management 

Review, 20(3): 571-610. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9508080331  

Sulaeman, A., and D.A. Surjandari. 2024. The Influence of Capital Intensity, Leverage, Profitability, and 
Corporate Social Responsibility on tax avoidance with Firm Size as a Moderating Variable. Asian 

Journal of Economics, Business and Accounting, 24(5): 433–442. 

https://doi.org/10.9734/ajeba/2024/v24i51320  

Ulinuha, D., and N. Nurdin. 2024. Capital Intensity and tax avoidance: The Moderating Role of Firm Size. 

Journal of Business and Taxation, 8(2): 132-145. 

Wardila, A., M. Maemunah, C. Lukita, W.S. Aji, D. Mulyadi, D Purwandari, S. Elvika, K.Maula, M.N. 

Munir, B. Rismayadi, Yanti, E. Mutiara, Pasha, M. Rafly, Agustina, P.N. Nurevri, L. Lasmini,  

Syamsiah,  A. Nur, I. Chandra, Subagyo, and D. Fredrica. 2023. Membedah Kemampuan Manusia 
Dalam Meraih Mimpi : Kemampuan Mengendalikan dan Menggunakan Sumber Daya [Dissecting 

Human Ability to Achieve Dreams: The Ability to Control and Use Resources]. Penerbit Peneleh 

[Peneleh Publisher] 

Zoebar, M. K. Y., and D. Miftah. 2020. Pengaruh Corporate Social Responsibility, Capital Intensity Dan 

Kualitas Audit Terhadap Penghindaran Pajak [The Influence of Corporate Social Responsibility, 
Capital Intensity and Audit Quality on tax avoidance]. Jurnal Magister Akuntansi Trisakti [Trisakti 

Accounting Masters Journal], 7(1): 25–40 

 

APPENDIX 1 – LIST OF SAMPLED COMPANIES 

This study analyzed 18 energy sector companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange (IDX) during the 

2021–2023 period. The companies selected using purposive sampling are listed below: 

No. Company Code Company Name 

1 ABMM PT ABM Investama Tbk 

2 ADRO PT Adaro Energy Indonesia Tbk 

3 AKRA PT AKR Corporindo Tbk 

4 BESS PT Batulicin Nusantara Maritim Tbk 

5 BSSR PT Baramulti Suksessarana Tbk 

6 BYAN PT Bayan Resources Tbk 

7 GEMS PT Golden Energy Mines Tbk 

8 HRUM PT Harum Energy Tbk 

9 ITMG PT Indo Tambangraya Megah Tbk 

10 MBSS PT Mitrabahtera Segara Sejati Tbk 

11 PGAS PT Perusahaan Gas Negara Tbk 

12 PSSI PT Pelita Samudera Shipping Tbk 

13 PTBA PT Bukit Asam Tbk 

14 SHIP PT Sillo Maritime Perdana Tbk 

15 SMMT PT Golden Eagle Energy Tbk 

16 TCPI PT Transcoal Pacific Tbk 

17 TEBE PT Dana Brata Luhur Tbk 

18 TOBA PT TBS Energi Utama Tbk 

 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accfor.2009.02.003
https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9508080331
https://doi.org/10.9734/ajeba/2024/v24i51320

