JURNAL AKSI Akuntansi dan Sistem Informasi

For companies with a high tax burden, the company's profit will decrease. The company will take tax-saving measures, so that the tax paid is small while the profit earned is large. The higher the company's tax savings, the I more I aggressive I the I company I is I towards I taxes I . The I purpose I of I this I study i is i to i examine i and i analyze i the i effect i of i corporate governance (independent commissioners, audit committees, institutional ownership), gender diversity on the board


INTRODUCTION
In Indonesia, tax revenue from taxpayers is highly expected by the state. Taxes function as state revenue to cover state and regional budgets and are used to regulate and implement state policies in the social and economic fields. One of the parties that makes anI importantI contribution inI theI fieldI ofI taxationI is the companies. For companies with high tax burdens, company profits are low, so companies take austerity measures, or often called aggressiveness tax, to reduce tax paid by company and increase profits. The higher the tax savings in a company, theI moreI aggressiveI theI companyI isI towardsI taxesI .
Minister of Finance Sri Mulyani Indrawati has announced that the government in various countries expect reception from taxes. Sri Mulyani supervises any non-compliance towards Constitution by the company regarding the applicable taxes or tax avoidance. Sri Mulyani provides proof of tax avoidance, i.e. the company is willing to move to a country with a lower tax rate. Sri Mulyani gave an example of the willingness of US companies to move to Northern Ireland because of the 0% tax rate. (Suryowati, 2021).
There are several factors that are thought to have an influence on tax aggressiveness in a company, namely: corporate governance, gender diversity on the board, and corporate social responsibility (CSR). CorporateI governanceI inI thisI studyI includes independent commissionersI , audit committees and institutional ownership.
The choice of the independent commissioner variable was due to differences inI theI resultsI ofI previous studiesI . ResearchI results from the studies done by Migang & Dina (2020); Hidayat & Muliasari, (2020) stated that independentI commissionersI haveI anI effectI onI taxI aggressivenessI . TheI presence of independent commissioners in the company ensures maximum control to minimize tax aggressiveness. However, different results are shown by the research conducted by Erlina (2021); Kamul & Riswandari (2021); Rengganis & Putri (2018) which stated that independent commissionersI haveI noI effectI onI taxI aggressiveness, that theI greater the numberI ofI independentI commissionersI does not reduce the tax aggressiveness actions taken by the company, this can be indicated by the role of supervision to influence management decisions in carrying out tax aggressiveness actions has not been effective.
In terms of taxation, several researchers have specifically examined the impact of gender diversity onI theI boardI against taxI aggressivenessI . Gender in this study is proxied based on the presence of women onI theI boardI ofI directorsI and theI presenceI ofI womenI onI theI boardI of commissioners. Research result by Ambarsari et al., (2020); Rahman & Charoline, (2020) showed that genderI diversityI onI theI boardI hasI anI effectI onI taxI aggressivenessI . However, different results are shown by the research conducted by Kamul & Riswandari, (2021) where gender diversityI onI theI boardI hasI noI effectI onI taxI aggressivenessI .
Increased disclosure on CSR activities mean that the company cares about society and the environment. Research conducted by Erlina (2021); Kurniawati (2019) shows thatI corporateI socialI responsibilityI hasI an effect onI I taxI aggressivenessI . However, different resultsI areI shown by research conducted by Makhfudloh et al., (2018);Noviyanti et al., (2017) which shows that corporate social responsibility (CSR) has no effect on tax aggressiveness planning. Based on the things described above, the researchers are interested in testing and analyzing the effect of corporate governance, gender diversity, corporate social responsibility on tax aggressiveness in companies listed on the IDX.

Agency Theory
Agency theory was introduced by Jensen and Meckling (1976) this theory explains the relationship that occurs between owners and shareholders (principals) and managers (agents). Agencyi relationshipi arisesi wheni onei ori morei peoplei (principal) hirei anotheri personi (agent) toi providei ai servicei andi theni delegatei decision-makingi authorityi toi thei agenti . Agency theory describes the companyi asi ai meetingi pointi betweeni thei owner ofi thei companyi (principal) andi managementi (agent). An employer is called a principal who will give rights to another person called an agent to exercise his rights (Wicaksono, 2017). Both parties are bound by an employment contract that states their respective rights and obligations.

Legitimacy Theory
Legitimacy theory is one of theI mainI theoriesI usedI inI researchI on corporate social responsibility reporting. Legitimacy theory is basedI onI theI ideaI thatI toI ensureI an organization continues toI operateI successfullyI , the organizationI mustI behaveI in a way that is coherentI withI whatI isI considered sociallyI acceptableI behaviorI byI societyI (Bianchi et al., 2019). Legitimacy theory explains the social contract of organizations.

Tax Aggressiveness
Tax aggressiveness is a management strategy that a company follows to reduce its tax burden and as a result minimize its tax liability under state regulations. Companies believe that the high tax burden will reduce the company's profit. Corporate tax aggressiveness is a measure of the conformation of taxableI incomeI throughI taxI planningI , bothI legalI (tax avoidance) andI illegalI (tax evasion). TheI moreI loopholesI theI companyI usesI , theI moreI aggressiveI theI companyI is towards taxes even though not all of the company's actions violate existing rules (Ratmono, D. and Sagala, 2015).

Corporate Governance
The Institute of Corporate Governance IICG (2012) definesI corporateI governance as a seriesI of mechanismsI to directI and controlI a company so that the company's operations run in accordanceI withI theI expectationsI ofI stakeholdersI . The implementation of a well-structured corporate governance will make agents comply with all existing regulations, including not taking aggressive action against tax planning. This action aims to increase the agent's performance (Ayu et al., 2017).

Independent Commissioner
Independent commissioner organization in a company usually consists of independent board of commissioners external agency which has the task of assessing company performance as a whole and in general (Oktadella, 2010). Independent commissioners mediate between company management and company owners in strategic or political decisions to ensure that tax decisions do not violate applicable regulations (Ardyansah, 2014).
An independent commissioner is a person who is not affiliated with the shareholders or directors and does not hold the position of director in the company concerned. according to Dwi & Supramono (2012), withI theI increasingI numberI ofI independentI commissionersI inI theI companyI , the supervisory manager's performance can run more effectively. Research result by Migang and Dina (2020); Onyali et al., (2018); Purwanti et al., (2021) showed that independent commissioners have an effect on tax aggressiveness. BasedI onI theI explanationI aboveI , theI firstI hypothesisI canI beI formulated, namely: H1: Independent Commissioner has an effect on Tax Aggressiveness.
Audit committee is a committee that was formed by the boardi ofi directorsi which oversee the management ofi thei companyi . Audit committee is one of prerequisite for the implementationi ofi good corporate governance. Thei auditi committeei has duties and responsibilities so that the company complies with regulations including tax regulations. With a sufficient sizei ofi thei auditi committeei ini ai companyi , it is expected to be able to reduce tax aggressiveness whichi aimsi toi reducei thei taxi burden (Midiastuty et al., 2017). Research result from Zheng et al., (2019), which is in line with Ayem & Supriyadi (2019) shows that the audit committee has an effecti oni taxi aggressivenessi . Basedi oni the explanation above, the second hypothesisi can be formulated, namely: H2: The Audit Committee has an effect on Tax Aggressiveness.
Institutional ownership is share ownerships by institutions like banks, company insurance, investment institutions, or other institutions. Such institutional ownership can improve supervision in within the company so that tax aggressiveness will not occur. The existence of control and a high level of supervision of institutional ownership will provide a positive aspect of tax avoidance (Priest, 2016 (2019) showed that institutional ownership has an effecti oni taxi aggressivenessi . Basedi oni thei explanationi abovei , thei third hypothesisi can be formulatedi , namely: H3: Institutional Ownership has an effect on Tax Aggressiveness.

Gender Diversity On the Council
According to Arfken et al., (2004) Gender in a company can offer a lot benefits, such as additional knowledge, ideas and Skills, new problems to solve, better strategic planning, new knowledge or opinions and experiences. Low proportion of women on the board is possibly caused by difference in views between women and man in managing a company (Kristina & Wiratmaja, 2018). The involvement of female directors in the decision-making process is a key factor in financial success. Since women are more tax compliant than men, the presence of female board members can prevent tax aggressiveness in companies.
The existence of women in board directors can reduce tax aggression, because women have higher level of taxes loyalty than men. According to research Lanis et al., (2017) thei presencei ofi womeni oni thei boardi or the genderi diversityi ofi thei boardi hasi an influence on tax aggressiveness. So it can be said that if there are women on the board, it can reduce tax aggressiveness in the company. Studies by Ambarsari et al., (2020); Onyali et al., (2018) showed the results that gender diversity on the board has an effect oni taxi aggressivenessi . Basedi oni thei explanationi abovei , the fourth hypothesisi cani bei formulatedi , namely: H4: Gender diversity in the Council has an effect on Tax Aggressiveness.

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)
CSR activities can be developed in various fields, both in the economic, social and environmental fields. CSR is carried out as a company's effort to protect the environment asi ai formi ofi company concerni fori thei environmenti . Lanis & Richardson (2015) found that the higher the company's CSR performance, the smaller the possibility to avoid tax. These results suggest that the most socially responsible firms tend to reduce tax evasion.
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) isi ai formi ofi ethicsi andi corporatei responsibilityi fori all company activities in carrying out their operational activities. CSR activities can be carried out in various fields, both in the economic, social, environmental and educational fields. Studies by Alifa et al., (2018); Migang and Dina (2020) shows the results of corporate social responsibility (CSR) effect on taxI aggressivenessI . BasedI onI theI explanation above, the fifth hypothesisi cani bei formulatedi , namely: H5: Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has an effect on Tax Aggressiveness. Table 1 Descriptive Statistical Test Table 1 shows the minimum, maximum, mean, and standard deviation value, with a total number (N) of as much as 49.   According to thei resultsi ofi thei autocorrelation testi ini thei tablei abovei with the test run shows a significance value > 0.05. In conclusion, the regression model in this study is free from autocorrelation symptoms. Table 6 Multiple Linear Analysis

RESULT AND DISCUSSION
The results of the table above, the regression equation can be written as follows: Y = -0.346 + 0.218X1 -0.017X2 -0.496X3 -0.208X4 -0.346X5 1. The value of a in the regression above is -0.346. This shows that if all these variables are constant, the tax aggressiveness will be constant at 0.346. 2. The regressioni coefficienti value ofi thei independenti commissioneri variablei isi 0.218 (positive), meaning that for every increase of 1 unit of the independent commissioner, the level of tax aggressiveness will increase by 0.218. 3. The regressioni coefficienti valuei ofi thei auditi committeei variablei is -0.017 (negative), meaningi thati for every increasei of 1 auditi committeei unit, the level of tax aggressiveness will reduce by 0.017. 4. The value of the institutional ownership variable regression coefficient is -0.496 (negative), meaning thati for everyi 1 unit increasei ini institutionali ownership,I the tax aggressiveness willi reduce by 0.496. 5. The value of the gender diversity regression coefficient on the board is -0.208 (negative), meaning that for every 1 unit increase in genderi diversityi oni thei boardi , the level of tax aggressiveness will reduce by 0.208. 6. The regression coefficient valuei ofi thei corporatei sociali responsibilityi variablei is -0.346 (negative), meaning that each increase of 1 unit of corporate social responsibility will reduce the level of tax aggressiveness by 0.346. Based on the table, it was found that the table value was 2.016 as seen from the statistical t table df= nk-1 (df=49-5-1). Basedi oni thei tablei abovei , iti cani bei concluded that the results of the partial test between thei dependenti variablei and the independent variable: 1. The independent commissioner variable shows the value of tcount > ttable and a significance value of <0.05 (2.357>2.016 and 0.015<0.05). In conclusion, independent commissioners have an effecti oni taxi aggressivenessi . 2. The audit committee variable shows the value of tcount < ttable and the value of significance >0.05 (1.581<2.016 and 0.121>0.05). In conclusion, thei auditi committeei hasi noi effecti oni taxi aggressivenessi . 3. Institutional ownership variable shows tcount <ttable and significance value> 0.05 (0.124 <2.016 and 0.902>0.05). In conclusion, institutional ownership has no effect on tax aggressiveness. 4. The gender diversity variable on the board shows a tcount > ttable and a significance value <0.05 (3.836>2.016 and 0.000<0.05). In conclusion, genderi diversityi oni thei boardi hasi ani effecti oni taxi aggressivenessi . 5. The corporate social responsibility variable shows the tcount < t table and the significance value > 0.05 (1.411 < 2.016 and 0.165> 0.05). In conclusioni , corporatei sociali responsibilityi hasi no effect on tax aggressiveness. Based on the table, it was found that the table value was 2.016 as seen from the statistical t table df= nk-1 (df=49-5-1). Basedi oni thei tablei abovei , iti cani bei concluded that the results of the partial test between thei dependenti variablei and the independent variable: Table 9 Coefficient of Determination Test (R 2 ) Based on the test results, it can be seen that the independent variable affects the dependent variable by 0.327. This means that the independent variable affects the dependent variable by 32.7% and the remaining 67.3% is influenced by other variables that are not in this study.

The Influence of Independent Commissioners on Tax Aggressiveness
The first hypothesis states that the independent commissioners had an effect on tax aggressiveness. This is the case because the existence of independent commissioner on the company can act as a strict supervisor on management so that the occurrence of tax aggressiveness can be reduced. The higher the number of independent commissioners in a company, the stricter the supervisions to management performance which could cause the management to be more careful in making decisions so that the tax aggressiveness could be reduced. Thei resultsi of this studyi are in linei withi research by Migang and Dina (2020); Hidayat & Muliasari (2020); Onyali et al., (2018) which stated that the independent commissioner is influential to tax aggressiveness. However, it is not in line with the research results by Erlina (2021); Kamul & Riswandari (2021); Rengganis & Putri (2018) which stated that the independent commissioner has no effect on tax aggressiveness.

The Effect of the Audit Committee on Tax Aggressiveness
The second hypothesis stated that audit committee has no effect on tax aggressiveness. The total number of audit committee members does not guarantee whether or not there is tax aggressiveness in a company. This is the case because of the existence of limitation from the board commissioner authority. Additional number of audit committee members in a company only aims to fulfilI the rules that it is required that there are ati leasti 3 (three) membersi ofi thei auditi committeei in a company. Results of this study is in line with the study done by Migang & Dina (2020); Kamul & Riswandari (2021); Yuliani & Prastiwi (2021) which stated that the audit committee had no effect on the level of tax aggressiveness. However, it is not ini linei withi thei researchi results from Ayem & Setyadi (2019); Zheng et al., (2019) which show that audit committee has an effect on tax aggressiveness.

The Effect of Institutional Ownership on Tax Aggressiveness
The third hypothesis states that institutional ownership has no effectI onItax aggressiveness. Institutional ownership act asI company supervisorI but not yet capableI of giving the incentives to managers inI reducing tax aggressiveness practiceI. This is probably due to the lack of resource high quality from owner institutions and the institution does not carry out its authority properly in supervising and controlling the decisions taken by managers so that tax aggressiveness still occurs.

The Effect of Gender Diversity on the Council on Tax Aggressiveness
The fourth hypothesis statesi thati genderi diversityi on the boardi hasi an effect on tax aggressiveness. This meansi that the existence of women in the board could reduce the presence of tax aggressiveness actions because women has a higher level of tax obedience than man. The resultsi ofi thisi studyi arei ini linei withi the research by Ambarsari et al., (2020); Onyali et al., (2018) which states that gender diversity on the board is influentiali toi aggressivenessi tax. However, it isi not in line with the results of the study by Kamul & Riswandari (2021) which declare genderi diversityi oni boardi has no effecti toi aggressivenessi tax. Results of this study are in line with research by Ambarsari et al., (2020); Onyali et al., (2018) which states that gender diversity on the board is influentiali toi aggressivenessi taxi. Howeveri not in line with the resultsi study Kamul & Riswandari (2021) declare genderi diversityi oni boardi has no effecti toi aggressivenessi taxi.

Effect of Corporate Social Responsibility on Tax Aggressiveness
The fifth hypothesisi state that corporate sociali responsibility has noi effecti oniaggressivenessi of taxi. This thing happenedi becausei possibilityi companyi doi and disclosei CSR activitiesi on annual reporti just to fulfilli their duty accordingito the rulesi whichi apply without connecting iti with the company's decision to doitax aggressiveness or not. Such results is in line with researchi donei by Noviyanti et al., (2017); Makhfudloh et al., (2018); Gunawan et al., (2019). But not in line with the results fromi Erlina (2021) and (Kurniawati, 2019) which showi thati corporatei sociali responsibilityi has an effect oni aggressivenessi taxi.
Based on the conclusions and limitations of the research above, the suggestions from the researchers are as follows: 1. For further research, it is expected to expand the research population to include all companiesi listedi oni thei IDXi and extend the research period so that generalizations will be obtained. 2. For further research, it is expected to add variables that have not been carried out in this study that might affect tax aggressiveness such as liquidity, capital intensity, profitability, and others.