Publication activity
Articles grouped by publication year
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2026 is year to date. 0 undated publications excluded.
Research across participating journals · All insights follow your collection filters.
Publication activity alongside incoming citations.
Articles grouped by publication year
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2026 is year to date. 0 undated publications excluded.
OpenAlex · year of the citing work
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2017–2026 annual-history window. 2026 is year to date. Unknown years have gaps.
Leading affiliations and themes in this collection.
Full distributions & methodology ↓Independent sources. Clear time scales.
Crossref and OpenAlex · separate totals for the same publication cohorts
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
Latest lifetime totals, grouped by the cited article’s year. These are not citations received in that year.
OpenAlex · incoming citation links grouped by citing-work year
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2017–2026 annual-history window. 2026 is year to date. Unknown years have gaps.
Select journals to compare the same collection filters. Source totals stay separate. These measures describe research activity, not journal quality.
Articles by publication year
Latest lifetime totals · grouped by publication year
Latest lifetime totals · grouped by publication year
By year of the citing work · 2017–2026
2026 is year to date. Crossref and OpenAlex lifetime charts share a citation scale. Unknown observations appear as gaps; known zero stays zero. Annual receipts use available OpenAlex histories and may not sum to lifetime totals. 0 undated publications excluded from publication-year charts.
Crossref citation coverage: 2 / 2 publications (100.0%). Latest observation: 21 Oct 2026, 07:22 UTC. Means and percentages use records with known counts.
DOI-matched OpenAlex observations for the same selected publications. These counts are separate from Crossref and are never added together.
Observation range: 22 Oct 2026 01:04 UTC — 22 Oct 2026 02:52 UTC. Missing matches are not zero citations. Previous observations may remain if a refresh fails or a DOI no longer matches.
OpenAlex affiliations and primary-topic classification. Each publication counts once per institution or country; multi-affiliated publications appear in multiple groups, so percentages can sum above 100%. Countries describe author affiliations, not nationality. Topics use one primary topic per publication.
2 / 2 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 2 selected publications.
2 / 2 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 2 selected publications.
2 / 2 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 2 selected publications.
Citations are the latest recorded totals for articles published in each year, not citations received during that year. Crossref and OpenAlex remain separate and share the same citation scale. 2026 is incomplete; newer articles have had less time to receive citations.
0 undated publications excluded. Unknown citation counts are shown as —, never as zero. Partial coverage can understate totals; expand each table for known / total records.
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Publications | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | All selected publications | 2 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Crossref citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | All selected publications | 3 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | All selected publications | 6 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
Incoming citations to the selected publications, grouped by the year of the citing work. This is separate from lifetime citation totals grouped by the cited article’s publication year.
The publication filters above define which articles receive the citations. The citation-year range below only controls this chart and the incoming-citation comparison. Removing publication-year filters includes older articles’ incoming citations too.
Annual history available for 2 / 2 selected publications. Supported display window: 2017–2026; 2026 is incomplete. Within a successfully fetched ten-year window, omitted years mean zero. Missing histories and years beyond a saved observation’s window remain unknown (—); partial coverage can understate totals.
Annual-history observations (UTC): 2026-10-22T01:04:10.096364+00:00 — 2026-10-22T02:52:47.486989+00:00. Older observations may be retained after failed or incomplete refreshes.
| Citation year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex · Citations received by year | Publications | Annual history known |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2018 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | 1 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 1 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | 3 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 1 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
Counts represent citation links, not unique citing papers across a journal: one paper citing two selected articles contributes two links. Older citations outside this window are excluded, so annual sums need not equal lifetime totals. OpenAlex methodology ↗
Publications by publication year. 2026 is an incomplete year.
| Period | Publications |
|---|---|
| 2018 | 2 |
Latest Crossref totals for the selected publications; not citations received in the selected years.
Unknown counts are excluded from the mean, median and cited-publication rate.
Same filters, source and counting rules across journals. Descriptive statistics, not a quality ranking.
| Journal / publisher | Publications | Crossref citations | OpenAlex citations | OpenAlex coverage | Crossref mean | Crossref median | Crossref cited %* | Crossref coverage |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science SSBFNET | 2 | 3 | 6 | 2/2 | 1.5 | 1.5 | 100.0 | 2/2 · 100.0% |
* Percentage among publications with a known citation count.
The Indonesian government is now seriously exploring in depth the proposed tax imposition for e-commerce. In this context, this paper will discuss the following issues: the first, if Indonesian government should impose the tax on e-commerce; the second, how much the potential tax revenue from e-commerce is; and the third, how Indonesian fiscal policy perspective views e-commerce taxation. The study in this paper adopts a descriptive analytical research method. The study concludes several points. Indonesia should tax its e-commerce. The total potential tax revenue on e-commerce from VAT and income tax in 2018 ranges from almost Rp11.75 trillion to Rp16.64 trillion, with VAT dominates the contribution up to more than 90% of the total tax revenue. By not levying the tax in the year means Indonesian government will lose a partial or the most of tax revenue. The revenue loss is potentially getting bigger in the coming years if the government still fails to collect the tax. E-commerce taxation should not be strictly enforced in the beginning, yet more is emphasized on socialization and education actions. It is also intended to help the online platform to be compliant. Tax policy in e-commerce can be used for the purpose of regulating the economy, such as to control excessive online import purchasing.
Based on the sayings of “Finance is the mother of civil affairs” and “Tax revenue is the context of national economy”, a healthy tax system based on the alternating utilization of central and local tax systems is essential for achieving the administration by law and tax balance. In light of this, the Ministry of Finance has proposed the improvement project of “Income Tax on the Consolidated Income from House and Land Transactions”. The third reading of “Amendment of Tax Act of Consolidated House and Land Taxation System” was passed by the Legislative Yuan on June 5th, 2015, and it was promulgated on January 1st, 2016. The purpose of this study is to investigate the content of “Income Tax on the Consolidated Income from House and Land Transactions”, including: 1. Is separate taxation a proper move? 2. Is the sunrise term appropriate? 3. Is it necessary to have the “anti-misuse” term? 4. The tax exemption of NT$ 4 million? 5. The effectiveness of tax revenue after suspension of luxury tax (also known as special sales tax) and the adoption of income tax on consolidate income from house and land? 6. Is it feasible for allocate tax revenue for expenditures of residential policy and long-term care? 7. Is the income tax on consolidated income from house and land in compliance with the principle of proportionality? This study is based on in-depth interview method along with literature review method for data collection and analysis. The results of this study indicate that: a separate taxation system is not appropriate in terms of income redistribution; the opposing party believes that sunrise terms are not appropriate; in theory the anti-misuse term - non-voluntary factors tax rate is not necessary; all interviewees agreed on the tax exemption of NT$ 4 million ; and the income tax on consolidated income from house and land is not in compliance with the principle of proportionality from the perspective of tax revenue.
The Indonesian government is now seriously exploring in depth the proposed tax imposition for e-commerce. In this context, this paper will discuss the following issues: the first, if Indonesian government should impose the tax on e-commerce; the second, how much the potential tax revenue from e-commerce is; and the third, how Indonesian fiscal policy perspective views e-commerce taxation. The study in this paper adopts a descriptive analytical research method. The study concludes several points. Indonesia should tax its e-commerce. The total potential tax revenue on e-commerce from VAT and income tax in 2018 ranges from almost Rp11.75 trillion to Rp16.64 trillion, with VAT dominates the contribution up to more than 90% of the total tax revenue. By not levying the tax in the year means Indonesian government will lose a partial or the most of tax revenue. The revenue loss is potentially getting bigger in the coming years if the government still fails to collect the tax. E-commerce taxation should not be strictly enforced in the beginning, yet more is emphasized on socialization and education actions. It is also intended to help the online platform to be compliant. Tax policy in e-commerce can be used for the purpose of regulating the economy, such as to control excessive online import purchasing.
Based on the sayings of “Finance is the mother of civil affairs” and “Tax revenue is the context of national economy”, a healthy tax system based on the alternating utilization of central and local tax systems is essential for achieving the administration by law and tax balance. In light of this, the Ministry of Finance has proposed the improvement project of “Income Tax on the Consolidated Income from House and Land Transactions”. The third reading of “Amendment of Tax Act of Consolidated House and Land Taxation System” was passed by the Legislative Yuan on June 5th, 2015, and it was promulgated on January 1st, 2016. The purpose of this study is to investigate the content of “Income Tax on the Consolidated Income from House and Land Transactions”, including: 1. Is separate taxation a proper move? 2. Is the sunrise term appropriate? 3. Is it necessary to have the “anti-misuse” term? 4. The tax exemption of NT$ 4 million? 5. The effectiveness of tax revenue after suspension of luxury tax (also known as special sales tax) and the adoption of income tax on consolidate income from house and land? 6. Is it feasible for allocate tax revenue for expenditures of residential policy and long-term care? 7. Is the income tax on consolidated income from house and land in compliance with the principle of proportionality? This study is based on in-depth interview method along with literature review method for data collection and analysis. The results of this study indicate that: a separate taxation system is not appropriate in terms of income redistribution; the opposing party believes that sunrise terms are not appropriate; in theory the anti-misuse term - non-voluntary factors tax rate is not necessary; all interviewees agreed on the tax exemption of NT$ 4 million ; and the income tax on consolidated income from house and land is not in compliance with the principle of proportionality from the perspective of tax revenue.
Source coverage refers to this result set; a publication may occur in several sources. Sync times refer to contributing journals.
Missing abstracts: 0 · Missing authors: 0 · Missing publication dates: 0 · Dates without day precision: 0
| Source | Most recent successful journal sync | Latest attempt |
|---|---|---|
| crossref | 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC |
| ojs-rest | 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 21 Oct 2026 06:46 UTC |
| oai-pmh | 20 Oct 2026 19:55 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 20 Oct 2026 19:50 UTC |
| openalex-enrichment | 21 Oct 2026 07:23 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC |