Even perfect transposition of EU Directives does not necessarily translate into homogeneous rules or application of rules across the European Union. Europeanization literature focused on the formal transposition of EU Directives. Newer studies suggest looking into the black box of how this translates into law in action. The 4th Anti-Money Laundering Directive incorporated taxes as a predicate crime for money laundering. We analyze how and why this Directive has been implemented so differently across EU countries both in the books and in action through a novel dataset. We find that country characteristics can explain formal transposition patterns and influence the domestic adaptation of regulation as well as how practitioners, the second front line of implementation, use these rules in action. We find that corruption, government effectiveness, regulatory quality, tax morale, and tax administrative capacity are important factors to explain lingering differences in the books and in action among EU Member States.

中文翻译：

---

揭示实施黑匣子：税收犯罪作为洗钱的前提犯罪

即使是欧盟指令的完美转换也不一定会转化为同质的规则或在整个欧盟范围内应用规则。欧洲化文献侧重于欧盟指令的正式转换。较新的研究建议研究如何将其转化为行动中的法律的黑匣子。第四项反洗钱指令将税收作为洗钱的前提犯罪。我们通过一个新颖的数据集分析了该指令在欧盟国家的实施方式和原因如此不同，无论是在书籍中还是在行动中。我们发现，国家特征可以解释形式转换模式并影响国内法规的适应，以及从业者作为第二条实施前线如何在行动中使用这些规则。我们发现腐败、政府效率、