You could certainly make the case that technology plays a role in tax evasion on the one hand and in catching tax evaders on the other.
With all the methods we have of tracking wrongdoers—the official documents, the measures, the agreements, the understandings, the commissions, in a word, with everything that we are able to come up with formally—it is interesting to see all the informal dynamics that cause problems. Three French sociologists have looked into the matter, specifically the way in which banks have implemented internationally signed measures against money laundering and the major qualitative jumps that occur between theory and practice. We must not lose sight of that.
So we have techniques, agreements, understandings and standards. But it remains to be seen how they will work in practice if the day comes when health services are working satisfactorily, when there is more money for education and when we see the state really benefiting from the increased revenue. As long as that is not the case, we have to understand that there are a lot of steps in the process intended to catch tax cheats and there are lots of ways in which they can get out of them.