MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2580564076

International Appraisal of Effect of Capital Gains Tax on Investment in Small Business

2001· article· en· W2580564076 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Pauline Downer

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of Financial Management and Analysis · 2001
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineBusiness, Management and Accounting
ThématiqueCorporate Taxation and Avoidance
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésCapital gains taxCapital gainTaxable incomeFixed capitalEconomicsCost of capitalPhysical capitalMonetary economicsCapital (architecture)Return on capitalLabour economicsBusinessFinancial capitalFinanceDouble taxationCapital formationAd valorem taxMarket economyAccountingHuman capital
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Introduction and Evolution of Capital Gains Taxation One of the aims of the Federal government in Canada is to promote small business growth and expansion. An integral part of this process is the manner in which small business income is taxed, both on the income earned and the increase in value of company shares. An examination of the history of capital gains taxation in Canada is important to put the current day legislation in context. A capital gain in Canada is defined as the excess of proceeds over the adjusted cost base of a capital property that is sold. Capital property includes tangible assets such as land, buildings and equipment as well as shares, and intangible property such as trademarks and goodwill. If the proceeds are less than the adjusted cost base, a capital loss results. Prior to 1972, capital gains realized by taxpayers in Canada were tax-free. In 1971, a major tax reform introduced a tax on capital gains. At that time, capital gains were included in income at 50 per cent of the amount realized. For example, if a taxpayer realized a capital gain of $ 100, the amount taxable would be $50. This would be taxable at the marginal rate of the taxpayer. Capital losses could only be used to reduce capital gains and could be carried back three years and forward indefinitely to reduce future capital gains. In Canada, capital losses cannot reduce ordinary income. The Carter Commission in 1966 argued that exempting capital gains from taxation was contrary to the principle of neutrality. While the Carter Commission proposed to include capital gains in income in their entirety, the government chose to introduce a tax on capital gains by requiring the inclusion of 50 per cent of the capital gains. The reason for rejection of the Carter Commission recommendation was the negative motivational effect on investors1. The actual tax rate on capital gains changed as the tax rates in Canada changed over time however, the requirement to include 50 per cent of the gain remained unchanged until 1988. In 1988, new rules were introduced to phase in an increase in capital gains inclusion rates from 50 per cent to 75 per cent. This was phased in over two years with an increase to 66 2/3 per cent for 1988 and 1989 followed by an increase to 75 per cent effective in 1990. Another change to the taxation of capital gains in Canada was introduced in 1985 when a lifetime capital gains exemption was introduced in Canada as an attempt to promote the growth of small business. The total exemption of $500,000 was available to individuals to shelter the tax on capital gains on the disposition of certain capital property. The total exemption was subdivided between a $100,000 exemption on all capital property such as shares in public companies and real estate, and a $ 400,000 exemption on shares in qualifying small business corporations. The importance of the capital gains exemption cannot be underestimated. In the Province of Nova Scotia, for example, a taxpayer who has realized a capital gain of $500,000 on the sale of capital property eligible for the full $500,000 exemption for qualifying small business corporation shares would save approximately $60,000 income tax in 2001-2002. The savings in 1999 would have been a substantial $182,925. The reduction in 2001-2002 is a result of Federal Government regulations in 2000, which decreased the capital gains inclusion rate from 75 per cent down to 50 per cent effective for dispositions after October 17,2001. In the Budget of May 1985, which originally introduced the exemption, a loss of revenue to the government from allowing this exemption was estimated to be $300 million in fiscal 1986-1987 alone.2 Obviously, the utilization of this exemption is one of the few, yet sizeable, tax breaks left for small business owners in Canada. The taxation of capital gains remained in a steady state until rates were lowered both provincially and federally in 2001. Canada is divided into ten provinces and three territories. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,107
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,213

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0020,004
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0020,001
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0040,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,013
Tête enseignante GPT0,238
Écart entre enseignants0,225 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations4
Publié2001
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of Financial Management and AnalysisMême sujetCorporate Taxation and AvoidanceTravaux en français237 207