MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3171942600 · doi:10.55016/ojs/sppp.v6i1.42450

2013 Annual Global Tax Competitiveness Ranking: Corporate Tax Policy at a Crossroads

2013· article· en· W3171942600 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Duanjie Chen, Jack Mintz

Notice bibliographique

RevueThe School of Public Policy Publications · 2013
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineBusiness, Management and Accounting
ThématiqueCorporate Taxation and Avoidance
Établissements canadiensUniversity of Calgary
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésCorporate taxRanking (information retrieval)BusinessTax policyValue-added taxEconomicsTax reformTax avoidancePublic economicsComputer scienceInformation retrieval

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Canada is losing its appeal as a destination for business investment. Its ability to compete against other countries for investment slipped considerably this year in our global tax competitiveness ranking, down six spots among OECD countries, and down 11 spots among the 90 countries. While many governments around the world responded to the fallout of the global recession by significantly reducing corporate tax rates, certain policy moves in Canada have us headed in the opposite direction. Canada is in danger of repelling business investment, which can only worsen current economic and fiscal challenges. Canada’s fading advantage is the result of recent anti-competitive provincial tax policies that increased the cost of investment. This includes, most notably, British Columbia’s decision to reverse the harmonization of its provincial sales tax with the federal GST, as well as recent corporate income tax rate hikes in B.C. and New Brunswick. When economic calamity strikes, and workers and their families feel the pain of lost jobs and lost wealth, politicians know they can score populist points by targeting the corporate sector. After all, corporations do not vote and they do not have a human face. News stories about major multinational corporations using tax-avoidance techniques to minimize their tax bills, only feed the populism, leaving voters believing that companies are getting away without paying a “fair share” of taxes. But when the corporate sector is targeted, it is not only supposedly wealthy capitalists who pay, but also employees, through lost wages and jobs, and working-class people who have a stake in companies through pension plans and mutual funds. On a larger scale, it is the economy that suffers. The same profit-maximizing imperative that leads companies to seek ways to reduce their tax liabilities also motivates firms to redirect investment to competing, lower-tax jurisdictions. Populist policies aimed at squeezing businesses may win votes in the short term, but they come at significant costs. Yet, there are politicians calling for still higher taxes on corporations. The federal Opposition leader, Thomas Mulcair, of the New Democratic Party, wants to raise the federal corporate income tax rate from 15 to 22 per cent, making Canada’s combined federal-provincial tax rate (over 33 per cent) one of the highest in the world. Such proposals promise an easy source of new revenue at no cost to individual taxpayers. In reality, the cost to taxpayers is lost competitiveness, resulting in a shrinking corporate tax base that will only leave Canadians with a weaker economy, profit-shifting to other countries leading to little additional revenue available to Canadian governments and, inevitably, a larger tax burden to bear individually. The right direction for Canada is the other way: improving tax competitiveness and enhancing tax neutrality by broadening the corporate tax base to further fund rate reduction. The harmonization of provincial sales taxes with the federal GST, in those provinces that have yet to do so, would substantially improve Canada’s tax competitiveness, as would the elimination of economically inefficient tax breaks for favoured business activities. And Canadian governments should continue to lower corporate taxes across the board, whenever possible. Canada’s edge as a globally competitive investment destination has been hard won over many years. It would be a pity to now see it squandered by reckless populist politics.

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 distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Communication savante, Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Théorique ou conceptuel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,712
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,005
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0010,004
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0040,005

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 Opus0,038
Tête enseignante GPT0,271
Écart entre enseignants0,233 · 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; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.

Devis d'étudeThéorique ou conceptuel
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

Citations6
Publié2013
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueThe School of Public Policy PublicationsMême sujetCorporate Taxation and AvoidanceTravaux en français237 207