MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4400897996 · doi:10.55016/ojs/sppp.v17i1.78329

Federal Business Subsidies: Explosive Growth Since 2014

2024· article· en· W4400897996 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
John Lester

Notice bibliographique

RevueThe School of Public Policy Publications · 2024
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineBusiness, Management and Accounting
ThématiqueCorporate Taxation and Avoidance
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésExplosive materialSubsidyBusinessEconomicsGeographyMarket economyArchaeology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Federal business subsidies have risen 140 per cent over the nine years ending in 2023–24, compared to 17 per cent over the previous nine years. New programs accounted for over half the growth. Clean economy measures, which rose $7 billion from 2014–15 to 2023–24, were the major contributor to growth in new programs. Even without the new climate change measures, business subsidies would have doubled over the period. Subsidies are likely to reach about $50 billion in 2027–28, which would represent 54 per cent of corporate income tax revenue, up from 42 per cent in 2014–15. Other key findings are: Small and medium-sized enterprises benefit disproportionately from subsidies. These firms account for about half of output in Canada but receive approximately two-thirds of business subsidies. Clean economy measures account for almost a fifth of business subsidies. The agri-food sector receives the second largest share, approximately 15 per cent, which is substantial relative to its four per cent output share. Business subsidies are concentrated in a small number of programs. In the current fiscal year, the top 10 programs (out of almost 150 programs) account for almost 60 per cent of subsidies, and the top 20 for almost 80 per cent. Spending programs account for a surprisingly small share of business subsidies — approximately 30 per cent in the current fiscal year. The tax system is the most important delivery mechanism (45 per cent), while government business enterprises and refundable tax credits account for just over 10 per cent each. What are taxpayers getting in return for the massive spending on subsidies? They are certainly getting more of the activities that are being subsidized and less of the activities that arenot. However, this change in the composition of economic activity won’t necessarily improve well-being because market prices generally allocate society’s scarce resources to their best uses. That is, if markets are functioning properly, subsidies harm rather than help economic performance. On the other hand, if subsidy programs address a market failure, the resulting reallocation of activity may be more efficient. Federal business subsidies that have the potential to improve economic performance, or more generally, to enhance well-being, because they address a market failure accounted for 64 per cent of business subsidies in 2023–24. However, measures accounting for about two-thirds of this spending fail a benefit-cost test — they are not successful in raising Canadians’ real income. These programs should be reviewed to determine if they can be restructured to deliver a positive net benefit. If not, they should be eliminated. Measures accounting for 36 per cent of total spending in 2023–24 are not intended to correct a market failure and are therefore transferring income from one group of Canadians to another while harming economic performance. These measures include general business subsidies and initiatives providing income support. These measures should be carefully reviewed to determine if their income redistribution effects can be justified in the context of the real income loss they cause. Since 2019–20, subsidies implemented to mitigate the impact of climate change and to creategood jobs by subsidizing high-productivity, high-wage industries have grown in importance andwill continue to do so. Climate change mitigation measures should only be implemented if they complement carbon pricing, the government’s main and most cost-effective instrument for reducing emissions. If they meet this minimum condition, climate change mitigation measures should be assessed based on their relative cost-effectiveness in reducing emissions. The proposition that subsidies intended to create good jobs are sound public policy is controversial. The impact of these measures should be tested against the data before additional funds are committed.

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)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,202
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,402

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,007
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0020,003
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,001
Communication savante0,0030,002
Science ouverte0,0010,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0020,003
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0210,006

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 Opus0,041
Tête enseignante GPT0,269
Écart entre enseignants0,228 · 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'étudeObservationnel
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

Citations0
Publié2024
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

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