Rectification of Tax Mistakes Versus Retroactive Tax Laws: Reconciling Competing Visions of the Rule of Law
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines the potential conflict between the right of the provinces to determine property rights, including the equitable right of rectification, and the federal government's right to enact retroactive tax legislation. It poses a hypothetical question: Does rectification provide the appropriate remedy for the "unfairness" of retroactive legislation to taxpayers who intend and plan their transactions to minimize or avoid tax? The article reviews the trend toward the judicial broadening of rectification remedies in tax cases, as well as perspectives on reliance on the rule of law to determine if and when rectification would be appropriate. The authors conclude that, in certain circumstances, a provincial court could and should rectify a tax plan to counter the effects of a retroactive tax that does not target abusive tax planning, such as Quebec's proposed (and subsequently withdrawn) tax increase aimed at high income earners.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.031 | 0.051 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.064 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.022 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.013 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".