MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1586894915 · doi:10.1787/218605563356

Corporate Taxation of Foreign Direct Investment Income 1991-2001

2003· report· en· W1586894915 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kwang-Yeol Yoo

Bibliographic record

VenueOECD Economics Department working papers · 2003
Typereport
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Taxation and Avoidance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForeign direct investmentBusinessInternational taxationEconomicsInternational economicsMonetary economicsPublic economicsMacroeconomicsTax reform

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper constructs indicators of tax burden on FDI in order to review their trends and cross-country patterns. Over the 1990s, the overall tax burden on inward FDI (measured by the effective marginal tax rates) fell by 8 percentage points, reflecting corporate tax reforms in some OECD countries. Nevertheless, a large variation across host countries still remains. With the effective tax rates on inward FDI differing across host countries by as much as 28 percentage points for marginal FDI and by as much as 21 percentage points for infra-marginal FDI in 2001, a cross-country comparison of tax burden indicators shows that, irrespective of the tax burden indicators chosen, Canada, Iceland and Japan are persistently ranked as high-tax host countries over the 1990s. It is also found that there is more variation in the tax burdens faced by a parent company operating in different host countries than in the tax burdens faced by subsidiaries from different home countries operating in the same host country.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.095
Threshold uncertainty score0.189

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.057
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.172 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations59
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOECD Economics Department working papersSame topicCorporate Taxation and AvoidanceFrench-language works237,207