MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1865361933 · doi:10.59403/16sxx9x

What Can Trade Teach Tax? Examining Reform Options for Art. 24 (Non-Discrimination) of the OECD Model

2010· article· en· W1865361933 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Tax Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicTaxation and Legal Issues
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsInternational economicsTax reformDouble taxationPublic economicsDirect taxAd valorem taxInternational trade

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although international trade agreements contain broad non-discrimination provisions that are potentially applicable to tax measures, in general tax measures are carved out of trade agreements and are dealt with exclusively under bilateral income tax treaties. This paper examines the relationship between tax and trade agreements with respect to the protection against discrimination and suggests that trade and tax should remain separate because there is relatively little that trade can offer tax in terms of policy guidance or even inspiration with respect to income tax discrimination issues. As an alternative to subjecting income tax systems to the non-discrimination provisions of trade agreements, the paper discusses the possibility of certain limited changes to the Commentary on Art. 24 of the OECD Model, to expand the protection against discrimination.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.546
Threshold uncertainty score0.575

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.227 · 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