MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Capital Gains Tan in Nigeria

2012· article· en· W1959707694 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Obaje Enemaku

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian social science · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFiscal Policy and Economic Growth
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsCapital gainAd valorem taxIndirect taxCapital gains taxTax avoidancePublic economicsTax creditTax reformValue-added taxBusinessFinanceEconomic policyMonetary economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tax is a compulsory levy imposed by the government on the incomes of taxpayers in order to pay the expenses of governance. Capital Gains Tax is a form of tax chargeable on capital gains arising from the disposal of chargeable assets. This paper examines the nature and the justification for Capital Gain Tax as a lucrative ground for raising revenue for development especially in the developing countries. In Nigeria, Capital Gain Tax is yet to yield the desired result in terms of raising revenue for the government. Our theoretical work on this subject explain reasons which includes lack of awareness, inadequate data and the high rate of inflation which has led to high incidence of avoidance of Capital Gain Tax. Arguments against capital gain tax in Nigeria are examined as well as issues, suggestions and recommendations for the effectiveness of this form of taxation. This paper recommends more aggressive awareness campaign, reduction of tax rate and even a merger of capital gain with income tax to reduce cost of collection. Key words: Capital Gains Tax; Government; Nigeria

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.198 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian social scienceSame topicFiscal Policy and Economic GrowthFrench-language works237,207