Sales Taxes in Canada: The GSTt-HST-QST-RST Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canadian experience shows that a standard invoice-credit destination-based value added tax (VAT) can be successfully imposed at the subnational level of government. In fact, two different varieties of subnational VATs – the QST and the HST -- exist in Canada. The Quebec Sales Tax (QST) is imposed on essentially the same base as Canada's federal VAT (the Goods and Services Tax, or GST) and is administered by the provincial government, which also administers the GST in that province. The Harmonized Sales Tax (HST) is essentially a provincial VAT imposed on the same base as the federal GST and administered by the federal government. The existence of these two different forms of provincial VAT raises neither technical nor economic problems for the federal VAT. On the other hand, the existence of a federal VAT has apparently spared the Canadian provinces with VATs from many of the VAT evasion problems to which so much attention has been paid in the European Union, largely owing to the exist of the federal VAT; Europe of course does not have any equivalent 'union-wide' VAT to, as it were, shelter the VATs of member states. On the whole, the evidence is that those provinces that altered their sales taxes from RSTs to VATs suffered no bad consequences and reaped some economic gains. Recently, this evidence has persuaded Canada's largest province, Ontario, to join the HST system. British Columbia is also becoming an HST province, although it has decided to impose a lower rate than the other HST provinces.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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.
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".