MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1970747503 · doi:10.1177/109114210102900603

Specific Inputs, Value-Added, and Production Linkages in Tax-Incidence Theory

2001· article· en· W1970747503 on OpenAlexaff
Kul B. Bhatia

Bibliographic record

VenuePublic Finance Review · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFiscal Policy and Economic Growth
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStylized factProduction (economics)EconomicsTax incidenceFactors of productionValue (mathematics)MicroeconomicsEconometricsProcess (computing)Production theoryMacroeconomicsPublic economicsIndirect taxTax reformComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Factors of production that cannot be moved from one activity to another due to their intrinsic nature, location preferences, mobility restrictions, or licensing requirements were featured prominently in the tax literature of the 1970s. Immobile factors, however, often produce inputs for other sectors. Several examples of this type that enhance and enrich some well-known existing models are presented. The value-adding process and cross-sector connections are explicitly specified. The new tax-incidence results often resemble those in mobile-factors-only (mfo) models in spite of one or more sector-specific inputs. Numerical examples, based on stylized U.S. data, illustrate the results and highlight the difficulties that arise in defining equivalent specifications. Goods mobility offsets some effects of factor immobility, but the computed tax elasticities are rarely the same as in mfo models. The Marshallian short-run/long-run distinction, blurred somewhat by production linkages, does not disappear.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.720
Threshold uncertainty score0.941

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations5
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePublic Finance ReviewSame topicFiscal Policy and Economic GrowthFrench-language works237,207