MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008955501 · doi:10.2202/1553-3832.1101

Reform U.S. Capital Gains Taxation à la Canada

2005· article· en· W2008955501 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jonathan R. Kesselman

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Economists Voice · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCapital gains taxEconomicsFixed capitalCapital (architecture)Cost of capitalTaxable incomeMonetary economicsCapital formationTax reformPublic economicsFinancial capitalInternational taxationMicroeconomicsProfit (economics)Accounting

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reformed taxation of capital gains could play an important role in a broader policy package to improve the simplicity, equity, and efficiency of the federal tax system. Constructive reforms for the United States would draw on Canadian provisions for taxing capital gains: a) eliminate the distinction between short-term and long-term gains, taxing both equally; b) use an average-cost basis for computing capital gains on all holdings of a security; c) apply a fixed tax inclusion rate for net capital gains; d) eliminate the $3,000 offset of taxable income for net capital losses; and e) adopt “deemed realization” of capital gains on death to facilitate quick abolition of the estate tax.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.496
Threshold uncertainty score0.344

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 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
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Economists VoiceSame topicCanadian Policy and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207