MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038644411 · doi:10.5195/taxreview.2013.16

ENTRY-LEVEL ENTREPRENEURS AND THE CHOICE-OF-ENTITY CHALLENGE

2013· article· en· W2038644411 on OpenAlexaff
Emily A. Satterthwaite

Bibliographic record

VenuePittsburgh Tax Review · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Taxation and Avoidance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIncentiveBusinessBarriers to entryGovernment (linguistics)Equity (law)Value (mathematics)EconomicsPublic economicsIndustrial organizationMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For first-time, lower-income and credit-constrained entrepreneurs (“entry-level entrepreneurs”), the employment tax savings proffered by a longstanding tax shelter known as the “Sub-S Shelter” can be particularly salient. Such hypersalience is problematic from a policy perspective. It not only increases the costs and complexity of the entry-level entrepreneur’s deliberation process concerning the appropriate entity for her business, but it distorts her incentives to choose the entity that best supports her business’s future growth. I argue that because the hypersalience of the Sub-Shelter is likely to be more pronounced for entry-level entrepreneurs than for entrepreneurs with more experience or better access to capital, the burdens of the shelter are distributionally regressive. As an alternative to full-scale reforms that would eliminate the demand for the Sub-S Shelter but may be politically infeasible, I suggest that the shelter’s regressive hypersalience can be addressed by government measures to provide choice-of-entity information tailored to the needs and concerns of entry-level entrepreneurs. Such targeted information can mitigate the hypersalience of the Sub-S Shelter by underscoring the risks of relying on it, while highlighting the real option value of choosing a more flexible business entity such as an LLC. By nudging entry-level entrepreneurs towards neutrality in regard to their choice-of-entity decisions, this approach has the potential to improve both the efficiency and the equity of a key step in formalizing a new business.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.691
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.203 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePittsburgh Tax ReviewSame topicCorporate Taxation and AvoidanceFrench-language works237,207