MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

<scp>The Effect of Tax Convexity on Corporate Investment Decisions and Tax Burdens</scp>

2006· article· en· W2075689815 on OpenAlexaff
Sudipto Sarkar, Levon Goukasian

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Public Economic Theory · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFiscal Policy and Economic Growth
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConvexityEconomicsInvestment (military)Corporate taxMicroeconomicsMonetary economicsTax basisScheduleIndirect taxTax creditDouble taxationTax reformPublic economicsState income taxFinancial economicsTax avoidanceGross income

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper examines the effect of convexity in the corporate tax schedule on corporate investment decisions and tax burdens. Using a contingent‐claims model, we show that greater tax convexity results in (i) earlier exit, (ii) delayed investment (except for small entry cost), and (iii) reduced corporate risk taking (except for small entry cost and unfavorable operating conditions). Also, the effective tax burden is an increasing function of tax convexity. The convexity of the tax schedule has a nontrivial impact on corporate investment decisions and investment levels. These results are relevant for economic growth, which depends (at least partly) on investment levels, and tax policy makers should be aware of these effects when making adjustments that might impact the convexity of the corporate tax schedule.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.183 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations18
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Public Economic TheorySame topicFiscal Policy and Economic GrowthFrench-language works237,207