MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131543209 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v6n9p199

Assessing Personal Income Tax Amendment Act 2011: Effects on Revenue Generation in Nigeria

2014· article· en· W2131543209 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Uche Lucy Onyekwelu, Uche Boniface Ugwuanyi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicTaxation and Compliance Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRevenuePublic economicsGovernment (linguistics)BusinessTax revenueWork (physics)Income taxScope (computer science)State income taxEconomicsTax reformAccountingEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study examines the effects of Personal Income Tax Amendment Act 2011 on revenue generation in Nigeria, with a view to exposing the possible challenges and prospects it poses to the Nigerian tax payers. The primary data for this study were sourced using a structured questionnaire while secondary data were sourced through relevant textbooks, academic journals and the internet. The data collected through the questionnaire was analyzed using chi-square statistical method. The study reveals among other things that the increase in the tax rate affected the tax payers revenue generation, and the retroactive nature of our tax laws constitutes a major problem thus: resulting in double taxation during the assessment and collection of taxes. following the findings, the researchers recommends that competent laws should be passed by the government on personal Income tax collection and generation, stiff penalties should be imposed on the tax defaulters and evaders, tax laws should be made less complex, recruitment of qualified personnel to enable them cover fully the scope of work and finally the tax payers should be educated sufficiently on the importance of 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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Economics and FinanceSame topicTaxation and Compliance StudiesFrench-language works237,207