L'impact des regroupements municipaux sur le fardeau fiscal et la valeur des propriétés résidentielles au Québec, 1992-1999
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we study the impact of the municipal mergers that occurred in Quebec between 1992 and 1999 on the effective tax rates and on the market value of residential properties. We show that the impact is undetermined a priori. The empirical analysis relies on two econometric methods that are frequently used in evaluating public policies: (1) The difference in differences estimator; (2) The matching estimator. The two methods yield qualitatively similar and robust results. Overall, the mergers that occurred between 1992 and 1999 are found to have reduced the marginal tax rates by approximately 15%. When disaggregated, it is found that only cities and villages have benefited from a reduction in their tax rates. Finally, the market value of residential properties has not been affected by the mergers. Nous étudions l?impact des regroupements municipaux survenus au Québec entre 1992 et 1999 sur les taux de taxation effectifs et la valeur marchande des propriétés résidentielles. Nous montrons que l?effet d?un regroupement sur ces deux volets de la vie municipale est indéterminé a priori. L?évaluation s?appuie sur deux méthodes économétriques récentes abondamment utilisées dans la littérature sur l?évaluation des politiques publiques: (1) L?estimateur différence de différences et (2) l?estimateur par appariement. Les deux méthodes économétriques donnent des résultats qualitativement cohérents et robustes. Dans l?ensemble, les regroupements observés entre 1992 et 1999 ont eu pour effet de diminuer globalement les taux de taxation effectifs d?environ 15%. Une analyse plus fine des résultats montre toutefois que seuls les villes et les villages qui se sont regroupés ont bénéficié d?une baisse de leur taux de taxation. Enfin, la valeur marchande des propriétés résidentielles ne semble pas avoir été affectée par les regroupements.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".