MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2219368199 · doi:10.54648/gtcj2013029

The Landmark Decision in <i>Jockey Canada Company v. President of Canada Border Services Agency</i>: Lessons for Compliance with Canadian Customs Valuation Requirements

2013· article· en· W2219368199 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Laura J. Murray, Darrel H. Pearson

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Trade and Customs Journal · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicLaw, logistics, and international trade
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsValuation (finance)TribunalBusinessTransfer pricingDocumentationDatabase transactionAgency (philosophy)AccountingMultinational corporationFinanceLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper analyses the reasons for the Canadian International Trade Tribunal's decision in Jockey Canada Company v. President of Canada Border Services Agency respecting Canadian customs valuation compliance in related party cross-border transactions. It offers practical insights into the precautions that should be taken by multinational companies when structuring import transactions in order to satisfy their evidentiary burden to prove the accuracy of declared values for duty, including the maintenance of probative supporting documentary evidence and the need for customs valuation oriented contemporaneous documentation such as granular transfer pricing studies and agreements between related parties that discretely cover intercompany payments. The application of the transaction value method when pricing is based on a formulaic transfer pricing policy is also examined.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.116
Threshold uncertainty score0.845

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0210.010
Scholarly communication0.0130.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0110.014
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Trade and Customs JournalSame topicLaw, logistics, and international tradeFrench-language works237,207