Bibliographic record
Abstract
This chapter focuses on the international tax policy directions of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa (BRICS). The BRICS countries present something of a counter-story to the narrative that international tax law has harmonized. These five countries, major economic and trade players in the world but not members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), have developed their international tax policy with an eye to the approach suggested by the OECD, but not necessarily in conformity with its strictures. This chapter explores the international tax policy directions of the BRICS jurisdictions under the familiar, broad heads of international tax policy: jurisdiction to tax, double tax relief, anti-avoidance measures, and exchange of information. A complete review of the international tax policy directions of any one of these jurisdictions on its own could easily become a book. As a result, the chapter focuses on providing a general and comparative overview centred on income taxation.
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.015 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
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".