MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2273166093

The High Costs of Controlling GST and VAT Evasion

2005· article· en· W2273166093 on OpenAlexaffabout
Bahro A. Berhan, Glenn P. Jenkins

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicTaxation and Compliance Studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessRevenueAuditValue-added taxEvasion (ethics)Administration (probate law)Public economicsIndirect taxTax creditGoods and servicesTax reformEconomicsFinanceAccountingEconomy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The GST is a value-added tax (VAT). Countries which impose a VAT are faced with problems and have proposed various solutions. North Cyprus and Bolivia, for example, refund some of the VAT paid on the purchases for which final consumers have obtained official receipts from sellers. In this article, the authors measure the compliance costs to taxpayers and the administration costs to the tax authorities in these two countries. Although similar schemes are not likely to be directly copied in Canada, the authors provide data to show how high compliance and administration costs can go when governments single-mindedly pursue the goal of controlling VAT evasion. The total VAT compliance and administration costs incurred by North Cyprus (in 2003) and Bolivia (in 2002) are estimated at, respectively, 1.50 and 1.55 times the total budgetary expenditures to administer the entire domestic tax system. In both countries, the compliance and administration costs of the VAT refund schemes amounted to more than the 5 percent of the total revenues collected by the VAT systems.

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)0.030
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations4
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicTaxation and Compliance StudiesFrench-language works237,207