Bibliographic record
Abstract
Income and consumption comprise the two main tax bases in most countries, leaving many governments with the perennial dilemma of deciding which ought to be the focus of fiscal policy. However, in Canada the situation is much less ambiguous; the existing Canadian tax regime disproportionately favours direct, income-based taxation, deriving over two-thirds [this includes property tax revenue] of tax revenues from this stream. This paper argues that Canada’s narrow focus on direct taxation leads governments to miss out on the revenuestabilizing effects that a greater emphasis on consumption taxes would bring. Tilting the balance toward indirect consumption taxes like the GST would benefit public revenues because: i) demand fluctuates less than income; ii) consumption is largely local, reducing tax avoidance; and iii) the GST is less amenable to being co-opted for market-distorting political purposes. As income and consumption taxes are broadly similar in their effects, a shift from the former to the latter would have few consequences for Canadian employment, investment and saving. The author provides a summary of income and consumption tax structures in several Western countries with consumption-oriented tax structures to contend that it’s time Canadian governments embraced meaningful tax reform. L’impôt sur le revenu et les taxes à la consommation constituent les deux principales assiettes fiscales dans la plupart des pays, si bien que de nombreux gouvernements sont confrontés en permanence au dilemme de déterminer sur laquelle de ces deux solutions concentrer leurs politiques fiscales. Toutefois, au Canada, la situation est beaucoup moins floue; le régime fiscal canadien favorise de façon disproportionnée l’impôt direct sur le revenu et tire de cette source plus des deux tiers de ses recettes fiscales (cela comprend les impôts fonciers). On soutient ici que le Canada fonde une trop grande part de ces recettes sur l’impôt direct et prive ainsi le pays des effets stabilisateurs sur le revenu que pourraient avoir des politiques davantage axées sur les taxes à la consommation. En faisant pencher la balance du côté des taxes indirectes à la consommation, par exemple la TPS, on produirait un effet bénéfique sur les recettes publiques parce que : i) la demande fluctue moins que le revenu; ii) la consommation est locale dans une large mesure et permet de réduire l’évitement fiscal; iii) la TPS est moins susceptible d’être instrumentalisée à des fins politiques, ce qui fausse le marché. Étant donné que l’impôt sur le revenu et les taxes à la consommation ont des effets largement similaires, le choix de cette deuxième option aurait peu de conséquences sur l’emploi, l’investissement et l’épargne au Canada. L’auteur propose une synthèse des deux structures d’imposition dans plusieurs pays occidentaux qui privilégient les taxes à la consommation, et soutient qu’il est temps pour les gouvernements canadiens d’opter pour une réforme fiscale substantielle.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".