Taxation Changes and the Cross-Border Pricing of REITs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
On November 21, 2005 the Canadian government announced a reduction in the tax on dividends in an effort to neutralize the tax system's bias in favour of income trusts. Eleven months later, on October 31, 2006, a new government changed direction and eliminated the tax deductibility of income trust distributions altogether. Exempted from this change in policy was the real estate investment trust (REIT) sector. 116 The BRC Academy Journal of Business Vol. 6, No. 1 This present study examines the return behaviour of both Canadian and U.S. REITs around the time of these announcements in an effort to inform the ongoing discussion about REIT taxation design in the United States and abroad. Ordinary least squares with dummy variables are used to estimate Canadian REIT returns using a variant of the market model on the event date and the day after. Both equally-weighted and value-weighted portfolios are created in order to check the robustness of the results. In addition, the relationships between Canadian REIT returns and U.S. REIT returns are examined for each event. Test results indicate statistically significant abnormal returns for the Canadian REITs relative to their U.S. counterparts on both dates.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".