MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2738355437 · doi:10.3138/cpp.2016-079

Big Tax Data and Economic Analysis: Effects of Personal Income Tax Reassessments and Delayed Tax Filing

2017· article· en· W2738355437 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Derek Messacar

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Public Policy · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicTaxation and Compliance Studies
Canadian institutionsStatistics CanadaMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsState income taxEconomicsAd valorem taxPublic economicsValue-added taxTax reformBusinessLabour economicsDemographic economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Amid an increasing reliance on administrative tax data for economic analysis, the extent to which such data are confounded by income tax reassessments and delayed tax filing requires examination. This article provides novel insight into this issue using population records of initial and delayed Canadian tax filers for 1990–2010. The results show that 3.5 percent to 4.8 percent of tax filers delay filing their returns each year. However, the consequences of this behaviour are generally small and do not bias estimates of income distributions, aggregate statistics, or inequality. These findings inform discourse about the relative merits of using administrative versus survey data in economic analysis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.716

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations10
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Public PolicySame topicTaxation and Compliance StudiesFrench-language works237,207