Subnational Value Added Tax in Ethiopia and Implications for States’ Fiscal Capacity: Research in Brief
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fiscal federalism comprises the distribution of functions and tax revenue sources between central and regional governments. Fiscal federalism issues in respect of value added tax (VAT) do not arise in unitary states; in federal states questions arise as to which level of government should levy the tax, and how revenue should be divided between central and regional governments. While a single VAT levied by a federal government with some, or in one case all, of the revenue being distributed to regional governments is common, in practice there are many variations. China levies a single national VAT, but distributes half the tax to provinces on the basis of the location from which supplies are made. Member states of the European Union (EU) levy separate VATs, subject to conformity with an EU law, the VAT Directive, and revenue is redistributed through a combination of VAT rules and a central clearing house on the basis of place of consumption. Most Canadian provinces impose a surcharge on federal VAT, which is collected by the federal government on behalf of the provinces – except in the province of Quebec, where the provincial government collects Quebec Sales Tax and federal Goods and Services Tax (as VAT is called in Canada), and passes the federal portion on to the central government. The revenue attributable to provincial surcharges is distributed to provincial governments on the basis of place of consumption, and the federal government portion flows to the federal governments consolidated revenue. The bifurcated Ethiopian VAT may be unique, with VAT administration and revenue being assigned on the basis of the legal status of businesses.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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 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".