MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2797333556 · doi:10.29173/alr1330

Missing the Net: The Law and Economics of Alberta's NHL Players Tax

2003· article· en· W2797333556 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Donald J. S. Brean, Aldo Forgione

Bibliographic record

VenueAlberta Law Review · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Taxation and Avoidance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTax creditTreasuryIndirect taxValue-added taxTax avoidanceAd valorem taxDirect taxTax reformPublic economicsEconomicsBusinessDouble taxationState income taxInternational economicsLaw and economicsLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Province of Alberta has introduced a tax on the income of all NHL players earned in every game played in Alberta. The Alberta government intends to forward the revenues from the tax to the ownership groups of the Province's two NHL teams - the Edmonton Oilers and the Calgary Flames. Reaction to the tax has been harsh. Criticism ranges from Oilers allegations of interference with collective bargaining rights to discriminatory treatment of high profile taxpayers in violation of the North American Free Trade Agreement. The NHL Players Tax is designed to take advantage of the practical application of international foreign tax credit and treaty rules to effectively transfer tax revenues from foreign coffers to the Alberta Treasury. After exploring the stated rationale and incidence of the tax, the authors conclude that Alberta's NHL Players Tax is likely to fail to achieve its objectives. Moreover, the tax represents aggressive extension of the province's tax authority with no public benefit.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.086
Threshold uncertainty score0.397

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.008
Scholarly communication0.0120.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0050.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.218
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 designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlberta Law ReviewSame topicCorporate Taxation and AvoidanceFrench-language works237,207