MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2885475764 · doi:10.5744/ftr.2018.0012

Taxation and the Cross-Border Trade in Services: Rethinking Non-Discrimination Obligations

2018· article· en· W2885475764 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueFlorida Tax Review · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicTaxation and Legal Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObligationInternational tradeTreatyTax lawBusinessDouble taxationService (business)Tax treatyInternational economicsEconomicsLaw and economicsPublic economicsLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This Article examines the conflict between tax and trade law principles in the tax treatment of a non-resident service provider. It explores that conflict through non-discrimination obligations found in the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS), regional trade agreements, bilateral trade agreements, and tax treaties. The interplay between these agreements has the potential to frustrate trade law objectives because States may impose discriminatory tax measures on non-resident service providers. Tax treaties can play an important role in providing a minimum non-discrimination obligation for tax measures impacting the cross-border trade in services. This Article proposes a new tax treaty non-discrimination obligation grounded in trade law principles.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.866
Threshold uncertainty score0.387

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.309 · 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