MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2888302173 · doi:10.5430/ijfr.v9n4p1

The Incidence of Social Security Payroll Taxes: Evidence From China

2018· article· en· W2888302173 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Xinxin Ma, Dongyang Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Financial Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicSpatial and Panel Data Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of Science
KeywordsPayrollPayroll taxSocial securityWageLabour economicsPanel dataChinaPublic sectorGovernment (linguistics)EconomicsPrivate sectorBusinessEconomic growthEconometricsMarket economyAccountingEconomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Chinese government enforced public security system reform in the economic transition period. Now, the enterprise’ social insurance premium, a kind of payroll tax, is nearly 40% of the total wage in China. It is thought enterprises may transfer the burden of payroll taxes to workers by reducing their wages. Does the level of an enterprise’s social security payroll taxes influence their workers’ wages? Using the Chinese Large and Medium-size Manufacturing Enterprises (CLMME) dataset to construct an enterprise panel data from 2004 to 2007, we employ an empirical study to provide evidence on the issue. We utilize the fixed effects model, random effects model and Generalized Method of Moments (GMM) method to address the heterogeneity problem, initial dependent problem and endogenous problem. It is found that in general, increased social security payroll taxes negatively affect the workers’ wages, which indicates that many enterprises may transfer the payroll taxes burden onto their workers. Increased social security payroll taxes may decrease the wage levels for workers in both the public sector and the private sector, but the negative effect is greater for workers in the private sector than in the public sector.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.187
Threshold uncertainty score0.372

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 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

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Financial ResearchSame topicSpatial and Panel Data AnalysisFrench-language works237,207