MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2949865072 · doi:10.5539/ibr.v12n7p24

Measuring the Efficiency of Tax Collection among Economic Sectors in Paraíba State Northeastern Brazil (2013-2015)

2019· article· en· W2949865072 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rodrigo Pereira de Oliveira, Bruno Ferreira Frascaroli

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Business Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFiscal Policy and Economic Growth
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInefficiencyRevenueBusinessTax revenueEconomicsValue-added taxPublic economicsFinanceMarket economy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the efficiency of tax collection on operations related to the circulation of goods and interstate services (ICMS) in far east of Brazil, Paraíba State. The efficiency was estimated using quarterly data of the electronic invoices from the period of January 2013 to December 2015. In addition, we aim to identify levy’s key factors among distinct sectors, disaggregated into 489 sub-classes, according to the national classification of economic activities. It was used a stochastic frontier analysis which suggests that the average of the technical efficiency of the tax collection among sectors was 73.75% of the potential tax revenues. The amount of uncollected tax during the studied period were approximately US$7 billion. There is technical inefficiency of tax levy among important sectors of the economy of the state of Paraíba, demonstrated by 88.88% of inefficiency of tax collection itself. The sector comprehends clothing, wholesale of personal care products and leather shoes, among others. We verify that an increase of oversight actions by the tax collection agency helps to inhibit the inefficiency of tax levy.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.183
Threshold uncertainty score0.364

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Business Research→Same topicFiscal Policy and Economic Growth→French-language works237,207→