MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963388974 · doi:10.5430/afr.v8n3p118

Taxation and Income Inequality in Nigeria

2019· article· en· W2963388974 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
John Obiora Anyaduba, Praise Oghenefejiro Otulugbu

Bibliographic record

VenueAccounting and Finance Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFiscal Policy and Economic Growth
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsEconomic inequalityCointegrationRevenueGross incomeIncome taxInequalityIncome distributionExciseDiversification (marketing strategy)Adjusted gross incomeDemographic economicsPublic economicsState income taxBusinessTax reformMacroeconomicsEconometricsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study examined taxation and income inequality (GINI), specifically, it determined the impact of Value Added Tax (VAT), Custom and Excise Duties (CED), Petroleum Profit Tax (PPT) and Company Income Tax (CIT) on GINI in Nigeria from the year 1990 to 2016. The Cointegration and Error Correction Models (ECMs) were used to analyze the data. Augmented Dickey Fuller unit root was used to test for stationarity. Data were sourced from the Central Bank of Nigerian statistical bulletin, Federal Inland Revenue Service and the National Bureau of Statistics. The result revealed that VAT, CED and PPT had positive relationship with GINI when measured at 5% critical level, though VAT and CED were not significant. CIT had a negative but significant impact on GINI. Based on the findings, we conclude that only CIT was able to reduce income inequality. We therefore recommend that VAT should be imposed on goods and services consumed by high income earners. In respect of CED, government should address the level of tariffs; for PPT, there is need for adequate diversification of the economy; and for CIT, tax authority should harness corporate taxes to its fullness.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations16
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAccounting and Finance ResearchSame topicFiscal Policy and Economic GrowthFrench-language works237,207