MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2967710951 · doi:10.1177/1091142119861352

Poverty and Savings: Optimal Taxes with Endogenous Discount Factors

2019· article· en· W2967710951 on OpenAlexaff
Pier-André Bouchard St-Amant, Louis Perrault

Bibliographic record

VenuePublic Finance Review · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFiscal Policy and Economic Growth
Canadian institutionsÉcole Nationale d'Administration Publique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsSubsidyConsumption (sociology)DiscountingValuation (finance)PovertyMicroeconomicsLabour economicsPublic economicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Following recent developments linking poverty to present-bias behavior, we conduct an optimal linear taxation analysis where some individuals (called “behaviorals”) have a discount factor that is a function of their disposable income. In the model, endogenous discount factors imply (1) that taxing labor decreases the valuation of savings and (2) that subsidies on savings mitigate for a lower weight being given to future consumption. We perform simulations where the number of behavioral individuals increases and find that resources raised through labor taxation are used to finance saving subsidies rather than an increase of transfers. The prevalence of behaviorals leads to an increase in the labor income tax rate.

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 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)0.000
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 score0.933
Threshold uncertainty score0.876

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.161 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePublic Finance ReviewSame topicFiscal Policy and Economic GrowthFrench-language works237,207