L' évitement et l' évasion en fiscalité internationale vus du Canada : le rattachement du bénéfice au territoire est-il toujours pertinent ?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
francaisCe texte traite du principe de territorialite applicable en France et du principe de residence applicable au Canada, dans le contexte de la fiscalite internationale. En premier lieu, l'auteure fait un survol des regles canadiennes de fiscalite internationale, en ce qui a trait a I' imposition des benefices des societes. Puis, elle evoque la reaction et le intentions du Canada a la suite de l'adoption du projet BEPS visant a contrecarrer l'evitement fiscal international decoulant du transfert artificiel de benefices d'un Etat a un autre. Enfin, elle s'interroge sur la pertinence de la determination du territoire ou sont generes les revenus des societes multinationales, dans une economie de plus en plus globale et numerique. EnglishThis paper addresses the principle of territoriality which is applicable in France and the principle of residence which is applicable in Canada in an international tax context. First, the author gives an overview of the Canadian rules regarding the taxation of corporate profits in such a context. Then she considers the reaction of Canada and its intentions on the BEPS Project in relation to the fight against international tax avoidance through artificial profit shifting to low or no-tax jurisdictions. Finally, the author brings up questions about the relevance of the identification of the territory within which income of multinational corporations is generated, in an increasingly globalised and digital economy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".