MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3122047131

Some Observations on Net Fiscal Transfers to Recent Immigrants Resulting From Income Taxes and Government Transfer Programs

2010· article· en· W3122047131 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Patrick Grady

Bibliographic record

VenueMunich Personal RePEc Archive (Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransfer paymentImmigrationCensusMicrodata (statistics)Social securityPer capitaDemographic economicsPopulationGovernment (linguistics)EconomicsPaymentPer capita incomeSurvey of Income and Program ParticipationHousehold incomeIncome taxLabour economicsGeographyBusinessPublic economicsDemographyFinanceWelfareSociology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper utilizes the comprehensive data on income\ntaxes paid by immigrants and others and the government transfer payments received by immigrants and others provided by the 2006 Census from income tax statistics.\nThe Census data was recently made available to researchers in the 2006 Census PublicUse Microdata File (PUMF), which contains 844,476 records, presenting census data on\nindividuals representing 2.7 per cent of the Canadian population. \n\nThe analysis revealed that recent immigrants on average only paid about half as much income tax as native Canadians\n($4,172.69 per capita compared to $8,130.82). It also showed that the most recent cohort of immigrants from 2000 to 2004 paid only 40 per cent as much income tax as native\nCanadians.\n\nIn the Other Government Transfer Income category, which is a catch-all for “all transfer payments, excluding those covered as a separate income source (child benefits, old age\nsecurity pensions and guaranteed income supplements, Canada or Quebec Pension Plan benefits and employment insurance benefits) received from federal, provincial, territorial\nor municipal programs,immigrants received per capita amounts in 2005 that are $13.05 less than nonimmigrants\nso there is no prima facie evidence of disproportionate reliance on social assistance from the Census. The one area where recent immigrants got a disproportionate share of government transfers is child benefits. This reflects their larger number of dependent children, which could be a result of their lower average age or greater proclivity to have children. On the other hand, recent immigrants received a lower per capita amount of employment insurance benefits. This could reflect their tendency to locate in areas with stricter eligibility requirements for EI such as the TorontoMetropolitan Region in 2005. Taking into account Other Government Transfer Income,Child Benefits and Employment Insurance, recent immigrants received $346.15 more per capita from Government Transfers than non-immigrants. In total, this would amount to $534 million, an amount that is small in relation to the fiscal transfer resulting from lower per capita income taxes paid.

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)0.006
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 score0.931
Threshold uncertainty score0.138

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMunich Personal RePEc Archive (Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich)Same topicCanadian Policy and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207