MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3126036342

Capital Tax Competition and Returns to Scale

2002· preprint· en· W3126036342 on OpenAlexafffund
John Burbidge, Katherine Cuff

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2002
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Taxation and Avoidance
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTax competitionEconomicsCapital (architecture)SubsidyMonetary economicsReturns to scaleCost of capitalMicroeconomicsIndirect taxTax reformIncentivePublic economicsMarket economyProduction (economics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is a gap between the predictions of capital tax competition models and the reality they purport to describe. In a standard capital-tax model, with head taxes, capital-importing regions tax capital and capital-exporting regions subsidize capital. In the real-world, competing regions appear to subsidize capital whether or not they are capital importers. We show that by relaxing the standard assumption of constant returns to scale symmetric regions in a Nash equilibrium may all subsidize capital.We also prove that any ine¢ciencies in a non-symmetric Nash equilibria arise entirely from regions’ incentives to manipulate the terms of trade, and not from increasing returns.We also compare our results to those in captial tax competition models without head taxes.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.006
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRePEc: Research Papers in EconomicsSame topicCorporate Taxation and AvoidanceFrench-language works237,207