Концепція вини в податковому правопорушенні через призму судової практики Канади
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tymchenko L. D., Selezen P. O. CONCEPT OF MENS REA IN TAX OFFENCES THROUGH THE PRISM OF COURT PRACTICE IN CANADA Successful and long experience of counteracting tax offences in Canada determines the need of its generalization and characterization with the purpose of best practices’ implementation into the reality of Ukraine. The Tax Code of Ukraine has included the criterion of mens rea in the definition of tax offence starting from 01.01.2021 so there is no stable and long practice of application of the referred concept in disputes between the Ukrainian tax authorities and taxpayers that might have negative impact on guaranteeing balance between public and private interests in the area of taxation. Taking into consideration the existing circumstances, it is highly recommended to implement best practices of foreign states in interpretation and application of the concept of mens rea in tax offences but with the due respect to legal traditions and features of the Ukrainian legal order. The three court cases are in the focus of the article: 1) R. v. Porisky, 2019 BCCA 159, 30.04.2019; 2) R. v. Patry, 2018 BCSC 1524, 17.08.2018; 3) R. v. Klundert, 242 D.L.R. (4th) 644, 18.02.2004. Following the position of the domestic courts in Canada, the special interest is determined by description of two key elements for identification of willfulness (fault component) in the behavior of taxpayer, i.e. knowledge and purpose that are closely related to each other. A person who does not know that there is a tax imposed by the tax legislation cannot do something for the purpose of evading payment of the respective tax. At the same time, there might be situations in which the taxpayer may know about his/her legal duty to pay tax and do something that has the effect of evading the payment of that tax without necessary having done so for the purpose of evading the payment of the tax (mistaken belief). For example, a taxpayer may through arithmetic error misstate the amount of tax owing (factual errors), or a taxpayer may be unaware of the statutory definition of income (legal errors), or a taxpayer may have come to a mistaken conclusion as to the application of that definition in the existing circumstances (combination of factual and legal errors).
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.044 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".