MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4239179610 · doi:10.26686/wgtn.17006818.v1

Alesco and Mark Resources: Cross-Border Tax Arbitrage, Economic Reality, and Anti-Avoidance Rules in New Zealand and Canada

2013· dissertation· en· W4239179610 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sarah Miles

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicTaxation and Legal Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArbitrageLegislatureJurisprudenceContext (archaeology)Tax avoidanceEconomicsLaw and economicsPolitical sciencePublic economicsDouble taxationLawGeographyFinancial economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>This essay compares the role given to the concept of economic reality in New Zealand and Canadian cross-border tax arbitrage decisions, particularly Alesco and Mark Resources. Alesco and Mark Resources both address the problem of drawing the line between acceptable tax mitigation and unacceptable avoidance, and adopt economic substance as a key indicator of where this line lies. This essay considers how the concept of economic reality pervades these cases and evaluates the influence of legislative and judicial context to the significance afforded to the concept of economic reality in the two decisions, as well as reviewing how the economic realities jurisprudence has evolved following these cases.</p>

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.263
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.266 · 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.

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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTaxation and Legal IssuesFrench-language works237,207