MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379388012 · doi:10.33423/jabe.v25i2.6093

A Monte Carlo Simulation of the Tax Burdens and Impacts Associated With Common Intergenerational Family Farm Transfer Strategies

2023· article· en· W4379388012 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kirsten M. Rosacker, Robert E. Rosacker, Sean Fingland

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Business and Economics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Literacy, Pension, Retirement Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDepreciation (economics)Context (archaeology)EconomicsDatabase transactionTransfer (computing)Capital gainState income taxSuccessor cardinalTax basisPublic economicsLabour economicsTax reformMicroeconomicsGross incomeFinanceCapital formationComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper utilizes a Monte Carlo approach to simulate intergenerational farm property transfers within the context of four common succession strategies across a series of ordinary income and capital gain tax rates. Ordinary income/expenses accompany these intergenerational transfers in the form of interest income and the potential for depreciation recapture and capital gain income for all sales between the parties where transaction prices exceed basis and financing is utilized. Finally, post-transfer depreciation charges for the successor may accompany the usage of the family farm assets exchanged. The findings highlight the fact that transfers through estates represent the best pure tax outcomes (lowest aggregate tax burden), while sales transactions involve the highest tax burden. The conclusion is that it would be prudent and well-advised for everyone contemplating or engaging in intergenerational family farm transfers to ensure that tax considerations represent a focus for evaluating, determining, and selecting the best timing and course of action.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.086

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Business and EconomicsSame topicFinancial Literacy, Pension, Retirement AnalysisFrench-language works237,207