MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402310456 · doi:10.3390/jrfm17090400

An Empirical Analysis of Tax Evasion among Companies Engaged in Stablecoin Transactions

2024· article· en· W4402310456 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rubens Moura de Carvalho, Helena Inácio, Rui Pedro Marques

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicTaxation and Compliance Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessTax evasionService (business)Database transactionRevenueAccountingEvasion (ethics)Corporate taxInternal revenueTertiary sector of the economyMonetary economicsIndustrial organizationPublic economicsEconomicsFinanceMarketingDouble taxationTax avoidance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research investigates the relationship between stablecoin usage and tax evasion. We present a model that includes variables related to transactions such as intensity, frequency, environment on-chain (P2P) vs. off-chain (IntraVasp), and company characteristics such as age, sector, and size. Our model was empirically tested using a logistic regression based on data from the Brazilian Federal Revenue Service (Receita Federal do Brasil (RFB)) in 2021. This novel approach aims to understand the tax behaviours associated with stablecoin use in corporate financial practices. Our results indicate that the intensity, frequency, environment of transactions (specifically IntraVasp and P2P transactions), age, sector, and size are factors significantly associated with tax evasion behaviour. However, we found no evidence to suggest that firms engaging in only P2P transactions have a higher propensity for tax evasion than those engaging only in IntraVasp transactions. Our findings reveal that younger and medium-sized companies with intensive use of stablecoin, with high stablecoin transaction frequency, engaging in IntraVasp and P2P transactions, and belonging to the service sector are more likely to evade tax. Therefore, our research provides a detailed understanding of how digital financial practices with crypto assets (blockchain-based technology) intersect with corporate tax strategies, which can offer valuable insights for regulators, industry practitioners, and policymakers.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicTaxation and Compliance StudiesFrench-language works237,207