MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403888342 · doi:10.3390/jrfm17110488

The Impact of Cryptocurrency Exposure on Corporate Tax Avoidance Among US Listed Companies

2024· article· en· W4403888342 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Junnan Cui, Li Gao, Yufei Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Taxation and Avoidance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessCryptocurrencyCorporate taxTax avoidanceAccountingDouble taxationFinanceComputer scienceComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined the association between corporate cryptocurrency activities and tax avoidance outcomes, utilizing data from US public firms covering the period from 2015 to 2023. Financial data were sourced from Compustat, while details regarding cryptocurrency activities were manually extracted from 10-K and 10-Q filings. Our analysis employed a fixed-effects regression model to examine the impact of these activities on cash effective tax rates (ETR). The findings indicate that firms engaged in cryptocurrency activities tend to have a lower ETR compared with those without such involvement. Notably, this effect was predominantly observed in companies directly engaged in cryptocurrency activities, such as accepting cryptocurrency as a payment method or actively trading cryptocurrency on an exchange platform. In contrast, firms involved in crypto mining or initial coin offerings did not exhibit a similar association. Our findings offer significant regulatory insights for governance bodies concerned with the implications of corporate cryptocurrency activities on tax strategies.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicCorporate Taxation and AvoidanceFrench-language works237,207