MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

International experience of legal regulation and evidence in criminal proceedings in the field of taxation

2025· article· en· W4408943847 on OpenAlex
S. V. Olefirenko

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueUzhhorod National University Herald Series Law · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation, Law, and Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsField (mathematics)Political scienceCriminal lawLawLaw and economicsCriminologyPsychologyEconomicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is determined that in Ukraine, during the martial law period, criminal law provisions regarding the protection of the taxation system have not changed. Paying taxes is a constitutional obligation of every citizen. Article 67 of the Constitution of Ukraine imposes on everyone the obligation to pay taxes and duties in the manner and amounts established by law. However, the desire of business entities to reduce or avoid their tax liabilities has created a number of tax evasion schemes in the Ukrainian tax system. Since the problem of combating tax evasion is one of the most acute for Ukraine, the author emphasizes that it is necessary to take into account the international experience of legal regulation and the practice of proof in foreign countries on this issue. World experience and history show that this problem is acute not only for our country, but also for other countries with developed economies and a high level of legal awareness of the population, as well as effectively functioning law enforcement agencies. The article discusses the experience of such countries as France, Canada, Germany, Kazakhstan, and England. The author emphasizes that in the modern legal science of Ukraine, in the context of evidence assessment and due to the deepening of the adversarial principles of criminal proceedings, the issue of standards of proof is becoming relevant. However, despite the fact that a lot of attention has been paid to this issue in the national legal literature, in practice there are still many unresolved issues, which emphasizes the relevance of the topic, especially with regard to the implementation of positive foreign experience in Ukrainian legislation. It is noted that in the countries of the Anglo-Saxon legal system, proof traditionally plays a significant role. At the same time, it is not typical for continental legislation and jurisprudence. Thus, the rules for assessing evidence in Anglo-Saxon and continental jurisdictions differ significantly. Based on the results of the analysis, the author concludes that a systematic approach is needed in introducing general and special measures to prevent criminal offenses in the field of taxation in Ukraine, and also that it is necessary to use evidence and proof in this category of criminal proceedings, taking into account the experience of other foreign countries.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.891
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.300 · 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