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 OpenAlexaboutno aff
S. V. Olefirenko

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.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.084

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0110.021
Scholarly communication0.0170.010
Open science0.0020.010
Research integrity0.0040.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.026
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

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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUzhhorod National University Herald Series LawSame topicEducation, Law, and SocietyFrench-language works237,207