Policy Forum: Reflections on the Relationship Between International Tax and Trade Law and Policy, and International Tax Avoidance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tax policy and law, trade policy and law, and consequential perceptions of what constitutes "international tax avoidance" are intrinsically connected, but too often these fields are examined separately without a necessary awareness of this connection. However, without understanding this connection, and states' interests in relation to each other as mobilized among other ways through their tax systems, both the theoretical and practical coherence of tax and trade law are undermined. In addition, the profound distinction between impugnable international tax avoidance when contrasted with what is merely, if not incontrovertibly, naturally occurring avoided tax because states' legal and tax regimes operate differently according to their interests, is not well enough understood in evaluating the adequacy and suitability of countries' fiscal interests in relation to each other. This article offers observations on these connections and a framework for considering them as much in practice as in tax and trade policy design.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.028 | 0.020 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.041 | 0.017 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".