The quest for tax reform continues : the royal commission on taxation fifty years later
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Quest for Tax Reform Continues: The Royal Commission on Taxation Fifty Years Later presents a collection of papers written by leading tax experts from Canada, the United States, and Australia, edited by Kim Brooks, based on a series of discussions on the evolution of tax policy since Canada's Carter Commission. The Carter Commission report is widely viewed as the most detailed and brilliant analysis of income tax policy produced by a government commission around the world. It was acclaimed by tax experts, and is viewed as a timeless contribution to the literature on taxation.\nThe Quest for Tax Reform Continues serves as a forum for the ongoing discussion of research and policy directions, using the Commission's recommendations as a starting point for reflection. This collection contributes to the Carter Commission's legacy. Each of the fifteen chapters offers unique insight into the tax reform landscape laid out in the report. The collection is divided into four parts. Tax Justice explores the politics of tax reform and the broader distributive questions raised by the imposition of taxes. Base Reform turns to questions about the appropriate tax base and mix. Human Relationships focuses on the way the income tax system takes into account (and should take into account) human relationships. Administration and Enforcement closes the collection with important, and often overlooked, issues around tax administration and enforcement. The tax system plays a fundamental role in a democratic society. This text is vital for tax scholars, practitioners, and policy makers who are interested in questions of tax reform.
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 | 0.006 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".