Pillar 2 and the United States: What's Next
Bibliographic record
Abstract
January 1 marked the official effective date of the 15 percent global corporate minimum tax imposed by pillar 2 as part of the G-20/OECD/ inclusive framework base erosion and profitshifting 2.0 project. Pillar 2 went into effect in Australia, Canada, the EU, Japan, Norway, South Korea, and the United Kingdom, with more countries expected to adopt it soon, including low-tax countries like Barbados, Ireland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and Switzerland. Critics have argued that pillar 2 violates tax treaties, customary international law, or bilateral investment treaties. But it seems unlikely that legal challenges against it will succeed. Most of the countries that have adopted pillar 2 can override tax treaties by domestic legislation (such as Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom) directive (the EU), or referendum (Switzerland). The existence of customary international tax law is disputed, and it would be a brave national court that relied on it to invalidate a reform endorsed by over 140 countries (after all, if enough countries adopt a rule, they can effect a change in customary international law). A bilateral investment treaty arbitration challenge by an investor is more plausible, but if a losing country refunds the tax it collected, this could trigger additional tax liability in another country the multinational operates in, so it's unclear what the multinational would gain.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.019 | 0.013 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.006 |
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".