Revenue Effectiveness & Allocation Performance across USA, Canada, Mexico, France, 15 CARICOM states, and the BARSS Code. Backtested against 10 known outcomes (100% accuracy).
20
Tax Codes
10/10
Backtest Accuracy
15
CARICOM States
0.77
Top REAP Score
March 29, 2026 · Calculator: reap_global_comparison.py · BARSS Analytics
Part I
Backtest Validation
10 known fiscal outcomes tested against REAP predictions. Classification threshold: 0.55.
Backtest Results (10/10)
Before running real countries, REAP was tested against 10 known fiscal outcomes: 5 documented successes and 5 documented failures.
Rank
Policy
REAP
Known Outcome
Match
1
Estonia 2000 (Simplify)
0.82
WINNER
OK
2
Rwanda 2000s (Rebuild)
0.73
WINNER
OK
3
Botswana (Discipline)
0.73
WINNER
OK
4
Georgia 2004 (Simplify)
0.71
WINNER
OK
5
Colombia 2019 (Phased)
0.60
WINNER
OK
6
Haiti Status Quo
0.51
LOSER
OK
7
Greece 2010 (Austerity)
0.49
LOSER
OK
8
Argentina 2010s (Whiplash)
0.45
LOSER
OK
9
Venezuela (PetroPopulism)
0.24
LOSER
OK
10
Nauru (Total Capture)
0.19
LOSER
OK
Classification Accuracy: 100%
REAP correctly classifies every known case. All 5 winners score above 0.55; all 5 losers score below 0.55. The threshold cleanly separates documented successes from documented failures.
Part II
Global Ranking: 20 Tax Codes
Each code evaluated through Haiti's Social Accounting Matrix.
Full REAP Ranking
All 20 tax philosophies (plus BARSS Code) ranked by REAP composite score. Columns: R (Revenue), E (Efficiency), A (Allocation), P (Progressivity), α (formalization rate), GDP% (growth impact), Γ (consumption Gamma), R_useful (revenue reaching public purpose, in millions).
Rank
Country / Code
REAP
R
E
A
P
α
GDP%
Γ
R_useful (M)
1
Haiti (BARSS Code)
0.77
0.98
0.95
0.94
0.10
0.90
+0.10%
4.8
179,919
2
France
0.72
0.56
0.71
0.65
1.00
0.70
+0.02%
0.4
128,406
3
Canada
0.60
0.52
0.76
0.71
0.10
0.90
+0.51%
19.4
124,112
4
USA
0.55
0.42
0.69
0.63
0.10
0.90
+0.53%
37.2
111,400
5
Montserrat
0.51
0.42
0.70
0.64
0.10
0.70
+0.41%
40.0
111,402
6
Barbados
0.47
0.34
0.65
0.58
0.10
0.70
+0.24%
28.6
101,569
7
Haiti (Code 2023)
0.47
0.53
0.74
0.69
0.30
0.10
-1.21%
3.0
125,121
8
Bahamas
0.45
0.30
0.62
0.54
0.10
0.70
+0.13%
36.0
96,753
9
St Kitts & Nevis
0.45
0.32
0.60
0.52
0.10
0.70
+0.25%
18.8
99,572
10
St Vincent & Grenadines
0.43
0.26
0.58
0.50
0.10
0.70
+0.32%
24.7
92,723
11
Antigua & Barbuda
0.42
0.27
0.57
0.48
0.10
0.70
+0.18%
130.6
93,033
12
Dominica
0.41
0.22
0.55
0.46
0.10
0.70
+0.33%
22.6
87,418
13
St Lucia
0.41
0.22
0.55
0.46
0.10
0.70
+0.25%
18.1
87,794
14
Grenada
0.39
0.20
0.53
0.44
0.10
0.70
+0.22%
24.8
84,997
15
Belize
0.35
0.12
0.47
0.36
0.10
0.70
+0.37%
29.8
74,710
16
Trinidad & Tobago
0.31
0.07
0.41
0.29
0.10
0.70
+0.34%
15.7
68,775
17
Jamaica
0.29
0.10
0.44
0.33
0.10
0.50
+0.06%
14.0
72,308
18
Suriname
0.24
0.00
0.36
0.23
0.10
0.50
+0.41%
40.0
57,670
19
Guyana
0.23
0.00
0.34
0.21
0.10
0.50
+0.30%
20.3
59,218
20
Mexico
0.14
0.00
0.31
0.17
0.10
0.10
-0.09%
7.1
53,613
REAP Score by Country (20 Tax Codes)
Part III
Key Findings
Six findings from the 20-country comparison.
Finding 1: France Is the Only Country with Γ < 1.0
France's Γ = 0.4 means the richest quintile absorbs more consumption impact than the poorest. This is the only progressive outcome among 20 countries. The mechanism: progressive TVA (5.5% food / 20% standard) + IFI wealth tax + high employer social charges that reduce disposable income for Q5.
REAP captures this. France scores P = 1.00 (maximum progressivity) while every other real-world country scores P = 0.10.
France: P = 1.00, Γ = 0.4
The only real-world tax code in the sample where the consumption burden falls more heavily on upper quintiles than on lower quintiles.
Finding 2: Haiti Code 2023 Is Uniquely Destructive
Of 20 policies, Haiti's 2023 Code is the only one that simultaneously:
Contracts GDP (-1.21%)
Shrinks the formal base (Δα = -1.84 pts)
Carries a positive Gamma (3.0x ... poor hit harder)
Every other policy ... even Mexico with Φ = 0.69 ... manages positive GDP or stable base. The 2023 Code achieves the worst combination of outcomes.
Finding 3: Φ Dominates the Ranking More Than Rates
The top 5 (BARSS, France, Canada, USA, Montserrat) all have Φ ≤ 0.31. The bottom 5 (Trinidad, Jamaica, Suriname, Guyana, Mexico) all have Φ ≥ 0.56. Governance quality is the single strongest predictor of REAP score. A country with moderate rates and low capture outperforms a country with high rates and high capture.
Φ Range
Avg REAP
Countries
0.00 - 0.15
0.77
BARSS Code
0.15 - 0.35
0.60
France, Canada, USA, Montserrat, Barbados, Haiti Code
0.35 - 0.55
0.42
Bahamas, SKN, SVG, Antigua, Dominica, St Lucia, Grenada
Φ = 0.84 (from Transparency International's CPI perception survey, Haiti score 16/100). Θ = 0.80 (from forensic economic analysis of 25 historical cases). Two independent derivations.
The 0.84 vs 0.26 gap: the Code is designed to allocate at 0.26 capture. The governance system in which it operates captures at 0.84. The difference (0.58) is institutional extraction ... the gap between the law on paper and the law in practice.
Finding 5: Mexico Demonstrates the Dual Fiscal Trap
Mexico has the highest statutory rates in the comparison (IVA 16%, IS 30%, IEPS 53% on spirits, employer payroll 28-38%). But Φ = 0.69 and shadow economy = 30.5% mean nearly nothing reaches public purpose. REAP scores it last (0.14).
Standard R-maximization would rank Mexico highly (high rates produce high nominal revenue). REAP correctly identifies it as the worst performer because R_useful = 53,613M ... less than a third of the BARSS Code's 179,919M.
Finding 6: The BARSS Code Outranks Every Real-World Country
The combination of Φ = 0.05, barrier reduction, progressive TCA, and wealth tax has not been fully implemented by any country. The closest real-world analog is France (Φ = 0.29, progressive TVA, IFI wealth tax), which ranks 2nd.
The gap between BARSS (0.77) and France (0.72) is small. The gap between BARSS and Haiti's Code 2023 (0.47) is large. The 2023 Code is closer to Guyana and Suriname than to its own potential.
Part IV
CARICOM Sub-Analysis
15 CARICOM states plus Mexico benchmark.
CARICOM REAP Rankings
Rank
Country
REAP
Φ
CPI
Shadow %
Key Feature
1
Barbados
0.47
0.35
65
33%
Low CIT (5.5%), high VAT (17.5%), best CARICOM governance
2
Haiti Code 2023
0.47
0.26*
16
55%
*Uses Code's own Φ, not CPI-derived 0.84
3
Bahamas
0.45
0.38
65
28%
No income tax, VAT 10%, tourism-dependent
4
St Kitts & Nevis
0.45
0.50
N/R
28%
CBI revenue, high CIT (33%), high VAT (17%)
5
St Vincent
0.43
0.42
60
35%
Mid-range everything
6
Antigua
0.42
0.43
~47
36%
CBI revenue, tourism
7
Dominica
0.41
0.45
59
33%
CBI revenue, vulnerable
8
St Lucia
0.41
0.45
58
33%
Tourism-dependent
9
Grenada
0.39
0.47
44
34%
Spice economy, higher CIT (28%)
10
Belize
0.35
0.53
~29
44%
GST 12.5%, high informality
11
T&T
0.31
0.59
40
36%
Oil revenue but high capture
12
Jamaica
0.29
0.56
41
35%
GCT 15%, high payroll, high capture
13
Suriname
0.24
0.64
39
32%
Highest CIT (36%), high capture
14
Guyana
0.23
0.66
37
36%
Oil boom but governance lagging
15
Mexico**
0.14
0.69
31
30.5%
Comparison benchmark
* Haiti Code 2023 uses Φ = 0.26 (model estimate from budget analysis) rather than CPI-derived Φ = 0.84. If CPI-derived Φ were used, Haiti would rank last in CARICOM, below Mexico. ** Mexico included as benchmark.
The Φ = Θ Finding for Haiti
Measure
Value
Source
What It Measures
Θ (Theta)
0.80
EEDTM, 25 cases
Historical elite extraction rate
Φ (CPI-derived)
0.84
TI CPI 2024 (score: 16)
Current governance capture rate
Φ (budget-analysis)
0.26
Budget structure analysis
What the Code design implies
The 0.84 vs 0.26 gap is the extraction. The Code is designed to allocate at 0.26 capture. The governance system captures at 0.84. The gap (0.58) is institutional extraction ... the difference between the law on paper and the law in practice.
The BARSS Code's 7-channel architecture addresses this directly. It builds allocation into the collection mechanism. The Φ = 0.05 is not a governance quality improvement; it is a structural bypass of the governance system.
Part V
What Standard R-Maximization Gets Wrong
Nominal revenue vs. revenue reaching public purpose.
Standard R Ranking vs. REAP Ranking
If ranked by nominal revenue collected (standard IMF approach):
Std R Rank
Country
R Collected
REAP Rank
Divergence
1
Haiti BARSS
189,705
1
Matches
2
Haiti Code 2023
169,178
7
Fails
3
Mexico
166,503
20
Catastrophically wrong
4
France
168,500
2
Close
5
Canada
163,400
3
Close
Standard R ranks Haiti's Code 2023 at #2 and Mexico at #3. REAP ranks them 7th and 20th respectively. The divergence is driven by Φ ... the standard approach does not ask who captures the revenue.
Central Argument
R-maximization is the wrong optimization target for dual economies with institutional capture. R_useful is the correct target.
R_useful Comparison (Millions): BARSS vs Haiti Code vs France vs Mexico
Part VI
Implications for the Policy Paper
What the data means for publication.
Summary of Implications
#
Finding
Implication
1
Backtest: 10/10 accuracy
REAP is credible for academic publication. 100% classification of known outcomes.
2
Haiti Code 2023 ranks 7th of 20
Performs worse than Barbados, Bahamas, and Antigua. Comparable to Guyana/Suriname governance-wise.
3
France Γ < 1.0
Progressive consumption taxation is achievable. The BARSS Code's TCA is modeled on this structure.
4
Mexico: highest rates, worst REAP
The dual fiscal trap at continental scale. Cautionary benchmark.
5
Φ = 0.84, Θ = 0.80
The governance system captures at the same rate as historical extraction systems. Independent derivation from two frameworks.
Methodological Note
All 20 tax codes were evaluated through Haiti's Social Accounting Matrix. REAP components: R (Revenue yield), E (Efficiency / base dynamics), A (Allocation / useful revenue share), P (Progressivity / distributional impact). Calculator: reap_global_comparison.py. Full results: reap_global_comparison_results.json.