Should this be merged with Assymmetric federation? UnHoly 19:54, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Canada[edit]

The Canada section is a bit of a mess. Even the first paragraph, which is largely correct, is unsourced.

The second paragraph is misleading when it says "tax collection is often a federal responsibility". Sections 91 and 92 of the Constitution grant taxing power to both the provinces and the federal government. The CRA does collect a number of provincial taxes and then remits them to the provinces in question, but Quebec is not the only province that does not participate in all of these arrangements. Further, these arrangements are by way of agreements - I am not sure contracts among governments to find bureaucratic efficiencies necessarily constitute asymmetric federalism. In entering into agreements with CRA to collect taxes, those particular provinces haven't abrogated their long-term legislative competence over those taxes.

The third paragraph, reference the 2004 health accord, seems to be trying to make hay out of a press release. There are no details provided to show that, beyond the posturing in a communique, how the funding implemenation results in asymmetric federalism.

The references to pension plans in the fourth paragraph is correct, but the subsequent line "matters that are handled by the federal government in all the other province" is incorrect. And the last paragraph appears to be unsourced opinion.

I will take a crack at fixing this, but first wanted to leave a note advising of the issue in case anyone had input. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 13:55, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

additional documentation on Canada and Spain[edit]

[1]----Bancki (talk) 10:21, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Asymmetric federalism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ((Sourcecheck))).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template ((source check)) (last update: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:29, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sources needed[edit]

The following countries in the National Examples section lack footnotes/citations:

Alternatively, if the stated information is available in the nation's respective articles, a Main Article template should be visible. lovkal (talk) 09:29, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Saint Kitts and Nevis[edit]

Would Saint Kitts and Nevis not qualify for inclusion on this post? The description on Constitution of Saint Kitts and Nevis#Structure of Government seems to describe an asymmetric federal situation. --Gimelthedog (talk) 03:53, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Categories