Technical note / Defect ('illah): It is like this in the manuscripts, but grammatically the words "muslim" and "mushrik" should have been in the accusative (mansub). Also, the word "yakun" is not found in al-Tabarani's "al-Mu'jam al-Kabir".

Note / Clarification: In manuscript (S) the word at this place is "akhidh" (one who takes).

Grading: Its chain is weak.
Technical note / Defect ('illah): al-Mughirah al-Azdi is "majhul" (unknown); Imam al-Mizzi said in "al-Tahdhib" (28/ 408): "I think he is al-Mughirah bin Muslim al-Qasmali, for the Qasamil are of al-Azd." Muhammad bin Zayd is also majhul, and Hayyan al-A'raj, although Ibn Ma'in declared him thiqah, his narration from al-'Ala' is "munqati'" (broken).

Important point: 'Abdan is 'Abd Allah bin 'Uthman bin Jabalah, and Abu Hamzah is al-Sukkari, Muhammad bin Maymun al-Marwazi.

Reference / Source: Imam Ahmad (34/ 20527) and Ibn Majah (1831) narrated it through various routes from 'Attab bin Ziyad with this same chain, but with the word "al-kharaj" (land tax) in place of "al-jizyah".

Technical note / Defect ('illah): 'Abd Allah bin 'Abd al-Rahman al-Darimi narrated it, according to what Ibn Mandah mentioned in "al-Sahabah" (p. 414), from Marwan bin Muhammad al-Tatari, from Bukayr bin Ma'ruf, from Muhammad bin Zayd al-Khurasani, from Hayyan al-A'raj as "mursal". But he (Ibn Mandah) said after it: "It is an error", and declared the narration of Abu Hamzah al-Sukkari to be correct, even though its chain up to Muhammad bin Zayd is sounder than the route of Abu Hamzah al-Sukkari, in which is the unknown al-Mughirah! Unless he meant to show the error of whoever made him (Hayyan) a Companion, in which case, yes.