I might also add to the discussion the question of grammatical function. In theories that include the specification of grammatical function (subject, object, etc.) in the syntactic representations they posit, the question arises what grammatical functions can be realized by non-finite VPs (or clauses). There is a discussion of this question by Rodney Huddleston in Chapter 14 of The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language (pp. 1206-1220). He argues that non-finite clause complements in English usually do not realize the object function (which is mainly realized by NPs), but a different function, which he dubs catenative complement.
A discussion of the grammatical functions of finite clause complements across several languages can be found in the paper “The grammatical functions of complement clauses” by Mary Dalrymple and Helge Lødrup (which can be found on the second author’s webpage).
In case you might find it useful, here is a tree for your sentence that follows by and large the syntactic framework in The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language.