Bureaucracies become influential through their expertise. A recent IMF working paper raises questions about the value of its expertise. Entitled “Assessing the Impact and Phasing of Multi-year Fiscal Adjustment: A General Framework” the paper develops a model of the effects of different approaches to fiscal adjustment to help Fund staff develop better lending programs. This paper also underscores the limits of the existing intellectual approach to austerity, which relies solely on economics to overcome what are essentially political problems.
The 10-point Lough Erne communique contained 13 uses of the word ‘should’ and not a single use of the word ‘will’. Perhaps David Cameron, the UK Prime Minister, was hoping that no-one would notice the difference and that the British public anger about tax dodging would be satisfied without any actual action. A new poll commissioned by Christian Aid shows that that gamble has failed and that the British public remain as angry, if not more so, than before the G8.
When a previous poll was undertaken in February, 80% of the public were angry about tax dodging, and 34% were boycotting products because of companies’ tax practices. The same percentage are still boycotting products – and 84% are now angry.
There is an old proverb that goes something like this: “one finger cannot lift a pebble.” And while reducing cross-border tax evasion is not like lifting pebble—it’s more like hauling a boulder—it is true that it cannot be achieved unilaterally. No single country can stop, stem, or slow offshore tax evasion by its own citizens without the help of at least one other nation. This is true by definition.
Historically much of the bilateral cooperation on tax evasion has been less than amicable. That is changing. Increasingly, we are seeing that the cooperation in matters of tax between nations—particularly wealthy ones—is neither begrudging nor forced. These nations are not just cooperating to stem tax evasion abroad; they are doing so willingly and proactively.
Read more: Increasing [Amicable] Cooperation On Offshore Tax Evasion
New report: A synthesis of studies on the tax system in five developing countries.
Anti-poverty campaigners are celebrating the Norwegian government’s release of an external audit of all outstanding public debts it is owed by developing countries, the first time any country has undertaken such a process.
The investigation, by the international financial services company Deloitte, was conducted on aid packages offered by the Norwegian government to developing countries since the 1970s. Auditors were tasked with studying whether the deals, mostly concessional trade agreements, complied with past and present national guidelines as well as with newly established international principles.
“The Norwegians clearly wanted to put out a test case that could be taken seriously." -- Eric LeCompte of Jubilee USA
Read more: Norway Sets Example in Audit of Poor Countries’ Debts
Ghana lost a whopping $4.9 billion through illicit financial flows from 1970 to 2008 in the extractive sector.
According to the Global Financial Integrity Report, this included loss of revenue from resource taxes.
Read more: Ghana loses $4.9b in extractive industry within 38 years
-What ever happened to the maxim “to each according to her needs?”
-He who has, fears losing privileges; he who does not have, aspires to have opportunities; that is the dialectics of hard reality. (L. Boff)
1. What the adoption of the human rights framework is all about is making sure that short-term responses do not preclude the chances of identifying and acting-upon long-term solutions. (O. de Schutter) The human rights framework is definitely used wrongly if it delays policy development or, as is often the case, it deteriorates into a series of public relations exercises by its proponents. The ultimate purpose of adopting the human rights framework is to embark in it with clear objectives and rules of engagement that are task- and action-oriented, as well as time-bound. (F. Gomez) That is why accepting the human rights framework does not allow for a 'pick and choose menu' approach. (M. Wopold Bosien)
World Bank President Jim Yong Kim said two senior executives will leave and others will get new responsibilities, part of a management shakeup 13 months after he took over the institution as he prepares a new global poverty-reduction strategy.
Caroline Anstey, a managing director who worked for 18 years at the Washington-based bank, will step down after the member countries’ annual meetings in October, Kim said in an e-mail to staff obtained by Bloomberg. Pamela Cox, a veteran of 33 years who most recently was senior vice president for change management, will retire at the same time, he said.
Read more: Kim says World Bank Shakeup to refocus poverty goal
In the last few weeks Edward Snowden has been holed in Moscow's airport trying to negotiate terms of asylum with various countries around the world. Thus far it doesn't seem that Snowden has been able to find any acceptable offers
Part of the reason is that the United States government has been openly threatening governments that are considering offering asylum, warning of dire consequences. Governments throughout the world take these threats seriously. Why?
In a report that calls for the Government to implement the Kay recommendations, British MPs have called for the Government to consider imposing an FTT to help reduce high frequency trading.
The number of “least developed countries” (LDCs), which rose from the original 24 back in 1971 to the current 49, is beginning to shrink – haltingly.
So far, three countries – Botswana, Cape Verde and the Maldives – have “graduated” from LDCs to the status of developing countries.
And as economies improve, at least six more countries – Tuvalu, Vanuatu, Kiribati, Angola, Samoa and Equatorial Guinea – are on the verge of leaving the ranks of LDCs by 2015.