- It was ten years ago this year that I read a newsletter
put out by a group founded by Bella Abzug, The Women's Environment and
Development Organization-WEDO, that told of the UN's plans to present
the idea of global taxation at the UN Social Summit in March, 1995. At
that meeting, Ms. Abzug, along with Dr. Inga Kaul, a key official from
the United Nations Development Programme, held a special day long press
briefing in which they presented their ideas. I asked Dr. Kaul why the
people of the world should allow global taxation since the various methods
they were suggesting would provide the UN with over $1.646T when their
1993 budget was $10.5B. Very flustered, she replied, "They deserve
it and they would have monies left over to help countries."
-
- Since that time, I have monitored and followed the concept
of global taxation. In order to have a global tax, which comprises the
highest form of transfer of wealth, you need really good reasons. At the
Millennium Summit in 2000, the UN presented the world's 189 kings, princes,
prime ministers and presidents a list of global needs. They include by
2015: reducing poverty and hunger by 50%, ensuring that children everywhere
are able to complete a full course of primary schooling, reducing by 66%
child mortality, halting and reversing HIV/AIDS, malaria and other major
diseases and improving the lives of 100 million slum dwellers, among others.
-
- Notice that this is not a country by country goal, which
would reflect the idea of national sovereignty but reflects a world united
and governed through a universal political body called the United Nations.
These goals have also been adopted by all of the extended UN family:
the International Monetary Fund/World Bank, the World Health Organization,
UNESCO, etc. as well as the Group of Eight heads of state. Many leading
multinational and transnational corporations have also adopted these goals.
It is only you and I who have not been told-probably because we would
not agree with it.
-
- As such, the primary focus of the Spring Meeting of the
IMF/World Bank that just concluded was how to meet and finance the UN Millennium
Development Goals. The UN estimates another $50B per year is needed.
The Development Committee which is comprised of key officials from both
the IMF and World Bank, including U.S. Treasury Secretary John Snow, issued
a report on how to increase funding which includes: (1) increase Overseas
Development Assistance-ODA, (2) set up a proposed International Financing
Facility, (3) global taxation and (4) increase in aid.
-
- It should be noted that all of these suggestions have
been around for awhile. In 1994, the United Nations Development Programme
issued the Human Development Report which basically outlined the same ideas
that are now being discussed. The difference is instead of them being
conceptual, as they may have been then, today they are being seriously
discussed by country governments and are now showing up at the IMF/World
Bank level and the G7 Finance Ministers and G8 heads of government levels.
-
- Let us take a look at each of these. (1) Increase Overseas
Development Assistance-ODA. To prepare for the Financing for Development
Meeting in Monterrey, Mexico in 2002, George Bush doubled the amount of
ODA from $10B to $15B beginning this year. The UN target is .07% of Gross
National Income. The U.S. as well as most of the developed countries,
are giving an average of 0.23%. ODA is used for debt relief, technical
cooperation, and emergency and disaster relief along with food aid and
totals $6B a year.
-
- (2) The proposed International Financing Facility. The
1994 Human Development Report recommended that an International Investment
Trust be set up. The proposed International Financing Facility would be
a temporary financing mechanism that would hold the annual payments from
donor countries as well as issue AAA-rated bonds based on the future donor
pledges of countries. In other words, it would securitize (issue bonds)
future pledges in ODA through the bond market. The bond proceeds would
be channeled through existing aid programs. This proposal has already
been widely discussed within the G8, EU, UN, the IMF and World Bank as
a result of being presented at the September 2003 annual IMF/World Bank
meeting in Dubai. The specific mechanics as to how to set up the Facility
is still under discussion.
-
- (3) Global Taxation. In the 1994 Human Development
Report, it recommended five different sources of taxation: possible tax
on arms trade, a global tax of $1 per barrel on oil consumption, assessing
a tax of 0.05% on the value of each international currency transaction,
Special Drawing Rights, and a world income tax of 0.1% on the richest nations.
The current Global Taxation Proposals include: environmental taxes of
various kinds-most prominently a carbon tax or a system of tradable permits
(the U.S. has established the first carbon permit trading exchange with
other European countries now following suit), a tax on foreign exchange
at the rate of 0.02% (many experts say that there are many barriers), increase
taxes on aviation fuel and/or air transport, on shipping or arms exports,
taxing resources held in the global commons such as the mining rights in
international waters (Law of the Sea-the U.S. is to hold hearings on ratifying
the Law of the Sea Treaty), create and voluntarily redistribute additional
Special Drawing Rights (SDR's), and other ideas such as a global lottery.
-
- In the final IMF/World Bank press briefing, I asked key
officials that included World Bank President Jim Wolfensohn if they could
tell me which global tax mechanism was preferred and what kind of timing
did they foresee. I was told that "this was a very complex issue."
Lastly, an increase in aid is always welcomed.
-
- It should be noted that you always need the poor to justify
a transfer of wealth. Interestingly enough many of the very poor and highly
indebted poor countries are rich in minerals such as gold. However, most
of the income from mining minerals goes to pay the World Bank back for
loans made to most of these third world countries. Back in the 1970s and
80s, the World Bank made specific project loans to these countries to help
them make money by selling electricity from hydro-electric dams, and other
high capital investment projects. Unfortunately more than 80% of these
projects never panned out but became the huge debt burden which these countries
have.
-
- Perhaps it is time to put an end to all of the schematic
transfer of wealth mechanisms and withdraw not only from the UN, but the
IMF, the World Bank, the World Health Organization, UNESCO, the International
Criminal Court, the World Trade Organization and all of the rest of the
alphabet soup organizations that have taken our sovereignty and are now
calling for additional transfer of wealth schemes!
|