REPORT EXPERT MEETING: THE HUMAN RIGHTS IMPACT OF FISCAL AND TAX POLICY

Transcription

1 REPORT Mandate of the Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights EXPERT MEETING: THE HUMAN RIGHTS IMPACT OF FISCAL AND TAX POLICY 16 TH 17 TH OF SEPTEMBER, PALAIS WILSON, GENEVA, SWITZERLAND The following text is a report on the expert meeting convened by the Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights, Magdalena Sepúlveda, in cooperation with MISEREOR, Christian Aid, Centre of Concern, the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Geneva office of the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung. At the 26th session of the United Nations Human Rights Council (June 2014), the Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights, Magdalena Sepúlveda Carmona, will submit a report concerning fiscal and tax policy, poverty and human rights. The report will apply human rights principles and standards to different practices for public expenditure, revenueraising and taxation, with the objective to: identify current trends in fiscal policy and their impact on human rights, especially those of persons living in poverty; highlight concerns as well as benefits raised by particular policies and practices in taxation and spending; make concrete recommendations to States on how to ensure fiscal policy is in accordance with human rights obligations.

2 Expert Meeting In order to assist her in drafting her report, the Special Rapporteur convened an expert meeting in Geneva September 2013, with the support of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, the Geneva office of the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, MISEREOR (the German Catholic Bishops Organisation for Development Cooperation), Centre of Concern and Christian Aid. The meeting brought together experts from civil society, grass roots organizations, UN agencies and academia working in diverse fields including economics, social policy, development and human rights (see: List of Participants for details). The meeting provided them with an opportunity to give inputs, based on their experience, which will help the Special Rapporteur decide the direction and content of the report. Proceedings In her opening remarks the Special Rapporteur encouraged members of the meeting to discuss widely and freely, emphasising the importance of debate and disagreement in order to prepare the best possible, progressive, report for the 26th session of the HRC. What followed were two days of productive, wide-ranging discussions, perhaps with less disagreement than expected but with a plethora of issues addressed. The meeting left the Special Rapporteur with a long list of recommendations both on format and content of the report. Though at times it seemed difficult to bring the discussion back to extreme poverty, the direct and indirect human rights implications of fiscal policy revenue-raising and expenditure were addressed widely. The meeting was structured according to multiple strands (Fiscal policy, poverty and human rights fiscal policy: revenue raising side, and International Dimensions) and each strand included presentations by expert members of the meeting followed by discussions. Many issues that were addressed however did not fit neatly into the allocated slots and so red-threads developed that ran throughout many discussion over the two days. The aspects addressed here are largely concerns that were raised on multiple occasions throughout the meeting. Fiscal Policy, poverty and human rights General Reflections and Impact on Vulnerable Groups and the Environment The general reflections focused on types of fiscal policy and how revenue generation and state expenditure can be brought in line with human rights principles. Principles of fairness, proportionality and the duty to protect the most vulnerable were met with ideas of universality and mobilization of the International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights. The covenant states in Article 2.1 the requirement of maximum Page 2

3 available resource mobilization to achieve the progressive realization of the rights. Not all fiscal policy aimed at mobilising the maximum available resources, although universally applied, is necessarily in line with, for example, principles of nondiscrimination. Particularly communities and individuals experiencing extreme poverty will be disproportionately disadvantaged by VAT, and even more so by increases in VAT. Furthermore progressive tax codes do not necessarily contain a gender dimension and women may suffer from unfair effects in that respect. Environmental taxes can also in some circumstances be contradictory to the rights of vulnerable populations. A carbon tax, for example, although aimed at reducing pollution and protecting future generations, if not well-designed with the need to protect the most disadvantaged communities in mind, can discriminate against poor communities whose energy use may be essential to their survival, wellbeing and dignity. However the use of well designed transfers of payments to alleviate some of the adverse impacts and hence protecting the most vulnerable and the environment simultaneously was considered. Well designed fiscal measures and often a series of revenue mobilizing instrument are needed in order to address issues of poverty and inequality and not leave the most vulnerable behind. Across the two day event concerns regarding policy sovereignty of states erupted frequently. Whether through direct means, such as loan conditionalities imposed by International Financial Institutions, or more indirect constraints on national states based on trade and investment agreements across nation state borders or between governments and multinational corporations, a reduction in policy sovereignty can be observed. The capacity of states in the South and, particularly since the global financial crisis, also the North to create and implement fiscal policy is in some cases severely limited which has real consequences for the rights of the population and the government s democratic accountability. Issues surrounding transparency and access to information were also addressed. Participants flagged knowledge and information gaps about tax and fiscal policy among civil society organizations and the general population. A fair and principled fiscal policy needs to be accessible to the most vulnerable and designed in a way that is transparent. Raising Revenue HR principles and taxation: Country Experiences and Sectoral Concerns Country examples from Egypt, Uruguay and Kenya further emphasized issues surrounding policy autonomy, accountability and in some cases corruption. Although issues across countries are similar, concerns were voiced from members of the meeting that the solutions cannot always be the same. Some experts Page 3

4 therefore suggested that the report of the Special Rapporteur should not be too specific in tax policy suggestions but rather emphasize the importance of contextual, historical and cultural considerations, whilst of course outlining the current problems with fiscal and tax policy. Fiscal policy, when implemented, needs to be part of a wider, more comprehensive, development model which in itself needs to comply with and promote human rights principles. The meeting heard of several examples where tax exemptions and stability agreements between multinational corporations and governments created a problematic environment for the fulfillment of human rights. Of particular concern where extractive industries in many developing countries. Corporate rights and benefits should not trump those of the local population. It was further emphasized that it is not just the national but also the local level at which fiscal policy revenue generation and expenditure is conducted and as such all levels of governance need to be examined in conjunction with one another. The International Dimensions and Spending The campaign for a financial transaction tax (FTT) as a multilateral approach to fiscal policy was mentioned throughout. Discussions revolved around its political implications and difficulties, as well as how its revenue would be allocated. How will accountability of spending work across the multilateral level? Are there other international instruments, such as the UN Committee of Experts on Tax, that could coordinate fair global cooperation on tax and fiscal matters? Especially since the financial crisis and the increasing environmental pressures on communities across the world, it has become clear that the duty to protect people from financial and environmental shocks needs global cooperation. And a financial system that is compatible with human rights principles and guidelines is a crucial aspect of that. The meaning of progressive fiscal policy was debated widely. Agreement was reached in particular on that, in order to protect and promote the human rights of the extreme poor and those most vulnerable, fiscal policies should have redistributive effects both through taxation and expenditure. This issue further highlighted the importance of not just an appropriate tax code, but a comprehensive domestic fiscal policy, that accommodates for local and international specificities, whilst promoting an inclusive human rights based approach to societal development. Page 4

5 Recommendations to the Special Rapporteur In the last sessions, the participants discussed in detail the content that the report should include, and in particular what recommendations the report should make, to States, inter-governmental organizations, international financial institutions and other stakeholders. A draft of the report should be available by January for comments. The report will be finalized by March 2014, and then officially presented to the Human Rights Council in June Questionnaire As part of the formulation of this report, the Special Rapporteur sent two questionnaires: to States and to civil society and National Human Rights Institutions regarding the human rights impact of fiscal and tax policies. The text of the questionnaires and the responses can be found in the mandate s Website. ages/fiscalandtaxpolicy2014.aspx About the Author David Cichon is an intern at the FES Geneva office. He has studied Engineering, Development Studies and International Politics at the University of Sussex and Trinity College Dublin. The views expressed in this publication are not necessarily the ones of the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung or of the organization for which the author works. Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, Geneva office 6 bis, Chemin du Point-du-Jour 1202 Geneva Switzerland Tel Fax: More information: Page 5