Inlay

This webinar is part of the Tax Justice Network’s webinar series: Four definitions to change the world: Struggles over meaning in the UN tax convention negotiations. #untaxconvention Illicit financial flows are widely recognised as a major barrier to development. Reflecting this, their reduction was included in 2015 as part of the Sustainable Development Goals under target 16.4. Yet this broad consensus masks a long-standing dispute over what the term actually means, especially which regard to tax related flows. Some countries and international organisations advocate narrow definitions, limiting illicit financial flows to strictly illegal activities, meaning that the term only covers tax evasion. By contrast, African countries, particularly through the High-Level Panel on Illicit Financial Flows from Africa (the Mbeki Panel), have advanced a broader approach, which includes not only illegal flows but also flows from aggressive tax avoidance. This broader understanding was reflected in several reports and recommendations by the United Nations, including in the conceptual definition elaborated in 2020 by the UNCTAD-UNODC Task Force on the statistical measurement of illicit financial flows. The UN tax convention is a unique opportunity to build upon these efforts, translating these recommendations into a clear and actionable legal commitment. This panel will trace the evolution of the concept, revisit the key disputes over its meaning, and examine how these debates are re-emerging in current negotiations on the framework convention, first in discussions on a protocol and its scope, and more recently in formulating the relevant commitment in the framework convention itself. Speakers 🔵Mr. Alex Cobham, Chief Executive Officer of the Tax Justice Network 🔵Dr. Gamal Ibrahim, Chief, United Nations Economic Commission for Africa 🔵Ms. Chenai Mukumba, Executive Director, Tax Justice Network Africa Moderator 🔵Liz Nelson, Director of Advocacy, Tax Justice Network For more information on this series: https://taxjustice.net/events/webinar-series-four-definitions-to-change-the-world-struggles-over-meaning-in-the-un-tax-convention-negotiations/ To find out more about the UN tax convention: https://taxjustice.net/topics/un-tax-convention/

This webinar is part of the Tax Justice Network’s webinar series: Four definitions to change the world: Struggles over meaning in the UN tax convention negotiations. #untaxconvention Disputes over who creates value – and where – are central to distributive conflicts, from struggles over wages and unpaid care work, to debates over where multinational corporations should be taxed and so on. Yet it was only about a decade ago that these debates entered international tax negotiations in a systematic way. In 2013, in the context of the OECD/G20 BEPS Action Plan, the G20 called on the OECD to align taxation with value creation. Although framed at a high level, this mandate went on to shape much of the subsequent debate on base erosion and profit shifting. “Value creation” has since become both a central organising concept and a major battleground in contemporary international tax policymaking. At the same time, the concept has been met with sustained criticism, particularly from developing countries. Throughout the BEPS process, the mantra of “aligning transfer pricing outcomes with value creation” was often seen as reinforcing existing asymmetries in the international tax system. Critics also argued that the concept could enable profit shifting to low-tax jurisdictions. In the current negotiations for a UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation (UNFCITC), the “fair allocation of taxing rights” is emerging as one of the most fundamental commitments states are expected to assume under the Convention. As the draft text currently stands, delegates may agree to language stating that taxing rights over income, or parts of income, belong, inter alia, to jurisdictions in which value is created. Against this backdrop, and given the concept’s contested history, this panel revisits the battleground of “value creation”: examining its origins in international taxation, tracing its evolution across the BEPS process, and exploring why it is re-emerging in current UN negotiations. The panel unpacks the major critiques and competing interpretations surrounding the term, while also engaging with arguments from those who seek to reinterpret it in ways that better reflect where real economic activity and social contributions occur. Ultimately, evaluating whether “value creation” has any merit as a foundation for constructing a commitment to the fair allocation of taxing rights under the UN tax convention. Speakers Dr.Lyla Latif, Director, Managing Partner at Lai’Latif & Co Advocates, Co-Founder at Committee on Fiscal Studies,Director at House of Fiscal Wisdom Dr. Clair Quentin, Lecturer in Law at Loughborough University Dr. Mathew Olusanya Gbonjubola, a fellow of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Nigeria and a member of the Chartered Institute of Taxation of Nigeria. In the course of his tax career, he had extensive exposure in the international tax arena representing Nigeria on many international tax bodies. Moderator Florencia Lorenzo, Senior Researcher Advocate, Tax Justice Network. For more information on this series: https://taxjustice.net/events/webinar-series-four-definitions-to-change-the-world-struggles-over-meaning-in-the-un-tax-convention-negotiations/ To find out more about the UN tax convention: https://taxjustice.net/topics/un-tax-convention/

Inclusive Framework. Decades later, the OECD process has failed to curb harmful tax practices – triggering the pursuit of a different approach at the UN now underway. From their inception, however, OECD-led initiatives received criticism that the criteria used to identify harmful regimes are self-serving: regimes that affect the bulk of OECD countries are weeded out, yet regimes adopted by OECD countries with detrimental effects on Global South countries are left untouched. Thus, in addition to facing criticism for their unfairness, they also created concerns around their effectiveness. As the UN negotiations of the harmful tax practices commitment have shown, a fundamental reconsideration of the concept of harmful tax practices is long overdue. An inclusive and universal approach to tax cooperation requires new ways to look at the negative spillovers felt abroad from national tax policy making. It also requires more transparency on the local societal costs of harmful tax practices, which are often hidden from the public eye. This panel revisited past efforts, examined how the issue is being addressed in current negotiations at the United Nations, and explored how a more inclusive and effective framework for tackling harmful tax practices might be built, starting with the current formulation of the harmful tax practices commitment in the Framework Convention. Speakers Professor Steven Dean, Prof. of Law, Paul Siskind Research Scholar, Boston University Ms. Marlene Nembhard Parker, Deputy Commissioner General at Tax Administration Jamaica´ Legal Services Division, Co‑Lead of Workstream III (Prevention & Resolution of Tax Disputes) and main delegate for Jamaica at UN Tax Negotiations Senator Hon. Mr Leo Ryan Pinder, Office of the Attorney General & Ministry of Legal Affairs of the Bahamas Moderator Sergio Chaparro-Hernández, International Advocacy and Policy Lead, Tax Justice Network For more on the webinar series: https://taxjustice.net/events/webinar-series-four-definitions-to-change-the-world-struggles-over-meaning-in-the-un-tax-convention-negotiations/ Or for to find out more about the UN tax convention https://taxjustice.net/topics/un-tax-convention/