Tax and transparency fact-finding mission

Obstacles, solutions and windows of opportunity for progress towards financial transparency and tax justice

By an independent delegation of experts from Asia, Africa and Latin America. Based on visits to Switzerland, France, Norway, United Nations, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, and the European Commission About this document About the Tax and Transparency Fact-finding Mission 2 This report is the outcome of a Tax and This mission was facilitated by the European Network on Debt and Transparency Fact-finding Mission carried Development (EURODAD) in cooperation with the African Forum out by a delegation of independent experts and Network on Debt and Development (AFRODAD) and the Latin from Asia, Africa and Latin America1 in American Network on Debt, Development and Rights (LATINDADD). October and November 2013. Based on The mission was funded by the Norwegian Agency for Development visits to Switzerland, France, Norway, Cooperation (Norad) under a project directed by AFRODAD. The United Nations, Organisation for Economic overall goals of the project are the following: Co-operation and Development, and the European Commission2. All views ● Strengthening the evidence base, deepening understanding presented in this report are those of of some of the main drivers and impacts of capital flight on the experts in their personal capacities developing countries, and addressing them through specific and reflect the group’s consensus on proposals on responsible financing standards; the key findings as well as negotiated ● Creating a broader and better coordinated civil society compromises. organisation (CSO) coalition on tax and capital flight issues, May 2014 mainstreaming key demands in CSO advocacy and campaigning on aid, debt, budget monitoring, trade and investment, and national resources; and

● Leading a coordinated advocacy strategy at national, regional and global levels that links tax and capital flight into other areas of development finance, and particularly ensures its inclusion in responsible financing standards. The views presented in this report do not necessarily represent the views of Norad, AFRODAD, EURODAD or LATINDADD. Contents 3

Introduction 04 Switzerland 06 France 09 Norway 11 European Commission 12 United Nations 13 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 15 G20 18 Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative 19 Overall conclusion 20 Annexes 21 Endnotes 25

Acronyms

AFRODAD African Forum and Network on Debt and Development ATAF African Tax Administration Forum CIAT Inter-American Center of Tax Administrations EITI Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative EU European Union EURODAD European Network on Debt and Development FATCA Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act G20 The Group of Twenty GFI Global Financial Integrity LATINDADD Latin American Network on Debt, Development and Rights Norad Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development UN United Nations UNTC UN Tax Committee US United States

Tax and transparency Fact-finding mission 4 Introduction

Tax revenues provide governments with the financial resources needed to deliver essential public services, combat poverty, ensure development, and provide a foundation for the economy. Effective tax systems are therefore crucial elements of a well-functioning society.

However, the tax collection in developing countries is currently being heavily undermined by tax evasion, which makes up a substantial part of the illicit financial flows from these countries. Estimates from Global Financial Integrity (GFI) have shown that for the period 1970-2008, commercial tax evasion accounted for 60-65% of the illicit flows from developing countries, while criminal activity made up 30-35% and corruption accounted for 3%.3

Together with the African Development Bank, GFI has also estimated that Africa lost between US$597 billion and US$1.4 trillion in net resource transfers over the period 1980-2009, exceeding by far the amount of resources Africa received in the same period, and thus making Africa a net creditor to the world.4

The most recent study from GFI estimates that illicit financial flows cost developing countries as a group on average US$590 billion per year during the period 2002-2011.5

Due to the lack of financial transparency at both the national and international levels, companies and individuals can keep their financial resources out of sight from governments and the public, to circumvent national laws and regulations, launder dirty money, or evade taxation. In addition to tax evasion, which refers to illegal tax dodging, corporations also engage in aggressive tax planning and so-called tax avoidance, which are technically legal activities that minimise tax payments, in many cases through exploiting loopholes and discrepancies between different tax laws.

Countries and jurisdictions offering financial secrecy and extremely low (in some cases zero) corporate tax rates are a vital part of the problems relating to tax evasion and avoidance, since these jurisdictions create the conditions corporations and individuals need in order to dodge taxes. Therefore, despite the fact that taxation is said to be an issue of national sovereignty, the laws and policies of one country can undermine the ability of other countries to collect taxes in their own countries.

European countries (including non-EU member states such as Switzerland and Norway) play a key role in the international political debate on tax and transparency. At the same time, a significant number of the multinational enterprises operating in developing countries are based in European countries, and the regulation (or lack thereof) of these enterprises by European governments has a major impact on developing countries. Furthermore, European banks are the final destination of the illicit financial flows from the global south in many cases, meaning that the banking and financial transparency regulations in European countries can also have an impact on the magnitude of illicit capital flight from developing countries.6

Tax and transparency Fact-finding mission 5

The Tax and Transparency Fact-finding Mission provided a delegation of experts from developing countries with an opportunity to question and assess the political positions, policies, processes and procedures of a number of global and regional institutions, as well as some of the European countries that are most relevant for the international debate.

The overall findings of the mission were that the current tax regimes and financial opacity are causing substantial negative impacts on developing countries. Although changes are afoot, the delegation found that these changes are primarily driven by the interests and concerns about tax evasion and avoidance in the US and Europe, and that a global perspective is often lacking. There is therefore a high risk that the new initiatives will not solve the problems faced by developing countries, and in particular not the low-income countries.

This report presents the outcome of the fact-finding mission, including the obstacles, solutions and windows of opportunity identified by the expert delegation. The countries are presented in the same sequence as they were visited, followed by the regional and international institutions. At the beginning of each chapter, an introduction presents the rationale for why that particular country or institution was included in the mission, followed by the key observations made by the delegation. Each chapter also includes the delegations’ perspective on what the obstacles are to progress towards transparency and tax justice for that particular country or institution, as well recommended solutions and a conclusion. The finding of the report are compiled in a summary of findings, which is included as Annex 1.

Objective With the overall aim of increasing revenue mobilisation for development, the Tax and Transparency Fact-finding Mission shall serve to identify obstacles to progress towards financial transparency and global tax justice, as well as refining solutions and identifying potential windows of opportunity.

Methodology For this mission, independent experts were selected based on their professional expertise with tax and transparency issues, ensuring the inclusion of perspectives from Asia, Africa and Latin America. The expert delegation included representatives of parliaments, media, academia and civil society from both low- and middle-income countries in the global south.

The meeting schedule of the mission was designed to include international and regional institutions, national governments and stakeholders currently playing key roles in the international debate, while covering a diverse set of interests and viewpoints.

During the mission, the expert group discussed and identified the shared observations, recommendations and conclusions that formed the basis of this report. A draft report was developed, circulated for comments, amended and finally approved by the experts.

Tax and transparency Fact-finding mission 6 Switzerland

Introduction conclusion of agreements on the automatic new system ensuring ‘automatic’ exchange exchange of information. Enhanced due of information is needed to replace the Internationally, Switzerland’s banking diligence requirements will be proposed with ‘upon request’ system. The government secrecy and role as a low-tax jurisdiction for regard to customers from states with which of Switzerland is also now acknowledging multinational companies are issues of intense there is no automatic information exchange. that automatic information exchange will debate. For example, the country ranks become more widely used in the future. number one in the world in the Tax Justice While the Swiss legislation requires banks Switzerland has recently agreed to develop Network Financial Secrecy Index, which to ask for information regarding real automatic exchange of information for tax was released in November 2013. Meanwhile, (‘beneficial’) owners of legal structures such purposes with the United States (US) and other voices, including representatives of the as foundations and trusts, there are currently the European Union (EU). It seems clear, World Bank, argue that Switzerland has taken some exceptions to this rule (particularly however, that these agreements have only important steps forward, creating a “billion- in cases where such structures are owned come about after the US and EU applied dollar opportunity for developing countries”.7 by companies with real economic activity). substantial pressure on Switzerland and Also, obligations to verify the required They refer to the Swiss government’s threatened direct sanctions against Swiss information are somewhat limited. Through decision, in October 2013, to sign the banks unless Switzerland would agree to complex arrangements involving several legal Multilateral Convention on Mutual automatic information exchange with the US structures, companies and individuals can Administrative Assistance in Tax Matters. This and EU. therefore open bank accounts in Switzerland decision still has to be ratified by the Swiss without providing the real name of the When it comes to sharing information parliament.8 person who is actually controlling the assets, automatically with other countries, In Switzerland, the fact-finding mission thus creating an additional layer of secrecy. Switzerland generally argues against being a delegation met with representatives of It is important to note, however, that the ‘first mover’ and instead intends to wait for a the Swiss government (Finance Ministry Swiss government has proposed stricter global agreement on the issue. Furthermore, and Swiss Agency for Development and legislation on the identification of beneficial as regards exchanging information with Coooperation), the Swiss bankers’ association ownership in line with the most recent developing countries, the Swiss government (SwissBanking), civil society (Alliance Sud), recommendations by the Financial Action seems to have a number of concerns, a whistle-blower from the banking industry Task Force (FATF). Parliamentary approval of which leads them to present conditions and a member of parliament for the Socialist the new legislation is pending. and demands for any future agreements to Party. exchange information automatically. These Regarding the exchange of information demands include: with other governments for tax purposes, Observations Switzerland has so far adhered to the ● ‘Reciprocity’: meaning that in order to Switzerland offers very strong banking ‘upon request’ system, which is based on receive information, developing countries secrecy to both companies and individuals. governments sending specific case-by-case must be able to provide the same level of It is currently difficult, and in most instances requests for information to each other. Until information back to Switzerland; impossible, for foreign authorities to obtain now, this system has been widely used ● Data protection in the country receiving information about who has a bank account internationally, but it has also been strongly the information; in Switzerland. Bankers revealing client criticised for being ineffective, especially information risk severe jail sentences. when it comes to obtaining information ● A guarantee that the information will not from countries with strong financial secrecy be misused or lead towards unjustifiable As a response to concerns about the role regulation such as Switzerland. In many or disproportionate sanctions against of Switzerland as a ‘tax haven’, the Swiss cases, it has proven very difficult, and often individuals. government has stated that it does not impossible, for governments to obtain want to see untaxed assets in Switzerland information, not least due to the fact that There does not seem to be a clear description and launched a new ‘White Money Strategy’ information requests often have to be very of what these conditions would imply in for this purpose. To put this into practice, specific. reality, nor any guarantee that countries changes to the anti-money laundering complying with the demands will be ensured In Switzerland, the banking secrecy legislation have been proposed, which automatic information exchange with regulation itself also directly provides strong would require Swiss institutions to follow Switzerland. It is also not clear whether the restrictions on the exchange of information. enhanced due diligence processes and ask same conditions would apply to all countries. One important exception, however, is cases high-risk customers to sign a declaration For example, the agreement that Switzerland involving crimes, but it is important to note stating that their assets have been taxed has signed with the US – a so-called Foreign that Swiss law only criminalises those fiscal (in case the customer refuses to sign such a Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) offences that involve forging of official statement, the bank must ask the customer agreement – does not include a reciprocity documents (known as ‘tax fraud’). Other to regularise the assets or, if this does not clause. happen, the business relationship must kinds of tax evasion are considered a civil be terminated). In October 2013, however, matter, and therefore the possibilities of The solution that Switzerland envisions for the Swiss government postponed further obtaining information from Switzerland on developing countries seems to be ‘capacity legislative work on such enhanced due cases of tax evasion are very limited. building’. However, there does not seem to diligence requirements, stating that these be a clear assessment of how much capacity Over recent years, a growing consensus should be elaborated along with the eventual building will be required, what the timelines among governments has emerged that a

Tax and transparency Fact-finding mission 7

will be, nor how it will be resourced and right to apply withholding taxes on financial systems are designed to allow as much implemented. transfers to Switzerland in an attempt to financial and corporate transparency as obtain improved access to information or possible, including public registries of the From the Swiss government’s side, there attract investments. beneficial owners of companies, trusts, also seems to be a concern that developing foundations, and similar legal structures. countries – if successfully obtaining In response to a specific criticism that automatic information exchange – would Switzerland is involved in harmful tax Regarding automatic information exchange, receive very large amounts of information, practice by giving favourable treatment the delegation is concerned that the which they would not be able to process. to multinational companies, Switzerland is conditions and demands presented by the However, it seems that the concerns raised considering changing the current system, and Swiss government as preconditions for by developing countries are in many cases instead introducing a lower tax rate for all obtaining the right to access information linked directly to information about a limited companies, domestic as well as multinational. from Switzerland are likely to prevent many number of individuals, who have obtained developing countries – and in particular the very large fortunes through tax evasion A general concern raised by the Swiss least developed countries – from being able or other illegitimate practices within their government is that changes to the Swiss to receive information from Switzerland. jurisdictions. laws and regulations will only cause corporations and individuals to relocate to In relation to the discussion about In October 2013, Switzerland signed other jurisdictions that provide a similar reciprocity of information sharing between the Multilateral Convention on Mutual environment of financial secrecy and low governments, confidentiality, and citizen Assistance in Tax Matters – a convention that corporate tax rates. Therefore, Switzerland privacy, the delegation notes that Edward facilitates exchange of information between argues for a global agreement to be Snowden’s exposure of very extensive global governments for tax purposes. However, developed as a precondition for further surveillance programmes, which have been this does not mean that Switzerland has changes to the Swiss system. carried out by a number of governments committed to automatic exchange of and in particular by the United States, have information with other signatories to the Obstacles and recommended provided an important new perspective to convention. The convention only provides an the discussion. option for Switzerland to commit to this in solutions the future. The delegation finds it to be beyond any The delegation does not share the concern doubt that Swiss banking secrecy and the raised by the Swiss government about Another issue that has caused concern general financial and corporate opacity developing countries receiving too much regarding Switzerland’s role as a tax haven in Switzerland are preventing developing information for them to process, since the is the very low tax rate that multinational countries from obtaining the information data should allow developing countries to corporations can obtain in Switzerland. Tax needed to collect the full amount of taxes scan for specific individuals suspected of tax rates are determined at the regional level, owed to them by individuals and companies. evasion. and Swiss cantons (provinces) are competing internally to attract multinational companies On the issue of information exchange, the On the issue of capacity building, the with special tax deals. This has caused delegation pointed to a fundamental flaw in delegation identified a risk that capacity international concern regarding whether the ‘upon request’ system, namely the fact constraints in developing countries become Switzerland is promoting legal, but very that some members of developing country an excuse for denying developing countries harmful, tax avoidance in other countries, governments can have a personal interest in the right to access the information needed where companies with substantial economic refraining from requesting information from to collect taxes. Furthermore, slow and badly activity are avoiding taxes by shifting their Switzerland. For example, this could be the resourced capacity building programmes can profits to Switzerland. This ‘profit shifting’ case if individuals in office are the very same prevent and delay the process of granting can happen in a variety of ways, for example, individuals making use of the Swiss system to developing countries this right. through transfer mispricing and artificial hide assets. As a solution, Switzerland (and other internal trading of intangibles such as developed countries) should initiate a ‘management fees’ and ‘intellectual property As regards companies, trusts, and similar stepwise approach to automatic information licensing’. As a consequence of profit shifting, legal structures, it is a well-known fact that exchange, allowing developing countries countries are experiencing erosion of their such structures have repeatedly been used with low capacity to receive information tax bases, and this is the concern that has to launder money obtained from tax evasion, before they are able to send information given rise to several international initiatives and the delegation finds it very problematic back automatically. Capacity building and addressing ‘base erosion and profit shifting’. that it is currently not possible to obtain public information about which individuals establishment of full reciprocity can still One approach for governments to prevent and corporations own such structures in be long-term goals, but must not block profit shifting and ensure that multinational Switzerland. the possibilities of developing countries companies pay taxes in their countries is accessing the information they need to to introduce a withholding tax on financial The first obvious solution to these problems collect taxes. resources leaving the country. However, due is to establish automatic information Furthermore, the conditions for obtaining to so-called double taxation agreements exchange, as discussed below. Secondly, automatic information exchange must be that countries have signed with Switzerland, governments, including Switzerland, must simple, well-defined, realistic and low-cost many countries have waived or limited their ensure that both national and international for developing countries to comply with, and

Tax and transparency Fact-finding mission all countries complying with the conditions It is important that Switzerland’s changes applies to double-taxation agreements with 8 must be guaranteed automatic information to its banking secrecy and corporate tax all other jurisdictions that have a high level of exchange. regulation are not only driven by concerns financial secrecy and low corporate tax rates. about losing market access for Swiss banks. As regards the Swiss ‘White Money Strategy’, Basic principles of justice for developing Although the delegation does not agree with the delegation finds that the serious problem countries that have lost billions of dollars due the argument that Switzerland should refrain of Swiss bank accounts being used for the to illicit capital flight and financial secrecy from taking further action until a global purpose of tax evasion cannot be solved with should be equally important. The solution is agreement is in place, the delegates do share a system based on bank customers declaring for Switzerland to engage in a genuine effort the concern that companies and individuals their asset ‘white’ without needing to provide to solve the problems of tax evasion and can move their assets to other jurisdictions any documentation or proof of tax payment. avoidance globally, and to develop a system if Switzerland tightens regulations and As mentioned above, the delegation finds that protects the national taxation rights of introduces transparency. The delegation that the right solution would be automatic both developed and developing countries. therefore stresses that a global agreement exchange of information for tax purposes. This would also be in line with the objective must be pursued as a matter of urgency, and Furthermore, as part of the new legislation of policy coherence for development, which non-cooperative governments should be being developed in Switzerland, it should Switzerland has committed to. pressured to engage in finding fair solutions. be a requirement for Swiss banks to ask Furthermore, the delegation recommends depositors to provide an annual copy of their If Switzerland fails to provide the that research should be conducted – for tax return and any further documentation transparency needed for developing example, by the United Nations (UN) or the needed to prove that taxes have been paid. countries to locate the resources obtained Organisation for Economic Co-operation Finally, tax evasion should be made a crime in from their countries through tax evasion and Development (OECD) – to map and Switzerland. and other illegitimate practices, developing assess the magnitude of this problem. countries must initiate a strong internal This research should include an analysis of On the issue of tax avoidance by cooperation and coalition building process in the multinational structure of banks with multinational companies, the delegation order to jointly apply the external pressure subsidiaries in different jurisdictions, to identified a high risk that Swiss banking needed to obtain this information from assess the role of such cross-border banking secrecy and low corporate tax rates create Switzerland. The US and EU examples show groups. incentives for corporations to engage in that this approach can be successful when it this practice. By implementing country- comes to Switzerland. by-country reporting of profits, number of Conclusion employees, economic activity and taxes Furthermore, developing countries should Although there are changes afoot in paid for all companies operating within its review all double taxation agreements signed Switzerland, the current developments jurisdiction, Switzerland can ensure that both with Switzerland, and they should also serve mainly to benefit European and North source and host country have the information refrain from entering into new agreements American interests. The progress seen so far to assess whether the tax payments in and avoid renouncing their right to charge in terms of developing countries has been each country are fair, as well as identifying withholding taxes on financial resources limited, and there is still a very long way to problems with base erosion and profit channelled out of their countries to go before the significant negative impacts shifting. Switzerland. This recommendation is not only caused by Swiss banking secrecy and low relevant for the case of Switzerland, but also corporate tax rate are avoided.

Tax and transparency Fact-finding mission France 9

Introduction France has gone ahead and established and avoidance is a global problem impacting this despite the fact that the EU has not yet a broad range of countries, developed and Internationally, France has been perceived as agreed on such a measure. developing countries will to a large extent leading in the fight against tax havens, not share the same interests, and solutions least when President François Hollande called As regards automatic exchange of agreed by developed countries are likely to for the ‘eradication’ of tax havens globally information for tax purposes, France, like automatically benefit developing countries in spring 2013, as well as when France has Switzerland, seems concerned about the as well. championed the issue of country-by-country issues of reciprocity and data protection. reporting at the EU level. However, the French government seems to On the issue of capacity building, France recognise the need to distinguish between provides finance to the initiative around Meanwhile, concerns have been raised countries that have the political will to ‘Tax Inspectors Without Borders’ – a project about whether all French companies improve transparency and cooperation, administered by the OECD’s Tax and operating in developing countries pay their but do not have the capacity to deliver Development programme. When it comes fair share of taxes. The latest example is information automatically, and those who to prioritisation of different tax issues in the energy company Areva, which received do not have the political will to share developing countries, some representatives negative public attention in relation to the information. France appears most concerned of the French government seem to believe renegotiation of a mining agreement with about ensuring reciprocity of information that developing countries should focus on Niger. sharing with states that are unwilling to domestic taxation before pursuing issues In France, the fact-finding mission delegation cooperate, and for developing countries with such as automatic exchange of information, met with representatives of the French low capacity, France seems open to offering tax havens and financial secrecy. government (finance ministry and foreign a transition period and technical support As regards France’s responsibility to ensure ministry) and civil society (CCFD-Terre to build capacity in states that commit to that French companies are not involved in tax Solidaire). reciprocity but are not yet ready to offer it. evasion or avoidance in developing countries, France is also closely following the Group this does not seem to be an issue that is Observations of Twenty (G20) and OECD processes receiving much attention in France. President Hollande’s firm announcement on the so-called ‘base erosion and profit regarding the need to ‘eradicate’ tax havens shifting’ – an initiative introduced to address Obstacles and recommended came after a hard-hitting political scandal multinational corporations avoiding taxes solutions concerning a French minister, who was by exploiting loopholes in international tax exposed as the owner of a secret bank regulation and shifting profits to circumvent It is encouraging that France is championing account in Switzerland. As well as the tax laws. However, the main focus of France’s issues of financial transparency at the financial crisis and the related shortage of involvement seems to be the issue of the EU level. However, in order to show true public funds, this seems to be a key driver of ‘digital economy’, which is the area where leadership, France should not wait for an EU the French government’s recognition of the France believes that potential domestic tax decision before implementing full country- need to address the issue of financial and revenue is being lost. by-country reporting for all sectors. Such corporate secrecy. a move would show that France is taking Both on the issue of base erosion and profit responsibility for the behaviour of French The position of France has been very visible shifting as well as automatic information companies, helping to build momentum, and in the EU, where French representatives have exchange, the awareness of the needs and establishing a good example for others to advocated strongly for introducing country- interests of developing countries seems low follow. by-country reporting for larger companies, as compared to the awareness of France’s own well as introducing public registries showing financial interests. However, there does seem On the issue of automatic information the beneficial owners of companies and to be a strong commitment to supporting exchange, the delegation is encouraged by trusts. capacity building in developing countries, the idea of a transition period for developing as well as a willingness to support the countries with low capacity, which allows for In France, there have also been political participation of developing countries in the them to receive information automatically discussions about introducing country-by- international processes. before they are able to send the same type country reporting unilaterally, regardless of of information back. The delegation therefore whether the EU introduces similar measures. For those developing countries that are not encourages France to promote this model at So far, France has adopted public country- part of the G20, the participation envisioned the G20 and OECD level. by-country reporting for banks (reporting seems to be in the form of ‘being heard’ on employees and turnover is due in 2014 rather than participation in decision making. The delegation is concerned about the and reporting on profits, taxes and subsidies This position seems to be based on the suggestion that developing countries will be included from 2015). However, it was rationale that, although a global democratic should pursue the taxation of domestic decided not to extend such transparency institution would be the ideal place to discuss enterprises and consumers before focusing rules to companies from all sectors unless transparency and tax matters in theory, a on the problems related to multinational the EU adopts similar country-by-country truly global process would in reality entail corporations and individuals using tax reporting for all EU member states. In other large amounts of inefficiency and difficulties havens. If developing countries give up areas, such as establishing a registry of in moving forward. There also seems to be a on catching the ‘big fish’ and solely focus beneficial owners of companies and trusts, perception that, since corporate tax evasion on ‘small fish’, the outcome will be a

Tax and transparency Fact-finding mission fundamentally unjust tax system that gives not only promote the right of developing is currently a serious obstacle to tax-related 10 advantages to multinational companies and countries to be heard, but also to participate work in the UN, France should consider wealthy individuals who, unlike ordinary in decision making. In this context, the risk providing financial resources to support citizens, have the capacity and possibility of inefficiency and slower progress should such work. In the context of the G20 and to transfer their financial resources to other not be used as an argument to exclude OECD, France should also work to ensure a jurisdictions. Furthermore, such a tax system developing countries from decision-making high level of awareness about the limitations would fail to raise the funds needed for processes that will have a huge impact on in membership, and thus the legitimacy of development. their sovereign tax interests and financial these forums as global standard setters on situation. tax and transparency. The recommendation of the delegation is that developing countries should give It should also not be assumed that solutions Lastly, it is important to ensure that France’s top priority to the issues of international agreed by developed countries will work on tax and transparency aims to transparency and tax justice, with a special automatically be beneficial for developing improve the situation globally and is not focus on multinational enterprises and countries. While this might be true in some driven solely by France’s own financial wealthy individuals engaged in tax evasion cases, there are also clear indications that interests. In this context, it is important that and avoidance. countries will have diverging interests on the French government pays attention to issues such as the distribution of taxation the criticism of French companies in relation On the issue of capacity building, the rights among jurisdictions. Historically, to tax payments in developing countries, delegation noted the fact that ‘Tax one of the key discussions in relation to and that corporate accountability for French Inspectors Without Borders’ is administered international tax matters has been on the companies becomes an integrated part of by the OECD. In this context, the delegation allocation of rights to tax corporations and France’s work on tax and transparency. finds it important to underline that such individuals operating across borders. On capacity building should not lead to a this issue, opinions have traditionally been In order to increase the awareness of situation where developing countries feel divided between the so-called ‘source developing country interests and identify obliged to support OECD as the leading countries’ – meaning the countries where solutions of mutual benefit, France should forum on negotiations around tax and the income is generated – and ‘residence also consider establishing dialogues and transparency in order to improve their countries’ – meaning the home country of partnerships with key developing countries access to capacity building support. Nor the corporation or individual receiving the on the issue of tax and transparency. For should capacity building initiatives seek to income from the activity. In many cases, example, this could take the form of an change the political positions and priorities this divide has also caused a rift between ‘alliance of the willing’, where governments of developing countries, for example, as developed and developing countries, ready to move forward on these issues can regards whether they want to pursue given that the former predominantly have work together. the taxation of domestic tax payers or negotiated with the interests of residence multinational corporations. Finally, the countries, whereas the latter have had Conclusion capacity building should not focus on interests in securing taxation rights for France is working actively for increased training developing countries in applying source countries. OECD guidelines and recommendations, transparency and against tax avoidance but rather provide a general unbiased Furthermore, tools and agreements and evasion in several ways. Some of introduction to the issues of tax and designed for developed countries might these efforts will benefit developing transparency, as well as the whole set of not be applicable to countries with countries. However, it seems clear that tools and approaches that are available fewer resources and capacities, and thus France primarily does so to promote its to enable and strengthen tax collection in developing countries might not be able to own financial interests rather than with developing countries. benefit from these. the aim of finding global solutions and supporting development. By strengthening In the international processes around tax In reality, the principle that developing the engagement and cooperation with and transparency, the delegation is very countries should be allowed to participate developing countries, the awareness of concerned that developing countries will on an equal footing would likely mean that developing country perspectives could be not be able to participate in decision- key decision-making processes should be increased and global solutions could be making on an equal footing. Therefore, the moved from the OECD and G20 to the UN. developed. delegation recommends that France should Since the availability of financial resources

Tax and transparency Fact-finding mission Norway 11

Introduction A concern in Norway seems to be the risk of loopholes in the current regulation must be acting alone with proposals for global action closed to ensure that the regulation actually Norway has garnered an international on tax and transparency, as well as becoming creates the transparency needed to ensure image as a champion of tax justice and the first to act – thereby undermining the that the regulation cannot be circumvented. transparency, as well as a country that competitiveness of Norwegian companies. Furthermore, it is also evident that such dares to present new ideas and be the first legislation should not only cover the mining to act. At the same time, Norway holds Recently, Norway has adopted a law on and forestry sectors, but all sectors. the world’s largest sovereign wealth fund country-by-country reporting for the mining and has investments in a large number of and forestry industries. This legislation is The fact-finding mission delegation agrees multinational corporations. In this context, based on a directive adopted by the EU with with the concern that Norway risks isolation questions have been raised about whether the aim of combating corruption, but the if it takes progressive positions and steps Norway’s policies on tax and transparency Norwegian law expanded the scope to also forward. To accommodate this risk, as well as are coherent with the country’s investment include combating tax evasion. Therefore, the to strengthen mutual understanding, Norway policies. regulation requires corporations to disclose should engage in strengthened cooperation which countries they have subsidiaries in, as and joint initiatives with other key In Norway, the fact-finding mission well as the number of employees for each governments – in particular, with developing delegation met with representatives of the subsidiary. Furthermore, the corporations will country governments – to form an ‘alliance Norwegian government (Norad and the be required to report on interest payments of the willing’ on tax and transparency. Ministry of Foreign Affairs), the Chair of the to other subsidiaries – a measure which In this role, Norway could become a very Parliamentary Finance Committee and civil can disclose profit shifting through internal important international bridge-builder society representatives (Norwegian Church lending arrangements within a multinational between developed and developing Aid). company. However, apart from data on country perspectives, and could help to corporate structures, employees, and interest identify globally workable solutions. With Observations payments, the Norwegian regulation allows this approach, Norway could also progress Following the election in September 2013, multinational corporations to avoid reporting its very important idea of an international Norway has recently shifted perspectives data from countries where they only have convention on transparency, which the from a left-wing to a right-wing government. support functions but no production or fact-finding mission delegation finds very Although this creates some uncertainty extraction activities. Since many tax haven interesting and positive. about the political positioning of Norway, operations take place in countries where As a very large investor, the Norwegian there is a general expectation that the no production or extraction occurs, critics sovereign wealth fund could have changes to the positions relating to tax and have pointed out that this can turn out considerable influence on corporate transparency issues will not be major. to be a major loophole in the regulation. Furthermore, questions have been raised adherence to tax and transparency principles It seems that Norway links the issues about why the regulation only covers the amongst other ethical matters. It is therefore of tax and transparency strongly to the extractive and forest industries, and not all crucial that strong provisions on tax and development agenda and sees progress sectors. transparency are integrated into the in these areas as an important way management of the fund and its investments. of mobilising funds for development. The Norwegian sovereign wealth fund Internationally, Norway has received has now reached a size that makes it the Conclusion attention as an advocate for increased action world’s biggest, and Norway has become In terms of ambition on tax and transparency on tax and transparency issues. Norway has a very important shareholder globally. issues, it is clear that Norway is a global also supported a proposal from developing Although the fund has an ethical council, leader. It is also clear that Norway is paying countries to upgrade the United Nations’ Tax the Norwegian policies and objectives close attention to the interests of developing Committee to an intergovernmental body, as regarding tax and transparency do not countries and links the issues of tax and well as launching the idea of an international currently cover the investment policies of the transparency strongly to the development convention on financial transparency. wealth fund. However, the new government agenda. Norway’s involvement has been and Furthermore, Norway has provided support has announced that they will conduct a remains very important for the state of the and financial resources to civil society consultation and subsequently have a fresh international tax and transparency debate, organisations and others working to promote look at the ethical management of the fund. especially given the fact that other developed tax and transparency issues. country governments are failing to engage Obstacles and recommended Not being a member of the EU creates properly on these issues. By integrating both advantages and obstacles for Norway. solutions strong policies on tax and transparency into On the one hand, it is easier for Norway to The newly adopted Norwegian law on the management of its sovereign wealth define its own political positions and be more country-by-country reporting iis a step fund, as well as strengthening the political progressive than the EU. On the other hand, forward, and the disclosure of the corporate cooperation with key developing countries, the lack of EU membership limits Norway’s structures and internal interest payments Norway’s positive impact could increase influence on the EU considerably. are helpful tools in the fight against tax substantially. evasion and avoidance. However, the serious

Tax and transparency Fact-finding mission 12 European Commission

Introduction In 2013, the EU adopted country-by-country sufficient streamlining and cooperation reporting for banks but so far it has not been among donors internally, as well as among The European Commission (EC) plays a possible for the EU to agree on country-by- donors and receivers. Therefore, there is central role as the initiator and enforcer of country reporting for all major companies. As a need to ensure strong coordination on EU legislation, as an implementer of EU-wide regards the beneficial owners of companies, capacity building initiatives. In this context, policies and as a manager of EU budgets and trusts, and similar legal structures, this the EC could play an important role. programmes. Furthermore, the Commission discussion is still ongoing as part of a review acts as a global representative of the EU – of the EU’s Anti-Money Laundering Directive. The fact-finding mission delegation also for example, in the G20, where the EU is the recommends that donors – including the EC 20th member (alongside 19 countries). In relation to tax and transparency, the EC – should prioritise the funding of civil society also plays a key role as a donor. For example, actors in tax and transparency initiatives, In recent years, the EC has been seen as the Commission has supported the work in order to promote the involvement of a promoter of financial transparency and of the UN Tax Committee and developing broader civil society in these issues, as well action to combat tax avoidance and evasion. country organisations such as the Inter- as increasing government accountability in However, on an issue such as public registries American Center of Tax Administrations developing countries. of beneficial owners of companies, as well as (CIAT) and the African Tax Administration in relation to its action plan on tax avoidance Forum (ATAF). As regards the involvement of developing and evasion, the Commission has also been countries in international processes on criticised for not showing enough ambition The EC seems to acknowledge the tax and transparency, the obstacles and and for failing to take into account the importance of involving developing recommendations listed under the chapter on perspective of developing countries despite countries, including non-G20 countries, in France are also relevant in relation to the EC. its commitment to ‘policy coherence for the international processes relating to tax The same is the case for recommendations development’. and transparency. However, like the French around building stronger connections to government, the Commission seems to developing country governments in order In Brussels, the fact-finding mission hold the opinion that participation should to increase understanding and awareness delegation met with representatives of the take the form of ‘being heard’ rather than of their perspectives and interests. Such EC’s Directorate-General for Economic and participating in decision making. The cooperation could also help to identify Financial Affairs and Directorate-General for Commission also seems to share the French solutions that benefit the EU as well as Development and Cooperation. perception that, to a large extent, developed developing countries and ensure policy and developing countries will have the same coherence for development in the tax and Observations interests in relation to tax avoidance and transparency work of the Commission. Internally in the EU, the Commission is evasion of multinational corporations. promoting action on tax and transparency Conclusion issues, but with the strongest focus on the Obstacles and recommended The EC plays an important role on tax and amount of financial resources that could be solutions transparency issues, but more could be recovered in Europe. However, some of the done to ensure that solutions promoted issues that the Commission has promoted – In relation to capacity building on tax by the Commission take into account the such as country-by-country reporting for all and transparency issues, there seems to perspectives of developing countries and major companies – would also be beneficial be a clear risk that different donors from creates policy coherence for development. to developing countries if the information developed countries will establish parallel The Commission could also play an important were to become public. initiatives and even engage with the same actors in the global south without ensuring role in coordinating different tax and transparency donor initiatives.

Tax and transparency Fact-finding mission United Nations 13

Introduction The transparency and possibilities for bilateral tax treaties, and assess the need participation in the meetings of the UNTC for a new global convention on tax and The United Nations (UN) is often highlighted are wide, and representatives of the private transparency. as the institution that would in theory be the sector, civil society, international financial ideal place to anchor an international process institutions and observing governments are On the issue of whether a UN process will to address tax and transparency issues. able to take the floor and make interventions. create inefficiency and lack of progress, it However, strong concerns have been raised is important to bear in mind that, although about whether the UN has the capacity to However, the financial resources allocated to consensus building can take a longer time take on these issues, as well as whether the work of the committee are very limited if more stakeholders and interests are the existing UN tax body would be able to and the number of meeting days is no more represented in the negotiations, it does provide the necessary solutions to the global than five per year. Consequently, much of the not necessarily mean that the process challenges. committee work is carried out in unfunded will be less efficient. It is also important to subcommittees. The resource restrictions also bear in mind that the speed of progress is In Geneva, the fact-finding mission limit the UNTC secretariat to two employees. strongly linked to the will of governments delegation met with representatives of the to cooperate, show flexibility and develop UN Tax Committee secretariat and members As mentioned under the chapter on France, solutions. Lastly, an advantage of global of the expert committee. The role and there is a historical rift between developed negotiations is that the final outcome will work of the UN was also discussed with and developing countries linked to the have broad support from all governments, governments, academics and civil society discussion about how to divide taxing rights and thus implementation will be easier and representatives throughout the mission. between source and residence countries. This the risk of some governments opposing the difference of interests is still very visible in the outcome and demanding a renegotiation will Observations ongoing discussions in the UNTC and is likely be smaller. to become a key issue in the negotiations, To address issues of tax and transparency, in case an intergovernmental process on tax As regards the work of the UNTC, the lack of the UN has established a Committee of and transparency is established. resources clearly poses a serious constraint Experts on International Cooperation to its work, for example, by restricting the in Tax Matters (known as the UN Tax number of meeting days and the size of the Committee (UNTC)). This committee is not Obstacles and recommended secretariat to a level that is clearly insufficient an intergovernmental body for governments solutions to take on the complex issues of international to negotiate agreements, but rather an In order to ensure that the tax and taxation. Furthermore, the lack of funding for expert body of 25 experts9 from developed transparency regulations of one country do participation can prevent governments from and developing countries acting in their not undermine the ability of other countries least developed countries from participating own personal capacity. While the guidance to enjoy their taxation rights and enforce as observers in the process. provided by the forum can be of great value their tax laws, an intergovernmental process for governments, no government can be held on tax and transparency issues is needed. The lack of resources will also make it accountable for any decision taken by the impossible for the experts and secretariat of UNTC. Although the existing UNTC can play a the UNTC to adequately follow, participate valuable role as provider of expert advice in, and reflect on the tax and transparency Apparently, the UNTC is perceived by some and development of new tools and models, related work of the OECD, even when they as being a ‘voice of the South’. However, it is only an expert committee and should are invited to do so. although the UN and the committee do in not be mistaken for an intergovernmental some cases pay special attention to the body on tax and transparency. Despite the Ultimately, the difference in levels of interests of developing countries, neither of clear need for such a body, this does not capacity between the UN and the OECD is these institutions are designed to represent currently exist and therefore a new body the result of the political prioritisations of the interests of the global south. As a global must be established. A key reason for the governments that do or do not decide body, the UN reflects the perspectives of establishing such a body under the auspices to fund them. However, if the UNTC was both developed and developing countries, of the UN is to ensure that all countries, provided with adequate resources, it could and as an expert body, the UNTC reflects the including the least developed countries, are play an important role as the provider of opinions of the appointed experts. able to participate on an equal basis. Such a analysis, technical guidance and proposals for solutions, which would be an important In several cases, the committee has taken body must also ensure the full and effective contribution to an intergovernmental process, the OECD frameworks and agreements participation of stakeholders, building on the in case such a process was established. as the starting point of its work, rather procedures of the existing UNTC. than considering and discussing more Once a new UN body is established, it should For these reasons, the fact-finding mission fundamental changes to the international address the current political issues relating delegation recommends that potential tax system and financial transparency. There to tax and transparency, including issues donors, including both developed countries also seem to be a number of issues – such such as automatic exchange of information and emerging economies, should mobilise as value added tax and links between taxes for tax purposes and base erosion and profit additional resources for the UN’s work on and customs – that have not made it onto the shifting. Furthermore, it should reconsider tax and transparency, through multilateral as agenda of the committee. the international approach to taxation, well as bilateral channels. Going forward, the conduct a review of the existing web of government should also identify sustainable

Tax and transparency Fact-finding mission sources of finance for the UN’s work on tax actively promote domestic debate and the to tax and regulate as part of unbalanced 14 and transparency. engagement of parliamentarians, civil society and disadvantageous bilateral treaties, and the broader public on these issues. including double-taxation agreements, When using the work of the OECD as the bilateral investment treaties, or free trade starting point for negotiations, rather than As mentioned under the chapter on France, agreements. These agreements can include discussing more fundamental changes to the it would be wrong to assume that developed restrictions on developing countries’ rights to international tax and transparency systems, and developing countries will always taxation – for example, through tax holidays the UNTC risks becoming a body for the have shared interests when it comes to for multinational corporations or waiving adjustment of OECD decisions rather than international tax and transparency matters. of withholding taxes, and can impose very a developer of new proposals and models. For example as regards the allocation of problematic restrictions on the future ability This means that important options for reform taxing rights or the design of international of developing countries to determine their are not being considered, even in cases tax and transparency tools, countries will own tax policies. If no solutions are found where proposals have been developed and have different interests and the best solution at the global level, developing countries could form the basis for discussion. Such for one country might not be the best should strengthen their internal cooperation proposals include formula-based taxation solution for all. on these issues to ensure internal capacity models such as ‘unitary taxation’, which building, sharing of experience and In the absence of a truly global process on provides an approach for calculating the development of model solutions. taxable profits of multinational enterprises tax and transparency, which can ensure that and appointing these profits to the different developing country interests and concerns countries in which the company is present, are taken into account, developing countries Conclusion based on a weighted formula reflecting should consider a range of measures to There are strong arguments in favour of the the company’s economic presence in each ensure that their interests are taken care of. UN hosting an international process on tax country. Proposals like these offer interesting These should include: and transparency, including the fact that solutions to problems such as multinational the UN is currently the only institution that ● Refusing to apply guidelines or tax avoidance and could provide important operates on the basis of equality among tools developed without the proper streamlining and simplification to the area of nations. However, while the existing UNTC consideration of developing country corporate taxation. The fact-finding mission can provide very valuable expert analysis interests; delegation therefore recommends that and recommendations, it is not designed to host intergovernmental negotiations on governments take these ideas into serious ● Establishing a process driven by the tax and transparency, and thus an additional consideration. global south to develop solutions to process must be established for this purpose. problems related to tax and transparency, In order for an international process to Furthermore, additional resources must be which solve the problems faced by the progress and yield results, developed and mobilised to support the work of the UNTC global south. developing countries must prioritise the as well as the broader work on the UN on tax issues of tax and transparency, and show Another concern with the current situation is and transparency issues. strong engagement. that, in the absence of proper international standards and guidance, developing country Furthermore, all governments, including governments might sign away their right those in the least developed countries, must

Tax and transparency Fact-finding mission Organisation for Economic 15 Co-operation and Development

Introduction Division, as well as the Tax and Development organisation more global would require Division. In addition, the role and work of buy-in at high political level, and no such The Organisation for Economic Co-operation the OECD was discussed with governments, initiatives appear to be emerging at the and Development (OECD) plays a central academics and civil society representatives moment. role as a standard setter and central actor in throughout the mission. relation to international tax and transparency As part of the process on base erosion issues. Recently, the role of the OECD was and profit shifting, G20 countries12 that are further strengthened as the organisation Observations not OECD members have been promised received a mandate from its member states Over the coming years, the OECD is set participation on an ‘equal footing’ with OECD and the G20 to launch new initiatives around to play a very central role on tax and member countries. However, given that they automatic exchange of information for transparency matters, not least due to work have been offered participation in some tax purposes and base erosion and profit around automatic information exchange and specific processes, but not in the general shifting. base erosion and profit shifting. work or management of the OECD, it is unclear exactly how much influence the non- On the one hand, the OECD is often 10 The organisation currently has 34 members OECD G20 countries will get in OECD. considered to be the only organisation that and accession discussions have been initiated has the capacity and now also the mandate with three potential new members.11 The importance of ensuring that developing to take on this work. On the other hand, the countries benefit from the work on tax was track record and limitations in membership The fact that the vast majority of OECD’s stressed by the G20, along with calls for of the OECD has led to questioning of the member countries are developed countries the increased capacity building of these organisation’s legitimacy when taking on has given rise to questions about the countries. issues of global interest. legitimacy of the OECD in relation to global issues such as financial transparency and The OECD has launched a number of In Geneva and Paris, the fact-finding mission global tax matters. However, a decision initiatives involving a broader group of delegation met with representatives of the to carry out a substantial transformation developing countries, including a taskforce OECD’s Tax Treaty and Transfer Pricing of the OECD membership and make the on tax and development and the capacity building programme called Tax Inspectors Without Borders. Furthermore, the OECD Figure 1: OECD member states (in red) works with a ‘Global Forum that is open to developing country participation and currently has 120 members.13 However, it seems clear that the offer from the OECD to the countries that are not members of the OECD or the G20 is to have a ‘voice, but not a vote’. In other words, their participation is welcomed, but not on an equal footing with OECD member countries.

A large number of developing countries, and in particular least developed countries,14 15 are still not members of the OECD initiatives nor of the Global Forum (see Figure 3 and 4).

In some instances, there seems to be a perception that all developing countries are somewhat represented through the emerging economies that are members of the G20. Furthermore, the fact that representatives of Figure 2: Members of the G20 (in red) the UN are invited to participate in meetings of the OECD is also seen by some as an inclusion of developing country interests.

The fact that much of the OECD output is in the form of guidelines rather than binding legal agreements is also brought forward as an argument in favour of global representation not being vital in the OECD processes.

Furthermore, as is the case within the French government and the EC, for example, there seems to be a perception in the OECD that all governments have similar interests in tackling

Tax and transparency Fact-finding mission tax avoidance and evasion by multinational Figure 3: Members of the global forum 16 corporations.

There seems to be an acknowledgement of the fact that many developing countries are finding the OECD principles and tools hard to adhere to and implement. To improve this situation, the need for capacity building has been highlighted. The importance of consulting developing countries when developing and agreeing new OECD tools and guidelines has also been emphasised.

OECD standards act as guidelines for governments, but the OECD does not have the tools in place to ensure enforcement, since this is considered the responsibility of the governments themselves.

On reform proposals such as formula-based taxation models, the opinion in the OECD seems to be that these ideas do not currently Figure 4: Least developed countries have the necessary backing of members to establish an OECD process to consider these issues.

Obstacles and recommended solutions The fact-finding mission delegation acknowledges that the OECD possesses a high level of resources on the issues of tax and transparency, and finds that the OECD can play an important role as provider of technical information and analysis. However, the delegation also notes that many of the multinational corporations that have been involved in tax evasion and avoidance in developing countries are based in OECD member countries. Furthermore, several of the OECD member states – such as, for example, Switzerland and Luxembourg – are must acknowledge that the outcomes are not no decision-making power. The fact that the among the countries causing international global outputs but OECD outputs. OECD only adopts guidelines is not in itself concern regarding their financial opacity. an argument for accepting inequality among Furthermore, to the extent that OECD Therefore, the delegation finds that OECD nations in decision-making procedures. possesses resources that are vital for members could have conflicts of interests Firstly, the legal nature of agreements is conducting a meaningful international when developing global standards for tax normally a core element of international process on tax and transparency, and transparency. negotiations, and some governments might governments should consider transferring argue that the non-binding nature of the Given the limited membership of the OECD, these resources to a more legitimate forum regulation is a key part of the problem. the delegation finds that the OECD in its such as the UN. Secondly, despite its non-binding nature, the current form is not suited as a place to adopt OECD guidance and tools cover global issues When offering a voice to developing global standards on tax and transparency and have a strong impact on all countries, countries, the delegation finds it important matters since these are of great importance including non-OECD members. Lastly, the for the OECD to recognise that neither the to – and will have great impact on – development of OECD guidelines and tools G20 nor the UN are in fact representatives of developing countries that are not members can limit the political space for addressing developing countries, and in particular not of the OECD. the issues of tax and transparency in other of least developed countries. Whereas the forums such as the UN, given that OECD G20 is an organisation of the world’s largest Despite the apparent ambitions of becoming governments tend to argue against having economies, the UN is a global institution, a global standard setter, there seems to be the several international bodies addressing representing the views of all its member no ambitions of transforming the OECD into the same issues. a global body. Therefore, the delegation countries. urges the OECD and its member states to be The delegation finds it unlikely that all However, there are also fundamental clear about the limitations in its mandates governments will have the same interests problems associated with offering developing and legitimacy. While the delegation also on issues such as corporate tax evasion and countries a ‘voice, but not a vote’. Since tax urges the OECD to ensure the strong avoidance. In particular, residence countries matters are politically very sensitive issues involvement of developing countries in their of multinational corporations are not likely to that have a fundamental importance for all processes, and a balanced reflection of the have the same interests as the countries that sovereign states, it cannot be expected of developing country perspectives in the host the economic activities of corporations any government that they leave such matters outcomes, the OECD and its member states based in other countries. to be decided by a forum in which they have

Tax and transparency Fact-finding mission The delegation finds that some existing in the OECD and G20 processes, the for the OECD, since the OECD is hosting the OECD tools and guidelines, such as the delegation recommends the establishment process on this issue. 17 OECD Model Tax Convention, have a of strong coordination and cooperation bias towards the interests of developed initiatives among the developing countries. Conclusion countries, at the expense of developing The regional bodies in the global south country interests, and others are simply very can play a central role in such initiatives The OECD can play an important role as difficult for developing countries to apply. and could facilitate the building of regional the provider of technical information and The delegation furthermore finds that that and southern consensus. The delegation analysis, but it is important for the OECD insufficient representation and decision- recommends that developing countries that and its member states to be clear about the making power for developing countries could have good access to the OECD and G20 limitations in its mandate and legitimacy. risk creating more OECD outputs that are processes ensure that their inputs are based While the OECD processes should seek a disadvantageous to developing countries. on regional consensus and consensus from strong integration of developing country In a scenario where all OECD member the global south, and that regular report perspectives, it should also be acknowledged countries start following such guidelines, the backs to countries that are not included in that the outcomes will not be global. delegation identified the risk of escalating the processes are ensured. Ultimately, the OECD and its member states international ‘tax-conflicts’ and breakdown of should focus on supporting a global process, international cooperation, which is a situation In relation to the concrete negotiations rather than replacing it. that could damage all governments. around automatic exchange of information for tax purposes, the obstacles and Since different developing countries currently recommended solutions identified under have very different levels of participation the chapter on Switzerland are also relevant

Tax and transparency Fact-finding mission 18 G20

Introduction Brazil, which were traditionally seen as Since the nature and interests of the developing countries, and in relation to tax emerging economies are fundamentally The Group of Twenty (G20) is a forum for and transparency issues they were regarded different from those of the least developed international economic cooperation among as source countries rather than residence countries, it is important to recognise that major economies and covers more than 80 countries. However, as their economies have their inclusion in the G20 does not equal the per cent of global gross domestic product. grown, their role as residence countries for inclusion of ‘developing country interests’ in Throughout the year, the G20 has generated multinational corporations and investors has general. the most important international statements also grown. On issues relating to international tax and on tax and transparency issues, and thus has In September 2013, the G20 requested a transparency, the G20 should delegate been a driving force in the developments roadmap “showing how developing countries decision making to a body where all nations in this area. However, questions have been can overcome obstacles to participation” can participate on an equal footing. Since no raised about the ability of the G20 to deliver in a global system of automatic exchange such body currently exists, the G20 should on its ambitions, as well as the strong of information for tax purposes. In the support the establishment of such a body limitations in the membership of G20. same decision, the G20 requested a global and should consider ways of financing it For this report, the role and work of the G20 standard on automatic exchange of under the auspices of the UN. was discussed with governments, academics information to be developed over the coming The G20 member states should insist that and civil society representatives throughout year, and it is unclear how this process will the process involves developing countries as the mission. relate to the development of the roadmap. an integrated part of the development of a global standard on the automatic exchange Observations Obstacles and recommended of information, rather than a parallel The G20 is a forum of 20 major economies solutions roadmap, which poses a risk of sidelining the (19 countries plus the EU) cooperating In terms of the participation of developing issue. on issues relating to the international countries, including the least developed financial system. The forum adopts countries, the obstacles and recommended Conclusion political declarations but is not equipped solutions identified under the chapter on The G20 has played and can continue to with implementation and enforcement OECD are also relevant to the G20. play an important role in the international mechanisms. The G20 has mandated the processes on tax and transparency. However, OECD to lead processes and develop tools to It is positive that the G20 acknowledges and like the OECD, it is important for the G20 and address the issues of automatic exchange of addresses the issues of tax and transparency. its members to seek to support, rather than information for tax purposes, as well as base However, the delegation finds that the replace, a global process on these issues. erosion and profit shifting. G20 should recognise the limitations in membership and thus the legitimacy of both The G20 includes emerging economies itself and the OECD. such as China, India, South Africa and

Tax and transparency Fact-finding mission Extractive Industries Transparency 19 Initiative

Introduction represented on the EITI board, which is easily accessible to the public. Engaging the supported by an international secretariat. media is also vital for the conclusions of the The Extractive Industries Transparency reports to be heard. Initiative (EITI) is a voluntary international For countries that have implemented the standard that promotes transparency around EITI standard, EITI publishes yearly reports Lastly, as a voluntary initiative, it is important countries’ oil, gas and mineral resources. disclosing all taxes and other payments, that the EITI standards do not become an which the oil, gas and mining companies obstacle for, or alternative to, more ambitious The EITI is often highlighted as an important operating in the country have made to the change. EITI should act as a step on the way, part of the solution when it comes to governments. The reports are public and but governments must still have incentives transparency and taxation in the extractive promote transparency at the national level. to move beyond the EITI standards. The EITI industry. However, questions are also However, the reports and its conclusions are secretariat and members must make sure to raised as to whether a voluntary initiative is in many cases not well known to the public. actively promote that. sufficient to combat the current problems.

In Oslo, the fact-finding mission delegation Obstacles and recommended Conclusion met with representatives of the EITI solutions The EITI is an important initiative that has secretariat. The delegation finds EITI to be an important succeeded in increasing transparency in the and well-functioning initiative, which is extractive industry. By strengthening the Observations paving the way for important progress on communication around the EITI reports, the The voluntary EITI standard contains a the issue of transparency in the extractive positive impact could become even greater. number of requirements that governments industry. However, stronger involvement of However, it must always be ensured that must fulfil to be recognised as an ‘EITI civil society and parliamentarians could build voluntary standards are a first step on the candidate country’ and ultimately as an ‘EITI up the strength, impact and legitimacy of the way towards more ambitious solutions and compliant country’. EITI even further. binding decisions to ensure transparency and tax justice. Therefore, the EITI secretariat This standard is developed and overseen The fact-finding mission delegation also and members must promote initiatives going by a coalition of governments, companies, finds the EITI reports very important and beyond the EITI standard. civil society, investors and international encourages EITI and its members to put organisations. All of these groups are more efforts into making them known and

Tax and transparency Fact-finding mission 20 Overall conclusion

Some changes are afoot within the area of tax and transparency, but regrettably the ongoing changes seem to be driven by a narrow focus on the problems faced by tax collectors in the US and Europe, not bearing in mind the needs and interests of developing countries. Therefore, there is a high risk that the problems faced by the global south, and in particular the least developed countries, will not be solved.

The solution lies in global cooperation among governments to develop solutions that also work for the global south. However, since the existing institutions and processes are not designed to support a truly global process on tax and transparency, new supplementary processes must be established for this purpose, and the existing processes must be redesigned to feed into, rather than replace, a global process.

Among both developed and developing country governments, there are those who seem truly interested in finding global solutions. Through a coalition of progressive developed and developing country governments, these ambitions could be turned into reality.

Tax and transparency Fact-finding mission Annex 1: Summary of findings 21

Obstacles Solutions and windows of opportunity Who should act When

Global cooperation on tax and transparency

Tax and transparency regulations of An intergovernmental body on tax and transparency must be All governments 2015 some countries undermine the ability of established under the auspices of the UN other countries to enjoy their taxation G20 rights and enforce their tax laws The G20 must support and consider options for financing such a body

Lack of a global agreement on tax and transparency can lead to escalating international ‘tax-conflicts’ and breakdown of international cooperation

The lack of financial resources under- Developed countries, emerging economies and other donors must Developed Immediately mines the tax-related work of the UN, provide financial resources to the tax-related work of the UN. In countries, including the UNTC the longer run, sustainable sources of finance must be identified emerging economies, and other donors

Insufficient levels of engagement of All governments – including those of the least developed countries All governments 2014 and parliamentarians, civil society and the – must actively promote domestic debate and engagement and donors onwards broader public in discussions about tax and transparency Donors must prioritise funding of civil society actors in tax and transparency programmes and initiatives

Progressive developed countries An ‘alliance of the willing’ should be formed to move the issues of Progressive 2014 overlook the perspectives of developing tax and transparency forward developed and countries and fail to form alliances developing countries

Important options for reforming the Governments must take key reform proposals, including formula- All governments 2014 and international tax system are not being based taxation models, under serious consideration onwards considered

OECD and G20 processes

Developing countries having a ‘voice, OECD and its member states must be clear about the limitations in OECD and its Immediately but not a vote’ in OECD negotiations its mandates and legitimacy member states on tax and transparency risks leading to the adoption of agreements Strong involvement of developing countries in the OECD disadvantageous to developing processes, and a balanced reflection of the developing countries’ countries perspectives in the OECD outputs, must be ensured OECD and its member states must acknowledge that the OECD processes can limit the political outcomes of OECD processes are not global outputs but OECD space for addressing the issues of tax outputs, and the OECD must aim to support, but not replace, a and transparency in other forums such global process as the UN

Risk that the G20 or the UN will be per- Governments must recognise the differences between developing OECD and its Immediately ceived as representatives of developing countries – for example, between emerging economies and least member states countries within the OECD processes developed countries. Furthermore, governments must recognise the UN reflects the perspectives of all its members, not only G20 and its developing countries member states

Capacity building

Capacity building initiatives can pres- It must be ensured that all capacity building programmes and Developed Immediately sure developing countries to change initiatives are completely detached from direct or indirect attempts countries, OECD priorities or political positions to politically influence developing countries and other donors

Lack of coordination between different Improve the coordination of capacity building and other tax and All donors. Immediately donors, as well as between donors and transparency related programmes and donor initiatives European receivers Commission lead

Tax and transparency Fact-finding mission Annex 1: continued 22

Obstacles Solutions and windows of opportunity Who should act When

Automatic exchange of information for tax purposes

Developing country governments do not A global system of automatic exchange of information must All governments 2014 obtain the information they need to collect be developed to replace the ‘upon request’ system the taxes owed to them OECD A stepwise approach to automatic exchange of information with developing countries, allowing countries with low G20 capacity to receive information before they are able to send Countries like the US and EU receive better information back automatically access to information than developing Conditions for obtaining automatic information exchange countries must be simple, well-defined, realistic and low-cost for developing countries to comply with

Conditions for obtaining automatic All countries must be treated equally and those countries information exchange can de facto result that comply with the conditions must be guaranteed in exclusion of developing countries that automatic information exchange cannot ensure ‘reciprocity’ or sufficient data protection These elements must be integrated into the OECD model for automatic information exchange, which will be developed in 2014 If capacity building becomes a precondition for participation in automatic information exchange, slow and badly resourced capacity building programmes can prevent and delay developing countries’ access to such information exchange

Individual members of governments might Automatic exchange of information between governments All governments 2014-2015 have personal interests in maintaining High levels of transparency to the public, including the financial and corporate opacity establishment of public registries of beneficial ownership of companies, trusts, foundations and similar legal structures

Switzerland

Tax evasion is not considered a crime in Change of legislation to classify tax evasion as a crime in Swiss government 2014-2015 Switzerland Switzerland and parliament

Swiss bank customer declaration is As part of the new legislative proposal being developed, Swiss government 2014 insufficient to prevent tax evasion since tax Swiss banks must be required to demand depositors should and parliament evaders might declare false information provide an annual copy of their tax return and any further documentation needed to prove that taxes have been paid

High risk of multinational corporations Introduction of country-by-country reporting on profits, Swiss government 2014-2015 based in Switzerland engaging in base number of employees, economic activity and taxes paid and parliament erosion and profit shifting for all companies which operate or have a subsidiary in Switzerland

Risk of Switzerland failing to provide Developing countries must establish strong internal Developing End of 2014 transparency for developing countries cooperation and coalition building to jointly apply the countries to locate instances of tax evasion and external pressure needed to obtain information from illegitimate practices Switzerland. The need for such measures should be assessed by developing countries at the end of 2014

Risk of double taxation agreements signed Developing countries should review all double taxation Developing 2014 with Switzerland will undermine the agreements signed with Switzerland (and other secrecy countries possibilities of developing countries to apply jurisdictions with low corporate tax rates), as well as refrain taxes, including withholding taxes from entering into new agreements

Risk that companies and individuals move Research must be conducted to map and assess the risk. UN / OECD Mid 2014 assets to other jurisdictions if Switzerland For example, this could be carried out by the UN or OECD tightens regulations and introduces trans- All governments parency All governments must pursue a global agreement on tax and transparency with urgency, and pressure non-cooperative governments to engage in finding solutions

Tax and transparency Fact-finding mission 23

Obstacles Solutions and windows of opportunity Who should act When

EU

EU countries awaiting EU decision EU member states should adopt progressive legislation on tax EU countries 2014 before adopting national measures on and financial transparency, regardless of whether all of the EU tax and transparency adopts similar legislation

EU regulation and initiatives that focus Increase the cooperation and engagement with developing EC Immediately on European issues and fail to ensure country governments in the tax and transparency related work policy coherence for development of the European Commission

Norway

Risk of multinational corporations based Ensure that the country-by-country reporting covers all relevant Norwegian 2014 in Norway engaging in tax avoidance corporate activities in tax havens government and evasion in developing countries

Norway’s global influence is limited and Strengthen cooperation with key governments in an ‘alliance of Norwegian 2014-2015 the country risks being isolated with its the willing’. government, in progressive proposals cooperation with Incorporate tax and transparency policies into the management others of the sovereign wealth fund (see below)

Tax and transparency policies are not Following the consultation on the future of the fund, the man- Norwegian 2014 incorporated into the management of agement of the fund must be reviewed and policies on tax and government the Norwegian sovereign wealth fund transparency firmly integrated

Developing countries

Lack of a global process can result in Developing countries should consider rejecting guidelines and Developing When guidelines and tools disadvantaging tools developed without the proper engagement of developing countries necessary developing countries countries, as well as establishing processes driven by the global south to identify alternative solutions

Absence of proper international Developing countries must strengthen their cooperation to Developing 2014 standards and guidance can lead ensure internal capacity building, sharing of experience and countries to developing countries signing development of model solutions. unbalanced and disadvantageous bilateral treaties Developing countries that have good access to the OECD and G20 processes must ensure that their inputs are based on regional consensus and consensus from the global south, Developing countries, in particular the and that regular report backs to countries not included in the least developed countries, risk being left processes are ensured out of the tax and transparency related processes in OECD and G20

Risk of developing an unjust tax system Developing countries should give top priority to the issues of Developing Immediately if developing countries focus on taxing international transparency and tax justice countries domestic actors before addressing international tax and transparency issues

EITI

Important EITI reports on transparency EITI secretariat and members must strengthen the EITI and members Starting 2014 in the extractives sector are not well communication work around its reports known by the public and media

The voluntary EITI standards risk EITI secretariat and members must promote initiatives going EITI secretariat and Immediately becoming an obstacle for and beyond the voluntary EITI standard members alternative to more ambitious solutions

Tax and transparency Fact-finding mission Annex 2: Members of the expert delegation 24

Name Profession Nationality Contact

Africa

Tafadzwa Chikumbu Policy Officer for Economic Governance, AFRODAD Zimbabwe [email protected]

Hon. Zitto Kabwe Member of Parliament – Kigoma North, Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee, Tanzania [email protected] Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Shadow Minister of Finance

Dr. Collins Magalasi Executive Director for AFRODAD Malawi [email protected]

Savior Mwambwa Policy and Advocacy Manager at Tax Justice Network Africa Zambia [email protected]

Raphael Ongangi Assistant to Hon. Zitto Kabwe Tanzania [email protected]

Hon. Mcjones Mandala Shaba Member of Parliament of Malawi, member of the Natural Resources Committee, Malawi [email protected] the Committee on Transport and Public Infrastructure, as well as former member of the Public Accounts Committee. Hon. Shaba is also a member of the African Parliamentarians’ Network Against Corruption

Asia

Sagnik Dutta Principal Correspondent, Frontline, The Hindu Group India [email protected]

Lidy Nacpil International Coordinator of Jubilee South – Asia/Pacific Movement on Debt and Philippines [email protected] Development (JSAPMDD)

Latin America

Abelardo Medina Bermejo Senior Economist, Instituto Centroamericano de Estudios Fiscales Guatemala [email protected]

Nora Fernández President of LATINDADD and Coordinator of Centro de Derechos Económicos y Sociales Ecuador [email protected] (CDES)

Jorge Gaggero Economist and Senior Researcher at el Centro de Economía y Finanzas para el Desar- Argentina [email protected] rollo de la Argentina (CEFID-AR)

Annex 3: Eurodad team

Eurodad

Tove Maria Ryding Coordinator [email protected]

Alex Marriage Rapporteur [email protected]

Paula Subia Logistics [email protected]

Annex 4: Schedule of the Tax and Transparency Fact-finding Mission in 2013

Date Location Meeting

20 Oct Geneva Arrival. First meeting of the Fact-Finding Mission Delegation

21 Oct Bern Mark Herkenrath, Alliance Sud

Silvia Frohofer, State Secretariat for International Financial Matters, Swiss Finance Ministry

Konrad Specker and Werner Thut, Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC)

23 Oct Montreux Heinrich Siegmann, Swissbank

Geneva Michael Lennard, Chief of the International Tax Cooperation Section, Financing for Development Office, United Nations

24 Oct Marlies de Ruiter, Head of the Tax Treaty and Transfer Pricing Division at the OECD

Rudolf Elmer, Swiss whistle-blower and former employee of Julius Baer

25 Oct Martin Hearson, Doctoral researcher at London School of Economics

Carlo Sommaruga, Member of the Parliament of Switzerland, Socialist Party

Tax and transparency Fact-finding mission Annex 4: continued 25

Date Location Meeting

28 Oct Paris Mathilde Dupre, CCFD-Terre Solidaire

Élise Calais and Léonardo Puppetto, Direction générale du Trésor, Ministère de l'Economie et des Finances, France

29 Oct Alexis Fremeaux, tax adviser of the Development Minister, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, France

Colin Clavey, Senior Advisor to the OECD Tax and Development Division

30 Oct Brussels Alison Tate and Mamadou Diallo, International Confederation of Trade Unions

Nadia Salson, EPSU Secretariat

31 Oct Stewart-Shaw Mills, DG DEVCO, European Commission

Dries Belet, DG ECFIN, European Commission

1 Nov Oslo Wenche Fone and Kjetil Abildsnes, Norwegian Church Aid

Lillian Prestegard, Vibeke Sørum, Ingvild Bergskaug, Norad

Hans Olav Syversen, Norwegian Christian Democratic party, Chair of the Finance Committee

23 Oct Jonas Moberg, Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative

Henrik Chr. Harboe, Jon-Åge Øyslebø and Harald Tolland, Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs

5 Nov Departure. Last meeting of the Fact-Finding Mission Delegation.

Annex 5: Selection of documents included in the work of the delegation

General France United Nations Global Financial Integrity. (2010). Illicit Financial Financial Times. (10 April 2013). Hollande seeks Michael Lennard, Asia-Pacific Tax Bulletin. (2009). Flows from Africa: Hidden Resource for to ‘eradicate’ tax havens. http://www.ft.com/intl/ The UN Model Tax Convention as Compared with Development. cms/s/0/8f224e3a-a1cc-11e2-8971-00144feabdc0. the OECD Model Tax Convention – Current Points html#axzz2lrtDTGUG of Difference and Recent Developments. African Development Bank and Global Financial Integrity. (2013). Illicit Financial Flows and the Eurodad. (Article published on 14 June 2013 at Problem of Net Resource Transfers from Africa: http://eurodad.org/1545681/). New EU anti- Organisation for Economic Co-operation and 1980-2009. corruption standards increase demands for greater Development transparency to combat tax dodging. Global Financial Integrity. (2013). Illicit Financial OECD. (http://www.oecd.org/ctp/beps- Flows from Developing countries: 2002-2011. Avaaz. (Petition published 22 November 2013 frequentlyaskedquestions.htm 2013). BEPS FAQ. at https://secure.avaaz.org/fr/petition/A_Luc_ Eurodad. (2013). Secret Structures, Hidden Crimes. Richard Murphy. (Blog posted 23 July 2013 at Oursel_PDG_dAreva_et_a_tous_les_actionnaires_ http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2013/07/23/ Tax Justice Network. (2013). Financial Secrecy dAreva_Le_pays_le_plus_pauvre_au_monde_ should-developing-countries-turn-their-banks- Index. http://www.financialsecrecyindex.com/ face_a_Areva/ ): Stop à la pression d’Areva sur le on-the-oecd/). Should Developing Countries Turn introduction/fsi-2013-results Niger ! Their Backs on the OECD? Tax Justice Network (2013). Briefing for the United Tax Justice Network. (2013). Financial Transparency Nations Tax Committee. October 2013. Reform of Index. Report on France.. Group of Twenty the International Tax System. G20. (2013). G20 Leaders Declaration. Norway Switzerland G20. (2013). Tax Annex to the St. Petersburg G20 Norwegian Government. (2012). Norwegian Leaders’ Declaration. Tax Justice Network. (2013). Financial Transparency Government’s White Paper, Meld. St. 25 (2012– Index. Report on Switzerland. 2013). Sharing for prosperity. Chapter 8, Illicit financial flows from developing countries. Blog submitted by Otaviano Canuto to the website of the World Bank. (2013). A Billion-Dollar Tax Justice Network (Blog post published Opportunity for Developing Countries. http:// on 22 January 2014 at http://www.taxjustice. blogs.worldbank.org/growth/billion-dollar- net/2014/01/22/norway-moves-towards-country- opportunity-developing-countries country-reporting/). Norway moves on Country by Country reporting.

Tax and transparency Fact-finding mission 26 Endnotes

1 See Annex 2: ‘Members of the expert delegation’. (Japan), Mr. Cezary Krysiak (Poland), Mr. Armando (FYROM), France, Georgia, Germany, Gabon, Ghana, Lara Yaffar (Mexico), Mr. Wolfgang Karl Albert Lasars Gibraltar, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guernsey, 2 See annex 4: ‘Schedule of the Tax and Transparency (Germany), Mr. Tizhong Liao (China), Mr. Henry John Hong Kong, China, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Fact-finding Mission in 2013’. Louie (United States of America), Mr. Enrico Martino Ireland, Isle of Man, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jersey, (Italy), Mr. Eric Nii Yarboi Mensah (Ghana), Mr. Ignatius Kazakhstan, Kenya, Korea, Latvia, Kingdom of Lesotho, 3 Global Financial Integrity. (2010). Illicit Financial Flows Kawaza Mvula (Zambia), Ms. Carmel Peters (New Liberia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Macau, from Africa: Hidden Resource for Development. Zealand), Mr. Jorge Antonio Deher Rachid (Brazil), China, Malaysia, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, 4 African Development Bank and Global Financial Integ- Mr. Satit Rungkasiri (Thailand), Ms. Pragya S. Saksena Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Montserrat, Morocco, rity. (2013). Illicit Financial Flows and the Problem of (India), Mr. Christoph Schelling (Switzerland), Mr. Stig Nauru, Netherlands, Nigeria, Niue, Norway, Pakistan, Net Resource Transfers from Africa: 1980-2009. B. Sollund (Norway), Ms. Ingela Willfors (Sweden), Mr. Panama, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Ulvi Yusifov (Azerbaijan). Russian Federation, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, St 5 Global Financial Integrity. (2013). Illicit Financial Flows Martin, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San from Developing countries: 2002-2011. 10 The OECD member countries are: Australia, Austria, Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Seychelles, Singa- Belgium, Canada, Chile, Czech Republic, Denmark, pore, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, 6 Eurodad. (2013). Secret Structures, Hidden Crimes. Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Sweden, Switzerland, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Korea, Luxembourg, 7 Blog submitted by Otaviano Canuto to the website of Turkey, Turks and Caicos Islands, Uganda, Ukraine, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, the World Bank. (2013). United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United States, A Billion-Dollar Opportunity Portugal, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, http://blogs.worldbank. Uruguay, and Vanuatu. for Developing Countries. Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom, Unites States. org/growth/billion-dollar-opportunity-developing- 14 UN. (Posted at https://www.un.org/en/development/ countries. 11 Accession discussions are currently ongoing with Rus- desa/policy/cdp/ldc/ldc_list.pdf 2014). List of Least sia, Colombia and Latvia. 8 Implementation of the Multilateral Convention will Developed Countries. require substantial changes in existing Swiss law. The 12 The members of the G20 are: Argentina, Australia, 15 The countries that the UN has identified as least devel- Swiss federal administration is currently drafting the Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Indo- oped countries are: Afghanistan, Angola, Bangladesh, corresponding bill. The draft proposal will be submit- nesia, Italy, Japan, Republic of Korea, Mexico, Russia, Benin, Bhutan, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, ted to a broad public consultation and a possible Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Turkey, United Kingdom, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Democratic revision in the course of 2014. Swiss parliament will United States, European Union. Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Equatorial Guinea, then need to pass the final bill. Only then can it ratify Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gambia, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, the Multilateral Convention. 13 The members of the Global Forum are: Albania, Andorra, Anguilla, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Kiribati, Laos, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Malawi, 9 The members of the committee are: Mr. Khalid Ab- Aruba, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, The Bahamas, Mali, Mauretania, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nepal, Niger, dulrahman Almuftah (Qatar), Mr. Mohammed Amine Bahrain, Barbados, Belgium, Belize, Bermuda, Bot- Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Sierra Baina (Morocco), Ms. Bernadette May Evelyn Butler swana, Brazil, British Virgin Islands, Brunei Darussalam, Leone, Solomon Islands, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, (Bahamas), Mr. Andrew Dawson (United Kingdom Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Canada, Cayman Islands, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tuvalu, Uganda, United Republic of of Great Britain and Northern Ireland), Mr. El Hadji Chile, China, Colombia, Cook Islands, Costa Rica, Tanzania, Vanuatu, Yemen, and Zambia. Ibrahima Diop (Senegal), Mr. Johan Cornelius de la Rey Curaçao, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominica, (South Africa), Ms. Noor Azian Abdul Hamid (Malay- Dominican Republic, El Salvador, European Union, Es- sia), Ms. Liselott Kana (Chile), Mr. Toshiyuki Kemmochi tonia, Finland, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia

Tax and transparency Fact-finding mission