who pays the price hunger the hidden cost of tax injustice may 2013
TRANSCRIPT
-
7/30/2019 Who Pays the Price Hunger the Hidden Cost of Tax Injustice May 2013
1/52
Who paysthe price?hunger: the hidden
cost of tax injustice
-
7/30/2019 Who Pays the Price Hunger the Hidden Cost of Tax Injustice May 2013
2/52
Poverty is an outrage. It robs peopleof dignity, freedom and hope,of power over their own lives.
Christian Aid has a vision anend to poverty and we believe
that vision can become a reality.We urge you to join us.
IDCS is an Indian government-sponsored programme and Indiasprimary social welare scheme to tackle malnutrition and healthproblems in children aged under 6 years o age and their mothers.Christian Aid partner Chetna Vikas helps some o the mostremote and poorest communities in India to access and improvegovernment welare schemes available to themChristian Aid/Sarah Filbey
-
7/30/2019 Who Pays the Price Hunger the Hidden Cost of Tax Injustice May 2013
3/52
hunger: The hidden cosT of Tax injusTice 1
contents
Introduction 2
1. Hunger the true extent 5
2. Why tax dodging means people go hungry 9
3. How tax justice could help combat hunger in India, El Salvador and Ghana 14
4. Secret links: how companies can use tax havens to dodge taxes 28
5. Swissploitation: the hidden cost of trading with Switzerland 32
6. Recommendations: what political leaders need to do in 2013 40
Endnotes 44
Abbreviations 48
Appendix 49
-
7/30/2019 Who Pays the Price Hunger the Hidden Cost of Tax Injustice May 2013
4/52
ChristianAid/NameName
This is a standard picture caption, it is the same width as thecolumns on the main pages
introduction
Ana Maria Ayalas maize crop was completely destroyed by oodsin El Salvador in October 2011. Most o El Salvadors armersrely on what they can grow in their smallholdings. Inequality,an unair tax system and lack o government investment inagriculture mean almost hal the population live in poverty, andone-third o all children aged under fve die rom malnutrition
ChristianAid/SusanBarry
-
7/30/2019 Who Pays the Price Hunger the Hidden Cost of Tax Injustice May 2013
5/52
hunger: The hidden cosT of Tax injusTice 3
Hunger still blights the lives o one in eight o the That the world remains a long way o seeing these
global population some 868 million people.1 Progress commitments met is a shameul indictment o modern
towards halving the number o people who are hungry day priorities, or the sad truth is there would be enough
by the year 2015, a goal set by world leaders at the turn ood to sustain every man, woman and child on Earth i
o the century, is disappointing. the interests o the poor were properly upheld. Lacking,
however, is the political will needed to saeguard their
In sub-Saharan Arica, the number o people rights, and sucient resources in developing countries
undernourished has actually increased. In Asia too, the to implement pro-poor policies that would usher in
gures are alarming. India, at the oreront o newly lasting change.
emerging economies, is still home to a quarter o
the worlds hungry, with more than 40 per cent o its In 2013, a mass campaign by more than 120
children malnourished and stunted.2 organisations in the UK has been launched6 to draw
attention to some o the key steps that could and
Hunger has many causes: harvests ruined by food should be taken to help eradicate hunger. Key
and drought both increasingly common due to demands include greater support or small-scale armers
climate change lead to shortages and rising prices who produce about our-ths o ood supplies in
that poor people can ill aord. In addition, a woeul developing countries, as well as measures to address a
scaling back o investment in small-scale arming in the undamental malaise that hampers the eorts o poorer
developing world has hit the ability o communities to governments to help themselves: illicit capital fight and
eed themselves. So, too, has the impact o large-scale tax dodging by multinational corporations (MNCs).
cash-crop plantations, particularly those producing
biouels, which have orced poorer armers o the land. Christian Aid estimates that businesses that benetrom lack o transparency in trade and nancial systems
Confict also plays a role in exacerbating hunger: crops deprive the poorer countries where they trade o some
are burned or seized or eeding armed groups; people US$160bn (102bn) in tax revenues every year ar
are driven rom their homes; and there is a shortage more than such countries receive in aid.7
o labour because o recruitment into armies and
militias. Employment or migrant workers also ceases Tax revenues are predictable and sustainable
as in the recent cases o Libya and Ivory Coast sources o income. They are undamental to allowing
ending the sending home o income to communities developing-country governments to oster human
in neighbouring states where ood shortages may development. But most poorer countries lack the sta,
also be acute. expertise and access to corporate inormation to counter
activities such as transer mispricing, in which some
Massive rich-country investment in commodity unds MNCs manipulate the prots they make and oten hide
is yet another actor contributing to rising prices its them oshore.
impact now so marked that a number o banks no
longer oer such portolios.3 In this report, Christian Aid provides new evidence o
how an end to such practices, coupled with appropriate
Global acceptance that everyone is entitled to development policies, could make major progress
a standard o living adequate or the health and towards eradicating world hunger. We realise that not all
wellbeing o himsel and o his amily, including ood4 the revenues raised would automatically be channelled
was enshrined more than 60 years ago in the United to priority areas such as health and nutrition. There are
Nations Universal Declaration o Human Rights, other priorities such as education and inrastructure.
with subsequent UN declarations and conventions There also remain the challenges o corruption and
underlining the duty o governments to respect, government profigacy; challenges to which Christian
protect and ull that right.5 Aid and our partners are rising. But without doubt, airer
tax systems and greater tax revenues could lead toincreased practical measures to reduce ood insecurity.
-
7/30/2019 Who Pays the Price Hunger the Hidden Cost of Tax Injustice May 2013
6/52
4 Who pays The price?
Chapter 1 looks at the extent o world hunger today. Chapter 5 looks at the role one tax haven, Switzerland
(the most secretive o all, according to a recent survey
Chapter 2 explains how unsustainable tax competition, by the Financial Secrecy Index8), plays in helping MNCs
ineective tax systems and nancial secrecy enable shit prots and dodge taxes. Analysis o trade data
MNCs and wealthy individuals to illicitly shit capital to shows that developing countries could have lost as
jurisdictions with low or zero tax rates, thus dodging much as US$578bn (368bn) between 2007 and 2010
taxes and maximising prots. It also looks at the rom MNCs trading with or via Switzerland. This is ar
practical measures that could be unded with the more than the annual estimated US$50.2bn (32bn)
money lost. cited in a 2012 UN Food and Agriculture Organization
report that would be needed to create a world ree rom
Chapter 3 looks at three middle-income countries hunger by 2025.9
India, El Salvador and Ghana showing how unair tax
systems and low tax revenues aect the lives o the Finally, chapter 6 contains policy recommendations
poor. about how to tackle nancial secrecy, illicit capital fight,
and tax avoidance and evasion. The UK government, as
Based on the analysis o a sample number o MNCs chair o the G8 in 2013, and the government o Ireland,
operating in our three country examples, chapter 4 as President o the European Union or the rst six
shows that those with connections to tax havens are months o the year, have a golden opportunity to take
paying 28.9 per cent less in taxes as a percentage o determined action to make tax justice a major weapon
prots than MNCs with no tax haven links. against poverty and hunger. Its an opportunity they
must not shirk.
-
7/30/2019 Who Pays the Price Hunger the Hidden Cost of Tax Injustice May 2013
7/52
Dorcas in the yard o her parents home in Fooshegu, northernGhana. Thanks to the support o Christian Aid partner NorthernPresbytery Agricultural Services, her ather, Samson Napatia, isable to give her and her fve sisters three nutritious meals a day,even during the hunger season when ood is traditionally scarce.Samson cannot speak highly enough o Northern PresbyteryAgricultural Services feld ofcers. Since they came to hiscommunity with practical ideas to help armers grow more, hismaize harvest alone is 10 times larger enough to see him tothe next harvest. Until the government has the unds to employmore o its own feld ofcers, it will all to NGOs like NorthernPresbytery Agricultural Services to fll in the gaps
1. hunger the true extent
-
7/30/2019 Who Pays the Price Hunger the Hidden Cost of Tax Injustice May 2013
8/52
6 Who pays The price?
Table 1: Number o hungry people worldwide (millions)
1990/1992 1998/2001 2004/2006 2007/2009 2010/2012
1,000 919 898 867 868
Source: FAO, The State o Food and Agriculture, 2012.
Table 2: Geographic distribution o hunger
Region Number o
millions hungry
Developed regions 16
Arica 239
Asia 563
Latin America and 49the Caribbean
Oceania 1
World 868
Source: FAO, The State o Food and Agriculture, 2012.
tePowell
oinet
Zenabu Razak, caterer at
Aid/Ant
Gbanyamni primary schoolin Ghana, prepares the lunch
tianthat will be provided ree tois
Chrall o the schools pupils as
part o Ghanas ree schooleeding programme
Progress has been made in the fght against hunger Although there has been some progress in recent years
since the start o the millennium, when 919 million in reducing the number o children globally aected
people went to bed hungry every night. Today, the gure by hunger, malnutrition and related causes still lead to
stands at 868 million, a reduction rom 15 per cent o the the deaths o 2.3 million children every year.14 Indeed,
worlds population to 12.5 per cent.11 childhood malnutrition is the underlying reason or an
estimated 35 per cent o all deaths o children under
To that gure, however, must be added another the age o ve in the developing world, with those that
1 billion people who continue to suer a lack o survive oten suering long-term irreversible damage.15
essential micronutrients.12 Known as hidden hunger, Meanwhile, one in every six children aged under ve in
micronutrient deciencies increase the rate o disease, developing countries is underweight, while as many as
lower lie expectancy and impair cognitive development, one in our suers stunting.16 Recent research suggests
learning ability and productivity. The result is a tragic that children under ve who are malnourished are likely
loss o human potential with ar-reaching implications. to see their uture earnings reduced by almost a quarter.17
In India, or example, iron and iodine deciencies that
cause stunting are estimated to result in productivity Women, who make up a little over hal the worlds
loss equivalent to 2.95 per cent o GDP annually.13 population, suer disproportionately, accounting or
some 60 per cent o the worlds hungry as a result o
persistent, deep gender inequalities.18
t t lt m blm t t lt mmt btw l
m. it ml t lt ltl t ttm mll m, t m vtm , t vt
Olivier de Schutter, UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food10
-
7/30/2019 Who Pays the Price Hunger the Hidden Cost of Tax Injustice May 2013
9/52
hunger: The hidden cosT of Tax injusTice 7
W m bm mt w That same year, at the World Summit on Food Security,In recent years, world leaders have been party to a held in Rome by the UNs Food and Agriculture
series o undertakings and pledges to tackle hunger Organization (FAO), world leaders unanimously
head-on. In 2000, at the Millennium Summit, they pledged renewed commitment to eradicating hunger
agreed to reduce poverty at historically unprecedented sustainably and at the earliest date. They set as
rates through collaborative global action. The rst o the their target reducing respectively the proportion and
eight millennium development goals (MDGs) aimed to the number o people who suer rom hunger and
halve the percentage o people aected by hunger by malnutrition by hal by 2015.20
the year 2015.
The then-FAO director-general, Jacques Diou, stressed
the need to produce ood where the poor and hungry live,
and to boost agricultural investment in those regions.21
Yet, despite all promises made, a look at the percentage
o people suering rom hunger and the actual number
o people undernourished shows that progress has
been disappointing. In southern Asia, where 327 million
children, women and men were undernourished in 1990,
In 2008, the year ood-price spikes triggered rioting the decrease ater more than two decades has been
in more than 30 countries, the UN Secretary-General less than 5 per cent. Worse still, in Arica, the number
established a High Level Task Force on the Global o hungry people has increased by 36 per cent over the
Food Security Crisis, which included heads rom UN same period, rom 175 to 239 million people.specialised agencies, and the World Bank and IMF.
The truth is we are a long way rom halving the number
A G8 Summit in Aquila (Italy) in 2009 then agreed a Food o people suering rom hunger.
Security Initiative that committed US$20bn (12.7bn)
over three years or sustainable agriculture development
and saety nets or vulnerable populations.19 However,
much o the money was later not orthcoming.
W v t m; w vt t t lmt
m t t t ltm. W l t wll
US President John F Kennedy, 1963
Table 3: Progress made towards halving the number o people who suer rom hunger, expressed as
prevalence o hunger
Region Baseline
1990/1992
1998/2001
2004/2006
2007/2009
2010/2012
MDG
target2015
Level o
achievement*
World 18.6% 15% 13.8% 12.9% 12.5% 9.3% 65.6%
Arica 27.3% 25.3% 23.1% 22.6% 22.9% 13.65% 32.2%
Asia 23.7% 17.7% 16.3% 14.8% 13.9% 11.85% 82.7%
Latin
America
and the
Caribbean
14.6% 11.6% 9.7% 8.7% 8.3% 7.15% 88.1%
Oceania 13.6% 15.5% 13.7% 11.9% 12.1% 6.8% 23.1%
Source: FAO, The State o Food and Agriculture, 2012.
*Level o achievement is our own calculation.22
-
7/30/2019 Who Pays the Price Hunger the Hidden Cost of Tax Injustice May 2013
10/52
8 Who pays The price?
Table 4: Progress made towards halving the number o people (in millions) who suer rom hunger,
expressed in absolute terms
Region 1990/1992 1998/2001 2004/2006 2007/2009 2010/2012 WFS
Target
2015
Achievement*
World 1,000 919 898 867 868 500 26.4%
Arica 175 205 210 220 239 87.5 No reduction
Asia 739 634 620 581 563 369.5 47.6%
Latin
America
and the
Caribbean
65 60 54 50 49 32.5 49.2%
Oceania 1 1 1 1 1 0.5 No reduction
Source: FAO, The State o Food and Agriculture, 2012.
*Level o achievement is our own calculation.
-
7/30/2019 Who Pays the Price Hunger the Hidden Cost of Tax Injustice May 2013
11/52ChristianAid/SimonWilliams
Women prepare ood or the Jan Satyagraha marchers.Christian Aid partner Ekta Parishad organised the march in 2012.More than 50,000 poor and landless armers marched peaceullyto demand rights to the land they have worked on or years.Eight days into the month-long march, the Indian governmentagreed to their main demands
2. Why tax dodgingmeans people go
hungry
-
7/30/2019 Who Pays the Price Hunger the Hidden Cost of Tax Injustice May 2013
12/52
10 Who pays The price?
W t t tl t long way rom the rate in the developed world they couldmbt achieve all the MDGs including halving the number oThe ace o global poverty and thereore hunger has people living in hunger.30
changed in recent years. Whereas two decades ago
most o the worlds poor people lived in low-income23 There are, o course, cogent reasons why developing
countries, today two-thirds are to be ound in countries countries are unable to raise the requisite amount. Large
that the World Bank classies as middle-income numbers o their citizens, especially smallholder armers
countries, such as India and China.24 in rural areas, live in poverty and do not enjoy taxable
incomes. In addition, such countries have large untaxed
With that change, in the UK at least, a growing chorus inormal sectors.
o dissent has questioned whether countries that are
relatively rich, in comparison to least-developed nations, Revenues are also lost when developing countries oer
should still receive aid, particularly at a time o cuts in major tax incentives to oreign companies in return or
public services at home.25 investment. The ear is that without such tax breaks,
the companies may go elsewhere. In recent years,
The argument ignores such salient acts as the minimal development agencies, including Christian Aid, have
dierence in per capita income between low-income sought to draw attention to the huge costs associated
countries and the economically disadvantaged in middle- with tax incentives. In act, evidence seems to suggest
income countries. It ignores too the sheer scale o need that costs are oten ound to be higher than the benets
in many o todays emerging economies. In Brazil, or derived rom the investment they seek to attract.
instance, a country that has a GDP almost as large as that
o the UK, some 16 million people the same number as Finally, one o the most important actors workinglive in the Netherlands go hungry every day.26 against developing countries is tax avoidance and
evasion by MNCs and wealthy individuals. In 2008,
Christian Aid would like to see a world ree rom hunger Christian Aid estimated that tax evasion associated to
and poverty, where aid is no longer necessary. For this trade mispricing by MNCs costs developing countries
to become a reality, the causes o poverty need to be around US$160bn (105.3bn) a year, ar more than they
addressed and developing countries need to nd the receive in aid.31
resources to cope on their own.
Dealing with the corporation tax gap in developing
As a sustainable and predictable source o nance, countries could, according to research by the IF
tax revenues have a key role to play in ostering campaign, raise enough public revenue to save the lives
economic sel-suciency or both the developed and o 230 children under ve every day.32
the developing world. Providing a sound economic
ooting or development, air and ecient tax systems hw m bl t talso have an impact on the body politic itsel, leading to Foreign direct investment, the investment in
greater transparency and accountability on the part o commercial activities in one country by a business in
governments as taxpayers demand evidence o how another, rose by 2,000 per cent between 1982 and 2011
their money is being spent.27 to US$1.5tn (955bn).33
The UK government says: Governance appears to be To attract the vast amounts o oreign capital now
better where governments have to earn their incomes available, many countries have resorted to potentially
by taxing a wide range o citizens and economic damaging tax competition, such as the reduction o
activities... Well-managed taxation systems can play a corporate income tax rates, the granting o generous tax
major role in state building.28 incentives to oreign corporations, and even, in some
cases, lax legal enorcement and the promotion o
Today, however, low-income countries collect an average secrecy provisions, eg banking secrecy laws.o only 13 per cent o their GDP in tax revenues, compared
to around 35 per cent in countries in the Organisation or Some countries those generally known as tax havens
Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).29 The or secrecy jurisdictions have made their capacity to
UN estimates that i the worlds least-developed countries attract oreign capital their major economic activity.
raised at least 20 per cent o their GDP rom taxes still a The prime attractions they oer are a low or zero tax
W tm t [g8] t v bt t v t v. T wll l
t t l vl t llt t tt t tm
UK Chancellor o the Exchequer George Osborne, February 2013
-
7/30/2019 Who Pays the Price Hunger the Hidden Cost of Tax Injustice May 2013
13/52
hunger: The hidden cosT of Tax injusTice 11
rate and nancial secrecy, heedless o the damage that Financial secrecy enables other orms o illicit capital
might cause elsewhere. fight too, including corruption. Raymond Baker, a senior
ellow at the US Center or International Policy and an
A lack o inter-government cooperation at regional and internationally respected authority on money laundering,
global levels and the eective infuence o powerul has estimated that some 3 per cent o money moved
beneciaries rom the tax competition phenomenon illicitly around the world consists o the proceeds o
have resulted in numerous legal loopholes as well bribery and thet by government ocials.40
as a lack o transparency, which enables MNCs and
wealthy individuals to shit capital and prots in secret Research published last year estimated that US$854bn
to minimise their tax liability. (543bn) illicitly escaped rom sub-Saharan Arica
between 1970 and 2008. This gure is double the
One method used by some MNCs is transer ocial development aid fows over the same period,
mispricing, where dierent subsidiaries o the same and our times the size o Aricas debt in 2008,41 thus
corporation sell goods and services to each other at making sub-Saharan Arica the region with the highest
manipulated prices. False invoicing involves similar prevalence o undernourishment a net creditor to the
transactions taking place between unrelated companies. rest o the world.
With 60 per cent o world trade, according to the OECD,34 Its clear that ar-reaching global action is needed to prise
now taking place between companies that are part o the open the nancial secrecy o tax havens that not only
same MNC, such transactions play an important part in acilitates tax dodging, but also hides the proceeds o
articially distributing prots and tax liabilities.35 corruption, drug tracking and other crimes.
However, transer mispricing is not the only mechanism Governments have their role to play (as outlined in
used by corporations to dodge taxes. As ActionAids chapter 6), but MNCs do too. The UN Guiding Principles
recent report on Associated British Foods shows, on Business and Human Rights state that corporations
corporations establish complex corporate structures to have the duty to respect human rights, including
exploit tax legal loopholes and benet rom the existing the right to be ree rom hunger.42 However, when
network o tax agreements between countries (double corporations engage in abusive tax avoidance or evasion,
tax treaties).36 they create an adverse impact on the human rights o
others. Such activities, even when legal, are increasingly
These complex corporate structures oten involve the being seen as immoral.
establishment o subsidiaries in tax havens. The sheer
scale o business now conducted through tax havens is hw t v immense. More than hal o world trade today ollows Tax revenues should account or at least 20 per cent
such a route: hal o all banking assets are held oshore o a countrys GDP or sustainable development to
and one-third o oreign direct investment is channelled become a reality.43 Indeed, evidence suggests that
through such accounts.37 Arican countries with higher tax collections generally
have lower levels o undernourishment: countries
This secret world allows vast amounts o money to collecting more than 20 per cent o their GDP in tax had
be hidden rom public scrutiny, acilitating tax dodging an average level o undernourishment o 15 per cent
and massively reducing revenues that could promote during 2005-08, while those collecting less than 10 per
development. The OECD has estimated that the money cent had an average rate o undernourishment o 32
lost by developing countries to tax havens is nearly three per cent.44
times the amount o aid they receive.38
Increasing tax revenues is necessary to end hunger
More recent research by the Tax Justice Network and poverty. However, what matters most is how
estimates that rich individuals alone could be hiding as governments make an eective use o the nancialmuch as US$21tn (13.4tn) in tax havens. I the capital resources available. In this sense, the eective
gains o 3 per cent o US$21tn (13.4tn) were taxed at investment o tax revenues to increase the productivity
30 per cent, it would generate revenues o US$189bn o smallholders agriculture and develop appropriate
(120bn) a year.39 pro-poor markets becomes essential.45
-
7/30/2019 Who Pays the Price Hunger the Hidden Cost of Tax Injustice May 2013
14/52
12 Who pays The price?
Today, more than hal the population o the developing As well as enhancing ood security and maximising
world (3.1 billion people) live in rural areas and, o these, the productivity o limited arable land, the right kind
2.5 billion derive their livelihood rom agriculture. In o support or smallholders can contribute to poverty
many developing countries, agriculture remains the main reduction through multiple benets, including providing
driver o economic growth and is oten the sector that is employment,48 building resilience to sudden changes
most resilient to global economic crises.46 in the weather or other actors aecting ood supply,
empowering women and vulnerable or excluded
At least hal o the ood consumed in the world communities, and enhancing the natural resource base
is produced by smallholders, who produce ood on which the uture o ood production depends, or
or subsistence and/or or sale to local, as well as instance by promoting soil-conservation practices.49
sometimes regional and international, markets. These
arms are the backbone o rural economies. The World Bank estimates that agriculture growth
is three times more eective in reducing extreme
However, many ood-producing households are trapped poverty than growth in other sectors, particularly in rural
in poverty, oten not producing enough or their own areas.50 A thriving agricultural sector is a strong basis
consumption or making only meagre prots rom their or economic diversication, creating new opportunities
sales, so they are unable to build up assets or invest that can contribute to much-needed economic
in practices that could help increase and diversiy their dierentiation and employment.
production, cope better with risks and uncertainties, and
seize market opportunities. Tackling tax dodging and nancial secrecy could provide
the US$50.2bn required every year to tackle hunger.
Food insecurity47 persists because sucient ood is notproduced or available to poor people in those places
where it is most needed, and because poor people
cannot aord to buy enough ood to meet their needs.
Low levels o production are the result o lack o
government investment in smallholder agriculture
or many decades. Small-scale armers are oten
marginalised by policy-makers, and lack the ability to
infuence policies and programmes to their benet,
particularly over the provision o agricultural research
and technology development, rural credit, transport
inrastructure, and access to markets to buy and
sell goods.
Other important causes o hunger are natural hazards
such as droughts and foods, slow-onset climate change
and environmental degradation, lack o income security
and other saety nets, as well as dispossession o some
o the worlds most vulnerable people rom land.
ahWilson
Even i smallholders produce enough to sell, ood
markets are characterised by power inequalities and Aid/Sar
policy and inrastructure ailures, which keep small-scale istian
ood producers poor, limiting their purchasing power Chr
and preventing ood rom being distributed to whereit is needed. In many developing countries, local ood In El Salvador, Rosa Cruz worries about her son and
husband. With no other jobs available, they work in thesugar cane felds, where they are exposed to toxic chemicals.Her husband is already suering rom chronic kidney ailure,which could be caused by the pesticides used in the felds
markets are ragmented, and in the case o staple oods,
the usual mechanics o demand and supply do not work
at all, especially in sub-Saharan Arica.
-
7/30/2019 Who Pays the Price Hunger the Hidden Cost of Tax Injustice May 2013
15/52
hunger: The hidden cosT of Tax injusTice 13
What developing-country governments could do to combat hunger
Tackling tax dodging and illicit capital fight could crops they grow, removing barriers to innovation
provide much needed revenue to help combat ood and adaptation (or example, lack o access to
insecurity. Governments in developing countries improved seed varieties), and integrating disaster
should use tax revenue eectively, particularly in risk reduction strategies and climate services with
support o measures to improve ood security. This agricultural development work
could include: implementing eective programmes o social
supporting ood production or local and national protection or the most vulnerable groups
domestic consumption and regional markets
through investment in agricultural research promoting education and health systems,
involving local armers (including smallholders), including improving nutritional education,
and the development o technologies appropriate healthcare and amily planning, and access to
to their needs, including irrigation and storage water and sanitation.
capacity
In addition, actions should be taken to: ensuring equitable access, especially o women,
to credit and land, with a ocus on long-term adopt policies to prevent and manage excessively
sustainable development volatile ood price fuctuations
promoting sustainable ood production, empower small-scale producers and their
which is commercially viable and protable, organisations in decision-making about public
environmentally sound, inclusive and equitable spending on agriculture and rural development
promoting pro-poor markets, or example through challenge unsustainable production and
the development o thriving and integrated local consumption in industrialised countries, and
ood industries in which ood producers can add highlight the links between ood and energy,
value to their products and improve their access including the problems o biouels expansion
to markets promote stronger and more equitable global
improving inrastructures, such as road systems, governance, particularly o international trade,
to support ood transportation agricultural investment, and nancial and
commodities markets. building the populations resilience to ood
shortages by helping armers to diversiy the
-
7/30/2019 Who Pays the Price Hunger the Hidden Cost of Tax Injustice May 2013
16/52
3. hoW tax justice coulhelp combat hunger
in india, el salvadorand ghana
d
The Jan Satyagraha 2012 campaign or land rights or some o thepoorest people belonged to, and was rooted in the experiences o,the Indian people. Yet Christian Aid partner and march organiserEkta Parishad stressed the importance o global solidarity to thiscampaign, striving or justice on a very global land issue. Withsecure access to land and ree rom the ear o being orced otheir land by big business, armers are able to invest their timeand resources in caring or the land and ultimately grow moreood or their communities
ChristianAid/SimonWilliams
-
7/30/2019 Who Pays the Price Hunger the Hidden Cost of Tax Injustice May 2013
17/52
hunger: The hidden cosT of Tax injusTice 15
Table 7: Child undernourishment in India
Percentage o children who are stunted 47.9%
Percentage o children who are
underweight43.5%
Mortality (per 1,000 births) 66
Source: UNDP, Human Development Report 2011.
Table 5: Poverty and inequality in India
Population 1,245 million
Gross national income (GNI) per capita US$3,296 (2,096)
Position in Human Development Index (2011) 134
Income GINI coecient51 36.8
Average income: 20% richest over 20% poorest ratio 5.6
Population living on less than US$1.25 (0.80) a day 41.6%
Source: United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), Human Development Report 2011.
Table 6: The goal to eradicate hunger in India
1990-1992 2004-2006 2010-2012 2015 target
(reduce by 50%)
Level o achievement
in 2012*
Number o people
undernourished
(millions)
240 238 217 120 19.1%
Proportion o peopleundernourished
26.9% 20.9% 17.5% 13.45% 69.9%
Source: FAO, The State o Food Insecurity in the World, 2012.
*Level o achievement is our own calculation.
Table 8: India in the Global Hunger Index 201252
1990 1996 2001 2012
Global Hunger
Index
30.3 22.6 24.2 22.9
Source: International Food Policy Research Institute
(IFPRI), Global Hunger Index 2012.
i
Indias gross national income (GNI) per capita doubled
between 1995 and 2010.53Yet, one in every our hungry the goal o halving hunger by 2043.55 As the Nobel Prize
people in the world lives in the sub-continent. As the winner Amartya Sen put it: there is probably no other
tables above clearly indicate, India will not reach the example in the history o the world development o an
target to halve the incidence o hunger by 2015. economy growing so ast or so long with such limited
results in terms o broad-based social progress.56
While the proportion o undernourished people has
allen by 35 per cent since 1990, the actual number o India, with a score o 22.9, ranks 66 out o 79 countries
people still suering rom hunger only decreased by in the Global Hunger Index (GHI), worse than Niger or
9.5 per cent, rom 240 million in 1990 to 217 million in Sudan. But the aggregated national data hides important
2012. Almost hal o the children under the age o ve in internal disparities.India suer rom stunting, while more than 40 per cent
o children and 30 per cent o women are underweight. According to the India State Hunger Index57 analysed
In addition, it is estimated that as many as 80 per cent by the International Food Policy Research Institute in
o children and 56 per cent o women are anaemic.54 2008, the scores ranged rom 13.6 or Punjab to 30.9
At the current pace o events, India would only achieve
-
7/30/2019 Who Pays the Price Hunger the Hidden Cost of Tax Injustice May 2013
18/52
16 Who pays The price?
or Madhya Pradesh, the worst-perorming state. Punjab
would actually rank 34th when compared to the GHI
2008 country rankings (between Nicaragua and Ghana),
while Madhya Pradesh would be ranked 82nd (between
Chad and Ethiopia).
The same analysis showed that 12 o Indias 17 states
all into the alarming category, while the situation in
one, Madhya Pradesh, was extremely alarming. For the
majority o states, high child underweight ratios were the
key reasons or the high GHI score.58
Despite the signicant and sustained growth rates
experienced in India in the past two decades, 3,000
people still die o starvation every year.59 But it is not as
though the country ailed to produce enough ood or
everyone. In act, India sold around 10 million tons o
ood grain in open market in 2012.
Handling o ood stocks remains a key challenge in
India.60 Some 80,400 tons o ood grain rotted in 2012
due to lack o storage acilities.61The government
claims that its ability to ensure ood or all is limited by
budgetary constraints.
T ntl f st Bll t bl tbt tmIn October 2010, concerned with the alarming state o
ood insecurity in the country, the National Advisory
Council (NAC) drated a National Food Security Bill,
proposing legal ood entitlements or 75 per cent o
the population.
In January 2011, an expert committee set up by the
then prime minister examined the Bill and made several
recommendations, including reducing the percentage o
the population entitled to the benets o the programme
rom 75 to 63 per cent.
Based on these recommendations, a drat Bill was
circulated in September 2011 by the Ministry o Food,
Consumer Aairs and Public Distribution or public
eedback. The Bill nally proposes ood grain entitlement
or up to 75 per cent o the rural population and 50 percent o the urban population. O these, at least 46 per
cent o the rural population and 28 per cent o the urban
population are declared as priority households and are
entitled to 7kg o subsidised ood per person per month
(non-priority households are entitled to 3kg per person
per month). Hence, the Bill ollows a targeted public
distribution approach.
However, many in India, including Christian Aid partner the
Centre or Budget and Governance Accountability (CBGA),
claim that all citizens in India should be entitled to the ood
distribution system. For households to be entitled to the
ood distribution system, they need to be identied as
poor by the government and receive the corresponding
Below Poverty Line card. In the past, methods used to
identiy potential recipients were proved to be based on
aulty estimates o who was living below the poverty line.
As a result, the programme ailed to reach many in need.
Three dierent national surveys62 have shown that as
many as hal o the current poorest households in India do
not have a Below Poverty Line card.63
One o the main arguments or the government to opt
or a targeted system was the need to control spending.
According to CBGA, ensuring ood or all vulnerablehouseholds would cost an additional US$20.6bn
(13.1bn) per year. This gure could be reduced i
transport systems and storage capacity were improved.
ChristianAid/SimonWilliams
Ekta Parishad activist Sita Ram holds a jar containingdonations oten given by people with precious little tospare to support the Jan Satyagraha marchers
-
7/30/2019 Who Pays the Price Hunger the Hidden Cost of Tax Injustice May 2013
19/52
hunger: The hidden cosT of Tax injusTice 17
Niyancis experience o the public distribution system (PDS)
Chr Shortages used to be a major issue. We wereistianAid/Sar
really struggling; villages were isolated we were
only having one meal a day and we didnt have anyah means to improve our ood supply, Niyanci recalls.Filbey
Most o the households were registered as BPL
Below Poverty Line which meant that they
were entitled to PDS grain, but collecting it entailed
an 8km walk to the nearest grain dealership.
We had to carry it ar on our heads and cross the river
during the rainy season. It would take us an entire
day to collect the rice, and when we reached the
dealership, we were oten told the distribution date
had changed, explains Niyanci.
We werent inormed about when the rations had
arrived. Also they would update the passbook [to
show wed collected], but say that the rations hadntcome. Months would pass at a time in that way,
she says, recounting a common tale o corrupt
administration o such schemes, which are not
properly monitored.
The consequences to amilies that depended on
these rations were signicant. When we were not
getting rations on time we would have to go or casual
labour, wed migrate and be underpaid, she explains.
The situation improved when the womens group,
ater organising protests, was oered the chance to
Niyanci Miranda lives in a village called Parasdah, take over the distribution.
in the state o Jharkhand, where the prevalence o
hunger is the second-highest in the country. We realised the importance o organising these
women and giving them a platorm rom which to
She is a member o a local womens group that claim their rights and entitlements, explains Rani
was established with the support o Christian Aid Kumari o Chetna Vikas.
partner Chetna Vikas. The group has been running
the governments public distribution system, which Niyanci concludes: Although the government is doing
provides subsidised oods in an area covering quite a lot, it is not enough. We were lucky, but most
more than 1,000 households. However, while ood o the programme does not reach all people in need
security has signicantly improved in Parasdah and in India. Many go still hungry.
neighbouring villages, it was not always like this.
-
7/30/2019 Who Pays the Price Hunger the Hidden Cost of Tax Injustice May 2013
20/52
18 Who pays The price?
hw i t v mGiven Indias sustained period o growth between 1990
and 2010, per capita income grew at almost 5 per cent a
year in real terms64 the Indian governments claims that
budgetary constraints hamper its ability to improve ood
security or the 212 million people that are undernourished
stretch credulity. Low tax revenues, however, are an issue.
With a tax-to-GDP ratio o 16.8 per cent, India obtains
a relative very low level o income compared to other
emerging economies. Brazil, or instance, has a 34.2 per
cent ratio, while South Aricas tax revenues represent
31.2 per cent o its GDP.65
Another key characteristic o the Indian tax system is the
relatively low part played by direct taxes (personal and
corporate income taxes). In 2009-10, they represented
37 per cent o total tax revenues, one o the lowest o
all G20 countries, and well below South Arica at 57.5 per
cent and Russia at 41.3 per cent. 66
One reason or the short all is the low tax rate enjoyed
by high earners. The current 30 per cent rate is lower
than the average maximum personal income tax rate in
sub-Saharan Arica, which is 35.07 per cent.67
As or corporate income tax, research shows that there
is a signicant dierence between the statutory tax rate
(33 per cent) and the rate that is eectively being paid
(24 per cent).68 Despite this, a new Direct Tax Code Bill
proposes to lower corporate taxes even urther.
Illicit capital fight and tax dodging in the orm o transer
mispricing by national corporations endeavouring to take
tax advantages (such as a tax holiday) in the special
economic zones69 that have been created, as well as by
international corporations shiting prots to lower tax
jurisdictions, are a major problem.
With around 3,500 disputes over alleged mispricing,
India has the most transer-mispricing cases in the world
ater Japan and Canada.70 According to the countrys
Directorate o Transer Pricing, the amounts involved
in mispricing ran at US$8.1bn (5.2bn) in 2010-11 and
US$12.6bn (8bn) in 2011-12.71 Corporation tax o 33
per cent on these amounts would have provided an
additional US$6.9bn (4.4bn).
That wealthy individuals and MNCs in India have
signicantly engaged in illicit capital fight and tax
avoidance and evasion practices is also conrmed
by recent research conducted by Global Financial
Integrity.72The Washington-based think tank estimates
that India could have lost as much as US$462bn
(294bn) between 1948-2008. The transer o deposits
rom Indian to oshore banks by individuals and
corporations is identied as one o the key routes o
illicit nancial fows out o the country. As the share o
oshore deposits increased rom 36.4 per cent o total
deposits in 1995 to 54.2 per cent in 2009, deposits in
Indian banks ell commensurately to 45.8 per cent.Not surprisingly, according to research by the OECD,
Mauritius, a tax haven, appears to be the top investor
country into India.73
Generous tax exemptions enjoyed by businesses and
individuals also help account or the low level o tax
raised as a percentage o GDP. A government estimate
o the revenue oregone in exemptions in 2011-12 alone
was US$99bn (63bn), which represents a staggering
5 per cent o GDP.74
Table 9, based on research by Christian Aid partner
CBGA, suggests tax-policy changes that could provide
additional revenue. The gures seem to indicate that
with a airer and more ecient tax system, the Indian
government could nd the resources required to
ensure ood security or all its citizens.
-
7/30/2019 Who Pays the Price Hunger the Hidden Cost of Tax Injustice May 2013
21/52
hunger: The hidden cosT of Tax injusTice 19
Table 9: How tax policies could provide revenue to tackle hunger
Area o intervention Policies to be adopted Estimated annual
additional tax revenue
Marginal tax rate on personal Increase marginal income tax rate on income above US$5.8bn (3.7bn)
income US$37,000 (23,532) rom the current 30 per cent to
40 per cent.
Capital gains tax Re-introduce long-term capital gains tax on securities US$13bn (8.3bn)
transactions, and tax short-term capital gainsprogressively as personal income. The current
zero tax on long-term capital gains on securities
privileges stock market speculation and avours
wealthy individuals.
Property tax, including Expand and make property tax more progressive; US$15.3bn (9.7bn)
wealth, inheritance and re-introduce inheritance tax (estate duty); improve
municipal property tax the targeting and valuation system or municipal
property tax.
Tax arrears Tax arrears should be collected immediately, and no US$11.5bn (7.3bn)
laxity should be shown in ling cases.
Tobacco tax Increase taxes on tobacco, as the current rate is low Increase o US$3.4bn
according to international standards. (2.2bn) and save
US$5.6bn (3.6bn)
on tobacco-related
diseases.
General anti-avoidance rule A strong GAAR should be introduced in order to
(GAAR) tackle aggressive tax planning by corporations.
The government decided to postpone this measure
to 2015-16.
Advance pricing agreements APAs could be established with some relevant US$4.3bn (2.7bn)
(APAs) corporations as a means to avoid transer mispricing.
Double tax avoidance The current double tax agreements with Mauritius US$2.3bn (1.5bn)
agreements and Singapore need to be reviewed in relation to the
treatment o capital gains tax.
-
7/30/2019 Who Pays the Price Hunger the Hidden Cost of Tax Injustice May 2013
22/52
20 Who pays The price?
el slvTable 10: Poverty and inequality in El Salvador
Population 6.225 million
Gross national income (GNI) per capita US$5,925 (3,768)
Position in Human Development Index (2011) 105
Income GINI coecient 46.9
Average income 20% richest over 20% poorest ratio 12.1
Population living on less than US$1.25 (0.80) a day 5.10%
ource: UNDP, Human Development Report 2011.
able 11: The goal to eradicate hunger in El Salvador
1990-1992 2004-2006 2010-2012 2015 target
(reduce by 50% )
Level o
achievement
in 2012*
Number o people
undernourished
0.79 0.71 0.76 0.395 7.5%
(millions)Proportion o people 15.6% 12.6% 12.3% 7.8% 42.3%
undernourished
ource: FAO, The State o Food Insecurity in the World, 2
Level o achievement based on our own calculations.
012.
able 12: Child undernourishment in El Salvador Table 13: El Salvador in the Global Hunger Index 2012
Percentage o children who are stunted 24.6% 1990 1996 2001 2012
Percentage o children who are
underweight
6.1% Global Hunger 10.1 8.7 5.4
Index
5.7
Mortality (per 1,000 births) 17 Source: IFPRI, Global Hunger Index 2012.ource: UNDP, Human Development Report 2011.
S
T
S
*
T
S
In El Salvador, the extent o undernourishment remains One child in our is stunted and, according to a recent
the same as 20 years ago. Despite a gross national World Bank study, 38 per cent o children aged 6-24
income per capita o almost US$6,000 (4,000), months are anaemic. In addition, one-third o all
the prevalence o hunger is very similar to the world deaths o children under ve is considered caused by
average: one in eight people are hungry. malnutrition.76 Eating varied and nutritious ood remains
a challenge in El Salvador, the World Bank concluded.
Although classied as a lower-middle-income country, a
recent government survey75 shows 47.5 per cent o the Inequality also remains an issue in El Salvador. In 2011,
population (47.6 per cent o women and 47.3 per cent o the richest 20 per cent o households enjoyed 58.3 per
men) live in poverty, o whom more than a third (15.46 cent o the national income, while the poorest 20 perper cent) live in extreme poverty. The governments cent accounted or just only 2.4 per cent.77 Exacerbating
estimation is thus largely consistent with the gures o matters is an unair tax system, where those with the
undernourishment provided by FAO, as shown in table greatest ability to pay ace the least taxes.
11 above.
-
7/30/2019 Who Pays the Price Hunger the Hidden Cost of Tax Injustice May 2013
23/52
hunger: The hidden cosT of Tax injusTice 21
altl vtmt tl El Salvadors lack o progress in tackling hunger cannot
be readily understood without considering the damaging
eects o the stabilisation and structural adjustment
programmes implemented since 1989. These are the
series o reorms demanded by donor governments and
international nancial institutions o poorer countries in
return or aid.
In El Salvadors case, they included a decrease in
trade taris, the suppression o agricultural marketing
boards, increases in the costs o agricultural inputs, the
elimination o guaranteed prices to producers, a cutting
back o agricultural research and technical assistance to
armers, and the reduction o credit to agriculture (rom
20 per cent o total credit in 1980 to 7 per cent in 2011).78
All are actors that help to explain to a large extent the
collapse o agricultural production, especially o rice,
corn, vegetables, meat and eggs. In 1993, El Salvador
produced 93 per cent o the ood grain consumed: today,
only 28 per cent o rice, 54 per cent o corn and 62 per
cent o beans eaten are produced locally. All the rest are
imported. In the case o vegetables, 70 per cent o the
amount consumed is imported.79
Today El Salvador invests just 1.5 per cent o its budget
in agriculture, as opposed to 5.2 per cent in 1990.80 More
than 80 per cent o its arms are small-holdings that
do not produce or market, nor do they have access to
modern production techniques and credit.
Unsurprisingly, the damaging eects o earlier policies
have led to a signicant increase in migration. In
1990, 60 per cent o the population lived in rural areas,
as opposed to 37 per cent today, while 3 million
Salvadorans have let the country, most to seek
new opportunities in the US.81
A vulnerable community the community. A small piece o land was assigned
to me by the community, so I can now produceChr some vegetables or our own consumption duringistianAid/Olg
the rainy season. Unortunately though, I cannot sell
ood at the market as we need to pay US$2 (1.27)a a day i we want to sell, or US$1 (0.64) i you only
o
Castr want to be there in the morning, but there have been
days where I sold nothing and had no money to pay
even US$1 (0.64).
I cannot get a decent job, and I cannot buy meat,
milk or even cereals or my children. I sometimes
work or another woman and sell the products that
she gives me, but with that I only earn US$3 (1.91)
The community o Milagro Belen is located in a day, not enough to take care o my amily.
Candelaria, a municipality in Cuscatln Region. It is
home to 350 people (200 women and 150 men), The act that larger companies and wealthy
most under the age o 35, grouped into 96 amilies, individuals do not pay their air share o taxes is
all living in poverty. outrageous. I wonder how it is acceptable that the
poorest people in El Salvador have to pay VAT, i
Families in the community mainly eat ruits and then large national and international companies do
vegetables, with occasional meat and dairy products. not pay taxes. The government has to require large
Food consumption is severely limited due to companies to pay their taxes, and with that money,
unemployment, problems to access markets, lack o it needs to create programmes to support rural single
land security and insucient credit. mothers, old people, and communities throughaccess to land, decent jobs, and seeds and ertilisers
Rosa Denis Aguilar, a 46-year-old woman, describes to grow our own ood.
the precarious living conditions aced by amilies in
-
7/30/2019 Who Pays the Price Hunger the Hidden Cost of Tax Injustice May 2013
24/52
22 Who pays The price?
The government o El Salvador is currently implementing
a ve-year development programme, with a total budget
o US$4.8bn (3bn), or an average o US$975m (620m)
per year. This plan ocuses mainly on improving access
and quality o essential services, while only 4 per cent
o the budget (US$40.6m/25.8bn) is directly devoted to
promoting agricultural production.82
Christian Aids partner FESPAD (Foundation or the Study
and Application o Law) considers that the government
should urgently upscale the plan to a total investment
o US$1.4bn (0.9bn) per annum. Some o the priorities,
as identied by FESPAD, should include the increase in
the level o credit available, the expansion o the national
production area, the growth o storage capacity, the
investment in agricultural research, the improvement o
irrigation systems and the promotion o womens access
to credit and land.
Investing to develop agriculture in rural areas would not
only raise national production, but also have an important
domino eect on other sectors o the economy, such astrade, banking services and construction, thus helping to
reduce hunger and poverty in El Salvador.
hw t l t tkl Two consecutive waves o scal reorms have been
adopted by the government o El Salvador in the past
ew years.
In 2009, new legislation was passed to counter transer
mispricing, and the capacity o the revenue service was
increased. A second wave o reorm took place in 2011
and brought signicant changes in relation to direct taxes.
Some 82,000 taxpayers with income below US$503
(320) per month were exempted rom paying taxes,
while the tax rate on income above US$6,200 (3,943)
per month was raised rom 25 per cent to 30 per cent.
On corporate income tax, the tax rate on income above
US$150,000 (95,400) was increased by 5 per cent, and
a tax rate o 1 per cent was created or businesses that
continued trading despite having declared losses or
two consecutive years. A tax rate o 5 per cent was also
introduced on dividends.
Although these are positive measures, the tax burdenas percentage o GDP in El Salvador is still below 16 per
cent, compared to the regional average at 18.3 per cent.83
In addition, the tax system continues to be highly
regressive, which partly explains the high level o
inequality. Compared to OECD economies, indirect
taxes in El Salvador provide a higher share o revenues
than direct taxes.
Within direct tax revenues, companies contribute 40
per cent more than individuals. Within individual tax
revenues, taxes on labour represent 57 per cent o the
total,84 which suggests that the tax burden in El Salvador
is disproportionately placed on ordinary people.
El Salvador also aces a very signicant challenge in
relation to tax evasion and generous tax incentives.
The government estimates tax evasion, oten in the
orm o transer mispricing, costs El Salvador as much
as US$1.7bn (1.1bn) a year, which is twice the 2012
scal decit.85
According to a report published by the Economic
Commission or Latin America and the Caribbean
(ECLAC), the overall income tax gap in El Salvador in2005 was estimated as 45.3 per cent o the tax income
revenue, equivalent to 3.1 per cent o GDP.86
O this, the tax gap or corporate income tax was
estimated as 51 per cent o the corporate tax revenue
and equivalent to 2.1 per cent o GDP, while the tax gap
or personal income tax was estimated as 36.3 per cent
o the revenue and equivalent to 1 per cent o the GDP.
As or tax incentives, a recent report by the scal
committee o the legislative assembly indicated that
there were 26 dierent laws in El Salvador that enabled
corporations to avoid taxes legally, oten through the
granting o incentives.87
The same report stated that the value o these
exemptions could have been as high as US$9.3bn (6bn)
between 2001 and 2009. For 2011, the commission
estimated a loss o US$1.2bn (0.76bn). The tax
incentives oered in special economic zones cost
US$206.5m (131.3m), a gure that represents 0.9 per
cent o GDP.
This implies that tax evasion and tax incentives together
are costing El Salvador more than US$2.9bn (1.84bn)every year. Taking action to collect 50 per cent o this
amount would provide much needed resources to
eradicate hunger in the country.
-
7/30/2019 Who Pays the Price Hunger the Hidden Cost of Tax Injustice May 2013
25/52
hunger: The hidden cosT of Tax injusTice 23
Table 14: How the government could increase tax revenue and combat hunger
Area o intervention Policies to be adopted
Tax evasion Strengthen legislation and the tax administrations capacity to ght tax
evasion, with a special ocus on tackling transer mispricing.
Tax incentives Review the current policies on tax incentives and other tax avoidance
provisions, and limit the granting o tax incentives to those cases
where they are really eective and benets are higher than the
associated losses.
Corporate income tax Introduce a more progressive corporate income tax system, where
those corporations that obtain higher prots contribute relatively more
to the exchequer.
Personal income tax Apply the minimum tax rates on income above US$800 (508) per
month, rather than the current US$503 (320). For single mothers, this
could go up to US$1,000 (636) per month. With this measure, it is
estimated that the government may lose US$35m (22.3m) per year,
but it would promote consumption and reduce inequality.
VAT Introduce a new 35 per cent tax on luxury items.
Property tax Introduce a new tax on property, with lower tax rates in rural areas.
Tax revenues rom property taxes could be transerred to municipalities
at local level.
Compiled by Christian Aids partner FESPAD.
ChristianAid/SusanBarry
This community lostits entire shrimpharvest due to theextreme oodingacross El Salvador
in October 2011caused by TropicalDepression 12E. Withno unds availableto help them rebuildtheir livelihoods,people had to repairthe damage and buynew shrimp larvaethemselves beorethey could startharvesting again
-
7/30/2019 Who Pays the Price Hunger the Hidden Cost of Tax Injustice May 2013
26/52
24 Who pays The price?
Population 25 million
Gross national income (GNI) per capita US$1,584 (1,007)
Position in Human Development Index (2011) 135
Income GINI coecient 42.8
Average income 20% richest over 20% poorest ratio 9.3
Population living on less than US$1.25 (0.80) a day 30%
Source: UNDP, Human Development Report 2011.
Table 16: The goal to eradicate hunger in Ghana
Ghana 1990-1992 2004-2006 2010-2012 2015 target
(reduce by 50%)
Achievement in 2012
Number o people
undernourished
6 2 1 3 Goal achieved as o
2012.
(millions)
Proportion o peopleundernourished
40.5% 9.5% 5% 20.25% Goal achieved as o2012.
Source: FAO, The State o Food Insecurity in the World, 2012.
Table 17: Child undernourishment in Ghana Table 18: Ghana in the Global Hunger Index 2012
Percentage o children who are stunted 28.6% 1990 1996 2001 2012
Percentage o children who are
underweight
14.3% Global Hunger 21.4 16.3 12.8
Index
8.9
Mortality (per 1,000 births) 69 Source: IFPRI, Global Hunger Index 2012.
Source: UNDP, Human Development Report 2011.
Ghana, a middle-income country since 2010, is widely
hailed as a positive development story. Clear policies,
together with a government commitment to support
and und them, have contributed to a signicant
decline in poverty and hunger, making it one o the very
ew countries in sub-Saharan Arica that could halve
poverty and hunger by 2015. Progress, however, has
been accompanied by increasing inequalities in the
living conditions o the Ghanaian people.
Agriculture is estimated to be the primary source o
livelihood or about 41.3 per cent o Ghanaians,88 withabout 80 per cent o total agricultural production in the
hands o smallholder armers.89 Yet smallholder arming
households, and in particular ood-crop armers more
than 50 per cent o whom are women are poorer
and more ood insecure than other groups in Ghana,
with about hal o them alling below the poverty line.
Today, around a third o the population lives on less than
US$1.25 (0.80) a day, more than 1.25 million people are
undernourished, and more than one child in every ve
is stunted.
The three northern regions in particular have suered
rom lack o targeted policies or, and limited investment
in, economic development. Fity-our per cent o the
extreme poor live in the Northern region alone, which is
home to only 17.2 per cent o Ghanas total population.
The Upper West, Upper East and Northern regionstogether make up 70 per cent o the countrys poor.90
These regions have unpredictable rainall patterns and
only one harvest each year in contrast with two in the
south. They also ace periodic drought and sometimes
gTable 15: Poverty and inequality in Ghana
-
7/30/2019 Who Pays the Price Hunger the Hidden Cost of Tax Injustice May 2013
27/52
hunger: The hidden cosT of Tax injusTice 25
foods, both o which are increasing in requency because
o climate change.91These climatic conditions, combined
with a series o challenges in the agriculture sector, create
an alarming situation that calls or urgent action. Most
people living in north Ghana do not have access to ood
or between three and six months a year.92 Families resort
to ood rationing in the long, lean season, and cut back to
two meals a day instead o three. In some cases, parents
go without to enable their children to eat, and livestock
and personal valuables are sometimes sold in order to
purchase ood, making the owners more vulnerable the
ollowing year as they have ewer assets to all back on.93
It is estimated that about 40 per cent o under-ve
mortality in Ghana is linked to malnutrition.94 According to
the World Food Programme, in 2007 chronic malnutrition
among children ranged rom 34 per cent to 48 per cent in
the Northern Region, and acute malnutrition rom 8 per
cent to 12 per cent in the Upper West and Upper East
Regions. In a bid to increase crop yields, many children
are taken out o school to work on their parents arms.
Central to the attainment o the vision o sustainable
long-term agricultural development is the need to
commit the requisite nancial resources to und the
sector, with special attention to irrigation, research and
technology, storage acilities and credit. A Medium Term
Agriculture Sector Investment Plan (METASIP) has been
developed to achieve an agricultural GDP growth rate
o at least 6 per cent annually, based on the Maputo
Declarations commitment to allocate at least 10 per
cent o government expenditure in agriculture.95
According to the nancial and investment plan contained
in the METASIP, it will cost the government o Ghana a
total o US$766m96 (487m) to achieve the objectives
o the sector or the period. O this amount, the
governments total unding contribution is 32 per cent.
Adopting policies to increase tax revenues could bridge
the unding gap o US$518.45m (329.7m).
e v l t t l mmGhana is the rst country in Arica to have adopted a
tailored national plan to promote a ree school eeding
programme, ollowing the recommendations o
the United Nations Millennium Projects Task Forceon Hunger and the New Partnership or Aricas
Development (NEPAD).
The programme started as a pilot in 2005 and has since
been expanded to target more than 1 million school
pupils rom deprived communities. The programme
aims at providing one hot and nutritious meal or each
child every day.
The programme targeted the eeding o 1,040,000
pupils by the end o the rst phase (2007-2010), but
it was only able to reach about 67 per cent o pupils
targeted.97 An additional US$ 34.5m (22m) would have
been required annually to meet the initial goal.98
In 2012, the programme was expected to reach 1,500,000
pupils with a unding requirement o about US$112m
(71.2m) to meet the target. However, the government
was only able to cover 38 per cent and the remaining 62
per cent had to come rom external donors.99
Currently, the programme covers just about 22 per cent o
all primary and kindergarten pupils across the country.100
Some donors have recently stopped their contributions, so
the eectiveness and sustainability o this programme is
largely dependent on a viable source o revenue.
ChristianAid/AntoinettePowell
Children at Gbanyamni primary school enjoy their schoollunch provided through Ghanas ree school eedingprogramme. Ensuring that Ghanas government can collectthe taxes it is owed will ensure more unds are available orthe programme to reach more schools
-
7/30/2019 Who Pays the Price Hunger the Hidden Cost of Tax Injustice May 2013
28/52
26 Who pays The price?
Fuel or learning
When I eat, I get energy, says Fuseini. I eel better
in class ater Ive eaten. I there wasnt ood or us at
school, it wouldnt be good or us.
ell
wo
But many children are yet to benet because thePet eeding programme does not run in their local
oine
t
school or because their parents rely on their help or
istianAid/Ant
arming. This is the case o Sulemana Alhassan, who
journeys several kilometres to his amilys eld to
work under the blazing sun. He is just 13.Chr
Sulemana would much rather be at school, but
Fuseini Fatmata didnt start school until she was nine without advice and support rom government on
years old. Now age 12, shes determined to do well, how to grow more without the need or extra labour,
but with money tight at home, breakast is never his ather says he needs Sulemanas help. I I dont
guaranteed. come to help my ather, where will they get enough
ood? asks Sulemana.
On the days she misses it, Fuseini struggles to
concentrate in class. Sulemana doesnt enjoy working on the arm andwould much rather be at school. When I am at the
Fuseini explains: Sometimes in the morning my arm I dont have a chance to talk to anybody and I
mother prepares rice and we eat it beore coming become tired. Sometimes I nd when I get home
to school. [Sometimes] we dont get anything. My there is nothing to eat. My whole body gets weak
stomach will be boiling when we dont eat and its and I will oten go to sleep early.
like a sickness to me. I eel dizzy and eel some
stomach pains and my mind is not on what they are I want to be in school because I want to be a teacher
teaching us in the class. in the uture. The reason I want to be a teacher is
they are normally paid at the end o each month. [I]
For pupils like Fuseini, Ghanas school eeding I got a salary at the end o each month, I could use it
programme means they get at least one nutritious to help my brothers and sister.
meal a day and can make the most o their lessons.
p m tw t t tkl A series o reorms in the 1980s to the Ghanaian tax
system contributed to improving overall tax collection in
Ghana, while making the system airer. As a result, tax
revenues today, as a percentage o GDP, are well above
the average in sub-Saharan Arica.
Direct taxes in Ghana are mainly individual income and
corporate taxes. Other types o taxes in the direct-taxcategory include capital gains, property and rent taxes,
which contribute marginally to the tax revenue due to
inadequate enorcement o these laws.
The tax burden on low-income earners has been
lessened through the abolition o tax on the minimum
wage and the introduction o a lower rate or those with
incomes only marginally above the minimum wage. This
is to ensure that disposable income or household basic
consumption stays above the minimum wage.
The corporate tax rate was reduced rom 32.5 per cent
in 2001 to 25 per cent in 2006. However, to increase tax
revenue, the mining sector corporate income tax ratewas increased to 35 per cent in 2012.
The contribution o direct taxes to total tax revenue has
been increasing since 2001, rising rom 24.61 per cent in
2001 to 32.84 per cent in 2005, and 34 per cent in 2009.
-
7/30/2019 Who Pays the Price Hunger the Hidden Cost of Tax Injustice May 2013
29/52
hunger: The hidden cosT of Tax injusTice 27
However, while the share o personal income taxes to
total direct tax revenue is increasing, that o corporate
tax ell rom 47 per cent in 2005 to 40 per cent in 2009.
Indirect taxes continue to be a major source o tax
revenue, accounting by the third quarter o 2011 or
about 33 per cent o total tax revenue.101 Some provision
has been made to reduce the burden on the poor, with a
range o basic consumption items exempted rom VAT.
During the 2008 ood crisis, the government removed
the 20 per cent import duty on rice and other basic ood
to keep prices down.102
In the same year, a communication service tax was
introduced to help und the national youth employment
programme (NYEP) and a 6 per cent charge is now
levied on all communications and related services
(such as internet and data services).103 As o June
2012, a total o 457,779 young people who would have
been vulnerable to poverty have been engaged in the
programme.104
Ghana passed a new transer pricing regulation
in 2012 and has since trained a team to oversee
its implementation. It has also signed the Mutual
Administrative Assistance in Tax Matters, a convention
that acilitates the sharing o inormation between the
tax authorities o signatory nations.105
s
cll mDespite Ghanas progress in improving tax revenues and
making the system airer, a number o challenges remain.
Coordination among the revenue collection agencies
has been a major challenge to building an ecient tax
system. This has been exacerbated by the absence o
proper mechanisms to share tax inormation among the
Ghanaian institutions concerned. While the government
has undertaken some important initiatives, such as
the creation o an integrated Ghana Revenue Authority
(GRA) in 2009 and the establishment o the Tax Policy
Unit to strengthen the capacity in the pursuit o
accountable, transparent and sustainable tax policies,
law and reorm and capacity building is still needed.
Increasing taxes rom the inormal sector, in which 80per cent o the working population is engaged, is a major
challenge because there are ew records o accounts,
many people earn very little income, and workers are
oten invisible to the authorities.106
Recently, new measures have been introduced including
a tax on public transport operators and a tax stamp or
small traders, but these bring in relatively little revenue.107
Christian Aid partners in Ghana have been working
with emale small traders who pay taxes and demand
accountability rom the government on that basis.
Generous tax incentives oered to oreign investors are
also a problem. Although corporate taxes in the mining
sector have been increased, along with a windall prot
tax o 10 per cent, exemptions seriously undermine the
potential revenue gains.108
The IMF estimated that tax exemptions amounted
to about 1.6 per cent and 0.9 per cent o GDP in 2009
and 2008 respectively,109 while the Ministry o Finance
and Economic Planning indicate Ghana may be losing
US$700m (445m) per annum rom VAT and import
exemptions. Christian Aid partner Ghana Integrity
Initiative (GII) has been campaigning or a tax-incentive
ramework that is transparent, accountable and well
targeted.
Ghanas revenues are also being undermined by
corporations not paying their due royalties. Research110
undertaken by Christian Aid and other development
agencies in 2007 revealed that mining companies have
never paid royalties above 3 per cent, despite the higher
rates on a sliding scale stipulated in the Minerals and
Mining Act. These lower royalties led to lost revenue o
US$68m (43.2m) a year between 1990 and 2007.
Finally, transer pricing abuse needs to be tackled.
Analysis o the mining sector suggests that some
US$36m (22.9m) is lost through transer mispricing
each year.111 In addition, Christian Aid research has
showed that the average amount o tax loss to Ghana
in trade relations with the EU between 2005 and 2007
through trade mispricing was between 30.7m-51.4m
(US$41.1m-US$68.9m/26.2m-43.8m) each year.112
In 2008, the country lost 62.4m (US$83.6m/53.2m)
because o trade mispricing, which accounted or about
3.4 per cent o total tax revenue in the same period.113
The challenges described seriously undermine the
capacity to raise tax revenues and address ood
insecurity and poverty in Ghana.
-
7/30/2019 Who Pays the Price Hunger the Hidden Cost of Tax Injustice May 2013
30/52
4. secret links:hoW companies
can use tax havensto dodge taxes
ChristianAid/RachelBaird
Mopani Copper Mine in Muulira, Zambia. The mine is largelyowned by a subsidiary o FTSE100 giant Glencore. It has beenaccused o dodging tax in Zambia, an allegation it denies. Inaddition, it causes signifcant local environmental damage sulphur dioxide air pollution and soil pollution so bad that mostplants will not grow and, local people suspect, chronic pollution othe water they drink. Christian Aid partner the Centre or Tradeand Policy Development is supporting a local campaign group todemand improvements to the Kankoyo environment
-
7/30/2019 Who Pays the Price Hunger the Hidden Cost of Tax Injustice May 2013
31/52
hunger: The hidden cosT of Tax injusTice 29
New research by Christian Aid into the fnancial and
ownership data o MNCs operating in India, El Salvador
and Ghana strongly suggests that corporations with links
to tax havens are not paying their air share o tax.
o t mtllOur research was to establish whether MNCs with
subsidiaries in tax havens114 pay less in taxes than
corporations without such links, based on the hypothesis
that, because tax havens oer secrecy and nil or low tax
rates, enterprises using their services have greater incentives
and opportunities to dodge taxes than those that dont.
To test this, we analysed three dierent indicators:
pre-tax prots reported per unit o asset, as a proxy
or the corporates tax base115
taxes paid per unit o asset
taxes paid per unit o pre-tax prot, as a proxy orthe average eective tax rate.
The concrete research goal was to test i MNCs with
connections to tax havens report lower pre-tax prots per
unit o asset and pay less in taxes per unit o asset and
unit o prot than other multinational corporations. The
level o revenue was not used as a variable in our research
because revenue itsel is oten aected by prot-shiting
strategies, so the preerence was to use assets instead.
In order to carry out our research, we obtained access to
Orbis,116 a commercial database containing consolidated
and unconsolidated nancial and accounting data, as
well as inormation on shareholders and subsidiaries o
around 108 million national and multinational companies.
Data in Orbis is derived rom ocial balance sheets, prot
and loss accounts, and nancial statements notes, and is
complemented with news, market research, inormation
rom ocial bodies (or example, stock exchanges) and
private correspondence. The producer o the data has
also developed a uniorm ormat that is applied to each
entity analysed in order to address comparison issues. In
our own research, we used the data available in Orbis or
India, Ghana and El Salvador to produce both descriptive
and regressive statistical analyses.
However, two considerations need to be taken into
account. First, data available or all the required variables
or El Salvador and Ghana was limited to a relatively small
number o corporations, so the aggregated results, and
thereore conclusions, are to a very large extent driven by
India, or which data in Orbis is much more abundant.
This limitation also implies that only descriptive
statistical analysis was applied to Ghana and El
Salvador, as regression models require a higher sample
o observations than are available in Orbis or thesetwo countries.
Secondly, because the data used in our analysis
belonged to MNCs o dierent sizes and operating in
dierent sectors with heterogeneous characteristics,
eg dierent average protability ratios, we took the
precaution o controlling or these dierences in our
regression model. In other words, we wanted to make
sure that dierences ound were really attributable to the
use o tax havens, and not to other variables such as the
size o the MNC or the sector where it operates.
Table 19 shows the results obtained in our research
when we analysed data rom those MNCs with asset
values o at least US$10m (6.36m).
Table 19: Aggregated results or MNCs with asset values o more than US$10m (6.36m)
MNCs with no tax MNCs with tax haven links Dierences observed: how much
haven links less profts reported and less
Indicator Numbero MNCsin sample
Resultsobtained or oursample o MNCs
Numbero MNCsin sample
Resultsobtained or oursample o MNCs
paid in taxes per unit o asset and
unit o proft respectively when
the MNC has links to tax havens
Prots reported per
100 units o assets
770 6.9 727 6.6 4.3%
Taxes paid per 100
units o assets
681 2.3 668 2 13%
Taxes paid per
100 units o prots
680 24.2 667 17.2 28.9%
Source: table uses data rom Orbis 2010.
-
7/30/2019 Who Pays the Price Hunger the Hidden Cost of Tax Injustice May 2013
32/52
30 Who pays The price?
As table 19 indicates, MNCs with connections to tax Tables 20, 21 and 22 show the results we obtained or
havens reported in 2010, on average, 4.3 per cent less each specic ratio and country on the basis o the data
prots per unit o asset; paid 13 per cent less taxes per available or all MNCs operating there, regardless o thei
unit o asset; and 28.9 per cent less taxes per unit o size. As stated above, only the sample or India is large
prot than MNCs with no links to tax havens. These enough to draw statistically meaningul conclusions.
results strongly suggest that MNCs with links to tax However, the descriptive results obtained or Ghana
havens use income-prot-shiting strategies to reduce and El Salvador, based on a much lower number o
their tax bills. corporations,117 may suggest that prot shiting could
actually be a more serious problem in those countries
with less administrative capacity to tackle tax dodging,
so urther research should be undertaken.
r
Table 20: Profts declared per 100 units o assets
MNCs with no
tax haven links
Country Number Profts
MNCs with tax
haven links
Number Profts
How much less profts reported
per unit o asset when the MNC
has a tax haven link
India 787 6.6 738 6.5 1.5%
Ghana 25 4.8 3 3 37.5%
El Salvador 15 15.9 16 4.8 69.8%
Source: table uses data rom Orbis 2010.
Table 21: Taxes paid per 100 units o assets
MNCs with no
tax haven links
Country Number Taxes paid
MNCs with tax
haven links
Number
How much less paid in taxes per
unit o asset when the MNC has
a tax haven linkTaxes paid
India 722 2.3 685 1.9 17.4%
Ghana 6 3.1 2 0.9 71.0%
El Salvador 4 0.7 5 0.2 71.4%
Source: table uses data rom Orbis 2010.
Table 22: Taxes paid per 100 units o proft
MNCs with no MNCs with tax
tax haven links haven links
Country Number Taxes paid Number
Taxes paid
How much less paid in taxes per
unit o proft when the MNC has
a tax haven link
India 714 24.1 683 16.8 30.3%
Ghana 6 17.1 2 8.6 49.7%
El Salvador 3 22 5 8 63.6%
Source: table uses data rom Orbis 2010.
-
7/30/2019 Who Pays the Price Hunger the Hidden Cost of Tax Injustice May 2013
33/52
hunger: The hidden cosT of Tax injusTice 31
As indicated in table 22, MNCs operating in India (4.8bn) would have been raised. However, we are not
with connections to tax havens are ound to pay, on suggesting that the dierence in the eective tax rates
average, 30.3 per cent less in taxes per unit o prot is entirely explained by prot shiting; other actors, such
than those MNCs with no tax haven links. Considering as the impact o tax incentives, could have an infuence
that all MNCs with tax havens links in our sample made as well. In any case, the eective rate estimated in our
total prots o US$104bn (66.1bn) in 2010, had they research is signicantly lower than the Indian corporate
paid the same eective tax rate as MNCs that do not income tax rate (33 per cent).
use tax havens, additional tax revenue oUS$7.5 bn
Table 23: Additional tax could be obtained i MNCs with tax-haven links paid the same tax rate as other
MNCs
Profts declared Eective tax rate Eective tax rate Eective tax rate Tax revenue that
by MNCs in our or MNCs with no or MNCs with tax dierence could have been
sample with tax tax haven links haven links lost due to proft
haven links shiting by MNCs
with tax haven
links
104,000,000,000 24.1 16.8 7.3 7,592,000,000
Source: research results based on our own estimation, using data rom Orbis 2010.
The results obtained in the descriptive analysis are where MNCs can exploit the existing legal loopholessupported by those obtained in the regression model, and secrecy provisions to avoid paying their air share
as shown in appendix 1. Our regression results remain o tax.
valid when we control or both sector heterogeneity118
and company size. All the dierent specications in the While the separate legal entities that orm a multinational
regression analysis show consistent results and indicate corporation are treated rom a tax perspective as i they
that MNCs with links to tax havens report ewer prots were independent companies, the truth is that they all
and pay less in taxes per unit o asset and prot. In the ollow an overall business strategy. Today, management
regression analysis, our results are particularly strong lines clearly go beyond national boundaries.
(statistically signicant) when the variable taxes paid per
unit o asset is analysed. In its report, the OECD identies prot shiting as a
undamental cause o tax dodging. Similarly, the OECD
Christian Aids research strongly suggests that acknowledges the increased segregation between
multinationals oten use tax havens to shit prots the location where actual business activities and
rom higher to lower tax jurisdictions. In many cases, investment take place and the location where prots
these tax haven subsidiaries lack economic substance are reported or tax purposes. In other words, MNCs
(eg there are no manuacturing processes or products are transerring mobile activities to where they benet
sold in the tax havens market), which implies that they rom a avourable tax treatment.
could exist or the only purpose o avoiding and evading
taxes. Our ndi