Parallel event on Financing Social Protection at the margins of the Third Session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee on the United Nations Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation

Okay, I think we should get started.

I hope you had a chance to enjoy the lunch that was provided outside, and if there is anything left, you can have it after the event, but now we should get started. I will abuse my moderator role and I will provide a very short introduction before our opening remarks.

Excellencies, distinguished guests, esteemed colleagues, I welcome you to this important parallel event on financing social protection. This event is an UNDESA-approved official parallel event organized at the margins of the third session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee of the United Nations Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation. My name is Umberto Cattaneo, and I'm honored to be moderating the distinguished panel today. in my capacity as Public Finance Specialist of the Universal Social Protection Department of the International Labour Organization. Today's event focuses on how we can ensure that social protection is effectively integrated into the negotiation of the UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation. This negotiation offers a unique opportunity to recognize social protection as a cornerstone of sustainable development and to strengthen international cooperation so that all workers and employers contribute to social security schemes in line with ILO standards. Before we turn to our distinguished panel, allow me to briefly introduce why social protection has become such a central topic in global policy discussion. You might remember that back in 2015, the Addis Ababa Action Agenda mentioned social protection only twice, and only in the preamble section. In contrast, the Compromiso de Sevilla refers to social protection five times, four of which appear directly in the action areas. Similarly, Those that are older might remember that in 1994, the Copenhagen Declaration made just three references to social protection, whereas the political declaration of the second World Social Summit, which was adopted last week in Doha, includes 24 references to social protection. Clearly, global interest in social protection is on the rise, and this is no coincidence. Extending social protection is essential for eradicating poverty, reducing inequalities, formalizing employment and enterprises, facilitating a just transition to a green economy, and promoting gender equality. Moreover, investing in social protection pays off. economically, because an ILO study showed that every dollar invested in social protection can increase GDP by, on average, 1.8 dollars after two and a half years. This means that social protection is not a cost, it is an investment that creates a virtuous cycle of increasing growth and increases tax revenues. Yet, despite these benefits, today, only 52% of the global population is covered by at least one social protection benefit, with 35% of the population covered by contributory benefits and 17% covered by non-contributory benefits, largely financed by taxes. ILO estimations show that the annual average financing gap to achieve a universal social protection floor in developing countries is 3.3% of GDP annually, or 1.4 trillion US dollar in absolute terms. This is the amount of money that is needed to ensure that everyone is covered by at least one social protection benefit. Taxes and social security contribution are the main strategies to close this financing gap and to lift people out of poverty.

However, as the world of work

continues to evolve and globalize, certain categories of remote workers, especially those who can work and live in countries other than the countries of their employment, still face significant challenges in affiliating to social insurance and paying taxes. It is our hope that the outcome of the UN Framework Convention on International Tax Will underscore the importance of social protection, both as a pillar of sustainable development and as a mechanism through which workers and employers can pay taxes and contribute to social security systems in line with ILO standards. Okay, so I have just made some remarks to set the scene, and now we will turn to our opening remarks. Unfortunately, due to unforeseen circumstances, His Excellency Rami Mohammad Youssef, Chair of the International Negotiating Committee, is not able to participate today and send his excuses, but we are truly delighted to have Her Excellency Giselle Fernandez Ludlow, Ambassador of Mexico to Kenya and Permanent Representative to the United Nations. Before giving you the floor, allow me to recall for all our distinguished guests that Mexico has recently made significant progress in extending social protection coverage, achieving a growth rate of social protection effective coverage of four percentage points per year, which is double the requirement of the Compromiso de Sevilla, which stands at two percentage points. allow me to thank Mexico for the continued strong engagement and constructive collaboration with the ILO on financing social protection.

Excellency, we are honored to have you with us and to deliver the opening remarks.

The floor is yours.

Thank you very much, Humberto, distinguished colleagues, and also distinguished speakers of this panel. Thank you very much for the invitation extended to Mexico to participate on this side event on financing social protection. Of course, it is a timely discussion to have now on the margins of the Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation. And as ILO mentioned, we are really proud that Mexico has made significant progress in social protection coverage. Let me share with you some ideas of what Mexico has done to achieve this increasing by more than two percentage points per year, the share of the population that is covered by at least one social benefit. The starting point is the view, is a humanist view. This humanist view is promoted by our president, Claudia Sheinbaum, in terms of policy to increase access on one hand, and on the other hand, the legal framework required to expand social protection. So that is the starting point of what we have done. This vision, of course, brings economic security and also well-being for the Mexicans that have social protection. What is the challenge? The challenge that we face is, as many economies, and I'm pretty sure this will resonate with other countries, many economies depend on formal employment to benefit from social protection. That is a challenge in Mexico. So in order to avoid leaving many Mexicans excluded, we are providing benefits directly to the population. Rather than trying them to formal employment, has been helping to close this gap and expand access to essential services. So this approach of giving directly the benefits has been a good response in our case. And other element that I want to share with you is the profound fiscal reforms that President Sheinbaum has undertaken in Mexico. On one hand, we want to expand the tax base, and then, of course, this needs to be done without having new taxes. So how do we expand the tax base? We have expanded the tax base, allowing for, thanks to the modernization of the tax administration system. Through technological modernization of the tax administration services, we have strengthened audits, improved tax intelligence, and digitalized administrative processes. This new simplified regime for small and medium-sized enterprises was promoted to reduce informality and incentivize their formalization. So that is one aspect of how modernization and allowing for simpler possibility for enterprises to benefit, to make their employees benefit from social protection, has been an advantage. As a reflection of those efforts, In the increase of annual tax compliance, we have managed to increase it by 7% in the past years, which is considerable for a country such as Mexico. Another aspect that I want to share with you, we have working closely with ILO on an active collaboration in the promotion of decent work, of course, social protection, and labor inclusion. As a member of the ILO, Mexico has participated in the adoption of key conventions on labor rights and the financing of social protection. So this legal framework is also reflected and is linked to social protection with inclusion and with gender equality perspective. The fact that it's not only on the law, but also on policies Mexico has gathered gender-based evidence on social protection coverage, and we have identified that social protection coverage is higher among women. And the reason for that is because primarily, due to their greater affiliation with healthcare services, women are more interested in being affiliated to social protection services. Studies indicate that women have more frequent contact with the healthcare system. And in the case of one of our policies, named Seguro Popular, which is a healthcare insurance program, women represent more than half of the beneficiary population and have therefore access, of course, to the health aspect, but also to financial services. This is challenging, again, because we want to make sure women and also rural population or vulnerable populations are also included. and we can combine social protection and access to microinsurance and strengthening the economic resilience of these vulnerable groups. Maybe just to identify four key dimensions of risks that Mexico is taking into consideration when promoting financing on social protection. One key dimension is access to healthcare. The second one is employment. The third one is orphanhood, disability, and old age. And fourth is low income. As you can identify, these are the challenges of economic security against life events. These life events that are often seen, such as illness, disability, death, unemployment, aging, are also considering limitations for households. And these limitations are challenging when Mexicans are not generating sufficient income to afford a basic food basket, and that's something we are looking to avoid by providing social protection, to be prepared in case one of these economic security life events happens. Maybe just to conclude my remarks, I will also highlight that it is important to recognize these spaces that do not count with the, we need to make sure that all countries are considered in the discussions that we are undertaking. Especially in the framework convention, we believe that for Mexico, it is a complementary opportunity that can amplify legitimacy and representativeness of the international fiscal system. To finalize, I will say that the commitment to social justice is also a commitment to have an inclusive cooperation system where countries can cooperate globally in the economic financial system as well. I will finish with that, Mr. Moderator, and looking forward to listen to my other distinguished colleagues. Thanks.

Thank you so much, Ambassador, for these inspiring opening remarks. I was pleased to hear that Mexico welcomes this debate and welcomes also social protection in this debate, and also that you made really many interventions in there of social protection that should lead by example for other countries. I would like now to turn to our discussants, and let me start by introducing our expert, Tove Maria Riding.

She's a policy and advocacy manager for tax justice at the European Network on Debt and Development, Eurodebt. She is our expert on tax and transparency, and one of the two elected representatives for Tax Justice Europe.

In the coordinating committee of the Global Alliance for Tax Justice.

Tove, I will turn to your question. Given your long-standing experience, where do you see social protection within the United Nations Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation?

And why do these negotiations represent a unique opportunity to strengthen the link between?

Tax justice and social protection systems globally? Over to you, Tove.

Thank you so much, and first, warm thanks to ILO for being here and for helping us raise this important aspect. Indeed, we are a very big group of civil society organizations. I am one out of many experts. And one of the things you'll see in the civil society group is that what we call hardcore tax people are now engaging very strongly with colleagues on social issues, human rights, environmental protection, feminism. We have such a broad coalition coming together. You'll see us in the back seats. It's a very, very big group, and we are here because, as you say, this is a unique opportunity that we cannot afford to miss. We are delighted that we are here negotiating international tax cooperation in a legally binding agreement at the United Nations. We have been calling for this for a very long time. It's really historic, but we cannot say that it is the first time ever, because when the UN was founded, and even before then at the League of Nations, tax was being discussed. And we here in the room, it's not untrue that tax is an issue of national sovereignty. So why was it one of the first topics that got picked up in international cooperation? Well, that is because as soon as money and people started moving across borders, as soon as we had companies in more than one country, suddenly the tax systems started clashing. It became very confusing who should pay tax where and how. and some actors could hide money in other countries. 100 years later, we're still trying to solve this issue, and at least now it's a good thing that we're getting to work on it. So that's one of the missions that we're on, but we're also here to talk about why we tax, because we do not collect taxes just for the sport of it. And this is where the issue of social protection comes in. Tax has a purpose. And this is also why we have all the colleagues from the broad coalitions on environment and social issues coming here to remind governments that there are other commitments that need to be fulfilled. We have right now a negotiation going on in Belem, where they're looking at a commitment to try and solve the climate crisis. This is one out of many examples of UN negotiations. We also have, as was mentioned, we have a recent outcome document from Sevilla, where it's very clear that the social protection systems, including floors, is something that the governments that are negotiating, they are committed to this. We have international human rights obligations, we have sustainable development goals, we have so many commitments that have been made here at the United Nations. And I dare say they all have one thing in common, one gigantic problem, and that is the issue of where should the money come from? If you followed any of these UN negotiations, you will see that the thing that keeps negotiators up 3:00 AM in the morning is the question of where's the money. What tax people know is that there is no lack of money in the world. We have not run out of money. What we are looking at is an international tax system that has failed, and this is causing the national tax systems to fail. So what we came with as a proposal for the UN Tax Convention is to say, this tax convention needs to fix the tax system. It needs to bring back progressivity and effectiveness in the tax system. But it also should be linked to all the other things that the governments have committed to in this institution. A UN convention should not micromanage national budgets or anything like that, but the UN is the place where governments must live up to the commitments they have already made under the UN framework. We were extremely happy last year when the terms of reference made it clear that what we are doing here is an international tax system for sustainable development. This was the mission that we wanted to see. This is the job that we have all been given by the UN General Assembly. And what this is saying is we need to build an international tax system that works, and we need to make sure it's linked to sustainable development. Now to how's it going, and this will be my last point. It was a bit of a tough day yesterday, wasn't it? We were looking at the negotiations and thinking, has everyone forgotten while we're here? Again, the job was international tax system and sustainable development. We are failing on both. We've been given a template, it's called the template negotiating text, because it's largely empty. What's missing from it is things like international mechanisms, the kind of things you normally use a framework convention to build up, is a system of cooperation, mechanisms for delivering the solutions, and clear government commitments, coordinated approaches to solving the problems. That's not what we have in the negotiating text. So right now, we don't have an international tax system in the negotiating text. The other thing we don't have is sustainable development. If you look at the articles, Article 9 on sustainable development is the worst example of how much this negotiating text is not doing the job. It's simply copy-pasted from the terms of reference. It's the same paragraph. If your boss gives you a terms of reference to write a report, and you do that report by copying the terms of reference and sending back to your boss, the boss is going to say you haven't done anything. This is the problem going on in the room right now, is that on sustainable development, there's nothing there. And going back to the objective, if we don't start building the Article 9 that can deliver on the objective of creating an international tax system for sustainable development, then we have not done the job. The good news is we're only getting started and we can still fix this. We were happy to see today, we saw the Africa group start off by saying we need public country-by-country reporting. Now we're talking. Now we're seeing groups of member states bring concrete proposals to the table. This is what we need to see. We still need to have a more in-depth discussion about what is the framework convention, because there is a misunderstanding sometimes that framework conventions don't have any content. Don't take our word for it. If you want, you can call the government colleagues in Belém and ask them what a framework convention looks like. They're sitting with a framework convention right now, the climate convention. It has mechanisms, the sections on commitments, it's six pages long. A framework convention sets up a solid framework. It has a lot of content. The COP has the job of fleshing out the details and implementing what the framework convention sets up. But the framework convention is the place where the commitment on sustainable development must be fleshed out. The issue of protocols is also coming up, and we want to flag one problem with that, is that every time you have a protocol, you set up a separate governance system. You fragment the system. One of the worst things that could happen is that sustainable development gets put in a protocol, because just as we brought sustainable development and tax back together, we would be tearing them apart again. It might not be the same parties that signed the convention and the protocol. So we need to get back to the job that we were sent here to do, and one of the things we're calling on now is for this process to be truly member state led, as the terms of reference say. What this means is that member states should come with ambitious proposals for how we should deliver on the job that we were given. And then, the next negotiating text that we get, what we're saying is, and this is normal in international negotiations, let's see the proposals in brackets. Brackets means they're not decided yet. But then, what we need to see is negotiations between countries. Right now, we just have a template text, and all the member states are just shooting at the text. And we're seeing even deletions from a very, very skeleton text. We need to bring ambition in, and we need to see the Member States negotiating with each other. That's where compromise solutions develop. So now it's time to speed up, and we were so happy to see that the atmosphere in the room is starting to change and ambition is starting to come in. This is exactly what we need to see. And as civil society, we have brought with us a number of concrete proposals for articles that should go into the convention, and one of the biggest ones is Article 9. We have a lot to say on Article 9, on sustainable development, and exactly the link. This is not about inventing something new. This is about delivering on the longstanding commitments to social protection, to human rights, to environment protection. and to sustainable development. So this is our call to you all for this week.

Thank you so much, Tove. I think these remarks were very insightful, and they reminded us one very important aspect: taxing for what purpose? So I think that connecting the dots between government revenues and government expenditure is essential to promote trust, but also compliance with the payment of taxes and social security contributions. And I was really delighted to hear that you see social protection as a key component of the sustainable development article 9, and we look forward to see how the negotiation on this article will unfold. We are now turning to the distinguished representatives of the governments of UN member states, and I'm now pleased to give the floor to Sarah Grew. She's the head of the.

International Tax Policy Section in the Danish Tax Ministry in the government of Denmark.

The Danish welfare model is based on the principle that all legally residing person should be guaranteed social protection in case they encounter a contingency, such as employment, sickness, or lose their ability to lead their own life, they become disabled, or they are in old age. In Denmark, social protection benefits and social services are mainly financed through general taxation. The question I would like to ask you is the following: reflecting on Denmark's approach that shows how progressive taxation can underpin social protection, from your perspective, how can international tax cooperation contribute to building fairer and more sustainable systems that allow all countries to finance strong social protection? In your view, what opportunities the ongoing negotiations present for financing social protection and closing coverage and adequate gaps? This is the question for you. Thank you.

Over to you, Sarah.

Okay, thank you very much. Those are very tough questions. rather complex also. Firstly, I should state that I can't really comment on the ongoing negotiations, so my remarks will be of a general nature, and I hope for your all's understanding in that matter. So if we take a step back, I will say that I do believe that for all states that our national rules and customs, they are like a lens through which we see the surrounding world. So our national background affects what we perceive as fair and how we engage in cooperation with other countries, that being in a bilateral litigation or in multilateral agreement. So we heard that tax has a purpose, and indeed it does have a purpose. In Denmark, as some of you might know, and what has been mentioned, we have a very well-developed welfare model where the public sector is actually responsible to be providing social security benefits, social assistance, and services to our citizens in general. And it's also correct that those security benefits and social assistances are mainly financed through our tax collection at state level. which indeed means that very much of our national taxes are seen as a tool to be used to finance our welfare model, including social security benefits. However, we also in Denmark have something called municipalities, and it's worth mentioning because at the municipality level, it is also possible to collect different taxes and the rates can be a bit different. And that is because at the municipality level, they will have a possibility to adjust the social services. And this means that even though a worker has the same job function, they can be paying different tax rates depending on where they live. So we have a local political priority of tax level and social security level. And that is designed to try to fit the specific circumstances in the local level. So that's a bit about how we, what's our background. And that being said, we also have a very long tradition of actually participating in international tax cooperation. And even though we are a very small country, we do have a lot of bilateral tax agreements. And those agreements are used mainly for the distributing taxation rights and income. but they don't decide how the money will be spent. The later is really a political question, and it would probably be very hard to agree upon it finally. And even in Denmark, it's actually really hard to find a fine agreement on this question. So that's a bit of our background as a country and how we view the world. So I will stop with that.

Thank you so much, Sara, for sharing the perspective. Well, we know that the national systems and legislation are essential in shaping social protection policies. However, I would like to remind also the audience that is here that the ILO has international labor standards. that are really used to shape social protection policies at the country level. Some example of these international labor standards, which are agreed by governments, workers, and employer in tripartite settings, are the ILO Social Security Minimum Standard Convention, Convention 102, which was issued in 1952 and has the latest ratification in 2025 with Angola that ratified. We also have the social protection floor recommendation that guides country on how to build a social protection floor. These standards really help countries to design social protection systems that are comprehensive, adequate, and sustainable. I'm now pleased to give the floor to our second distinguished representative from UN member states. Pollyanna Garcia Ferreira is the general coordinator for international tax cooperation at the government of Brazil. Brazil has recently been advancing a tax reform model designed to promote greater equality, reduce policy, and create new fiscal space for social protection and social policies. From your perspective, Poliana, how could the ongoing negotiation on the United Nations Framework Convention can help?

Advance the financing of social protection.

And do you see a place for social protection within the convention?

Thank you so much. The floor is yours, Poliana.

Thank you very much, Humberto. It's an honor here to be here participating in this panel. And I also would like to salute my colleagues, the panelists that are participating here today in this event. And I might say as well, I shouldn't say that, but Tove, it's always so inspiring listening to your intervention, so congratulations for that. Well, I also would like to acknowledge the ILO's long-standing leadership in advancing the global agenda on social protection, and Brazil is very proud to support this work, and most recently, within the initiative of SPA during the Sevilla. So we will keep working together this way, and I'm looking forward to keep collaborating with the ILO on this. So we gather here in Nairobi to reaffirm our commitment to enhance our tax systems in light of the 21st century challenges. And to achieve this, we must reaffirm our commitment to multilateralism as the most inclusive path to addressing inequalities and other global economic challenges. First and foremost, it is this principle that underpins our participation in this negotiation. We believe this initiative will be an important step toward a fairer and more coherent global tax architecture. One that enables countries to align their fiscal systems and their fiscal policies with the sustainable development goals. Precisely because of this importance, we must be realistic about the current stage of these negotiations. The convention will only fulfill its promise if we are able to mobilize the necessary resources and political will to ensure that the work of the Intergovernmental Committee advances with sufficient technical depth and institutional support. The recent discussions on budget constraints within the UN system are therefore concerning. If we want this convention to deliver meaningful outcomes, it must be backed by adequate financing and by substantive provisions that move beyond declarations of intent. In this regard, we encourage members to support this negotiation, engage constructively, and explore possible alternatives to ensure that this process is properly carried out. We also believe that global and regional tax cooperation initiatives can serve as powerful drivers of domestic transformation. Domestically, Brazil has embarked on one of the most significant tax reform processes in its history. an effort that reflects both the opportunities and challenges of advancing fiscal justice. After the social and economic setbacks of previous administrations, President Lula's third term has placed social protection and financing for development at the heart of our political strategy. So alongside international cooperation efforts, Domestic reforms remain essential for strengthening social protection systems and rebuilding a public consensus on fiscal justice. A more progressive tax structure, tax system, not only increase revenues, but also reinforce citizens' trust in public institutions and enables governments to sustain inclusive social policies. This is crucial for democratic institutions. At the Ministry of Finance, we have worked to make our tax system more progressive, efficient, and aligned with social equity objectives. Last year, we introduced some taxation of offshore investments, making an effort to broaden the tax base, and correcting longstanding asymmetries between labor and capital income taxation. We also implemented a major consumption tax reform, merging several taxes into a dual VAT. While revenue neutral, this reform is progressive because it eliminates exemptions for luxury goods and introduces a personalized VAT refund for low-income households registered at a Cadastrar Único program. This approach enhances fairness while improve productivity and revenue stability in the medium term. We are proud to say that our income tax reform was recently approved by Congress last week, marking a structural step toward greater equity. That reform will benefit an estimated 15 million Brazilian workers who will see lower tax burdens or full exemption while establishing a minimum effective tax rate for the super rich, thus addressing one of the major regressivity distortions in our tax system. This outcome was made possible through the dedication of our colleagues in the Ministry of Finance, the Secretariat for Economic Policy, and through strong collaboration with partners in civil society, such as EU Tax Observatory, whose analytical work helped demonstrate the redistributive potential of tax progressivity. We are also advancing this agenda at the regional level, particularly during Brazil's presidency of the Regional Platform for Tax Cooperation in Latin America and the Caribbean, the PTLC. We view this as an essential forum to promote dialogue, coordination, and technical cooperation among countries on issues of tax progressivity, review of tax incentives, and taxation for sustainable development. The region continues to face some of the world's highest levels of inequality, compounded by limited fiscal space and regressive tax structures. And for this reason, Brazil has worked to ensure that progressive taxation remain a central topic to the PT-LAC agenda, recognizing that stronger regional cooperation is crucial to tackling shared challenges. In this regard, the framework convention could play a vital role in helping countries to advance their own reforms. By establishing fair global standards, addressing tax avoidance and evasion, and enhancing cooperation, the convention can support states in mobilizing domestic resource in a consistent way with the development priorities. To achieve these objectives, the Convention's outcomes should strengthen members' capacity to implement effective policies and reforms, and this includes also social protection. It should therefore provide members with the necessary instruments to improve public administrations, enhance domestic resource mobilization, and design fair and efficient tax systems, essential tools for reducing inequality, eradicating poverty, and promoting more inclusive and equitable growth. Brazil also believes that public investment in health and education, alongside a strong social protection system, are vital components of the commitment to sustainable development in all its dimensions: economic, social, and environmental. More specific, we do see some space for social protection in the commitment dedicated to sustainable development. While we think the current draft is current balance, we believe this and other commitments could incorporate more substantive elements to ensure they are robust enough to achieve the Convention's objectives. This effort could be combined with continued member support for the work of the ILO, which, besides enhancing the coverage and effectiveness of social security for all, provides important evidence to inform decision makers in the shaping of social protection programs. So, to conclude my remarks, we believe that strengthening social protection coverage goes hand in hand with rethinking the effectiveness, fairness, and inclusivity of tax systems, so that international tax cooperation can truly become a driver of equity, sustainability, and shared prosperity. We look forward to a fruitful debate today and throughout the third session. Thank you very much.

Thank you so much, Poliana, for these, I would say, illuminating remarks about the strategic importance of featuring social protection in the United Nations Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation. We heard that there is a scope for social protection in Article 9 on sustainable development. I'm now pleased to give the floor to our third representative of Member States, Peter Rombassa.

You are Senior Social Protection Specialist in the State Department of Social Protection at the National Social Protection Secretariat.

In the government of Kenya, our host country.

And first of all, we would like to thank you for.

Hosting us here as a member of the government of Kenya. Kenya is a member of the Universal Social Protection 2030 Partnership, which is co-shared by the ILO and the World Bank.

And as Kenya has demonstrated strong commitment to expanding social protection coverage and strengthening national systems, it is therefore particularly meaningful to hear from our host country today.

Peter.

From your perspective, why is it important to finance social protection through a combination of taxes and social security contribution? Could you share some insights from Kenya's perspective? Peter, you have the floor. Thanks.

Thank you so much, Kataneh, and good evening to all who are here, and welcome to Nairobi. Those who have come for the first time, and for those who are coming the second time, Karibuni tena. That means welcome back. Thank you for the question. And I want to first reiterate that Kenya is among the low and middle income countries. Therefore, we are also like any other low and middle income country, at the global south, we have our own challenges. And some of the challenges include health challenges, a young youth population that doesn't have employment. We have some challenges in poverty, low income, among others. That basically means that social protection is the in thing that can alleviate that kind of challenges within us. The constitution of Kenya, article 43, and very specific article 43E, states that every person in Kenya is entitled to social protection. That is where we all base our argument in social protection. The question you've asked is very important. Yes, we are in the USB 2030. And we want to expand social protection to reach the unreached in the effort of leaving no one behind. Therefore, what are the efforts that we've been making all along to make sure that social protection reaches to the last person within the Republic of Kenya? First things first, social protection has had its own history in Kenya. Started in 2005 with a small pilot, courtesy of our colleagues from UNICEF, and there's nothing wrong to mention them, in a small pilot that started under OVC. Here we are now, we are universal in certain schemes, whereby we have reached close to about 1.8 million households in Kenya. If you convert that one household, it's about three persons in a household, we're talking close to about 6 million covered. Therefore, with a population of about 50 million in Kenya, we've done tremendously good. I'm only talking on the non-contributory. The contributory part of it, which includes the pension, the health cover, we've done tremendously well. But, of course, with a lot of challenges, but we are pushing on. However, I need to answer the question that have been asked about How do we increase the coverage despite all the challenges? Three things that I want to bring into your attention. Number one, how do we do the budgeting process so that we can get more financing, especially from the national treasury? It's good to indicate that all non-contributory schemes are tax financed in Kenya. Therefore, we must be able to get funding from our national treasury to be able to meet the cost of paying for the cash transfers in Kenya. Therefore, we need a lot of advocacy, especially when we are doing the budgeting process. The budgeting process takes close to about a year. So by the time we start that process, we must always be with them and make sure that our issues are understood from why we want that money, what impact it will create, and what will be the return on investing on that money. The second part of it, which is very critical, is laws and regulations that are also governing the schemes. Earlier on, we had the constitution, but now we have an extra law, which is called the Social Protection Act. This act has critically made sure that the cash transfers are within law, and regulations are being developed to make sure that everything is fine. The third aspect, and this is very critical, is diversification of programs. 80% of our population are in the rural and informal economy. They contribute taxes to the government, but they are not covered under any scheme of social protection by their nature of what they're doing. What is government doing? For so many years, we've not been taking care of them, but of late, the government has developed a strategy whereby we want to bring all those who are not covered to be covered, either through contributory or non-contributory schemes. Finally, as I finish our discussion, what are the reasons for tax financing? Three quick reasons. Number one, trust in government. A good government is one that takes care of its population. Kenya is among them, and for every reason, The population is now trusting government for what it's getting in return. Secondly, sustainability. Any time you as government, especially in Kenya, you are able to meet your costs of social protection, then sustainability of the program will be very easy. Most programs that are started by the donor, unfortunately, get off because they are not sustainable in the long run. But those that are run by government, they have a sustainability element in them. And finally, accountability. Any time government is spending money, then it must be accountable, not only to its population, but also to all arms of government that are spending that money. Therefore, That is what I wanted to say, especially in expanding social protection. We have not reached the end because we've not covered the entire population, but we are sure that in the next five or six years, with the strategies that have been put in place, we'll expand to reach the unreached and, of course, leave no one behind. Thank you.

Thank you so much, Peter. An applause for Peter. Thank you very much. It was, I would say, very encouraging to listen to the progress that Kenya has made to extend the social protection coverage. I think you stressed an important point that extending social protection coverage means extending both contributory and non-contributory programs. I think it's key to recognize that social security contribution and social insurance are available for those who can afford to pay them, but there is a part of the population that still requires tax finance benefits that are very powerful to reduce poverty and inequalities. I'm now pleased to invite UNICEF, and I am sorry if your name plate is not correct. So I would like to give the floor to George Kinianjui, I hope I pronounced well your name, who is the social policy specialist at UNICEF Kenya. UNICEF is also a member of the Universal Social Protection 2030 Partnership. As I said, this partnership is co-chaired by the ILO and the World Bank, and together with the ILO, UNICEF has closely followed the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development. It has followed the negotiation. We have worked together through the many prep cons, and we have worked together in Seville at the final conference. UNICEF and the ILO together, they have welcomed paragraph 27i of the F54 outcome document, which calls for the extension of social protection by at least two percentage points per year. And we particularly welcome the fact that this paragraph is not in the preamble part, but it is in the domestic public resource section of the F54 outcome. Based on your experience, George, I would like to ask you the following question: Why does a UN tax convention for you represent a unique opportunity to accelerate progress towards sustainable development and the achievement of the SDGs? And can you please elaborate on the achievement of SDG target 1.3 on universal social protection?

Thank you, Peter.

Over to you.

And apologies again for the nameplate.

Yeah, no, thanks so much, Katerine, and distinguished panelists who have spoken before me. And for this particular question, I'm standing in for Dr. Ana Gabriela, who's also my chief, who was engaged earlier on on other assignments. And I will try as much as possible to very quickly bring some three points that speak to the importance of the UN Tax Convention. And, Kateneo, you have placed it very rightly in the sense of the collaboration that UNICEF has had together with all the other agencies within the USP 2030 and the progress that we've been able to make since the 2015 Addis Ababa Action Agenda, transcending 10 years later to the just meeting that possibly ended some few months ago in Seville. that increasingly has stressed on the need for us to think around what Tove talked about, the underdevelopment and the financing for that, with a very clear approach in social protection. To answer the question, I have lifted some three key areas in the sense of what the UN Convention on International Tax presents opportunities for the gains in social protection. And the first one that I had was the fact that for a long time, we were finding a situation where now we have an opportunity for what I would call liberalization, or basically ending some long, winding bias in terms of the international taxation, where we had pretty much a few number of countries that were setting the stage for international taxation. They're coming to an end. what I will call in quotes, coming to an end of the few countries that have played on the global stage in setting the rules for international taxation, and the welcoming of the democratic approach where the United Nations member countries are able to be equally, be on the table and have an equal voice. brings great benefits, particularly on the global south, where majority of the countries that are reeling in poverty are found, and ensuring that it gives a voice to these countries to really prioritize taxation at a global stage. Looking at digital giants, for instance, that have reaped off if I may use that word, really resources from the global south in, you know, to the staggering estimates of about 200 to 500 billion dollars yearly from the global south. It provides that avenue and opportunity to ensure that these countries are able to prioritize taxation and bring back resources that can then be utilized in accelerating the achievement of the SDG 1.3, and of course, the Sevilla commitments that on an annual basis, that we can be able to expand social protection, both contributory and non-contributory by about 2%. The second thing that I think is very important, and I think Tovi had actually spoken about it, and also colleagues on this stage, is what we will call the early protocols of the convention are providing for binding approach on ensuring that it's not voluntary anymore, that we can find ourselves in choosing what to do, and countries are going to be binded by these protocols, you know, to ensure that, particularly on the digital taxation and the challenges that, you know, Tovi spoke about, you know, the cross-border services, that, you know, we're closing those loopholes. And the cost to the low-income countries that, you know, ranges between 13% to 20% of the GDP. really coming back as part of revenue. And this is through ensuring that we are closing the loopholes that have been there through the illicit financial flows. These recovered resources, for instance, will be able to be directed to finance the gaps that you're already seeing in the SDGs. between four to six trillion dollars, and bringing the aspirational effects of the Seville Commitment really to the fore. If I give a good example, and I'm seated next to Mr. Mbaso, in terms of what our social protection in Kenya, and I'll speak this because I'm Kenyan. The commitments that we've had, particularly on social assistance or the non-contributory social protection in Kenya has ranged for a couple of years around 30 to 31 billion Kenya shillings. But when you look at estimates of how much money that we've been losing through IFFs, illicit financial flows, it is in the staggering ranges of 253 billion shillings every year. And this includes, you know, aspects of corruption, aspects of counterfeit goods, and the misinvoicing when you look at international trade. At the continental level, I know many of us who are in this room are very aware of the Mbeki panel report that pointed to about staggering $88.6 billion lost for this continent, that so much needs the support for social protection for their most vulnerable. This $88.6 billion is, you know, overly higher than the total FDI and ODA receipts that the continent receives. Now, the opportunity that then we are getting through the UN tax convention is, you know, we're advancing very quickly to ensure that there are commitments and binding protocols that allow countries that have created avenues for IFFs to comply. The last one of my thinking, and I think this is pretty much most of the important one, Cateneo, is on the synergies that have been brought by this convention and also the commitments that we've had in Sevilla. In Sevilla, basically, the commitments explicitly links domestic public resources to social protection expansion, right? But on the other side, the UN Convention really operationalizes this mandate by recommending progressivity in the taxation approaches, taxing more on wealth, capital taxes, and asset recovery that has really bedeviled most of the countries in the Global South. And that basically adds about 2 to 5% of global GDP in new revenues for developing countries. And this can definitely be one of the areas that channels to the realization of SDG 1.3. But I think in anecdotes, what we also have to agree is that the opportunity breaks the global financial architecture constraint that was actually identified when we all met in Sevilla. when we had thought that, you know, the GFA was an avenue in itself to building domestic resource mobilization. But, you know, in hindsight, we realize that the mandates and the intentions for the Bretton Woods were in themselves a constraint to ensuring that there is increased resources for social protection. And with that, we're seeing then that this platform within the Sevilla, you know, commitments and also the UN tax convention will really help enable governments to deliver universal assistance, systems that are very resilient to shocks than what has been the history of the cyclic and perpetual underfunding that leaves close to 4 billion people unprotected. I want to stop here with my summations. Thanks.

Thank you so much for your remarks and for highlighting, it means thanks so much for those. I didn't know, someone told me. So, I'm not pretending to speak Swahili. So, I would like really to thank you for highlighting the need to scale up effort to finance social protection and especially to connect the dots between Seville and the United Nations Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation, I think it is crucial that despite these processes sometimes are led by representative of different ministries, they are connected, because what works, what we have seen that works at the country level, is when ministries, especially I'm talking about social protection, when ministries of finance, ministries of labor work together. And I'm saying that because this was actually a request of our ILO constituents that in 2021 requested the ILO specifically to collaborate with the International Monetary Fund on financing social protection. We have been collaborating in 12 countries with the ambition to bring together ministries of finance and ministries of labor. Therefore, you highlighted that this is important and that this could be actually an opportunity for the United Nations Framework Convention. I'm now delighted to turn to, i mentioned governments, but I'm now delighted to turn to social partners. Social partners are constituents of the ILO, and they are employers and workers' organizations. and they have a crucial role to play in financing social protection. If we don't see it with governments, workers, and employers at the same table and all agree, it's going to be difficult to find a strategy to finance social protection. I'm delighted that today we have here Stephen Obeiro, who is the head of advocacy, consulting, and partnership of the Federation of Kenyan employers. Stephen, the question for you is the following: we know that it is ultimately the responsibility of states to ensure the existence of tax and social insurance systems, but we know that enterprises can play a significant role in promoting the formalization of economies and the payment of taxes. From your perspective, why is social protection important for encouraging formalization and ensuring the regular payment of taxes and social security contribution? Stephen, you have the floor. Thank you so much.

Thank you. Let me start by stating that the employers do recognize the importance of social protection for our business mandate. It is not something that is contestable, and we know that social protection policies can play a very crucial role in promoting more inclusive growth, one that will be able to build social cohesion and reduce poverty in societies. And we also understand that One of the things that we seek also as even businesses is not just about profits, but also to build socially responsible and people-oriented businesses. And so social protection policies become very important for businesses to ensure that we stay competitive and also we sustain our growth. And so this discussion is really important to us. And as businesses, we are very keen as employers to engage both whether it is at national or regional level in this discussion and ensure that we develop social protection systems that One, we want to see them in incentivizing private sector growth. And when we talk about informality, if you look at Africa, and this is where we have a lot of informality, like in Kenya, if you look at the employment landscape, more than 85% of all the employees in wage employment are in the informal sector. I know in some countries in Africa, like Ghana, it's even more than that. we realize that informality in Africa is not by choice, it's a necessity-driven informality. And so social protection is very important to ensure that then that strain that is pushing people to operate informally is reduced and then we can see them getting into formal businesses. And so what we need to see are systems that incentivize private sector growth, because then they're able to move with enterprises, even when they started as informal enterprises, to become more formal enterprises. And so we look at it and see that then for One of the things that we have to see for effective social protection policies, some of the prerequisites will be to ensure that we are looking at the economic growth, how are they impacting on the economic growth, and how are we creating an enabling environment for businesses to be able to thrive. And if we do that, then we move a lot of businesses and a lot of workers that are in the informal sector into the formal sector, and thereby they we have a very positive impact, as we are going to see. Now, we, as the businesses, we are very keen to see that social protection policies include provisions for the private sector that include measures that will improve competitiveness and productivity. And if that happens, then we are able to compensate for the costs that we see, that some of it that come, you know, we had a question that was asked that the biggest thing when we talk about social protection is where are we going to get the money? And we all know that the easiest way, the national treasuries and the government's answer is that tax the businesses, tax the employers. Where are we going to get the money? Tax the employers. But what are we saying? We're saying that in the discussion and in the policies, and if we want to even help them move away from the informality, we must also be able to look at it and ask ourselves, what are the costs that are involved? And be able to do a cost and benefit analysis so that then we don't have the unintended adverse effect of the policies. And I will talk a little bit of this from the employer's perspective. When we increase, whether it is a contributory tax, say, we say employees or workers, you're going to contribute this percentage of your salary, and then the employers, you are going to match it so that then we can be able to finance a certain social protection, perhaps provision, that benefit. At the end of the day, when we start negotiating our collective bargaining agreement and the employees will come and say, you know, the cost of living has gone high, our income has been eroded, so we need you, the employer, to be able to compensate. And so it becomes like a double payment from the employers. And that's why it is very important for us to do the cost and benefit analysis so that then we are not pushing the formal employment into informality. we are making them very, these businesses uncompetitive. And we are not also scaring away those businesses who are operating informally and are thinking, wait a minute, I need to move and start operating formally. The other thing I want to say is that a very important thing is about the coordination, where we need to see more coordination among the agencies and government ministries responsible for social protection policies, because these policies cut across. You'll see the Minister of Health, like if I take an example of Kenya, we'll be looking at the health policies, looking at the universal health coverage, and then you see the Minister of Labor looking at the income side, and you will see the national treasury coming in. And all the challenge is when they operate in a silo form. But if there is proper coordination, then we are able to see that there is a lot of reduction on cost because then they're able to talk to each other and have social protection policies that improve the competitiveness of the workforces in our labor sector. The other challenge, and the other thing I want to speak about, is the involvement of the employers and the social partners. What we've seen as the challenge, and that, as we are going to see, that has a very big impact when it comes to informality, is that sometimes we involve the social partners at the very end. When we are making a decision, and especially when we are telling them, you need to start paying this tax, and then now that's the time we are involving them. We need to have involved them from the word go, and so that then they can also be able to give the perspective and say, wait a minute, this proposal, it is likely to bring this challenge. And I will come to an example. There was a proposal some time back about saying, Why don't we increase, in Kenya, we have maternity cover, that maternity leave that is employer gives them the maternity leave for three months, full pay, and then they will see how their businesses run. And that was a push from under quarter, why don't you increase it to six months? without looking at what is going to be the adverse impact of this. The involvement of social partners then will give you a holistic look at it and then be able to avoid some of the push factors that push businesses to operate in the informal sector. Now, the question was how this can help. One is that if you look at the informal sector, Largely, the informal sector in Kenya, the informal sector in Africa, these are self-employed people who are operating their own micro businesses. And so even if we talk about them as workers, we are not talking, they're not the traditional workers who are employed and somebody's giving them a salary. They're actually employed for profit. And so we have to look at them and the interventions that we are going to give to ensure that they are looking at their business. And that's why for us, we look at it, how then do you put in place measures that carry them to be able to grow, to become then businesses that can able to pay even the different contribution to contribute to the different taxes and different contributions that they are to make to ensure that then they provide for, they are covered in different social protections. And the other thing we're looking at, if we are able to protect, say, if we are talking about the income protection, then we have to ask ourselves, how is it going to encourage these workers to get more and more into employment? And so for us, as the private sector, for us as the employers, we see a big role of social dialogue playing so that then we ensure that these policies that we put into place are able to have the positive impact that we need. Thank you.

Thank you so much, Steven. Really, it was very important, I think, to end with the social dialogue. I think it's crucial that workers, governments, and employers are seated at the same table when discussing financing social protection. Some of you that are here, in the panel, in the audience, might have noticed that representative from workers' organization is not here. So I would like to say that this was not possible, and there will be another occasion where the representative of the workers' organization will be able to attend. I would like to thank so much the panel for the excellent remarks. And I would like to ask the audience for an applause for our panel. Now, i think you have been patient here in the audience, listening to us, and we would like to open the floor for questions, so that you can, I mean, if there are questions panelist to panelist, it's also possible. So it's not only the floor that is here, but also panelists. So if you can keep your question brief, because we have around 20 minutes for the debate, and then I would like to keep one minute to close. So if you can keep your question brief, and you can say who you are and from which organization when you take the floor. The floor is open. Thanks. Okay, I see one hand there.

Please go ahead.

Hi, my name is Sylvain Dri. I work for Human Rights Watch. So first, quickly, thank you so much for this conversation. It's so great to hear a conversation linking the spending and taxation and making this connection in a comprehensive way. So thank you, ILO, for bringing that forward, such an important conversation, and very timely, as we are about to discuss Article 9 in the negotiations, and I hope everyone here took notes of the proposal. My question is the following: I see your proposal in your paper from ILO on how to incorporate social protection in the language of the Convention, which seems pretty good to me. But I wonder how this articulates with other areas. So we've heard from everyone in the panel that Everyone has talked about other issues that are equally important and not social protection, like health care, education, electricity, transportation. So I want to ask the panel whether you would, first of all, I'm curious what everyone thinks about the proposal from ILO here, and whether you would consider extending that and incorporate that in Article 9, about a requirement, something similar to what's proposed here, covering a range of public services and social security together. Thank you.

Thank you so much, Human Rights Watch. I think we can take three questions, and then we go to the answers. So we have one other hand there.

Please go ahead.

And another one there. Sorry, I did not see you. So now I don't know who was first. So you are saying that you were first, so you are before him? OK, so let go her before, and then we come to you.

Thank you, Shay, and thank you, colleagues, for allowing me to speak first. My name is Thao, and I work with ActionAid in Vietnam. I first would like to thank and congratulate INO for this very highly substantive and meaningful session. Given all of the presentation and sharing, I have a question to ILO itself and also the participating countries. How do you see social protection for the migrants? All of us are having migrants, internal migrants and international migrants. And Vietnam is a sending and receiving country of this, and we are struggling with this. So I hope it would be considered, whether it's in this convention or the future work of ILO. Thank you.

Thank you. Please.

Thank you so much. So first of all, I need to, you guys have given a great detailed presentation, and I'm happy that you are able to link social protection. As well as tax issue, just give me a minute. I was running back when I was told that you guys opened the floor. So I just wanted to find out, I know that from a feminist perspective, we know that women, especially those in formal sector and across border work, and the unpaid care will contribute so much on economies, but yet they remain excluded from the both tax and social protection system. As the lady just mentioned, the immigrant, which are actually mostly on the global south. But also my question now is, how can the UN Tax Convention ensures that progressive taxation of social protection coverage actually recognize the finance women's of unpaid and informal labor, but especially in the global south, so that the tax justice also delivers gender justice in real terms? But also, can we start thinking about including gender responsive budgeting or reporting mechanism within this framework, so that commitment are not just police language, but something that can be measurable?

Thank you. Can you say which organization or country you represent?

Yeah, so my name is Magdalena Gise. I represent Tanzania Young Feminist Movement, and I'm from Tanzania.

Okay, great. So we have there, yeah, sure. Go ahead. Sorry.

Yeah, thank you very much. My name is Musa, and I'm from Senegal, who is ActionAid Tax Aid Alliance. So I just wanna thank you for this opportunity and mention quickly that for decades, the global south has received assurances that development would follow if we open our markets, if we liberalize our economies, and if you attracted foreign investment. We open our markets, corporation came, and then they extracted our resources. They employed our workers at poverty wages, sold our consumers, and systematically avoided tax in every jurisdiction where these activities occurred. And I guess my question for this time is that, The ILO input emphasizes the need for financing social protection. Will the ILO formally monitor whether the UN tax convention delivers adequate revenue for member states to meet the ILO social protection floor obligation? And the last one is, can human rights treaty bodies like CEDAW, like CS, CR, et cetera, hold state accountable if they agree to tax convention that prevent them from financing the economic and social right of women workers? Thank you.

Thank you so much. I don't see other hands, so I think I said three questions, there are four. There are two points. three, I would say, for the ILO. I will quickly address them, and then I will give the floor to the other panelists for their remarks. So regarding the "why not other areas?" Human Rights Watch, well, we are fully aware that social protection is not the only category of government expenditure that is included under sustainable development. However, what know is that social protection is included under SDG target 1.3, which is on universal social protection, and SDG 1 on no poverty. Why is there? Because it has an overarching role for all the SDGs, and this is well proven by ILO research. But I'm not saying that we should not provide finance for other SDGs. I'm just saying that social protection has an overarching role. Regarding the question on the ILO will monitor, I mean, yes, we are monitoring coverage. As you know, there is a target with the ILO label on the FFD4 outcome document in paragraph 27 that calls developing countries to extend social protection by at least two percentage points.

We launched last week in Doha, my director, the director of the Universal Social Protection.

Department, Shal Razavi launched the ILO platform to monitor progress towards this target. When it comes to monitoring social protection, we monitor more coverage because it's an outcome than expenditure. Because if you monitor expenditure, you don't know how many people are reached by this investment. The monitor of expenditure is in the hands of the International Monetary Fund. Regarding the migrants, the ILO has been doing a lot of work on migrants. especially in the Gulf country, and we have really worked to extend the social protection to migrants and also refugees, and we can be in touch bilaterally on this question because it's going to take time to go through in detail. I would like now to go back to the panel. Maybe we follow the order that we had at the beginning. So, Sara, you would like like to give some... Sorry, Tove, I made a mistake. I'm so sorry. Tove, you would like to give some remarks on these questions, please.

Thank you. I'll try to be brief and to the point. Can we think about gender-responsive budgeting in the UN tax convention negotiations? So In July this year, only a few months ago, the same governments that are sitting and negotiating, they committed to advancing discussions on gender responsive taxation. This is the place to do that. And what we're talking about here is not doing something that hasn't already been committed to. It's about following up. We heard earlier this week also some European governments saying we should take the Sevilla outcome document and follow up now. So we look forward to seeing the Europeans bringing up gender responsive taxation in the negotiations when we get to Article 9. It's also true what Sara said, that there are many, many problems with the bilateral tax treaties. One of them is that they're completely disconnected from everything else, sustainable development, gender equality, reducing inequality. Tax has been living in its own little bubble. And that's what we're doing here. We're bringing it home because all the other things that governments commit to will not work if we don't fix the tax system. On the issue of, yes, I think the ILO suggestion for language is exactly this idea of saying, let's link to the other UN instruments in the UN tax convention. Let's connect the dots now. And that's also what the terms of reference told us to do. There are more things you can do under sustainable development. First, you can commit to saying that the spending should be in line with the UN commitments that governments have taken on. As part of that, you can also do reporting on how governments are complying with this, both in collecting taxes. If the tax systems are regressive, they make inequalities worse. So you can have a top level reporting on how the collection is in line with sustainable development, and the same on the spending side. It's very normal in UN conventions to have reporting obligations. It's also normal that the developed countries take on more extensive obligations under that. And that's also something the terms of reference speak of. And the last thing, in terms of the Article 9 and how to make it connected to sustainable development, the last thing that's important to say is that Article 9 cannot stand alone. We're here also because there is a crisis in the tax system. Now we're negotiating transparency and access to information. This is about getting the information out of the tax havens so that governments can collect taxes. This is about public access to information about how much multinational companies pay. We don't have an article in the text on equitable taxation of multinational corporations, even though that's very clear in the terms of reference that that's part of the job. We just saw the discussion of high net worth individuals. I don't know what that was, but it was not a commitment to ensuring effective taxation of high net worth individuals. That's the job in the terms of reference. We need to discuss how to do that, not whether to do that. So Article 9 is an important part, and it must be linked to an ambitious outcome on all the elements in the terms of reference. Thank you so much.

So I have the impossible task of having six minutes before the closure and give the floor to five people. So I think I would like only to give the floor to those who would like to take the floor. If you don't want to take the floor, you are not obliged. So among the panelists, no? Okay, it's okay.

Sarah, you want to add something?

I'm just clarifying. Sometimes it's, maybe it will be worse for me for trying to clarify, but I will try to clarify. So tax living in its own bubble, I don't think that was my point. I think my point was that tax is the revenue governments collect and use in national law to, at least in Denmark, redistribute social rights to every citizen in Denmark. So indeed, it is very much connected. And it's a revenue path, and I think I said it's a tool, and I think that is how most governments see that. And it is true that the DTAs are a revenue distribution mechanism, hence you are creating a mechanism for distributing revenue, but this revenue governments can use to give back to their citizen with welfare, pensions, roads, all those kind of things, but I just wanted to clarify that we do actually see an interlink.

Thank you so much, Sara, for this remark and for being precise on this aspect. Anyone else in the panel that would like to take the floor to address some of the questions?

Maybe in a minute or so, allow me to talk to the migrants. persons of concern, refugees, and internally displaced persons, they have rights to social protection. And in Kenya, it has been clearly articulated in what we call the Shirika Plan, whereby they are supposed to be integrated to the host communities, support through the UNHCR, and of course ILO in terms of making sure that they get social protection within Kenya as they are waiting for other alternatives. I think, as you rightly said, we can have that conversation, because a long conversation may be outside this particular discussion. Thank you.

Thank you, Peter, for being brief, and it's very good that you brought the answer to the question on migrants. I didn't go in the detail because I didn't want to take time for our panelists, but I will give a short additional piece of information. You have read the input that ILO made to the tax convention, and we were suggesting a provision on social security contribution to be paid by all workers and capacity to affiliate to social insurance, because there are certain countries where migrant workers still cannot affiliate to social insurance if they are non-nationals. thought that this is important because having social insurance releases actually some pressure on general revenues of the government. Anyone else in the panel? No? I think if there are no, because I think we should close here because the broadcast will be cut at three, so there are a few minutes before 3, so I think it's a good time to close. So I would like to thank everyone that was here in this panel and also in the audience. I believe that what we have heard today is some support for social protection and for its inclusion in the UN tax convention negotiation. I hope if you support social protection and you support the ILO inputs, you will be able to take the floor in plenary, especially during the discussion on Article 9, and do not hesitate to mention it, to mention the ILO standards, as Tove rightly said, and we will also have a statement in that occasion. Thank you very much, everyone, and I think we can now close the broadcast.

Thanks, thanks so much.