Third Session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee on the United Nations Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation

Welcome back. I hope everyone enjoyed the lunch break. Now we resume our discussions on Article 8, harmful tax practices. I think we were left with some requests for the floor on this article, mainly from the stakeholders. So now I'm handing the floor over to my colleague Daniel to proceed with the discussions. Thank you.

Good afternoon and welcome back from lunch. We all know that after lunch sometimes people can get a bit woozy. So I'll try not to put you to sleep. And you also try not to put me to sleep. I think that's a good compromise that we can have. And so that we want to invite AS to address us, please.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I hope I can fulfill your wish of not putting you asleep. Yes, distinguished delegates, in the name of the Global Alliance for Tax Justice and Alliance Sud in Switzerland, I would like to raise awareness for an aspect in regard to harmful tax practices, which seems to fly a little bit under the radar so far. And that's with the implementation of OECD's pillar two, we see in several countries a shift from the infamous race to the bottom on tax rates to a new race to the top on subsidies. This is especially the case for low tax jurisdictions in Europe. like Ireland, the Netherlands or my own country, Switzerland. As one of the big four in the world of tax advisors put it last year in a report, Switzerland joins the international competition in a world of minimum tax. As we all know, when Pillar Two was discussed at the OECD three years ago, it was very far from all member states in this room that agreed to its final architecture. A third of the countries in the world were not even at the table. Furthermore, BEPS 2 as a whole is not leading to a fairer distribution of tax revenues among countries as it was originally promised by the OECD. On the contrary, especially with the implementation of the so-called qualified domestic minimum top-up tax in pillar 2 and due to the inability of the OECD to effectively tackle profit shifting practices, The minimum tax gave low tax jurisdictions the possibility to gain even more tax revenue. To make it fully clear, of all countries, Pillar Two is mostly benefiting exactly those who have been fooling the race to the bottom for a very long time. As we have been able to observe over the past few years, These countries are not using those additional revenues for fighting climate change or securing the important contributions to development funding. Instead, they're using the so-called qualified refundable tax credits to the benefit of exactly those multinational companies who they now tax at the minimum tax rate. Their approach also means that the income of these companies in question, which often originates from profit shifting, cannot be top-up taxed by other countries. This is especially to the detriment of source countries. To give you an idea of the striking dimensions these back transfers of tax money currently develop, I suggest to look at the example of the Swiss canton of Zug. It is home to only 136 people and offering one of the lowest corporate tax rates in the world. With the implementation of Pillar Two, the cantonal government is calculating with 200 million euros in additional tax revenues per annum, which it intends to spend on new subsidies. Those will be to a very large part used for the promotion of some of the biggest and most profitable commodity traders in the world, their wealthy employees and for local subsidiaries of foreign multinationals. These companies are often lacking substance on site and generate their income mostly outside of Switzerland, all over the world. Distinguished delegates, I tell you all this not to specifically harm my home country itself, which I consider as an extreme privilege to be a citizen of, but out of the obligation we have as economically privileged countries to redress historic inequalities and ensure everyone can equally enjoy their rights. I hope I was able to illustrate that building on existing international tax rules, as we say, and at the same time achieving a fair, transparent, efficient, equitable, and effective international tax system for sustainable development is an endeavor that seems to be doomed to fail from the outset. Fundamental change is thus needed, and this wonderful venue here in Nairobi is the place to initiate it. The Global Alliance for Tax Justice is therefore urging you to include strong language under Article 8, which includes subsidies like URTC in a definition of harmful tax practices and commits parties to get rid of such instruments. Finally, the article should enable the future COP to develop provisions which include sanctions or penalties for non-compliant states. Thank you very much.

Thank you, AS. BC, AS, please.

Thank you, Chair. There are few comments which are made on the opening sentence of para one of Article 8, you know, saying that this is something which will go in the preamble. And this sentence indeed is like a preamble kind of a sentence, similar sentence appears in para one of Article 6 as well. the sentences, you know, although they appear like a preamble, but they are very useful in understanding the provision of the article itself. Now, if the sentences are shifted to the preamble of the convention, maybe they need to be, you know, cross referenced saying that this sentence should go along with the article six or article eight. My suggestion would be to retain the sentences in the respective article itself, but the numbering of the article, paragraph of the article may start after the sentences. So it, you know, it, it works like a preamble in future to understand why the article came into existence. Let's look at the problem which we are facing in PPT principle purpose test. One of the conditions which have to satisfy is to ensure that the object and purpose of the relevant article you know, is satisfied if the treaty benefit is given. Now, after so many years, there is no way to figure out what is the object and purpose of Article 12, Article 13, Article 14. What we get to see is only preamble, which is maybe two or three sentences, and it becomes difficult to identify, you know, how this preamble at the top of the treaty helps in understanding the object and purpose of Article 12 or 13 and so on. So if we retain those sentences in the respective article, that's really going to help in interpreting the article further. Another observation, there may be some confusion about harmful tax practices by whom? Is it by the taxpayers, by MNEs or by the countries themselves? I believe it's understood that the practices, harmful practices followed by the countries, so maybe that may be clarified when the term is defined. In para one, there's a reference made only to MNEs. Probably a reference can be made to HNIs as well, you know, because that will be relevant. Now, para two talks about certain parameters for tax incentives. And I would suggest that maybe we should talk about incentives based on the employment generation. Because that's a very critical aspect in today's world. We have started seeing the true colors of AI, artificial intelligence. You know, hundreds and thousands of people are losing their jobs because of AI on a daily basis. So of course, there are, you know, there are conflicting policies where the government wants to encourage AI. At the same time, the employments need to be protected. So if we can link the tax incentives to employment generation, that could be, you know, sort of a balancing feature. Thank you.

Thank you, BCAS. Now we have OHCHR.

Good afternoon. My name is Ateya Waris. I'm the UN independent expert on foreign debt and international financial obligations and its implications for human rights. And I thank you for the time. I have been listening to the conversations over the past year and I have certain language that I think needs to be reflected upon and considered. The first is the phrase international cooperation. Under the UN system, the phrase that normally exists is international cooperation and assistance, and it would be important since this is a UN mandated activity that we stick as closely to existing and agreed upon UN language and terminology. The second, which I think is quite important, is I've heard reference to other fora and I would like to remind Member States very, very gently, of course, that in addition to the ones that have been mentioned, there are tax discussions happening at the International Maritime Organization. There are tax discussions happening during the pandemic treaty negotiations. as well as the ones on climate finance, which has also been mentioned earlier. These diverse mechanisms do need to be taken into account here as well, including human rights mechanisms. The third point I would like to make is that, as regards the issue of harmful tax practices, The word that we see being used repeatedly is the word sanctions. And I'd like to again remind member states very, very gently that the only entity authorized to issue sanctions is the Security Council. And any other entity that does it is falling under UCMs or unauthorized mechanisms, which is important to be reflected on that this is not a space to implement sanctions on member states. The other point I would like to make is what was mentioned by the co-chair on interpretation and the use of meanings and language, which I think is very important. And so as regards rules of interpretation, I think we have to be very cognizant of the fact that LDCs, many of whom I don't see represented here, and also SIDS, remain some of the most vulnerable countries and under the considerations and principles of the United Nations, These are countries we really need to ensure are taken very seriously as we add into the conversation on the treaty negotiation. I would like to thank you for your time and I look forward to the continuing conversations. Thank you.

Thank you. DMUN Foundation, please.

Thank you, Chair. My name is Irene Nyangasi from the DMUN Foundation. We welcome the inclusion of Article 8 on harmful tax practices in the convention. This is critical given the significant impact of harmful tax practices on the lives of children and youth. Specifically, harmful tax practices reduce public revenue and undermine the financing of essential services such as education, healthcare, social protection and infrastructure, services that young people depend on most. Secondly, harmful tax practices worsen intergenerational inequality. When wealthy individuals and multinational enterprises avoid taxes, they shift the burden to future generations, leaving young people to face debt, underfunded public systems and fewer opportunities. Thirdly, preferential tax regimes distort markets and disadvantage small domestic enterprises where most young entrepreneurs and innovators operate. And lastly, harmful tax practices threaten the social contract between government and citizens as they erode trust in the fairness of governance and fiscal institutions, deepening the sense that global system is rigged in favor of the powerful. To meet our collective mandate, we propose the following actionable recommendations to strengthen Article 8, defining harmful tax practices, The convention must incorporate a clear and comprehensive definition of harmful tax practices. A precise and objective definition is essential as it forms the foundation for all subsequent action. We recommend that definition be based on established criteria which should include no or low effective tax rates that allow actors to avoid meaningful contribution to public finances, ring fencing that separates certain activities or entities from domestic tax obligations, lack of transparency in tax rules, agreements or incentives, insufficient exchange of information, which prevents accountability and enables cross-border tax abuse. This definition must be beyond technical tax language and be inclusive of development considerations, recognizing that harmful tax practices disproportionately affect vulnerable populations, including children and youth who rely most on public services. and fair economic systems. It is important to note that historically, oversight of harmful tax practices has largely fallen under the OECD, a framework that has often been non-inclusive and inefficiently attentive to the development priorities of key populations. This convention presents an opportunity to establish a truly inclusive framework, one that centers the needs of youth in all their diversities and ensures that fiscal justice benefits current and future generations. We have a historic opportunity to create a level playing field. Let us ensure that this convention is is equipped with binding commitment and actionable mechanisms to finally dismantle harmful tax practices. Thank you.

Thank you. We now have CYI.

Thank you, Chair. I'm Lurie Chigusa from the Youth for Tax Justice Network, and I will be speaking on behalf of the FFD Children and Youth Constituency of the major group for children and youth. First, we welcome the inclusion of this article in the draft convention. This is an acknowledgement that harmful tax practices erode the national tax bases with particularly severe impact on developing and transitional economies. Further, they continue to weaken the capacity to mobilize domestic resources for essential services like education, healthcare and infrastructure, that children and youth depend on. So addressing these practices is therefore key to building a fair, inclusive and effective international tax system that supports sustainable development and intergenerational justice. While we appreciate the recognition of harmful tax practices in articles 8.1 and 8.2 and the rest that have been incorporated in this text, we note important gaps that must be addressed for the convention to be transformative. So follow with me, distinguished delegates. First is within the first paragraph, we acknowledge that it focuses narrowly on multinational enterprises. So this means that it leaves out other critical actors that engage in international tax abuse. Given this dynamic, we recommend expanding its scope to include all types of actors, including, but not limited to, high net worth individuals, private investment vehicles such as trusts and shell entities, and professional enablers as well, such as banks, auditors, and legal advisors. This will really ensure that the article reflects the full ecosystem of tax avoidance and evasion amid other harmful tax practices. When we move to the second paragraph, we acknowledge that it rightly mentions tax incentives and the need for them to be substance-based, which indeed is a positive step. However, to ensure accountability, it must be complemented by binding commitments to public transparency. Parties therefore should be required to publish information on all tax incentives, including the costs in terms of forgone revenue, so that citizens can assess whether these incentives truly serve developmental objectives. When we move closer to-- when we move to the third paragraph, My submission is a lot about strengthening the article. First, we recognize that it does mention reporting on a country by country basis, but the text remains sort of vague and non-committal. So in this case, as I make this recommendation, I call you all as distinguished delegates to remember that secrecy has been the lifeblood of harmful tax practices. Therefore, to promote genuine transparency, we strongly recommend that the convention explicitly require public country by country reporting. And when we move to the next part of this particular paragraph, we see reference to measures against harmful tax practices, including possible minimum taxes. But then again, we recommend that it is anchored in a robust, transparent, and multilateral review mechanism of standard through the conference of the parties. Chair and distinguished delegates, harmful tax practices reduce investment in our future and weaken public trust in financial institutions. Transparency and inclusivity therefore should be the foundation of Article 8. We therefore urge the committee to adopt the strong, clear and enforceable language within this article, capturing all actors, ensuring public disclosure and safeguarding this fiscal space that is really needed to invest in young people, in this case our constituents, children and youth and future generations that matter for the conversation we're having today. Thank you, Chair. I give you back the mic.

Thank you, CYI. With that, I believe we've exhausted the list of member states and stakeholders. So we've had quite a lot of interventions in this regard. We'll look at them, put them together, and also await the comments from member states. Once we have these, we'll put them together and then we can start having our intersessional meetings prior to February. I believe that we'll do all this in good time. And so with that, having closed that session, we'll move to Article 9 and Okay, all right. So, Article 9 reads, taking into account their different capacities, the state parties agree to pursue international tax cooperation approaches that will contribute to the achievement of sustainable development in these three dimensions, economic, social, and environmental, in a balanced and integrated manner. Um, this is article nine is one of the short, uh, commitments, but sometimes the smallest ones are the ones that have the most, uh, cause the most trouble. Hopefully not this time. So I want to open the floor for comments on article nine. Okay, I don't see any. Oh, okay. United Kingdom, please.

Thank you, Chair. Sustainable development is, of course, a core role of the UN and was central to the FFD4 agreement. The UK is steadfast in its support for achieving sustainable development worldwide. We know there's been much discussion throughout this process of the economic and social dimensions of sustainable development, but it is not fleshed out in this text. We would like to look to the Seville commitment where there is text on human rights and gender, for instance. We would welcome including such language given the importance of reflecting human rights, all human rights and gender equality. We would also welcome more discussion of the environmental dimension. We think the convention could helpfully set out how the Conference of the Parties will consider each of the three dimensions and some key principles for doing so, such as the polluter pays principle. The UN is well placed to add value by integrating tax and sustainable development objectives, and this could be reflected both in the preamble and in this article. Thank you.

Thank you. We hope you'll give us texts in that regard. India, please.

Thank you, Chair. We generally agree with the language in para 7 of the terms of reference, which establish an inclusive, fair, transparent, efficient, and equitable and effective international tax system for sustainable development. The current draft of Article 9 aligns with the para 10 of the terms of reference, which we believe takes into account all the factors for sustainable development in its three dimensions. So we support the current drafting. Thank you.

Thank you, India. Brazil, please.

Thank you, Chair. Since this is my first intervention here, allow me to make some preliminary general comments. The UNFC ITC, we consider it a timely and necessary effort to strengthen the multilateral architecture of international taxation in a context of increasing challenges. We have been deploying our best resources and engaging our tax experts to ensure that this process is substantive and effective, so we invite other members to invest in the appropriate resource for the success of this convention, considering members' different circumstances and capacities. Brazil also remains committed to engaging in the negotiations in a pragmatic and cooperative manner, seeking balanced solutions that reflect the perspectives and realities of both developing and developed countries. We would like to stress that more elaboration on the commitments will be crucial for the achievement of this convention's objectives. We are looking for a text that is balanced, but at the same time presents sufficient elements for discussions to be substantive and for the effectiveness of such provisions. We need ambition. We need to put more flesh and substance into those articles and throughout the protocols and commitments. Specifically related to Article 9, we understand that it appropriately place international tax cooperation within the broader framework of sustainable development, acknowledging its three dimensions and stressing the need for balance and integration. This recognition is positive and reflects the growing awareness that taxation is the main tool for finance and development. The provision, however, remains largely declaratory in nature, only repeating the terms of reference language. Brazil considers that key elements related to sustainable development, such as domestic resource mobilization, progressivity and inequality reduction, including through investment in social protection systems, need to be added to increase the article's comprehension and alignment to the objectives of the Convention. Therefore, Brazil suggests the following additional paragraph. Number two, the state parties recognize that strengthening domestic resource mobilization and progressive taxation is central to financing sustainable development, reducing inequalities, strengthening social protection systems, and supporting inclusive growth. In this regard, the state parties agree that cooperation shall aim to enhance countries' capacity to generate fair and predictable revenues while safeguarding policy space to design tax systems that respond to their specific development strategies and needs. Also, when we were about to come here to Nairobi, we received some suggestions from actors of civil society that perhaps we could include in this Article 9 reference to advance inequity, gender equality, racial equality, fighting racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and intolerance in general. recognizing that persistent historical and structural inequalities continue to shape global and domestic fiscal and economic systems. There's also a demand to include reference to reparatory and restorative measures where appropriate so that we can increase the reach of the article and adhere to requests and demands that seems in our view just and proper. Even though we don't have specific text to recommend right now, we would suggest the members here and the Secretariat to pay careful attention to those issues that are being proposed. Thank you.

Thank you, Brazil. Norway, please.

Thank you, Mr. Khaled, and thank you also for presenting us with this draft text for this article. Norway would like to emphasize the importance of sustainable development as a cross cutting issue in this convention process, but also in the UN as a whole. Sustainability is not a stand alone goal, but should be considered in all the commitments under this convention. And We think we would support most of the intervention from the UK on this issue. And following from this, we would suggest ensuring that this overarching importance of sustainable development is reflected and operationalized as a cross-cutting issue in this convention and the protocols. So therefore, perhaps going forward, we could consider where to position this article or the language in this article as suggested by others. This may need some adjustment in the wording and we are happy to come back with proposals for wording perhaps in our written input or later on. And like the UK, we think there could be a case for considering the language in the severe commitment on this issue. Thank you.

Thank you, Noemi. France, please.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm going to speak in French.

France fully supports. the presence of a commitment on sustainable development in all of its forms. At present, it's one aspect of international taxation which should be improved. And in this regard, therefore, we welcome the fact that it's here, but we'll also be very attentive as to its operational nature to ensure that it's implemented. We want to underline that from our point of view, it's really here that the UN can have an added value. perhaps the greatest added value in terms of international taxation. In particular, given the amount of UN institutions that discuss a number of topics where taxation is very important, in particular when it comes to maritime activities, where work on taxation relating to these challenges, for example, using kerosene in international aviation, where you have tax collection on plane tickets, This could be work which could very tangibly see major progress in terms of international taxation and on sustainable development. So we think it's urgent that we work on these topics. Thank you.

Thank you. France, Mexico, please.

Thank you, Chair. The dimensions of sustainable development could be further explored in Article 9. For example, Mexico is committed to universal social protection as a cornerstone of human rights inclusion and sustainable development. Mexico strongly supports the global target of increasing social protection coverage by at least two percentage points per year, included in paragraph 27A of the compromisos of Seville, the Seville. Noting that in Mexico, this target, it is not only met, but exceeds between 2015 and 2023, despite fiscal constraints, Social protection plays a crucial role of formalizing economies, generating economic growth, reducing poverty, mitigating inequalities, and therefore increasing tax revenues. Social protection systems are financed through a mix of tax finance and social insurance. We should be aware that social insurance reduces the pressure that social protection has on tax revenues. In this regard, Mexico sees merit in the proposal to include a reference to social protection in Article 9 of the Convention. Such a provision would strengthen the Convention of the Sevilla and the political declaration of the second world social summit while promoting coherence across global development agendas. Mexico therefore supports the consideration of a provision calling for the progressive extension of social protection coverage in line with ILO international labor standards which provide clear guidance on how to design sustainable rights-based social protection systems. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Coe. Bahamas, please.

Thank you very much. The Bahamas appreciates the inclusion of sustainable development as a separate article in the convention. However, we were hoping for language that goes beyond reiteration of just what's in the terms of reference. Small island developing states and developing countries in general, our public finances are under significant strain. Small island developing states experience even more strain on our public finances as a result of matters related to the environment and the climate crisis in which we live. Jamaica just got 30% of their GDP, I think, is the calculation, destroyed by Hurricane Melissa, uh, just a matter of a few weeks ago. Uh, and we've lived that through Hurricane Dorian as well. Uh, so the climate crisis is real for us. We recognize that, uh, tax policy can influence, um, actions of countries and both in growth and in taking responsibility for their actions. We think that this is a, a significant opportunity for us to bring, uh, three separate tracks at the United Nations together to really affect significantly the climate crisis and climate finance. We know that the COP27, for example, the loss and damage fund was created to help finance mitigation and adaptation to the climate crisis for vulnerable states and particularly countries like the Bahamas and small island developing states. We also know that there was a resolution that caused for the International Court of Justice to issue an advisory opinion on states obligations when it comes to the climate crisis and whether states themselves have obligations to other states for actions or inactions related to climate regulation. And here we speak about tax policy with respect to environmental matters and helping to achieve the sustainable development goals. We see this as a significant opportunity to bring these three initiatives together. The International Court of Justice has indicated in their advisory opinion that climate reparations from other countries to vulnerable countries are a suitable avenue to which adaptation and mitigation for small island developing states can occur. We believe that an environmental tax, a carbon tax, a polluter tax, as the United Kingdom has said, polluter pays principle can be factored into this convention in which a loss and damage fund that was established by COP27 could actually be funded for meaningful reform on the climate crisis. as well as helping countries like the Bahamas adapt and mitigate to the climate crisis that we did not create, that other countries did create, therefore imposing the obligations that the International Court of Justice has said are legitimate. and we should expect. And therefore, I think we should link the three. We should, we advocate, the Bahamas advocates for a carbon tax or a polluter's tax as a function of this convention that will fund a loss and damage fund established by COP27 and bring the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice to a meaningful resolution. We thank you for this opportunity to contribute.

Thank you, Bahamas. China, please.

Thank you, Chair, for the opportunity to speak.

We acknowledge the great importance of sustainable development and we support the current languages of provisions in Article 9. The current languages are pretty much in line with that of TOR, which, if we recall, has been or had been excessively debated and agreed on. This is a text convention. The current languages are high level and broad enough to encompass many aspects in the three economic, social, environmental dimensions.

Thank you.

Thank you, China. Saudi Arabia, please.

Thank you, Daniel, for giving me the floor. I think we have extensively debated this paragraph previously.

Mainly the concept during the TOR discussion and later on during the workstream meetings. And I think there were broad consensus that we should stick to the TOR language and therefore we support the language as presented here on the screen. And for the calls on discuss things beyond than that environment related discussion.

I think there are other fora that are very well equipped to discuss this matter and I think The way of the drafting of this paragraph does align with the methodology that we have been.

Using in this convention so far, which is to be general and not to get into the detail.

Thank you so much.

Thank you, Sadiya. Bangladesh, please.

Thank you.

Regarding the sustainable development linkage, Bangladesh position is that tax cooperation must support SDGs and increase domestic resource mobilization. We feel tax must be explicitly linked to development priorities such as infrastructure, social protection, and digital administration modernization. Our opinion is that tax cooperation must support development outcomes, not only administrative harmonization. I thank you.

Thank you, Bangladesh. Zambia, please.

Thank you, Chair. On behalf of the Africa Group, I wish to deliver a statement. Chair, from the Africa Group, we are generally in support of Article 9. So the Africa Group expresses its general support of Article 9. and also with openness to see what we can consider in terms of what other countries have raised, for instance, Brazil on domestic resource mobilization. Article 9 reflects the very essence of what Africa has long advocated for. That is an international tax system that is fair, inclusive, and aligned with broader goals of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and Agenda 2063 of the African Union. Effective tax cooperation is vital for mobilizing domestic resources, keeping illicit financial flows, base erosion, and ensuring that countries have the fiscal space to invest in people, infrastructure, the green transition, and provide the necessary social protection. The African Union underscores, however, that the capacities of states to engage in and benefit from international cooperation are not equal. And we note that the current wording of the article takes cognizance of this, taking into account different capacity of the states, which we fully support. So recognizing these asymmetries is essential to achieving true inclusivity, fairness in global tax governance. And therefore, Chair, member states, we call for international cooperation that supports capacity building, technology transfer, and equitable participation of all countries, especially developing countries, in shaping global tax norms. We find the current work that we are doing that provides this opportunity of inclusivity and other countries to come on the table and shape global tax norms. In this spirit, the African group reaffirms its commitment to a multilateral, inclusive, and transparent tax cooperation framework under the auspices of the United Nations. and one that upholds the principles of fairness, solidarity and shared responsibility and that contributes meaningfully to sustainable development for all. Chair, I submit. Thank you.

Thank you. Can we have Jamaica, please?

Thank you, Chair.

Very short intervention.

I just want to support the Bahamas in their intervention and to express.

Or I don't know if disappointment is too emotive, but we too believed that we would have.

Seen more than what was just in the terms of reference on this very important issue.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you. Thank you, Jamaica. Islamic Republic of Iran, please.

Thank you, Chair. We support the current draft of Article 9, which adequately addresses all three pillars of sustainable development. We emphasize the importance of fair, inclusive, and transparent approach to the international tax system, and we use this article as a positive step toward straightening the link between tax policies and the objectives of sustainable development in an equitable and balanced way.

Thank you.

Thank you, Iran. Okay, I don't see any more member states. I think we can move to stakeholders. ILO, please.

Thank you, Chair. The ILO would like to propose the inclusion of social protection in Article 9 of the Convention. The ILO would like to emphasize the role of social protection in promoting inclusive growth and strengthening tax revenues. But Chair, please allow me to ask this rhetorical question, why the ILO is making this proposal, but also why do we need stronger international tax cooperation? Ultimately, it is to increase tax revenues. But the real question is, what will government do with these additional tax revenues? Connecting government revenues to government expenditure, is crucial. It shows how international tax cooperation can help finance the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals, including the target on universal social protection. And also a stronger connection between government revenues and expenses makes the Convention's outcome meaningful for all people's daily lives. Achieving universal social protection has a well documented multiplier effects across the SDGs. It supports economic growth, poverty reduction, gender equality, decent work and social inclusion. It is therefore no coincidence that universal social protection is anchored under SDG 1 on no poverty, specifically in target 1.3. 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 social protection mechanism and 17% by non-contributory mechanism, largely tax financed. Taxes and social security contribution are the main strategy to close this gap and ensure adequate and sustainable access to social protection for all. While national systems and legislation are essential in shaping social protection policies, ILO constituents, which include governments, workers, and employer organizations, agreed on international labor standards, which are international treaties on social protection, such as the ILO Social Security Minimum Standard Convention number 102, 1952, and recommendation number 202 on social protection floor. They provide a common framework to guide countries on how to design right-based social protection systems and programs. ILO standards in the field of social protection call for financing social protection through a mix of tax finance and social insurance mechanism. It must be noted that strengthening of social insurance mechanism eases the pressure on tax finance social protection, promoting formalization of economies and increase in tax compliance. As ILO, we believe that given the overarching role of social protection in achieving all the SDGs and recognizing that ILO international labor standards providing clear guidance on how to design effective social protection system, member state may wish to consider including in article nine a provision that calls for the progressive extension of social protection coverage in line with the standards. Such a provision would build bridges between the UN tax convention, the Compromiso de Sevilla, the political declaration of the second World Social Summit. It would also link government revenue with government expenditure, thereby strengthening trust in tax systems and ultimately in government themselves. I remain available here in the room to provide further context on this proposal. Please do reach out. I thank you, Chair.

Thank you. GPI, please.

Thank you, Chair. Let us take the floor. I'm speaking on behalf of Greenpeace as part of the civil society coalition. Delegates, while we are in this room, we must not forget the world outside that has led us to this point and which reinforces the urgency of a bold new UN tax convention. Devastating climate impacts are happening with increasing regularity and wrecking havoc on lives and livelihoods across the globe. Floods and typhoons have been sweeping Pakistan and the Philippines just last week. And let us not forget our colleagues in Belem, Brazil right now, with political leaders from all over the world as they yet again negotiate urgent measures and financial commitments to save our world from the climate crisis. Without making the connection between this convention and the commitments being discussed at COP, we risk negotiating a framework that exists in a vacuum, detached from the realities and responsibilities our governments have already accepted. Delegates, our political leaders tell us that there isn't enough money yet. Since the Paris Agreement was adopted in 2015, the wealth of the richest 1% has surged by over 33.9 trillion US dollars, enough to end annual poverty 22 times over. And the top five oil and gas majors alone have accumulated almost 800 billion US dollars in profits. This is what has brought us here, to negotiate a historic convention that can help deliver sustainable development in all its fullness. and equitably address the shared global problem of the climate emergency. To be fit for purpose, Article 9 must be strengthened to include the following: a clear commitment mandating states to deliver both nationally and internationally progressive environmental taxation in line with the polluter pays principle and common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities with specific reference to multinational corporations and high net worth individuals. It must ensure that fiscal systems contribute and are fully aligned with the progressive realisation of human rights, inequality reduction, gender and race equality, repatriation and sustainable development. And also a commitment to establish an international tax mechanism in the form of a polluter pays tax on the global profits of highly polluting industries, beginning with fossil fuel companies. These revenues should be used for global climate, environmental and sustainable development goals and funds under the existing UN agreements. Details and implementation of this mechanism should be agreed through future decisions at the Conference of Parties. And delegates, we must be frank. If some of you say that you've been given a mandate to negotiate tax, but not sustainable development, and that this is the reason for your silence on this matter, then please ask your governments to include experts on the environment and sustainable development in your delegations. Because this convention cannot and should not be negotiated in isolation from the realities of people and the planet. Dear delegates, let us be clear about the stakes in this room. You are not just negotiating a technical text here. You are, through this convention, and in particular Article 9, making choices that will be decisive for our capacities or not to address the climate and inequality crises. Don't let us down delegates, thank you.

Thank you, AAI.

Excellencies, distinguished guests, Xin Zhao. I speak on behalf of ActionAid Vietnam and our partners in the Tax and Fiscal Justice Alliance Asia, TAFJA. tax and gender working group hosted by the Global Alliance on Tax Justice, GATJ. Today we stand at a historic moment shaping the UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation, a process that can redefine global tax governance to be inclusive, equitable and transparent. Tax systems are not neutral. They perpetuate inequality by ignoring gendered reality such as income gaps and unpaid care work. The current architecture rooted in colonial and patriarchal structures concentrates wealth among a few while depriving millions, especially women and marginalized communities of opportunity. This is not just a technical issue. This is political, systemic, and deeply tied to human rights and injustice. Vietnam, my country alone, loses 860 million annually dollars, resources that could fund gender responsive public services. The states have pledged gender responsive taxation under CDO and compromissal that Sevia, yet these commitments remains unrealized because of the global tax system limits, fiscal sovereignty, particularly for the global south. We urge this convention to deliver transformative change by one, embedding human rights and gender equality obligations into fiscal systems. This should include explicit references to the goal of reducing gender inequality within and among countries and to publicly financing gender responsive public services. by mandating gender responsive tax policies, eliminating bias and establishing a gender and tax advisory group for implementation. To support this, the convention should establish a multi-stakeholder gender and tax advisory group to guide its implementation, ensure that the feminist perspective are integrated across all work streams and that reforms remain inclusive, evidence-based and responsive to the needs of the marginalized groups. Three, by ensuring transparency and accountability through gender disaggregated data and regular progress reporting at each Conference of the Parties from now on. The future Conference of the Parties should also perform an overall review of the implementation of this article as a standing agenda item for each meeting. A feminist tax system does more than remove discrimination. It actively closes gender gaps. Tax justice is gender justice and gender justice is the cornerstone of a fairer and more sustainable world. This is opportunity to lead and let us build a global tax system that serve all, not just privileged few. Thank you.

Thank you, GCE please.

Thank you so much, sir. My name is Cheikh Mbo of the Education for Senegal Coalition. I'm a member of the Global Campaign for Education, and I'm speaking on behalf of the Global Alliance for Tax Justice. Distinguished delegates, yes, you can. You can save lives. You can give rise to new hope. You can guarantee to all access to quality education, to health care and social security. You can make our world a fairer one, one that acts in more solidarity. You have the power to act here in this room. And to do this, dear delegates, you have to be bolder when it comes to what the Convention wants to achieve by strengthening Article 9, by integrating in a balanced way the achievement of sustainable development and its three dimensions economic, social and environmental. The terms of reference for the Framework Convention clearly define the objective of this process, namely sustainable development, and yet, This is not reflected in Article 9. Distinguished delegates, we can manage this, we can be successful. Distinguished delegates, it is for this reason that we ask that Article 9 should explicitly refer to commitment in favour of public services for greater social and economic justice as well as gender equality. The financing need for essential public services is within our grasp. We require $325 billion per year to eradicate extreme monetary poverty. $340 billion per year by 2030 to guarantee access to preschool, school, and high school. 371 billion dollars per year to ensure that there is universal sanitation for all states around the world. A bold convention, one which has been properly crafted, would enable us to raise thousands of billions of dollars which are currently not being paid as tax. And these billions, millions of billions of dollars could guarantee and uphold the rights of billions of individuals. Distinguished delegates, This year our governments have again undertaken concrete commitments to achieve our rights to education, water, health, sanitation, food, housing. Last week they renewed their commitment in favour of quality public services and adequate social coverage. It is your duty to ensure that your governments actually achieve this by strengthening Article 9 by firstly including a clear commitment aimed at ensuring that tax systems are in keeping with existing commitments to achieve human rights with a maximum of resources, as well as reducing inequality both within as well as between countries. This of course includes a commitment to step up efforts to fight against racism, all forms of discrimination, xenophobia and intolerance. Two, an explicit reference to an objective of the financing of public services, including education, health and social security. The ILO made a proposal to this end. We urge all of you to complete it by including all public services which the taxation system should serve. And three, an obligation upon each party to regularly account for its performance, regarding the commitments under Article 9. Transparency, accountability will guarantee broad support by our peoples. And fourthly, a mandate granted to the Conference of the Parties to examine the implementation of Article 9 as a permanent agenda item for each meeting. Distinguished delegates, it is your moral and legal obligation to uphold economic, social, and cultural rights, as well as the right to development. The obligation to meet the challenge of inequality, the duty to ensure that there's a democratic and participative taxation mechanism. We believe that you will be able to meet these challenges. History will recall that you will have turned international tax cooperation into a lever for changing social relationships. We count upon you, do not disappoint us, thank you.

Thank you, KMT please.

Thank you, Chair, for the opportunity to take the floor. My name is Bishop Nelson Kisari, Presiding Bishop of Kanisala, Menanet, Tanzania, speaking on behalf of KMT, Norwegian Church Aid. all African Conference of Churches, Lutheran World Federation, and the African Civil Society Working Group on the UN Tax Convention. Chair, as faith actors, we believe Article 9 on sustainable development requires inclusions and strengthen linkages between tax and sustainable development. Rising inequality continues to widen the gap between the super rich and ordinary citizens. Through tax evasion, avoidance, and illicit financial flows, The wealthiest amass vast fortune while draining billions from public treasuries. This undermines government capacity to fund education, healthcare, social protection, and climate resilience, especially in developing countries. The 2024 commitment to reducing inequality, CRI index, shows that most countries in Eastern and Southern Africa are backtracking on anti-inequality policies. Since 2022, 80% have cut social spending, 50% have made tax system less progressive, and 90% have worsened labor rights. This trend pushed millions into deeper precarity. To reverse this, we must strengthen international cooperation, close tax loopholes, enforce transparency, and embrace progressive taxation so that the wealthiest contribute fairly. Tackling inequality is not charity, it is a moral and economic imperative. The convention should include commitment to ensure that fiscal systems are fully in line with the UN member states obligations to progressively realize human rights to the maximum of their available resources. Inequality reduction and sustainable development, including the achievement of relevant UN goals, obligations and commitments. This should include specific mentions of the goal of reducing inequality within and among countries, environmental protection, including action to mitigate, adapt and respond to loss and damage from climate change, and action to protect and restore ecosystem and biodiversity, gender equality, financing quality universal public services for all, such as education, healthcare and social security, and the promotion of progressive tax systems. Furthermore, the convention should uphold the right-based approach to taxation that operationalizes the concept of gender-responsive taxation, including by promoting the collection and analysis of gender disaggregated tax data. The article on sustainable development should create an obligation on each party to respond regularly on its performance in relations to commitments under the article in accordance with the different needs, priorities and capacities of parties as per terms of reference paragraph 9A. The report should include a specific section on potential negative spillover effect of the parties' tax system on the capacities of other parties to deliver sustainable development either through domestic resource mobilization or armful incentives. The future conference of parties should also perform an overall review of implementation of this article as a standing agenda item during each meeting. The quality of public service directly determines how societies grow economically, socially, and environmentally. To address these interconnected challenges, requires a global cooperation and coordinated value-driven approach to work together to pursue global social and ethical reforms that uphold equity, fairness, integrity, and human dignity established by God for human development. Even tax collectors came to be baptized. "Teacher," they asked, "what should we do?" He told them, "Don't collect any more than you are required to." Excellencies, we reaffirm our unwavering conviction that the UN Tax Convention represents our best opportunity to establish a truly fair, inclusive, and effective international tax system, one that serves both people and planet. We, the representatives of faith factors and civil societies, remain deeply committed to supporting this process and contributing constructively to its success. I do yes submit and thank you, Chair.

All right, thank you. CYI, please.

Thank you, Chair. I am Domadidui from the European Youth Forum and I will be speaking on behalf of the FFD Children and Youth Constituency of the major group for children and youth. Distinguished delegates, as it stands, Article 9 is composed of 41 words. There are 17 sustainable development goals. So that's less than three words per SDG. I could maybe stop my statement here and let us all reflect on what that means. But this matter is too important for the world's youth to let it pass in silence. You have committed to developing international tax cooperation that contributes to achieving sustainable development. That means tackling poverty and hunger, ensuring health, education, and gender equality, guaranteeing clean water and energy, decent work, infrastructure, reduced inequalities, sustainable communities, responsible production and consumption, climate action, peace, justice and safeguarding life below water and on land. Young people cannot accept a hollow promise in this article. Without a clear link between fair taxation and the goal of progressive realization of human rights, this commitment is an empty declaration. Article nine must do more than restate a principle. It must ensure that international tax cooperation directly delivers sustainable development. We call for major additions to Article 9, including specific mentions of all the building blocks of our collective future. Our demand is simple. Invest in us. Invest in our minds with free, equitable, and quality public education and lifelong learning. Invest in our health. Our taxation is the most reliable foundation for universal public health systems that serve everyone, not only those who can afford them. Invest in our planet. The climate and biodiversity crisis are a massive intergenerational injustice. The international tax system must discourage pollution and finance a just transition and give us the means to build the resilient infrastructure our generations will depend on for decades. Right now, your negotiators are in Brazil at COP30, searching for the funds to deliver climate action. Well, the drafters of the Compromisso de Sevilla, the drafters of the Baku to Belem Roadmap, And all of us in this room know very well where those funds can be found. Children and youth are not just a demographic. We are the long term stakeholders. A strong Article 9 is your promise to us. This promise cannot be empty. Our future must be funded. Thank you.

Thank you. OHCHR, please.

Thank you, Chair, for the opportunity to speak. I am speaking on behalf of the UN Human Rights Office. As this is the first time I've spoken, we would like to express our appreciation to the hosts, Kenya, as well as to all the work of the Secretariat to make this meeting happen. Let me also make some slightly general points in my statement. An inclusive, effective and fair international tax system is critical for the achievement of sustainable development as well as the realization of human rights, including for the obligation to mobilize the maximum available resources for the realization of economic, social and cultural rights, such as the rights to health, education, social security, as well as civil and political rights and the right to development. Human rights norms and standards can also help to shape a more transparent and equitable tax system. We would call your attention to the fact that member states in the UN Human Rights Council have recognized the need, the urgent need for global tax reform. The UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights this year released a statement on tax. setting out the relationship between human rights and tax. All, in fact, many of the UN human rights treaty bodies have been developing standards on human rights and tax, including tax avoidance and tax evasion over the last decade. We think that member states might find some of this useful in their work. I would also like to make three quick points. On raising revenues, we need ambition to achieve sustainable development and human rights. This Article 9 should make reference to what states have already agreed in the FFD outcomes and commitments, as well as all their existing international obligations. The FFD Seville conference identified a massive gap in financing for sustainable development of about $4 trillion. With the steep declines in ODA over this year and unprecedented levels of debt distress across much of the developing world, we were struck at the FFD4 how much of the pressure for financing development is now being placed on domestic resource mobilization, in other words, on tax and on this process. But we have to ask the question, who will be paying these taxes? It is clear, as the FFD outcome documents also makes clear, that without more progressive taxation, it will be the poor and the middle classes who bear the disproportionate burden for financing development. especially women. We cannot argue that there are not enough resources to finance sustainable development for all, as civil society has repeatedly pointed out today. And we know how many that most of our countries are losing revenues to tax evasion and avoidance by multinational corporations and wealthy individuals. Earlier in this process, we had heard some more ambitious proposals from member states regarding raising revenues, new revenues to meet this funding gap. Ideas for reforming the OECD's minimum tax on multinational corporations to better meet the specific needs of developing countries, ensuring economic activities are taxed. where the value is created and profits are generated. We saw an earlier G20 proposal led by Brazil for a global minimum tax on the world's wealthiest billionaires with estimates that a tax of just 2% could raise $250 billion per year. That proposal was not for an old fashioned wealth tax at the domestic level, but it was a proposal for a global minimum tax, similar to the global corporate minimum tax, for those who have generally not paid taxes anywhere. But this obviously requires international cooperation. We understand that all of these issues are difficult and sensitive for many of our countries, but we need to anchor this process in the FFT for outcomes. The scale of global development financing gap requires more ambition. Secondly, on transparency, the procedural principles of international human rights law, including the principles of participation, transparency and accountability, are critical for this process. We call for strengthening transparency and the right to information and to take account of the full range of human rights. as well as establish procedures under international human rights law for balancing between these rights when and if that becomes necessary. And thirdly, on participation in civic space, we would welcome the active participation of civil society at this meeting. and we recognize the importance and the expertise and commitment in this process. We call for more the creation of more space for meaningful participation of civil society, including in relation to the intercessional meetings to be updated on what is happening. We believe that this greater civil society participation can help us all to keep ambition high. Thank you.

Thank you. Can we have the South Centre, please?

Thank you, Chair. South Centre welcomes the inclusion of the article on sustainable development. We support the interventions by the African group, Brazil and India. International tax cooperation should indeed contribute and support domestic revenue mobilization to meet sustainable development goals. and this will ensure fair and equitable outcomes, especially for developing countries. Thank you.

Thank you, South Centre. Right, I don't see any more flags or requests for the floor. So, With that, I think we'll take note of the suggestions that have been made, and we'll welcome the comments as and when they come. We'll take, if I want to say 10, we take 15, so we might as well take a 15-minute break, and then come back and go to the next article. Thank you.

Hello everyone. Now we are resuming our discussion for uh we we are done with article nine. So when I'm saying we are done I mean we we already we don't have any other requests for the floor for article nine. Uh so now we are moving to the next article which is article ten about dispute prevention uh and resolution. Daniel please.

Thank you everybody and welcome back. So article 10, prevention and resolution of tax disputes. We have, we've done two things over here. We have the text that we've tried to put together. Also, looked at some questions that were raised in terms of some of the relationships between Article 10 and the other articles on disputes, and tried also to come out with some possible case studies on dispute resolution. So we'll basically go through them and then we'll open up for comments. So for the text, paragraph one, The state parties recognize that implementation of effective measures for avoiding and resolving tax disputes supports cross-border investment and cross-border trade in goods and services. The state parties will seek to minimize the potential for disputes by providing clear and accessible legislation and interpretive guidance regarding tax obligations. Three, the state parties also will strive to implement domestic dispute resolution mechanisms that are fair, independent, accessible, and effective in resolving disputes in a timely manner for both taxpayers and the tax authorities. This is the text we came out with, but we did some further work. Next slide, please. Now, over here, what we tried to do was look at the relationship between Article 10, Article 20 and Protocol 2. As we mentioned earlier, the dispute resolution is mentioned in three parts of the terms of reference, as a commitment, as one of the elements, and then as a protocol. So, What we are looking at in terms of the dispute settlement, that's the 20, we are saying that it could be similar to what we have in other framework conventions or other multilateral conventions and look at what they have and then how it relates to the interpretation and application of the convention and the protocols. On the commitment itself, the commitment that's, okay, so it's an effective prevention of tax disputes in the framework convention. The idea is to foster a tax climate that encourages foreign direct investment and domestic economic growth and resource mobilization. Now, this one then is not limited to disputes arising under the convention, but it also provides an anchor for the protocols that's on dispute prevention. The protocol on disputes, on prevention and resolution of disputes, which we are currently discussing, also could then provide detailed rules to implement the provision on dispute settlement and a commitment on effective prevention of disputes in the framework convention. The idea is to promote cooperation between state parties and to provide a process for resolving both domestic and cross-border disputes on a variety of taxes. So these are the three areas in which we believe that the three articles are related. Now, we also created some examples of maybe how these things could work out. A lot of these ones would fit more into this, but so I'll leave out, ask Patricia to just go through the examples for us and then we'll continue.

Thank you, co-lead. So we added the slide that Daniel just took you through is one that we had used, I think, certainly in August and in the multi-stakeholder consultations. So that should be familiar. But as we have been working on these different, you know, the commitments and the protocols, there has been a little bit of some back and forth about what is covered in each one. So we thought the example would be helpful. How do we, I don't have the example. Okay. And so, um, the, as we'll hear next week, and I don't, I, I'm trying very hard not to step on the co-leads toes here, but I don't think it's a spoiler to say that the focus of the protocol is on cross-border tax disputes. Yeah, it's now up. But the issues note in August does confirm that the scope of Article 10 could be broader. So we have these two examples here. Article 9, so the first one is is in fact a cross-border tax dispute. We have a classic transfer pricing case where country A believes that the price that was charged by its resident to its corporate sibling should be 10 euro per unit higher. The tax authorities of country B review the adjustment and determine that the original price is correct. So that is a clear dispute that could be addressed or could be within the scope of Article 10, where you want to have a mechanism to ensure that taxpayers can get their taxpayers and tax authorities can resolve such disputes in an efficient, fair manner. Case two is a company that is, it's a resident of country A. I used an example of an airline because this is an issue that comes up with some airlines about whether renovations, rehabilitation, that they conduct on their airplanes constitute ordinary or capital expenditures. And this is a purely domestic question. But if the goal is to encourage cross-border trade and investment, then the idea would be that Article 10 that the commitment in Article 10 would also extend to resolving cases like this in a fair, equitable, timely manner. So 10 is disputes between governments and taxpayers in either a domestic or cross-border setting. So that's article 10. We could come up with more, but I think, and we can, we can talk about it. I mean, let's, I think it, we want to hear from the committee whether they agree that, that the scope of 10 would cover both of those. Um, Katie, can we go to the next one? So we haven't talked about article 20 in the work stream yet. Um, but, In order, the assumption based on the slide two before this is that this Article 20 would probably look a lot like similar provisions in other multilateral conventions, which is this is when there are disputes between governments, not between governments and taxpayers. And one of the reasons we haven't talked about Article 20 up until now is that we didn't know what the commitments would look like. And so thinking about what disputes could arise between governments in terms of applying the convention, it's a little difficult. When you look at the commitments, there is very little that could give rise to disagreements. But the one example that, at least as it is now, obviously the convention could change and there could be more potential disputes in terms of interpretation of the convention. But the one that sort of is there in Article 6 is the confidentiality rules. So you might have a circumstance, as paragraph three is drafted now, that requires the country that has received information to keep it confidential and comply with safeguards that are specified by the requested country. And if the country that receives the information disclosed it in a manner that was not consistent with the safeguards that were specified under paragraph three of Article six as it's currently written, that could be a dispute that would have, would not be in Article 10 and probably not be in the protocol but would fall within Article 20, which is disputes between the parties to the convention. So we'll talk about, I mean, one of the big questions for next week is what is covered, what is a cross-border tax dispute that is going to be covered by the protocol. But we wanted to just sort of look at some examples and think about what is in each of the articles before we start looking at the actual text. So with that, I will hand it back to the co-lead and open it up for discussion.

Thank you, Patricia. So we will now open up for comments. As we mentioned, the examples was just to see, help us to what kind of relationships we expect to have between the three articles. Are we ready to close? Yeah, I don't see any. Okay, let me count up to five. If we don't have anything, then I believe that we are all happy with what we have and we can, I'm sure if everybody's tired, we can go and have a holiday. Okay, Austria, please. Thank you, Veronica, for.

Thank you, co-leader. I feel a little bit pressured now, but I think it's an important article, so we should not just move on. So let me collect my thoughts a little bit. So first of all, thanks for providing the examples on Article 10 and Article 20. I think it is indeed helpful to have a little bit of material at hand to consider this draft text. I think as Article 10 reads right now, I'm not entirely sure if it is really can really serve as an anchor what we've been discussing under the dispute resolution and prevention protocol so far, because I don't see any mention of an anchor for having mutual agreement procedures, arbitration, mediation, because the only thing we talk about here is in paragraph three, striving to implement domestic dispute resolution mechanisms, which from my understanding would more refer to legal proceedings in the domestic legal system and I, at least from our point of view, this should not be the focus of Article 10. So we will need to think about some wording to add here to make sure that also other mechanisms would be covered. Other than that, I think paragraph One is important in a sense that it sets the right context, however, it is more like a preamble language to me. So also some redrafting will probably be required. We will get back with concrete drafting proposals. Thanks.

Thank you, Austria. Switzerland, please.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I basically, I mean, thank you for these slides. I was wondering if we shouldn't break now so that we could reflect on these, I think, important relationships between the different articles and pick up the discussion on article 10 tomorrow. I don't know exactly what our agenda is like, how full it is tomorrow. That would be my first proposal. Substantively regarding Article 10, I had exactly the same preliminary remark as Veronica from Austria. I don't understand quite the link between, for instance, this article and the protocol and different aspects that we're discussing in the protocol. And I was wondering if so I think it's interesting to see the different, the whole picture in a certain way, the different articles and trying to cover all the different fields, the disputes in the convention, domestic problems, cross-border. But I would wonder if we wouldn't want to break now and start with this tomorrow so that we can think about this before tomorrow.

We do have some flags raised, so let's continue. We'll see where we get to. I'm sure if members need to come to it tomorrow morning, I'm sure after that we can still make time for further reflections. So with that, I think we have Zambia, please.

Thank you, Chair, and thank you also for those slides. I think preliminary views, speaking on behalf of the Africa group, I think there are two issues. I think I concur with the suggestion with Switzerland that it would be important to sit back and reflect. in terms of the examples, in terms of how they relate from what you've explained so that we have that discussion. Notwithstanding, I think we had some amendments to the text, but I think it will be important that we get back and reflect and our preliminary proposals may change depending on how we reflect on what has been submitted. So notwithstanding that, I think Like Austria indicated, I think from the Africa group, we had proposals to refine paragraph one, but subject to the reflections we have on what has been submitted in terms of the interaction of Article 10, 20 and Protocol 2. So I think for paragraph one, we wanted it to come out more of a commitment and not the way it's currently worded, which to us looks like a preamble. where we had suggested that the parties commit to take all necessary measures to ensure effective prevention and resolution of cross-border tax disputes. That was our proposal, but we may come back to this after we reflect as a group, depending on how the Chair looks at having a relook at this tomorrow, depending on how the program is. And the idea of us rephrasing to that is we have a key commitment. which provides a basis for Protocol 2 because this commitment from our understanding also provides a basis to the protocol prevention and resolution of tax disputes but also a commitment for member states in terms of how they take measures within their own domestic legislation to ensure that there's effective prevention and resolution of disputes because the domestic legislation does have a bearing on your cross-border disputes. We had also a suggestion that paragraph two and three be merged and the sentence, the words that says the state parties in both be deleted such that we have an opening which says in favorance to this commitment the parties shall among other measures so that we don't limit to that Then we retain what is there. However, paragraph two, we have to delete the state parties will, we delete that. Paragraph three, the state parties will also, we delete that so that it starts from strive. Then we also delete reference to domestic so that it just says dispute resolution mechanism, which makes it broader. So, Chair, that's from the Africa Group, but like I said, I think with the examples that have been given, we may come back on that once we reflect, depending on how flexible it is to look at this item again tomorrow, but we submit. Thank you.

Thank you, Zambia. No, No, we please.

Thank you, co-lead. I was just about to lower my flag after the interventions by Switzerland and Zambia, because I think we agree that it would be good to reflect upon what has been said as introduction to this provision now and the examples on the screen perhaps. You could circulate the examples. on e-delegate so that we can review overnight and have a reflection and have a broader discussion, not only related to Article 10, because we would agree that that is important. Thank you.

Alright, so maybe let me ask this question. We have two flags up. Will you still want to talk on it or like the others, you want us to, you want to have time to think about it? I mean, if you want to make your statement, you can. If you still want to make it or do you feel that we should give ourselves time to discuss it? Or if you want to go ahead, Saudi Arabia.

We're okay with reconvening tomorrow. We just have a general comment. Thank you.

Okay. All right. India.

So please, if everyone would like to save it for tomorrow, just lower your flag. If still you would like to take the floor, so keep your flag on. All.

Right, India, please.

Thank you, Chair. the in the article 10 if it's just a small suggestion that it's best if we could if we don't connect the dispute resolution to outcomes like support of cross-border investment and cross-border trade in goods and services and we may restrict it to promoting of international economic cooperation. We believe that the purpose of this article is to ensure effective dispute resolution as a primary tool for strengthening domestic resource mobilization rather than supporting cross-border trade. And second point being the mention of resolving tax disputes rather than cross-border tax disputes. So that just as clarification is sought why we are retaining it as tax dispute rather than cross-border tax disputes. Thank you.

Thank you, India. Okay, since I don't see any more flags, let me hand over to the chair. To, oh, Brazil, okay.

Okay, thank you, chair.

This is my first intervention.

Thank you for providing the examples.

We may come back with further comments tomorrow after reviewing the slides.

But we were.

For now, we were considering whether it might be necessary or appropriate to include a placeholder or an additional paragraph referring to the potential role and institutional support of the UN in this area. this matter which may involve questions of structure and institutional arrangements could already be reflected in the framework convention.

Thank you, Chair.

Can you come back please? It wasn't too clear what you were saying.

Okay. We are trying to say that we could consider an additional paragraph that address the role of the UN in this area, in this tax disputes resolution area, and it could involve questions of the structure and institutional arrangements here in the framework convention.

All right, thank you. So, Ando, what you're saying?

Okay, thank you everyone. I think by this we are done for today and we complete our course work for today. Tomorrow we're gonna continue with Article 10. And just before we close, I would like to remind everyone that tomorrow afternoon as per the program of work agreed in the bureau, tomorrow afternoon is a closed meeting for member states only. So tomorrow afternoon from three o'clock it's a closed meeting Thank you all and looking forward to see you tomorrow in the same room at 10 AM.