Similar Posts
YTJN is centering youth In FfD4 agenda
The Youth for Tax Justice Network (YTJN), in collaboration with partners including, Africa-Europe Foundation and the Southern Africa Youth Forum (SAYoF) is spearheading a side event at the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development (FfD4).
Financing our Futures: What does Domestic Resource Mobilization (DRM) mean for Youth?
Youth should care. The main reason is because we’re paying, but not heard. Africa is the youngest continent in the world, with over 60% of its population under the age of 25. Yet despite being the majority, young people are among the most heavily taxed, especially through consumption taxes such as VAT on airtime, mobile money, transport, and everyday goods.
Plea For Tax Justice In Africa
“Taxation is the price which civilized communities pay for the opportunity of remaining civilized”. …
Youth and Climate Justice: An Assessment of COP29 Outcomes on Climate Financing for Low-Income Countries
Youth are also greatly impacted by climate change due to the loss of educational and skill-building opportunities. The United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) estimates that by 2050, climate change would cause up to 1.8 billion school days to be lost worldwide, which will have a catastrophic effect on the education and skill-building of young people.
Why Should Young People Care about the Financing for Development Agenda?
It’s a call to action for youth to rise, engage, demand, and drive transformative change and co-creators of a new financing paradigm that truly serves the people and the planet. This piece is also a call to action for governments, multi-lateral institutions and civil society organizations to rise to the challenge of meaningful youth inclusion.
YTJN Nairobi Tax Talks Day 7 RoundUp: Third Session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee to Develop a UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation
The conversation then drifted on questions on how to handle disputes in the absence of tax treaties. For developing countries, the answer was simple … “No treaty, no dispute-resolution mechanism.” For them, the Protocol should not create new legal bases.
But across the room, private sector voices insisted that disputes do not wait for treaties; businesses struggle with uncertainty, and governments lose revenue. They pressed for innovations, with some calling for strengthening MAP, others calling for coordinated unilateral Advance Pricing Agreements (APAs), and others for the view that temporary unilateral relief would prevent double taxation.
