View previous stories
	Greenhouse gases in the atmosphere endanger public health and welfare by Union of Concerned Scientists, agencies USA   16 Mar. 2026   War-driven energy price spikes highlight value of renewables: UN climate chief   The disruption of global energy supplies is being felt worldwide, the UN’s top climate change official warned, as conflict in the Middle East drives oil and gas prices sharply higher – echoing the market turmoil triggered by the war in Ukraine.   Speaking at the 2026 Green Growth Summit in Brussels, Simon Stiell, Executive Secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), said the volatility underscored the strategic value of renewable energy.   “Renewables turn the tables,” he said during a keynote address to the event, which brings together European climate and environment ministers alongside businesses, investors and other key stakeholders.   “Sunlight doesn’t depend on narrow and vulnerable shipping straits, wind blows without massive taxpayer-funded naval escorts and renewable energy allows countries to insulate themselves from global turmoil and to side-step might-is-right politics.”   Renewable energy delivers on people’s top priorities: security, well-paid jobs, better health and relief from rising living costs, he added.   “Fossil fuel dependency is ripping away national security and sovereignty and replacing it with subservience and rising costs,” he said, adding that the reality is what most voters are demanding, climate action delivers at scale. “Renewables and resilience keep bills down and create far more jobs,” he said.   “Cutting out fossil fuel pollution cleans our air, improving health and quality of life.”   “Some responses to the fossil fuel crisis, incredibly, argue for doubling down on the cause of the problem and slowing the shift to renewable energy even though it is clearly cheaper, safer, and faster to market,”   “This is completely delusional because history tells us, this fossil fuel crisis will happen again and again,” Mr. Steill said, adding that fossil fuel dependency means economies, household budgets and business bottom lines are “at the mercy of geopolitical shocks and price volatility in a chaotic world”.   His message was simple: Meek dependence on fossil fuel imports will leave countries forever lurching from crisis to crisis, with households and industries literally paying the price.   10 Mar. 2026   The Iran war has sent oil and gas prices soaring. Countries invested in renewable energy are better protected. (DW)   Countries that generate more of their power from wind, solar and other renewable sources are better protected from global energy shocks, experts say, as the escalating conflict in the Middle East rattles global markets.   The war has widened since the US and Israel launched strikes on Iran more than 10 days ago. Critical infrastructure in the region has come under attack and the risk of Iranian strikes has essentially shut down the Strait of Hormuz,the crucial waterway used to transport 20% of the world's oil and gas.   The disruption means fuel may struggle to reach the countries that depend on it to generate electricity, heat homes, power industry and run transport. The resulting supply squeeze is pushing prices higher around the world and intensifying cost-of-living pressures.   "Energy is the lifeblood of our societies and our industries," said Antony Froggatt, aviation, shipping and energy expert at Brussels-based NGO Transport & Environment. "And we're still highly dependent on fossil fuels."   The world still gets about 80% of its primary energy from fossil fuels, the main source of greenhouse gas emissions driving climate change. In his second term, US President Donald Trump has doubled down on fossil fuels, scrapping Biden-era green energy and climate regulations aimed at cutting emissions.   That dependence makes economies and societies vulnerable to geopolitical shocks, said Rana Adib, executive secretary of the Renewable Energy Policy Network for the 21st Century (REN21).   Countries with a higher share of "homegrown" renewables in their energy mix are "less vulnerable to these shocks," she argued.   "Once you bring the technology into the countries, the fuel you're using is the sun, is the wind, is the heat that is local," Adib told DW. "And this is a reason why renewable energy as a solution for energy production is much more resilient to those global shocks."   Uruguay bets on wind and hydro   After the financial crisis in 2008, unease about a reliance on oil and gas imports was what drove Uruguay to go all in on renewables.   Two decades ago, the small South American country with a population of 3.5 million embarked on a plan to phase fossil fuels out of its power grid by rapidly expanding wind farms.   Today, more than 90% of the country's electricity comes from renewables — mainly wind, solar, hydropower and biofuels. That figure has reached 98% in some particularly wet and windy years.   "It shows us that a 100% renewable electricity grid is fully possible," said Adib, adding that Uruguay has managed to do so without the massive amounts of storage required for when the sun isn't shining and wind isn't blowing.   Adib said the shift to green power helped limit Uruguay's exposure to past energy price surges.   "During the energy crisis linked to the war in in Ukraine, Uruguay energy prices remained stable," Adib said. "This is extremely important because it means that the inflation does not hit this country in the same way as a country that has a high dependence on fossil fuel imports."   Adib said the investment in renewables created 50,000 jobs and has allowed the country to save $500 million in energy import costs annually. Uruguay is now moving to electrify its public transport system and decarbonize industry.   Another country that has significantly reduced reliance on fossil fuels is Denmark. The oil crisis in the 1970s hit the Scandinavian country hard, prompting it to begin developing renewables early.   Today, more than 80% of Denmark's electricity is supplied by green energy, with wind making up almost 60% of that amount, followed by biogas. The country of 6 million has cut its planet-heating emissions by half since 1990 and wants to have a fossil-fuel free electricity system by 2030.   Its district heating systems, which link up more than 65% of homes, have largely phased out coal and are planned to rely 100% on renewable biomethane by 2030.   Froggatt said having renewables dominate the grid keeps prices down, citing an IMF study showing that every 1% increase in the amount of renewables translates on average to the wholesale electricity price falling by 0.6%.   "And that's in normal circumstances. Obviously, when you have vastly inflated gas prices, then the economic advantage of renewables goes up even higher," he added.   He says that consumers will only be protected from rising oil and gas prices when things like transport and heating are fully electrified, for example, with electric vehicles and heat pumps.   High fossil fuel prices and the vulnerability of the commodities to supply bottlenecks make clean energy more competitive and financially attractive, as well as pressuring governments to find alternative solutions, say analysts.   "The current crisis shows again that we need to enter the renewable-based era and leave the fossil fuel-based era behind" if we want societies and economies that are more resilient, said Adib.   Accelerating renewables to secure a more stable energy supply will take greater investment and system change. Though green power sources are now much cheaper than fossil fuels, oil and gas are highly subsidized. Froggatt says making the switch is not just about slowing climate change, but also about energy security.   http://www.dw.com/en/iran-war-sends-oil-prices-soaring-these-countries-are-better-protected-thanks-to-renewables/a-76294122 http://euobserver.com/212892/wind-and-solar-cut-eu-electricity-prices-by-25-but-gas-still-rules-market/ http://www.planetaryguardians.org/renewablefreedom http://unfccc.int/news/un-climate-chief-in-brussels-fossil-fuel-dependency-is-ripping-away-national-security-and http://news.un.org/en/story/2026/03/1167135 http://transitionawayconference.com/press-releases
	Global Corporate Tax Reforms could boost Public Revenues by 50% by Public Services International, ICRICT, agencies   Feb. 2026   New Research shows Global Corporate Tax Reforms would boost Public Revenues by 50%   The research, commissioned by Network of Unions for Tax Justice and the Vienna Chamber of Labour and is the first to model the global impact of unitary taxation; a reform which would see multinationals taxed as single entities with their tax obligations split among states through a formula based on factors such as sales and labour force.   Current rules allow multinationals to use accounting tricks and subsidiaries to artificially shift trillions in profits away from where they are actually generated and into tax havens.   The study is being presented to negotiators currently meeting at the UN in New York to draft a Global Tax Convention.   The reports findings challenge the narrative that reform would harm major economies, instead showing that countries like the US, Germany, the UK, and Australia stand to gain significantly from ending profit shifting. Tax revenues in high-income countries would grow by almost 70%, reflecting the restoration of taxing rights over real economic activity that is currently booked in tax havens.   Haley Quinn Acting Deputy Director for Health Issues at the American Federation of Teachers said: "Healthcare workers faithfully pay their taxes while caring for our most vulnerable populations. So why, then, should wealthy private health corporations be afforded tax havens, all while claiming they can’t afford to pay workers more?"   Tax havens which currently enable multinationals to artificially shift profits would face dramatic losses. Pure tax havens like Bermuda and the Cayman Islands risk losing 80-90% of their tax base under most scenarios, exposing the fragility of economic models built on paper profits rather than genuine economic activity and production.   When employment is weighted more heavily in determining where profits should be taxed, labour-intensive economies gain a fairer share. India's tax base more than doubles, while Indonesia and Brazil see increases of over 40% each — recognition of their substantial but previously under-valued role in global value chains.   This restored fiscal space could fund infrastructure investment, new essential workers such as doctors and teachers and expanded social protections — benefits flowing directly back to workers and communities.   For the vast majority of companies, including small businesses and domestic competitors, the reforms would change nothing while levelling the playing field. Average tax increases for the biggest global multinationals would be around 8%, with the largest jumps concentrated among corporations currently engaged in aggressive profit shifting through tax havens.   Contrary to the myth that cutting corporate taxes creates jobs, recent research shows countries with stronger corporate tax systems achieve better employment outcomes and fairer wage distribution. Meanwhile firms engaging most aggressively in tax avoidance rarely reinvest savings in jobs or productive capacity.   Jayati Ghosh, co-chair of the Independent Commission for the Reform of International Corporate Taxation (ICRICT):   Multinationals should be taxed in a way that recognises the economic reality that these are single global entities, not a collection of separate units strung together in ways that reduce their tax footprint. Governments must now take action to collect the hundreds of billions of unpaid taxes left on the table in the current system and come up with a fair formula to ensure that companies pay what they owe, where they do business.   Daniel Bertossa, General Secretary of Public Services International:   "Workers pay taxes on their wages where they work - so why should corporations be allowed to dodge taxes where they make their profits. These urgent reforms would chase hidden profits out of offshore havens, into public coffers and onto corporate balance sheets to be invested in better jobs and wages for workers.   Jose Antonio Ocampo, ICRICT commissioner and Professor at Columbia University:   For the first time, we have empirical evidence that shows what many economists have long suspected: getting rid of the broken transfer pricing system would immediately undercut tax havens. A new global tax system must be designed so that countries can tax profits where value is created, which includes where their workers are located. Only when the global tax rules recognise the labour and resources utilised in the South, will our countries get their fair share of tax revenue to support development and public services.   http://publicservices.international/resources/news/our-new-research-shows-global-corporate-tax-reforms-would-boost-public-revenues-by-50-?id=16364&lang=en http://www.icrict.com/international-tax-reform/un-ecosoc-a-blueprint-for-financial-integrity/ http://www.socialprotectionfloorscoalition.org/2026/02/financing-social-protection-a-matter-of-global-justice/ http://www.socialeurope.eu/will-democracy-govern-capitalism-or-be-consumed-by-it http://www.hrw.org/news/2026/03/17/un-global-tax-system-undermines-rights-development http://www.oxfam.org/en/press-releases/untaxed-wealth-hidden-offshore-richest-01-surpasses-entire-wealth-poorest-half http://taxjustice.net/reports/the-last-chance/ http://taxjustice.net/topics/un-tax-convention/ http://globaltaxjustice.org/news/march-6-joint-submission/ http://www.ips-journal.eu/topics/economy-and-ecology/its-time-to-settle-up-8954/   The UN Tax Convention could be a game-changer. So why is ambition still stuck in first gear, by Clara Thompson - Global Tax Justice Lead at Greenpeace International.   If you’ve been following global climate and finance politics lately, you’ll have noticed a strange contradiction.   On the one hand, governments keep telling us we need more climate finance, fairer taxation, and new public resources to deal with climate breakdown, inequality and crumbling public services.   On the other hand, when it comes to the one global forum designed to actually fix international tax rules – the UN Tax Convention – that bold ambition doesn’t translate.   These negotiations, currently underway in New York, present a unique chance to hold corporate tax avoiders and polluters accountable, unlocking trillions in public funds for climate action, nature protection, and vital public services. Instead of rising to that moment, however, the process risks failing to deliver the transformative change many countries are calling for.   The latest draft of the UN Tax Convention includes articles on sustainable development and taxing high-net-worth individuals (HNWI). That’s good news. A few years ago, neither would even have made it into the room. But here’s the catch: they’re still written mostly as ‘principles’, not commitments.   The sustainable development article remains declaratory. It acknowledges that tax cooperation should support social, economic and environmental goals, without spelling out how, or what kinds of mechanisms would be needed to deliver them. No change to this article since the Terms of Reference were set out.   The article on high-net-worth individuals has improved on paper (it uses ‘shall’ instead of ‘agree’ now), but still stops short of what’s actually needed to tax extreme wealth effectively and fairly.   In short: governments agree that something should happen, but appear reluctant when it comes to the details of how to actually make it happen. That’s like agreeing to catch smugglers, but banning customs from opening the luggage.   This is where things get awkward. In other international forums (COP30, G20, FfD4 to name a few examples), many of the same governments are already making much bolder statements. For example:   Calling for progressive environmental taxation, Demanding new climate finance sources, Warning about the social and political risks of inequality, and even (occasionally) saying the words ‘tax extreme wealth’ out loud.   In 2025, at the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development (FfD4) in Seville, Spain, governments committed to improving tax cooperation and transparency, explicitly referencing progressive taxation to fund social protection and integrate undeclared wealth, and in written submissions, countries such as Brazil, Colombia, Germany, France, Spain and Sierra Leone have explicitly supported stronger cooperation on HNWI taxation in the UN process.   Many African countries, including Zambia and Nigeria, have repeatedly highlighted in their interventions how our broken global tax system undermines development and climate action.   Since the UN Tax Convention negotiations began in 2025, at least 17 countries have made supportive statements for more detail to be added on the issue of sustainable development, several of whom have explicitly endorsed inclusion of environmental taxation and the polluter pays principle.   And yet, when negotiations move from statements to drafting, ambition narrows. Not all elements raised in countries’ submissions find their way into the Chair’s text, and several governments continue to defer to high-level, non-committal language.   Political choices are reframed as technical questions by some countries, while the potential of the Convention to support climate action and sustainable development through tax policy remains underexplored. Issues with clear distributional complexities are quietly treated as beyond the Convention’s scope.   Whenever ambition stalls, one word inevitably appears: sovereignty. We’re told that taxing the super-rich is a domestic issue. That coordinated standards on taxing polluters would infringe national autonomy. That global rules somehow threaten democratic choice.   But here’s the inconvenient truth: there is nothing sovereign about a tax system you can’t enforce. Here’s the problem: in today’s world, money, profits, and assets move faster than national laws, often through loopholes and tax havens, and across borders, while information about these assets does not.   Countries trying to take action alone end up competing with each other, lowering standards, and losing billions in the process. These are funds that could have supported climate finance and sustainable development.   Real sovereignty isn’t the right to say “no” alone. It’s the ability to withstand pressure together to enforce rules that protect public resources and the planet. This is why we need global tax reform.   The old era of club-based tax governance (dominated by a handful of rich OECD countries) is cracking under its own contradictions. At the same time, multilateralism itself is under attack, with institutional deadlock and unilateral action increasingly replacing cooperation, from the UN Security Council to climate negotiations.   That’s precisely why the UN Tax Convention matters. It’s the only forum in international tax governance where every country has a seat, decisions aren’t hostage to unanimity, and tax cooperation can be anchored in sustainable development, not just capital mobility. In short: it’s the one place where we can move from fair taxation by permission to fair taxation by right.   If the Convention is to live up to its mandate, four things need to happen:   Moving beyond “exploring” coordination. On taxing extreme wealth, governments need to commit to developing coordinated approaches including minimum standards, progressive elements and redistributive options, not just endlessly discussing them.   Naming the preconditions. You can’t tax what you can’t see. That means committing to transparency tools like beneficial ownership information, asset registries and effective exchange of information, especially for high-net-worth individuals. It means fair taxing rights based on economic activity. It means true sovereignty.   Agreeing new rules to tax polluters. That starts with a new global agreement that countries will deliver – nationally and internationally – progressive environmental taxation in line with the polluter pays principle and the principle of equity (common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities). From there, new mechanisms can be established, like a global tax on the profits of fossil fuel companies to boost international climate finance.   Embedding the articles in the bigger goal. Taxing the super-rich and corporate polluters aren’t side issues. They are central to funding climate action, protecting nature and rebuilding trust in public institutions. The Convention should say so, clearly.   The tools exist. The political arguments are already being made elsewhere. And the costs of inaction are painfully visible. What’s missing isn’t expertise – it’s alignment.   If governments are serious about climate justice, social cohesion and sustainable development, the UN Tax Convention is not the place to be cautious. It’s the place to be honest.   Because in a world where crises are global and wealth is mobile, collective action isn’t a loss of sovereignty – it’s the only way to reclaim it. And yes, taxing the super-rich and corporate polluters is part of that story.   http://www.greenpeace.org/international/story/81233/the-un-tax-convention-could-be-a-game-changer-so-why-is-ambition-still-stuck-in-first-gear/ http://www.greenpeace.org/international/story/80908/climate-whiplash-understanding-todays-violent-weather-extremes/ Visit the related web page
	View more stories