Latest news with #WorldBankGroup
Business Recorder
10 hours ago
- Business
- Business Recorder
Surge in conflicts fuels extreme poverty: World Bank
WASHINGTON: Conflicts and related fatalities have more than tripled since the early 2000s, fuelling extreme poverty, the World Bank said Friday. Economies in fragile and conflict-affected regions have become 'the epicentre of global poverty and food insecurity, a situation increasingly shaped by the frequency and intensity of conflict,' the bank added in a new study. This year, 421 million shaped by the frequency and intensity of conflict,' the bank added in a new study. This year, 421 million people get by on less than $3 a day in places hit by conflict or instability — a situation of extreme poverty — and the number is poised to hit 435 million by 2030. Global attention has been focused on conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East for the past three years, said World Bank Group chief economist Indermit Gill. But 'half of the countries facing conflict or instability today have been in such conditions for 15 years or more,' he added. Currently, 39 economies are classified as facing such conditions, and 21 of them are in active conflict, the Washington-based development lender said. The list includes Ukraine, Somalia, South Sudan and the West Bank and Gaza. It also includes Iraq although not Iran. The report flagged that moves to prevent conflict can bring high returns, with timely interventions being 'far more cost-effective than responding after violence erupts.' It also said that some of these economies have advantages that could be used to reignite growth, noting that places like Zimbabwe, Mozambique and the Democratic Republic of Congo are rich in minerals key to clean tech like electric vehicles and solar panels.
Al-Ahram Weekly
21 hours ago
- Business
- Al-Ahram Weekly
Surge in conflicts fuels extreme poverty: World Bank - Economy
Conflicts and related fatalities have more than tripled since the early 2000s, fueling extreme poverty, the World Bank said Friday. Economies in fragile and conflict-affected regions have become "the epicenter of global poverty and food insecurity, a situation increasingly shaped by the frequency and intensity of conflict," the bank added in a new study. This year, 421 million people get by on less than $3 a day in places hit by conflict or instability -- a situation of extreme poverty -- and the number is poised to hit 435 million by 2030. Global attention has been focused on conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East for the past three years, said World Bank Group chief economist Indermit Gill. But "half of the countries facing conflict or instability today have been in such conditions for 15 years or more," he added. Currently, 39 economies are classified as facing such conditions, and 21 of them are in active conflict, the Washington-based development lender said. The list includes Ukraine, Somalia, South Sudan and the West Bank and Gaza. It also includes Iraq although not Iran. The report flagged that moves to prevent conflict can bring high returns, with timely interventions being "far more cost-effective than responding after violence erupts." It also said that some of these economies have advantages that could be used to reignite growth, noting that places like Zimbabwe, Mozambique and the Democratic Republic of Congo are rich in minerals key to clean tech like electric vehicles and solar panels. "Economic stagnation -- rather than growth -- has been the norm in economies hit by conflict and instability over the past decade and a half," said Ayhan Kose, World Bank Group deputy chief economist. The bank's report noted that high-intensity conflicts, which kill more than 150 per million people, are typically followed by a cumulative fall of around 20 percent in GDP per capita after five years. Follow us on: Facebook Instagram Whatsapp Short link:
Straits Times
21 hours ago
- Business
- Straits Times
World Bank urges aid for economies in conflict as US pushes cuts
FILE PHOTO: The World Bank logo is seen at the 2023 Spring Meetings of the World Bank Group and the International Monetary Fund in Washington, U.S., April 13, 2023. REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz/File photo The goal of ending extreme poverty around the globe remains elusive partly due to compounding challenges faced by economies in fragile and conflict-affected situations (FCS) including food insecurity and weak government capacity, a report from the World Bank showed. The report released on Friday by the Washington-based lender calls on a scaling up of international support, debt relief and technical assistance at a time when the United States, the world's largest aid donor of the past decades, steps back. Extreme poverty is rising fast in economies hit by conflict and instability, according to the World Bank's first comprehensive report on FCS economies since the COVID-19 pandemic. Over 420 million people in conflict-ridden economies survive on less than $3 a day, more than the rest of the world combined, even as they are home to under 15% of the global population. The number is projected to rise to 435 million, or nearly 60% of the world's extreme poor, by 2030. "FCS economies have become the epicenter of global poverty and food insecurity, a situation increasingly shaped by the frequency and intensity of conflict," the World Bank report said. Economic output in FCS nations could stall or weaken further as conflict and violence have surged and intensified over the past years. The most high-intensity conflicts can shrink per capita GDP by some 20% after five years, according to the report. Conflict and war economies are home to 1 billion people and their populations average only six years of schooling, with life expectancy seven years shorter than in other developing countries. Since 2020, the per capita GDP in these economies has shrunk by an average of 1.8% per year, while it has expanded by 2.9% in other developing economies, the report said. 'Progress on poverty reduction has stalled since the mid-2010s, reflecting the compounded effects of intensifying conflict, economic fragility, and subdued growth,' it said. Targeted domestic reforms and coordinated, long-term global engagement are needed to lift those populations out of poverty, according to the World Bank. Measures need to focus on addressing root causes of conflict such as injustice and exclusion, as well as expanding access to education and healthcare, and improving infrastructure. Investment in tourism and agriculture could help create jobs for a growing working-age population. "With sound policies and sustained global engagement, FCS economies can chart a better path toward development," said the World Bank. REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Forbes
a day ago
- Business
- Forbes
Crisis Averted—But What Was The Section 899 Revenge Tax Proposal?
WASHINGTON, DC - APRIL 23: U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent delivers remarks during the ... More International Finance Institute Global Outlook Forum at the Willard InterContinental Washington on April 23, 2025 in Washington, DC. The forum is being held alongside the 2025 spring meetings of the World Bank Group (WBG) and International Monetary Fund (IMF). (Photo by) There are myriad ways to express displeasure with international tax policy: you can file a complaint at the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), leverage a charm offensive, or, if you're looking for a quick fix, you can slap a retaliatory tax on foreign investors, spook the market, and call it a day. The Trump administration opted for the latter—albeit briefly—with the seemingly now-defunct Section 899 provision, branded by some as the 'revenge tax.' This provision, tucked into the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, levied a targeted tax meant to punish countries that impose 'discriminatory' taxes on American firms – particularly tech giants. Now however, after some handshakes and a flurry of posts on social media, it seems the revenge tax has been scrapped. Quietly scuttled, its political usefulness exhausted—for now. What Was the Section 899 'Revenge Tax?' At its core, Section 899 was a legislative jab aimed squarely at America's trading partners. Buried in the GOP's sweeping policy bill, the provision would have authorized the U.S. to impose punitive taxes on companies headquartered in countries that were, in the view of the Trump administration, treating American firms unfairly. The sweeping new section of the tax code would have been titled 'Enforcement of Remedies Against Unfair Foreign Taxes'—not exactly a subtle start. Section 899 didn't go after governments that it felt had treated U.S. firms unfairly, but instead targeted people and businesses with ties to 'discriminatory foreign countries.' That included foreign individuals, corporations not majority-owned by U.S. persons, private foundations and trusts, and just about any other foreign partnership or structure that Treasury didn't like the looks of. The goal was clear: foreign investors from offending jurisdictions were going to be made to feel real economic pain. The core mechanism was an annual ratcheting-up of tax rates by 5% on the U.S. income of 'applicable persons' – everything from dividends and royalties to capital gains and even real estate sales. Exceptions were few – the legislation even explicitly overrode Section 892, which exempts sovereign wealth funds from taxation. The triggering mechanism for the tax was any broadly-defined 'unfair foreign tax,' which included the Undertaxed Profits Rule from OECD's Pillar 2, Digital Services Taxes (DSTs), and any other tax Treasury later deemed discriminatory or deliberately burdensome to U.S. persons. In sum, it would have been sweeping. If passed, Section 899 would have been a weaponization of the tax code into a tool of transparent foreign policy enforcement. It would have marked a sea change in international tax policy, shifting tax rates away from economics and towards the punishment of deemed foreign policy sins. What Prompted this 'Revenge?' Likely the most salient policy shift that triggered this revenge tax was the OECD's Pillar 2. Championed by the Biden administration, Pillar 2 aims to impose a 15% global minimum tax on the profits of multinationals—regardless of where they are headquartered or what markets they serve. On paper, it was intended to end the race to the bottom of low-tax jurisdictions; in practice, it creates a complex web of policies and enforcement rules that can allow foreign governments to tax U.S. companies in situations where the U.S. does not. The Undertaxed Profits Rule allows other countries to claim the ability to tax if a company's home jurisdiction does not sufficiently tax its own domestic entities. Think of it as a foreign state saying, well, if you aren't going to tax your companies at 15%, we'll gladly make up the difference for you. To the Trump administration, this was unacceptable—a path to the European Union skimming revenue from American companies. The final straw was likely the imposition of DSTs—levies aimed at the revenue of tech giants like Meta and Google, often imposed by European countries that have grown tired of waiting for the U.S. to sign on to Pillar 2. Of course, countries considering and ultimately passing DSTs were merely exercising their right to tax American companies selling into their markets—but that is neither here nor there. Why Section 899 Was a Problem—And Why It Died For all its bluster, Section 899 had one main flaw: it was bad policy masquerading as tough politics. From the moment the bill hit the docket, or more accurately folks found it swimming around in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, alarms went off across the market. As it turns out, foreign investment doesn't like uncertainty. Section 899 would have injected a lot of uncertainty into the foreign investment market. The tax hikes weren't automatic, and there was no schedule that could be consulted by any one individual state; they turned on vague determinations like what was and wasn't an 'unfair tax.' Treasury could label a state a discriminatory foreign country based on opaque criteria and ramp up rates immediately—all without Congress lifting a finger. As is to be expected, trade groups warned of chilling effects on capital markets. Foreign governments viewed it as a backdoor sanctions regime. So it died – not with a bang, but with a post. Scott Bessent publicly called for the provision's removal, citing diplomatic progress. The death of the Revenge Tax doesn't mean this particular international tax skirmish is over, however, only that the battle was paused temporarily in favor of diplomacy. If global talks stall, or DSTs raise their heads again, no one should be surprised if a future Congress pulls out this playbook again.
Straits Times
2 days ago
- Business
- Straits Times
World Bank, IAEA to cooperate on nuclear power development, safety
The World Bank and the United Nations nuclear watchdog on Thursday launched a new agreement to cooperate on the safe development and financing of nuclear power for developing countries, including extending the life of existing reactors. World Bank President Ajay Banga and International Atomic Energy Agency Director General Rafael Grossi were due to sign the memorandum of understanding in Paris that is part of the bank's return to nuclear energy financing. The IAEA and the World Bank said in a statement that they agreed to work together to build knowledge in the nuclear field, including expanding the World Bank Group's understanding of nuclear safety, security, energy planning, and waste management. The institutions also said they would work together to extend the lifespan of existing nuclear power plants as a cost-effective source of low-carbon power and accelerate the development of small modular reactors, saying that they have potential for widespread adoption in developing countries. In prepared remarks, Banga said that reliable baseload power provided by nuclear energy was essential for job-generating sectors such as infrastructure, agribusiness, health care, tourism and manufacturing. "Jobs need electricity. So do factories, hospitals, schools, and water systems. And as demand surges — with AI and development alike — we must help countries deliver reliable, affordable power," Banga said. "That's why we're embracing nuclear energy as part of the solution — and re-embracing it as part of the mix the World Bank Group can offer developing countries to achieve their ambitions." Grossi said that the "landmark" agreement was "a sign of the world's return to realism on nuclear power" and would open the door for other multilateral development banks and private investors to consider nuclear power as a viable tool for energy security. He called the partnership a "crucial first step" to clearing the financing path for small modular reactor technology, which has the potential to cleanly power developing economies. REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
