By Irma Mosquera Valderrama and Peter Hongler
Since the adoption of the December 2022 UN General Assembly resolution on the promotion of inclusive and effective international tax cooperation at the United Nations[1] and the launch of the subsequent intergovernmental negotiations, one question has been at the heart of the process, and representatives should keep asking it. How can this process be made legitimate for developed, developing, least developed, landlocked developing and small island developing states? The same question was raised with regard to the OECD/G20 BEPS project and the Pillar One and Pillar Two negotiations. Yet almost four years later, much remains to be done at the UN. This requires leadership from countries and delegates who believe that a new institutional setting at the UN would be an improvement over the current governance structure.
This is still a historic moment and a unique opportunity to bring tax matters to the United Nations. In our view, with only one year of negotiations left, major issues must be addressed as soon as possible if the UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation (UNFCITC) is to be a success:
It is a framework convention, not a tax treaty
As we have stated several times in blog posts and in our submissions on the drafts[2], the goal is to agree on a framework convention; the commitments should therefore remain at a high level.
Any strong commitment will make it very difficult for many countries (and their parliaments) to ratify the convention. And if neither the European countries nor the United States (which is unlikely in any case) ratify the Framework Convention, its impact will be limited.
The unresolved governance question
The remaining negotiation time should be used to discuss governance going forward: What is the role of the Conference of the Parties (COP)? What is the role of the Secretariat? How should inter-state disputes (not related to specific tax assessments) be resolved? How can participation be facilitated through funding for attendance at meetings and through capacity building, so that all countries can engage in the discussions? We have seen in other UN bodies that if governance does not receive the necessary attention, the whole structure becomes ineffective and costly.
One example is a shortcoming of the Committee of Experts on International Cooperation in Tax Matters[3]: once the experts have been appointed (for a four-year term), the Committee spends its first meeting discussing its mandate, which reduces the already limited time available for technical tax issues.
By establishing a sound governance framework with the participation of all countries, the UNFCITC can serve as the basis for future work at the United Nations. However, from the outset the negotiations have focused on goals, principles and commitments. Given that formally only one year of negotiations remains, it is unlikely that countries will be able to develop an effective governance structure unless the focus clearly shifts to these questions as early as the Nairobi session in November.
Duplication or not?
One of the main challenges for this Framework Convention is whether, and to what extent, the work of the OECD and other bodies should be taken into account. So far, European countries in particular have highlighted the risk of duplication, whereas African countries do not share these concerns.
Despite concerns regarding agenda-setting, representation (input legitimacy) and outcomes (output legitimacy)[4], we should not forget that some standards developed by the OECD have become global standards and are, to a large extent, considered a success. In our view, a particularly successful example is the set of tools developed to enhance the cross-border exchange of information. These standards are addressed not only in bilateral tax treaties (e.g. Art. 26 of the OECD Model Tax Convention) but also in multilateral instruments such as the Multilateral Convention on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Tax Matters (MAC). With more than 170 members of the Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes and more than 150 jurisdictions participating in the MAC, both have become too important to ignore. Who will oversee the further development of these standards?
Given the success of the Global Forum and the MAC, we believe that, as has already been suggested, the MAC should be integrated into the UNFCITC as a protocol, and that the COP and the Secretariat should be in charge of the further development of this work.
The historic opportunity for inclusiveness
At the Third International Conference on Financing for Development in Addis Ababa in 2015, developing countries and civil society called for a stronger role for the United Nations, including upgrading the UN Tax Committee to an intergovernmental body.[5] This proposal was rejected by developed countries.[6]
Although the upgrade did not materialize, the Report of the Third International Conference on Financing for Development stated: “We stress that efforts in international tax cooperation should be universal in approach and scope and should fully take into account the different needs and capacities of all countries, in particular least developed countries, landlocked developing countries, small island developing States and African countries. We welcome the participation of developing countries or their regional networks in this work, and call for more inclusiveness to ensure that these efforts benefit all countries”.[7]
More than ten years later, we are once again discussing inclusiveness and participation at the United Nations. As in 2015, the different needs and capacities of countries should be taken into account, as should the differences among least developed countries, landlocked developing countries, small island developing states and developing countries in general.
To be inclusive and legitimate, the process must take all countries’ perspectives into account. Beyond the divide between developed and developing countries, there are also differences within the latter group, and these should be reflected when negotiating the wording of the Framework Convention. These differences make it even more difficult to agree on specific provisions on commitments, which strengthens our recommendation to keep these commitments at a high level.
From multilateralism to plurilateralism
In recent years, the world has moved away from multilateralism due to geopolitical tensions, and plurilateral solutions are a more likely path to success. This means that coalitions of the willing will, and should, still be able to enhance their cooperation, but “global” solutions seem very unlikely in the near future. Importantly, the UNFCITC enables such plurilateral solutions. Consider some hypothetical examples: if some African and South American countries wanted to make progress on the cross-border enforcement of tax claims, the UNFCITC could offer them a forum for negotiations. The same would apply if European and South-East Asian countries wished to cooperate more closely on the taxation of cross-border air transport services. And if some countries wanted to harmonize digital services taxes (DSTs), the UNFCITC could offer them a framework for this cooperation as well.
To conclude, at this historic moment, the challenge for countries is to reach compromises, to speak and to have a voice in these international negotiations, whereas for the Secretariat and the Bureau of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee the challenge is to find the common ground on which agreement can be reached and which can ensure a sustainable UNFCITC in the future.
[1] https://docs.un.org/en/A/RES/77/244
[2] See our submissions on the drafts: July 2025, December 2025 and August 2026
See blog posts: By P. Hongler and I. Mosquera The UNFCITC and the Future of Mutual Administrative Assistance Link; By P. Hongler Assessing the State of Play in the UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation Link; By P. Hongler and I. Mosquera Commitments Workstream I: A matter of a Preamble? Link; By I. Mosquera, UN Framework Tax Convention and Global Tax Governance: What changes are needed to enhance global tax governance? Link; By I. Mosquera The legitimacy of the UN Negotiations and the Path Towards Inclusive and Effective International Tax Cooperation. Are we getting it right? Link; By P. Hongler, Getting the Priorities Right: The Central Role of Workstream I in the UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation Link.
[3] The Committee of Experts on International Cooperation in Tax Matters is a subsidiary body of the UN Economic and Social Council, distinguished and globally recognized for its work in norm- and policy-shaping and for the practical guidance provided in the area of international tax cooperation. Tax Committee Home | Financing for Sustainable Development Office
[4] See I.J. Mosquera Valderrama (2023) Global Tax Governance: Legitimacy and Inclusiveness.
Why it matters. Link; I.J. Mosquera Valderrama (2018), Output Legitimacy Deficits and the Inclusive Framework of the OECD/G20 Base Erosion and Profit Shifting Initiative, 72 Bull. Intl. Taxn Link. 3, Bulletin for International Taxation IBFD.; I.J. Mosquera Valderrama (2015) Legitimacy and the Making of International Tax Law The Challenges of Multilateralism World Tax Journal 7(3):344-366. Link See also Corlin Christensen, Rasmus; Hearson, Martin; Randriamanalina, Tovony (2020). At the Table, Off the Menu? Assessing the Participation of Lower-Income Countries in Global Tax Negotiations || The Institute of Development Studies. Report. Link
[5] ADDIS: UN negotiations resume on financing framework to advance global development | UN News
[6] Paras. 28 and 29 of Resolution 69/313 adopted by the General Assembly on 27 July 2015, Addis Ababa Action Agenda of the Third International Conference on Financing for Development https://docs.un.org/en/A/RES/69/313
[7] Para. 8, Report of the Third International Conference on Financing for Development https://docs.un.org/en/A/CONF.227/20