

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Lee Kuen, lkuen@greenpeace.org | Greenpeace International Press Desk pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org
New global tax rules that could help fund climate action, protect nature, and reduce inequality are being negotiated at the historic UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation (UNFCITC), which kicks off a 2-week round of negotiations in New York today.
Commenting on what’s at stake, the Greenpeace International delegation said the UN process could reform global tax rules so that the richest individuals and multinational corporations like oil and gas companies are forced to pay their fair share for the pollution they cause. Practices like tax dodging and profit shifting are depriving countries of vital resources needed for development and climate goals.[1]
Fred Njehu, Global Political Lead for Greenpeace International’s Fair Share campaign, said: “We’re at a turning point in history. Billionaires and corporations must finally pay their fair share of tax to fund climate action, protect nature, and invest in the wellbeing of people and the planet. World leaders must listen to what the people want and deliver a fair tax system that works for everyone, not just the powerful few.”
Rebecca Newsom, Global Political Lead for Greenpeace International’s Stop Drilling, Start Paying campaign, said: “Climate resilience must not depend on voluntary donations, or on market-rate loans that exacerbate the debt crisis already facing many countries. The costs of rebuilding from devastating floods and storms, and adapting to increasingly brutal heat waves should be financed by taxing the fossil fuel polluters who caused the problem in the first place. The UN Tax Convention provides a once-in-a-generation opportunity to properly tax the global profits of multinational oil, gas and coal corporations and raise vital revenues to fill the financing gap for communities facing disasters on the frontlines of the climate crisis – this is what we’re here to demand.”
European countries make up the bulk of OECD, the club of rich countries who currently set global tax rules in an exclusive and unrepresentative process. Commenting on the role of Europe in negotiations to change this system, Clara Thompson, climate and tax justice lead, Greenpeace International, said: “You can’t tackle the climate crisis while the super-rich stash billions in tax havens. The UN Tax Convention is a historic chance to rewrite the global rules and to make polluters and profiteers finally pay their fair share. In their written submission, Germany has recognised the need to explore taxing high-net-worth individuals as part of the commitment to sustainable development. Now is the time to turn that recognition into action. Europe must step up and help build a fairer global tax system that puts people and the planet first.”
Ahead of negotiations in New York, Greenpeace organisations have written to ministers in key countries taking part in this process, calling for their leadership and speaking out in favour of three key demands. [2] The demands call for:
Greenpeace International is also calling for governments to make fossil fuel corporations and the super-rich pay their fair share for the damages they cause through the Polluters Pay Pact and the global movement to #TaxTheSuperRich.[2][3]
ENDS
Notes:
[1] New global tax rules in an UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation are being negotiated, from now until 2027. It aims to take control of global tax rules from the rich OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development) countries to place it in the hands of the 193 member states of the United Nations.
[2] Greenpeace’s detailed demands for negotiators are:
[3] The Polluters Pay Pact is a global alliance of more than 235,000 people on the frontlines of climate disasters, concerned citizens, first responders like firefighters, humanitarian groups and political leaders.
[4] The #TaxTheSuperRich global movement is powered by a diverse network of organisations from across the globe, united by a shared commitment: to create a fairer and greener world by taxing the super rich.
Greenpeace is a global, independent campaigning organization that uses peaceful protest and creative communication to expose global environmental problems and promote solutions that are essential to a green and peaceful future.
+31 20 718 2000"Anyone who is a disciple of Christ, the Prince of Peace, is never on the side of those who once wielded the sword and today drop bombs."
Pope Leo XIV on Friday vehemently rejected the notion that "God" endorses any war in remarks many interpreted as an implicit rebuke of President Donald Trump, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and others who claim that the Christian deity figure supports the illegal US-Israeli war of choice against Iran.
"God does not bless any conflict. Anyone who is a disciple of Christ, the Prince of Peace, is never on the side of those who once wielded the sword and today drop bombs," the pope said on X. "Military action will not create space for freedom or timees of peace, which comes only from the patient promotion of coexistence and dialogue among peoples."
"Absurd and inhuman violence is spreading ferociously through the sacred places of the Christian East, profaned by the blasphemy of war and the brutality of business, with no regard for people’s lives, which are considered at most collateral damage of self-interest," the American pontiff added. "But no gain can be worth the life of the weakest, children, or families. No cause can justify the shedding of innocent blood."
This, after the pope responded to Trump's genocidal threat to destroy Iran's civilization by urging "all the people of goodwill to search always for peace, and not violence, to reject war, especially a war which many people have said is an unjust war."
Responding to President Trump’s threat that “a whole civilisation will die tonight”, Pope Leo XIV calls for peace, says “let's remember, especially the innocent children, the elderly, sick. So many people who have already become, or will become victims of this continued warfare,… pic.twitter.com/2LygUzjuC6
— Catholic Sat (@CatholicSat) April 7, 2026
The pope's latest remarks also followed Trump's assertion that God supports the US-Israeli war on Iran and the claim by Hegseth, a Christian nationalist, that American airstrikes on Iran—which have killed more than 2,000 people including hundreds of children—are being "carried out under the protection of divine providence."
Pope Leo used his Palm Sunday sermon to take what many observers interpreted as a swipe at Hegseth after the self-styled secretary of war publicly prayed that God "trains my hands for war and my fingers for battle."
“This is our God: Jesus, King of Peace, who rejects war, whom no one can use to justify war,” the pope said. “He does not listen to the prayers of those who wage war, but rejects them.”
The pontiff also criticized the Trump administration ahead of its brief invasion of Venezuela and kidnapping of its president, Nicolás Maduro, and his wife in January.
The pope's latest comments came on the heels of reporting that a senior Pentagon official bullied Cardinal Christophe Pierre, the Vatican’s US diplomatic representative, telling him that the United States “has the military power to do whatever it wants in the world," and that "the Catholic Church had better take its side."
Another Pentagon official allegedly mentioned the Avignon Papacy, a period in the 14th century when popes resided in France and were essentially controlled by the French monarch—a reference some Vatican officials reportedly took as a threat.
Did…the Trump regime lowkey threaten to kill the pope?
[image or embed]
— Max Berger (@maxberger.bsky.social) April 8, 2026 at 2:32 PM
Early during the war, Congressional Freethought Caucus Co-Chairs Jared Huffman (D-Calif.) and Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) and House Armed Services Subcommittee on Military Personnel Ranking Member Chrissy Houlahan (D-Pa.) led 27 of their colleagues in requesting the Defense Department investigate reports that US commanders were invoking the apocalyptic theology of "End Times" prophecy to justify attacks on Iran.
American leaders have claimed divine sanction for their wars since the nation's inception, from George Washington claiming that "the hand of Providence" favored the revolt against Britain, to George W. Bush declaring that "God is not neutral" as he launched the decadeslong "crusade" against terror after 9/11 that has killed nearly a million people in more than half a dozen countries, almost all of them Muslims.
"Governments must restore their aid budgets, and shore up the global humanitarian system that faces its most serious crisis in decades," said an advocate with the international charity Oxfam.
The global anti-poverty group Oxfam International warned this week that US President Donald Trump’s decision to slash foreign aid by more than half could kill nearly 10 million people by the end of the decade.
Responding to new data released Thursday by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) showing the largest annual drop in the history of official development assistance, Oxfam said “wealthy governments are turning their backs on the lives of millions of women, men, and children in the Global South.”
The OECD released preliminary data on international aid that was provided last year by member countries of the organization's Development Assistance Committee (DAC), finding the largest annual drop in the history of official development assistance.
OECD member countries provided $174.3 billion in aid last year, according to the new data, representing 0.26% of the countries' combined gross national income.
In 2024, the countries sent $215.1 billion, or 0.34% of their gross national income to developing countries, including across the Global South—helping to provide nutritional assistance and healthcare initiatives among other programs.
US foreign aid spending dropped by 56.9% after Trump dismantled the US Agency for International Development, cut smaller aid programs, and pushed Congress to rescind previously approved foreign assistance.
"At a time when aid cuts are already driving instability and fostering greater inequality, government donors are cutting life-saving aid budgets while financing conflict and militarization."
Overall, wealthy OECD countries provided 23.1% less in foreign aid last year than they did in 2024—a greater decline than what the Institute of Global Health in Barcelona projected in February when it released a study in The Lancet, evaluating the impact of development assistance funding declines around the world.
The institute found that aid cuts in 2025 alone, which it assumed would represent a 21% decrease in funding, would lead to 695,238 excess deaths. If cuts continued at the same rate, an estimated 9,416,417 people could die of preventable diseases like malaria and AIDS, starvation, and other impacts by 2030.
The drop in foreign aid spending would suggest even more people could be killed by the cuts over the next four years.
“We are in a time of increasing humanitarian needs; strong pressures on the poorest and most fragile countries; and facing growing global uncertainties and massive insecurity," said Carsten Staur, chair of the OECD's Development Assistance Committee (DAC), which compiled the data. "In this situation, the world needs more ODA, not less—to help fight extreme poverty, improve resilience, and mobilize more private resources."
Trump's cuts helped make Germany the largest provider of development assistance for the first time ever, providing $29.1 billion to countries in need. The US sent $29 billion while the United Kingdom provided $17.2 billion, Japan sent $16.2 billion, and France sent $14.5 billion. All five of the top ODA providers reduced their foreign aid spending, accounting for 95.7% of the total decline.
Eight out of the DAC's 34 member countries either maintained or increased their development aid spending, and four countries—Denmark, Luxembourg, Norway, and Sweden—exceeded the United Nations' target of spending 0.7% of their gross national income on ODA.
Didier Jacobs, development finance lead for Oxfam, emphasized that while "recklessly" cutting foreign aid, "the Trump administration has been preparing to ask Congress for tens of billions in additional funding for bombs, ammunition, and other military equipment relating to its unlawful war against Iran."
"At a time when aid cuts are already driving instability and fostering greater inequality, government donors are cutting life-saving aid budgets while financing conflict and militarization. Cuts from donors including Germany, France and the UK will be felt by the world’s poorest," said Jacobs.
In addition to slashing military spending instead of crucial foreign aid, he said, "there are other ways to find tens of billions, such as by taxing the $2.84 trillions of dollars that the super-rich hide in tax havens.”
"Governments must restore their aid budgets," he said, "and shore up the global humanitarian system that faces its most serious crisis in decades."
"It is unacceptable that Treasury may not have performed the most basic planning before it was launched," said US Sen. Ron Wyden.
The top Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee revealed Thursday that an adviser to the US Treasury Department admitted he was unaware of the agency doing any work to prepare for the economic fallout of President Donald Trump's war on Iran, which has plunged the global economy into chaos and cost American drivers billions at the pump.
Sriprakash Kothari, a top adviser to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Trump's nominee to serve as Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy, told US Sen. Ron Wyden's (D-Ore.) staff behind closed doors that "not only did he not perform any work related to energy markets leading up to the war, but that he wasn’t aware of anyone at Treasury who did," Wyden wrote in a letter to Bessent.
Wyden quotes Kothari as saying he did no work to prepare for economic impacts of the war "leading up to the conflict," just "subsequent" to its start on February 28.
"When later asked to clarify this response, he reiterated that he had not performed any analysis or work related to energy markets, or any other economic facet, in the lead-up to military action in Iran," Wyden added. "He further told staff that the work he performed subsequently occurred after learning about the February 2026 strikes in the news. Mr. Kothari was then asked whether he was aware of anyone at Treasury performing analysis or work related to energy markets in the lead-up to potential military action in Iran, he responded that he was not aware of anyone performing any such work."
Wyden wrote that given the "rapidly growing affordability crisis" in the US—a crisis intensified by Trump's war on Iran—"it is unacceptable that Treasury may not have performed the most basic planning before it was launched."
"Every problem resulting from the conflict which we are seeing now," wrote Wyden, "was not only foreseeable but was predicted by the intelligence agencies, which reported as recently as last March that Iran was 'capable of inflicting severe damage to an attacker' and of 'disrupting shipping, particularly energy supplies, through the Strait of Hormuz.'"
In just six weeks, Trump's Iran war has cost American taxpayers over $30 billion and counting, and US drivers collectively spent over $8 billion more on gas during the first month of the illegal assault, which sent oil prices surging.
CNN reported last month that the Trump administration "significantly underestimated Iran’s willingness to close the Strait of Hormuz in response to US military strikes while planning the ongoing operation."
"While key officials from the Departments of Energy and Treasury were present for some of the official planning meetings about the operation before it started," CNN reported, citing unnamed sources familiar with the discussions, "the agency analysis and forecasts that would be integral elements of the decision-making process in past administrations were secondary considerations."