Kofi wants to tax YOU! uh - US!

[Snowden]

The United Nations in your wallet

By Sally McNamara
May 26, 2006


In spite of some pretty torrid scandals in recent years, the United Nations (U.N.) is far from finished. In fact, Kofi Annan, Secretary General of the U.N., is leading the gambit for perhaps its biggest power-grab yet – independent tax-raising powers or globo-taxation.

In fact, the U.N. is deeply committed to establishing this ‘sovereign’ power for itself – independent of the scrutiny and direction of its large aid donors (namely the United States). It wraps this concept up in the intentionally boring globo-speak of ‘enhanced dialogues on tax co-operation’ and ‘new innovative funding mechanisms,’ but that is just intended to put a pretty bow on top of a very ugly concept – the removal of the exclusive sovereign power of nation states to levy taxes on its citizenry.
Cliff Kincaid, President of America’s Survival, Inc., has just published a devastating chronology of the U.N.’s sustained campaign for global taxes, noting the 2001 High Level Panel on Financing for Development as a turning-point in the debate. Not only did that meeting call for the establishment of an International Tax Organization, it blatantly outlined two major areas where globotaxation might easily be levied – a currency transactions tax and a carbon tax – both of which would disproportionately hit the U.S.

Since then, a succession of high-level meetings, summits and conferences have been busy gathering steam for this concept: the Millennium Development Goals, the 2005 World Economic and Social Survey, the World Summit on Sustainable Development, the World Commission Report on the Social Dimension of Globalization and so on and so on; they all share this notion that globotaxation is the most ‘innovative’ solution to long-term funding for the U.N. They propose globotaxes on everything from air transportation to aviation fuel, from airline tickets to carbon emissions, from currency transactions to arms. The list is as ambitious as it is scary. The long arm of the U.N.’s IRS could be in your pocket soon.
One of the U.N.’s more fruitful attempts at global taxation is the formal plan to levy a tax on airline tickets. In November 2005, Brazil, Chile, France, Germany, and Spain issued a joint statement calling for a ‘nationally applied, internationally coordinated’ tax to be levied on air transport travels. The French government has been the first one to bite the bullet, and from July onward, passengers will pay between one and 40 euros on all flights taking off in France. With enthusiastic U.N. support and much back-slapping for President Chirac, Chile has undertaken plans to do the same, with Belgium and Germany currently hovering in the wings to do so. Luckily, both Great Britain and the U.S. have resisted Mr. Annan’s calls for others to follow suit. But make no mistake: the rot has started.

Britain’s Liberal Democrats are openly advocating for taxation on aviation fuel as a way of reducing climate change, and with the current spin-over-substance streak running through the Conservative Party, anything is possible from our normally reliable British partners.

Of course, France’s projected annual revenue of $248 million is not nearly enough for the U.N.’s aspirations and the finger-pointing – largely toward to U.S. – is really gathering steam now. Dr. Jeffrey Sachs, special adviser to Secretary General Annan on the Millennium Development Goals, has gone as far as to say that the U.S. is coming up short in its global aid commitments to the tune of $65 billion a year. Of course, Dr. Sachs is a vocal proponent of globo-taxation to make up the difference. At the 2002 International Conference on Financing for Development, Dr. Sachs helpfully points out that: “A global tax on carbon-emitting fossil fuels might be the way to begin”.

The undercurrent of this debate should not be ignored – any global tax will not be a tax on income, at least not at first; there wouldf be riots in the streets if that happened. Any global tax will stealthy enacted and will have to be far-removed from the scrutiny of ordinary taxpayers. So, what better way to circumvent the problem than to tax corporate America, especially the energy companies who both the U.N. and the European Union have been collectively obsessed with since President Bush refused to ratify the Kyoto Protocol. Feeding on media hysteria about imminent global disaster and excessive corporate profits, the proposition seems easier and easier to sell from a public relations perspective.

There is maybe a glimmer of hope though. John Bolton, the ever-sensible U.S. ambassador to the U.N., has flat-out said that the United States accepts neither global aid targets nor global taxes, and President Bush has backed him. But it cannot always be assumed that the White House will be this sensible. Indeed, Bill Clinton told the Millennium Summit in 2000 that national sovereignty needed to be put aside for the sake of a more active U.N.. And for activism you can read – more of the same, with a tax raising platform to boot. [Empathis mine.]


Sally McNamara is the Director of International Relations at the American Legislative Exchange Council.


http://www.townhall.com/opinion/colu...26/198676.html

[Forlorn Hope]

I must admit I became irked when I read this. The UN is already funded by the member nations. Some of which are way behind in their dues.

I have drawn a line in the sand. The only money the UN is going to get from me is what they can pry out of my cold dead hand!

Well…. Let’s look on the brighter side. If this tax goes through, maybe we can use our involvement n the Middle East as a deduction.

Hey, maybe will get a refund!

[Snowden]

Originally Posted by Forlorn Hope

I must admit I became irked when I read this. The UN is already funded by the member nations. Some of which are way behind in their dues.

I have drawn a line in the sand. The only money the UN is going to get from me is what they can pry out of my cold dead hand!

Well…. Let’s look on the brighter side. If this tax goes through, maybe we can use our involvement n the Middle East as a deduction.

Hey, maybe will get a refund!

The UN already owes us money, ForlornHope. They live here and refuse to pay their rent, etc., all the while screaming that we owe them their dues. And Congress gets in an uproar and gives them more money instead of deducting their bills first - and sending them a bill for the remainder.

Our junior Senator, about to become the senior, once wrote and asked me didn't I think we should pay the UN the dues we owe them, and when I said that to her, I never heard another peep.

This would be a direct tax that the UN would have the power to demand - and that Clinton appears to think we should pay. He wants to be the one to replace Kofi Annan - now there's a happy thought! Not at all!!

The power to tax is the power to destroy; somebody said that some time ago. It's an old saying about an older truth.

[USA11B]

We could tell the UN to try and collect the tax.
But I think it by far better to not allow it to even be placed on the books.

[Snowden]

Originally Posted by USA11B

We could tell the UN to try and collect the tax.
But I think it by far better to not allow it to even be placed on the books.

We better make sure we keep it off the books. I don't know how, and I still think we should kick that organization out of the country and get out of it. It was a noble idea, like the League of Nations. It hasn't done what it set out to do for some time now, has it? It's fallen into the hands of the greedy and is a get-rich-now organization for those who have managed to get in.

The most vivid proof of this is the nations given charge of the lives of others in the Human Rights committee (by whatever name); the considerations they need for simple survival. Or so it seems to me; my opinion and I don't really think I'm alone in it.

If humanity were of importance to the UN or to the nation now in charge of it - I have forgotten which Mid East nation has that position now, but if it were of concern, I believe we would see the UN helping the women of the Congo that SG reported in chit-chat. Rape, brutality ignored to keep the peace in Congo - ttp://www.trackpads.com/forum/showthread.php?t=598753

This is just one of the most obvious failures of the UN - not a failure of accomplishment, which would be understandable. This is a failure in even attempting to address a tragic situation.

[Woodmonkey]

We are a sovereign nation and do not have to pay taxes to an entity like the UN. Talk about taxation without representation!

[Snowden]

Originally Posted by Woodmonkey

We are a sovereign nation and do not have to pay taxes to an entity like the UN. Talk about taxation without representation!

Exactly, Katie - and notice two things. Bill Clinton wants to be Kofi's successor - and as I highlighted above:

Bill Clinton told the Millennium Summit in 2000 that national sovereignty needed to be put aside for the sake of a more active U.N.. And for activism you can read – more of the same, with a tax raising platform to boot.