Government Finance Policies

In a significant move toward "economic patriotism," Prime Minister Narendra Modi has issued a nationwide appeal for citizens to adopt austerity measures to safeguard India’s financial future. Despite the country maintaining a robust foreign exchange reserve of $691.11 billion, the PM emphasized that global uncertainties including the West Asia conflict & fluctuating oil prices require proactive discipline. By reducing non-essential spending on imports, the government aims to strengthen the rupee & ensure long-term economic resilience. The Prime Minister’s message is clear: collective public participation is the key to navigating global supply chain disruptions. This appeal isn’t just about saving money, it’s about strategically preserving India’s dollar outflows to keep the economy stable during volatile times. Key Highlights of the PM’s Appeal: ➡️ Citizens are urged to avoid buying gold and to postpone foreign vacations or destination weddings for at least one year. ➡️ A call to reduce petrol & diesel consumption by switching to public transport like the Metro, using EVs, & practicing carpooling. ➡️ Re-adopting WFH systems to lower daily commuting costs & reduce the national fuel bill. ➡️ Encouraging the use of domestic products & reducing dependence on imported edible oils & fertilizers.

In a historic move, Oman is set to introduce income tax starting in 2028, becoming the first Gulf nation to break away from its long-standing no personal tax tradition. For decades, countries like Oman, UAE, and Saudi Arabia attracted millions of expats — especially from South Asia — with the promise of zero income tax and 100% take-home salary. That promise is now shifting. ▶️ Here’s the twist… This isn't just about revenue collection. It's a strategic shift — driven by the need to diversify the economy beyond oil, as hydrocarbon revenues face long-term decline and global energy transitions accelerate. 📊 Backed by the International Monetary Fund, Oman’s Ministry of Finance confirmed that: The income tax will initially target high-income individuals (exact thresholds are under discussion). Oman’s public debt stood at over 40% of GDP in 2023, with rising fiscal pressure to fund social programs and development plans. The government aims to increase non-oil revenue to 35% of total income by 2030 (up from 28% in 2022). ✅ Meanwhile: UAE introduced a 9% corporate tax in 2023. Saudi Arabia already has a 20% tax on foreign company profits and a 15% VAT. The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) is collectively working toward tax reforms under economic vision plans like Saudi Vision 2030 and Oman Vision 2040. So what does this mean? ✅ For expats: The “tax-free” attraction of Gulf jobs is shrinking. Financial planning will need a new lens. ✅ For businesses: Salary structures, relocation offers, and operational models will need tax buffers. ✅ For India and others: Reverse migration may increase, along with changes in remittance flows and workforce strategy. Oman's decision is a milestone — one that signals a new era in Gulf economics. The global tax wave has officially reached the desert. Are you ready for this shift?

The US government has become a mining investor. In the past six months, Washington has committed more than $30 billion in loans, equity stakes, and guarantees across critical minerals projects. MP Materials, Lithium Americas Corp., Trilogy Metals Inc., Vulcan Elements, ReElement Technologies, USA Rare Earth, Inc. (Nasdaq: USAR), Korea Zinc Company, Ltd (고려아연). The United States Department of War now holds equity positions. Export-Import Bank of the United States approved a $10 billion facility for Project Vault. The Department of Commerce is taking ownership stakes under the CHIPS Act. China controls most rare earth processing, lithium refining, and battery supply chains. Relying on spot markets and private capital alone hasn't closed the gap. So Washington is deploying debt, equity, warrants, and guarantees to backstop projects that would otherwise sit in permitting limbo or fail to attract institutional capital. But the structure reveals something more important. The US isn't just funding projects domestically. It's taking equity in South Korean smelters, Australian cobalt producers, and Jamaican bauxite operations. It's signing bilateral deals with Japan, Malaysia, Pakistan, Thailand, South Korea, and Ukraine. It's using Export-Import Bank financing and Development Finance Corporation tools to extend capital into jurisdictions where Chinese state-backed firms have had a structural advantage. This is the state as limited partner, with geopolitical returns prioritised over financial ones. Sovereign backing is now a competitive variable. Companies with US equity participation or debt guarantees will have easier access to offtake agreements, permitting support, and follow-on institutional capital. Projects without state alignment will face higher hurdles, regardless of grade or jurisdiction. For more of my takes on the resource industry sign up to my weekly newsletter www.kamoacap.com #Mining #CriticalMinerals #Resources #CapitalMarkets #EnergyTransition #RareEarths Sources: https://lnkd.in/g7W3SbW6 https://lnkd.in/gzM-NpK8 https://lnkd.in/gcrqaABs IISS Analysis (chart source)

In a country like Mexico, where healthcare investment is already among the lowest in the OECD, recent budget cuts to the health sector are being celebrated as “savings.” But at what cost? My latest article unpacks the devastating consequences of these austerity measures—on patient care, public trust, and the very fabric of society. This isn’t just about numbers; it’s about the lives disrupted and lost due to chronic underfunding. It’s time to challenge the absurdity of cutting budgets in a system already struggling to meet basic needs and expose the immorality of prioritizing fiscal optics over human well-being. 💡 Read the full article to explore why healthcare budgets must never be sacrificed and join the conversation about the future of public health in Mexico. Should the health of a nation be reduced to a line item on a budget? Let me know your thoughts in the comments or send me a message. #Mexico #Healthcare #PublicHealth #Policy #Ethics

Africa Can Fund Its Own Healthcare—Lessons from Zimbabwe and Botswana For decades, Africa has relied heavily on donor aid to sustain critical health programs. But Zimbabwe and Botswana have shown that domestic resource mobilization is not only possible—it’s sustainable. 🔹 Zimbabwe’s AIDS Levy – Introduced in 1999, this 3% tax on income funds HIV/AIDS treatment and prevention. Despite economic hardships, Zimbabweans embraced it, ensuring a steady supply of ARVs and reducing donor dependency. 🔹 Botswana’s Universal HIV Treatment – Leveraging diamond revenue, Botswana prioritized free HIV treatment for its citizens, drastically reducing HIV-related deaths and mother-to-child transmission. The lesson? African nations can achieve healthcare self-sufficiency through political will, strategic resource allocation, and strong governance. With global health funding shifting, the time to act is now. By investing in tax levies, public-private partnerships, and domestic financing models, African countries can build resilient health systems that serve their people on their own terms. Let’s rethink health financing for Africa, by Africa. #HealthcareFinancing #GlobalHealth #Africa #Innovation #Sustainability #DevelopmentFinancing #PublicHealth #HealthSystemStrengthening #UniversalHealthCoverage Read more here: https://lnkd.in/e-fteGvM

In June 2025, Nigeria signed a new Tax Reform law. It starts fully on January 1, 2026. It affects everyone: employees, business owners, freelancers, investors, and even content creators. The Four New Tax Laws 1. Nigeria Tax Act (NTA): combines Personal Income Tax, Company Tax, VAT, Capital Gains Tax, Petroleum Tax, etc. into one. 2. Nigeria Tax Administration Act (NTAA): explains how taxes will be collected, penalties, audits. 3. Nigeria Revenue Service Act (NRSA): creates the new Nigeria Revenue Service (NRS) (replaces FIRS). 4. Joint Revenue Board Act (JRBA): makes federal and state tax offices work together, adds a Tax Tribunal and a Tax Ombudsman (for complaints). Tax Identification Number (TIN) From 2026, everyone earning money must have a TIN. Without it, you may not be able to: Open some bank accounts Do property or car registration Get government contracts or loans Example: If you’re a freelancer on Fiverr, you’ll need a TIN to stay compliant. Declaring Your Income Everyone must declare their annual income to the tax office. This includes salary, side hustles, business profits, rent, shares, crypto, YouTube, TikTok, Fiverr, or Upwork income. Example: A content creator earning ₦2m from Instagram ads must file tax returns. Comparing Old vs New Personal Income Tax (PIT) System Tax is now based on how much you earn. Under the old system (PITA), everyone got a Consolidated Relief Allowance (CRA) of ₦200,000 + 20% of income before tax was applied. Under the new 2025 reform, CRA is removed and replaced with Rent Relief (₦500,000 or 20% of annual rent, whichever is lower). Old PIT Rates Income Band Rate First ₦300,000 7% Next ₦300,000 11% Next ₦500,000 15% Next ₦500,000 19% Next ₦1,600,000 21% Above ₦3,200,000 24% New PIT Rates (2025 Reform) Income Band Rate Up to ₦800,000 0% ₦800k – ₦3m 15% ₦3m – ₦12m 18% ₦12m – ₦25m 21% ₦25m – ₦50m 23% Above ₦50m 25% Example: ₦5,000,000 Annual Income Old System: CRA = ₦200k + (20% × ₦5m) = ₦1.2m Taxable income = ₦3.8m Total tax = ₦704,000 Effective rate: 14.08% New System: First ₦800k → 0% Next ₦2.2m → 15% = ₦330k Remaining ₦2m → 18% = ₦360k Total tax = ₦690,000 Effective rate: 13.8% CRA Removed, Rent Relief Added Before: Consolidated Relief Allowance (₦200k + 20% of income) reduced your taxable income. Now: CRA is gone. Instead, Rent Relief: You can deduct ₦500k or 20% of annual rent (whichever is lower). Example: If your rent is ₦1m → 20% = ₦200k deductible. If rent is ₦4m → 20% = ₦800k, but capped at ₦500k. Capital Gains Tax (CGT) Individuals: profits from selling land, crypto, or shares are added to your income and taxed with PIT rates. Companies: pay 30% on chargeable gains. Exemption: If you sell shares below ₦150m in a year and gains are less than ₦10m, you don’t pay CGT. Example: You sell shares worth ₦100m, profit = ₦8m → no CGT.

India spends more on healthcare each year but, the key question persists: are health outcomes improving at the same pace?   After six months of cross-sector collaboration, the report “𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗪𝗲 𝗩𝗮𝗹𝘂𝗲 𝗶𝗻 𝗛𝗲𝗮𝗹𝘁𝗵: 𝗔 𝗖𝗼𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗩𝗶𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗕𝗲𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝗖𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗶𝗻 𝗜𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗮” has been released. It sets out a clear and strategic roadmap to help shift India’s health system from a volume-led approach to one centred on value and outcomes.   I am proud to have contributed to this unique coalition and to have shared perspectives from an insurer’s point of view. Months of structured, constructive dialogue and collaboration have helped reimagine the future roadmap of healthcare in India. With a ringside, three-tiered view of the ecosystem – across my organisation, the insurance sector, and the broader system – I was particularly invested in exploring avenues to strengthen health financing and drive sustainable outcomes.   Congratulations to Leapfrog to Value and its CEO Dr. Balkrishna Korgaonkar for spearheading this important effort and bringing together diverse voices across the healthcare ecosystem.   The coalition’s work identifies core systemic gaps such as fragmented care, limited transparency of outcomes, and financing structures that reward service volume over improved health. It also highlights promising bright spots across the system.   The initiative has resulted in four catalytic proposals: ✅ People’s Commission for Health Improvement – transparent benchmarking to strengthen accountability ✅ Primary Health Care Design Laboratory – prototyping integrated, outcome-focused care models ✅ Business Case for Quality, Safety & Patient Experience – aligning incentives with what truly matters to patients ✅ Coordinated Care Bundles – piloting bundled payments for NCDs and surgeries   The roadmap presents a practical agenda aimed at improving alignment, equity and measurable outcomes. It is an important step toward a more resilient and health-focused future for India.   You can download the strategy here: https://lnkd.in/gErbNiFV Bindu Ananth, Dr. N. Krishna Reddy, Ravi Vishwanath, Sarang Deo, Tejasvi Ravi, Vishnu Vasudev, Rubayat Khan, Dr. Balkrishna Korgaonkar and Chintan Maru.

Sharing some reflections on a this new paper that revisits Weitzman’s 1974 question on when policymakers should use taxes versus quotas to correct externalities in stochastic networked economies. The authors model random supplier‑buyer matches and show that the optimal instrument hinges on the correlation structure of shocks across nodes—whether sectors, firms, or countries. Key takeaways: Positive, correlated shocks (e.g., a common energy‑price shock or a productivity boost from AI) favor linear taxes. Asymmetric or negatively correlated shocks that shift bargaining power (think logistics or retail intermediaries) call for quotas. The paper’s theorems also introduce bilateral nonlinear taxes and flexible allocation‑dependent taxes that can reach the first‑best outcome when the network is symmetric or shocks are symmetric. These insights underline a simple but powerful point: network knowledge is the lever that moves policy from blunt to precise. Without a map of who is connected to whom or what is produced with what, and how, we’re forced to rely on blunt tools like quotas. With partial knowledge, linear taxes outperform quotas. With full knowledge—full visibility of the production network—we can deploy tailored nonlinear instruments that hit the first‑best allocation for each shock realization. Enter AIPNET. Our AI‑retrieved production‑network map gives the structure and spillover relationships that the paper requires. It lets us: 1. Identify high‑spillover nodes (e.g., gallium in the China‑US trade frictions). 2. Test whether shocks are symmetric or asymmetric using granular price data. 3. Locate critical inputs whose subsidy or disruption would cascade through the network. In practice, a policymaker or platform firm can observe network metrics (degree centrality, linkage strength) and offer targeted subsidies to early adopters, triggering diffusion cascades. When shocks are symmetric - say a global awareness campaign- flexible allocation‑dependent subsidies can track the shift in real time, much like a price‑discriminating monopolist. The upshot: better network knowledge unambiguously improves the effectiveness of any chosen tool. It raises the policy ladder, just as a monopolist refines pricing with better consumer insight. AIPNET also informs directed technological progress. By pinpointing interventions that generate the largest direct and indirect benefits, we can accelerate sustainable transitions that win globally - climate mitigation, food security, employment, and domestic value chains. Beyond physical goods, the same framework applies to services and digital trade. In short, the paper shows that the choice between taxes and quotas is not one‑size‑fits‑all; it depends on the network’s shock structure. AIPNET supplies the data to make that choice precise. More on AIPNET on aipnet.io.

The European Commission's 2026 study on the climate transition and public finances arrives at a conclusion that should reframe board-level thinking on sustainability risk: a net-zero trajectory is fiscally sustainable, but the path there will fundamentally restructure how governments raise and spend money. The analysis, conducted using two independent macroeconomic models across all EU member states, finds that revenues lost from declining fossil fuel taxation are more than offset by new income streams, including ETS1, ETS2, the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), and the removal of fossil fuel subsidies. The fiscal arithmetic can work. What differs is the distribution of the adjustment. Several findings demand the attention of sustainability leaders, CFOs and board audit committees. The International Monetary Fund estimates climate-related public spending could increase sovereign debt by 10 to 15% of GDP by 2050. Delayed carbon pricing adds a further 0.8 to 2% of GDP annually. For businesses operating across EU jurisdictions, sovereign fiscal stress is not an abstract risk. It translates directly into tax policy volatility, subsidy withdrawal and regulatory uncertainty. Carbon pricing alone could generate revenue equivalent to 0.9% of GDP by 2050, but tax base erosion reduces the net figure available for balancing to just 0.4% without complementary measures. Corporates relying on current tax structures to model long-range cost bases are working with assumptions that will not hold. Member states are not starting from the same position. Poland and Romania remain heavily dependent on EU financing to fund their transition, whilst Denmark and Spain are mobilising domestic public and private capital at scale. Supply chain exposure to high-dependency member states carries regulatory and operational risk that boards should be stress-testing today. The broader message is clear: the transition does not threaten fiscal stability, but it will demand active management of the revenue and expenditure shifts it triggers. Companies that treat this as background noise rather than a strategic input are accepting avoidable risk. Understanding the intersection of climate policy and financial materiality is now a core board competency. Platforms such as Plan A (plana.earth) are built to translate this regulatory and fiscal complexity into the decision-ready data that leadership needs.

🌍 Major Changes Ahead for EU Health Funding: From EU4Health to the Next MFF (2028–2034) 🌍 The European Commission has proposed a significant structural shift in how health policies and public health initiatives will be financed in the upcoming 2028–2034 MFF. Here are the key changes: 🔹 The End of a Standalone Health Programme Unlike the current 2021–2027 period, which is defined by the dedicated €4.6 billion EU4Health programme, the next MFF does not include a standalone health programme. Instead, EU4Health will be merged alongside 13 other programmes into the newly created European Competitiveness Fund (ECF), a single investment capacity worth €451 billion. 🔹 Where is the Public Health Budget? Health initiatives will be grouped under the ECF’s "Health, biotech, agriculture and bioeconomy" policy window, which has an indicative allocation of €20 billion. Crucially, the exact share of the budget dedicated specifically to health is not specified. This design aims to provide maximum flexibility to reallocate funds for unforeseen priorities during the MFF cycle. 🔹 Shift from Public Health Protection to Industrial Competitiveness The new framework represents a strategic change. While EU4Health focused heavily on disease prevention, reducing health inequalities, and crisis preparedness, the ECF integrates health into a cross-sectoral framework focused on competitiveness, biotechnology, artificial intelligence, and robotics. 🔹 New Public Health Focus Areas Despite the broader focus, the ECF does introduce new emphasis on areas that were not explicitly covered under EU4Health, including autism, degenerative diseases, and diseases related to pollution. 🔹 Risk of Fragmentation A major concern raised is that the ECF’s provisions are framed in general terms, blurring the lines between specific objectives and activities. This lack of precision creates a risk of fragmentation for public health priorities, which could weaken the coherence of EU actions, reduce predictability for applicants, and potentially cause crucial initiatives—like Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan and Safe Hearts Plan—to lose visibility without a dedicated financial envelope . 🔹 Other Key Funding Streams for Health Beyond the ECF, public health and health security will draw from: * Horizon Europe: Receiving a massive boost to €175 billion (nearly double its current budget) to drive health research and innovation. * Union Civil Protection Mechanism (UCPM+): An indicative €10.5 billion to integrate financing for health emergency preparedness and response. * National and Regional Partnership Plans: To support healthcare services, long-term care, and infrastructure. The Bottom Line: The COVID-19 crisis proved the importance of a strong, unified EU health policy. As negotiations for the 2028-2034 MFF continue, the key challenge ahead will be ensuring that public health policy retains its prominence and isn't diluted within broader economic and industrial goals.