Partnerships for the Goals

Living Edition
| Editors: Walter Leal Filho, Anabela Marisa Azul, Luciana Brandli, Pinar Gökcin Özuyar, Tony Wall

Financing for SDGs: Toward a Responsible Public-Private Tax Approach

  • M. A. Grau RuizEmail author
Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71067-9_59-1
  • 14 Downloads

Synonyms

Introduction

In order to afford a truly global sustainable development, new responsible tax initiatives could be envisaged and jointly put into place by the public authorities and the private sector. While the ongoing search for innovative financial instruments may not meet the initial expectations set in the Addis Ababa Action Agenda, a slight reorientation of the available tax tools and their use may lead to an improvement in the path toward sustainability.

Definition

Definition of Social Responsibility as a Means to Overcome the Inefficient Present Situation Caused by Limited Views on Taxation. In the following paragraphs, an overview of the present situation is briefly described in an attempt to expose the blockage caused hitherto through the usage of the most common limited tax views. Subsequently, a call for every organization, irrespective of their public or private nature, to be globally, socially responsible is made....

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Alfano R et al (2019) Medidas fiscales y medioambiente: principios UE y su concreta aplicación en países europeos en tema de imposición sobre las emisiones de CO2 (Environmental fiscal measures: EU principles and their application in some European countries on CO2 emissions taxation). In: Cubero Truyo A, Masbernat P (dir) Protección del medio ambiente. Fiscalidad y otras medidas del derecho al desarrollo (Environmental protection. Taxation and other measures of development law). Thomson Reuters Aranzadi, Cizur Menor, pp 370–405Google Scholar
  2. Avi-Yonah RS (2006) The three goals of taxation. Tax Law Rev 60(1):1–28Google Scholar
  3. Bird RM (2015) Global taxes and international taxation: mirage and reality. ICTD working paper – institute of development studies, Brighton, 28, 6Google Scholar
  4. Brown EW (2003) Conclusions: understanding compliance with soft law. In: Shelton D (ed) Commitment and compliance: the role of non-binding norms in the international legal system. OUP, Oxford, pp 538–539Google Scholar
  5. European Commission (2019) Corporate social responsibility, responsible business conduct, and business & human rights: overview of progress. Commission staff working document, Brussels 20.3.2019 [SWD (2019) 143 final], pp 4Google Scholar
  6. Glogower A (forthcoming) A constitutional wealth tax. Mich L Rev 118Google Scholar
  7. Grau Ruiz MA (2015) Tax expenditures to promote environmentally responsible investment. In: Kreiser L et al (eds) Environmental pricing. Studies in policy choices and interactions, critical issues in environmental taxation. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 100–114Google Scholar
  8. Grau Ruiz MA (2016) State aid schemes for environmental protection in the form of tax exemptions or reliefs in energy taxes. In: Pistone P, Villar Ezcurra M (eds) Energy taxation, environmental protection and state aids: tracing the path from divergence to convergence. IBFD, Amsterdam, p 271Google Scholar
  9. Grau Ruiz MA (2018) Climate change-related action and non-productive investments in the European Union. In: Hymel M et al (eds) Innovation addressing climate change challenges, market-based perspectives, critical issues in environmental taxation. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 154–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Grau Ruiz MA (2019a, in press) Corporate social responsibility and taxation in regulation: the EU perspective. In: Elgaard K et al (ed) Fair taxation and corporate social responsibility. Ex Tuto, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  11. Grau Ruiz MA (2019b) Efficient tax incentives for better environmental performance: experiences with certificates for sustainable housing. In: Villar Ezcurra M (ed) Environmental tax studies for the ecological transition. Thomson Reuters – Civitas, Madrid, pp 165–184Google Scholar
  12. Grau Ruiz MA (2019c) Sostenibilidad global y actividad financiera. Los incentivos a la participacion privada y su control (Global sustainability and financial activity. The incentives to promote private involvement and their control). Thomson-Reuters Aranzadi, Cizur MenorGoogle Scholar
  13. Grau Ruiz MA (2019d) Some lessons learnt from environmental labelling information schemes: could certification of inclusive robotics follow a similar path? Available via Eprint UCM https://eprintsucmes/50680/. Accessed 6 Oct 2019
  14. Greene J, Braathen NA (2014) Tax preferences for environmental goals: use, limitations and preferred practices. OECD environment working papers 71, pp 32–33.  https://doi.org/10.1787/5jxwrr4hkd6l-enn
  15. Gruère G (2013) A characterisation of environmental labelling and information schemes. OECD environment working papers 62, pp 10.  https://doi.org/10.1787/5k3z11hpdgq2-en
  16. Haščič I et al (2015) Public interventions and private climate finance flows: empirical evidence from renewable energy financing. OECD environment working papers 80, pp 23.  https://doi.org/10.1787/5js6b1r9lfd4-en
  17. Henley PH (2011) Case not, minerals and mechanisms: the legal significance of the notion of the ‘common heritage of mankind’ in the advisory opinion of the seabed disputes chamber. Melb J Int Law 12:377Google Scholar
  18. Masbernat P, Ramos G (2019) Una introducción al problema sobre la tributación y la regulación de la minería en los fondos marinos profundos, el Área (An introduction to the problem about the taxation and the regulation of the mining in the deep seabed, the area). In: Cubero Truyo A, Masbernat P (dir) Protección del medio ambiente. Fiscalidad y otras medidas del derecho al desarrollo (Environmental protection. Taxation and other measures of development law), Thomson Reuters Aranzadi, Cizur Menor, pp 187Google Scholar
  19. Nerudová D et al (2019) Tax system sustainability evaluation: a model for EU countries. Intereconomics:138–141.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10272-019-0811-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. O’Brolchain F, Inbots WP2 Team (2019) D2.1 preliminary report on interactive robotics´ legal, ethics & socioeconomic aspects. In: Inbots white paper on interactive robotics (H2020 public deliverable). Available via INBOTS. http://inbots.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Attachment_0-1.pdf. Accessed 6 Oct 2019
  21. Pirlot A (2016) Environmental cross-border taxation from an international (trade) law perspective: bringing coherence to the legal Chaos, Ph.D. Thesis, Université Catholique de LouvainGoogle Scholar
  22. Pirlot A (2017) Environmental border tax adjustments and international trade law. Fostering environmental protection. Edward Elgar, CheltelhamGoogle Scholar
  23. Pirlot A (forthcoming) A legal analysis of the mutual interactions between the UN sustainable development goals (SDGs) & taxation. In: Brokelind C and Van Thiel S (ed) Tax sustainability in the EU and international context. IBFD, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  24. Roberts T (2017) Choice of instrument, efficiency and the WTO. Paper presented at the 18th global conference on environmental taxation, University of Arizona, Tucson, 28 Sept 2017Google Scholar
  25. Taylor P (1998) An ecological approach to international law, responding to challenges of climate change. Routledge, London/New YorkGoogle Scholar
  26. Uricchio A (2017) I tributi ambientali e la fiscalità circolare (The environmental taxes and circular taxation). Diritto e Pratica Tributaria 5:1849Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Universidad Complutense de MadridMadridSpain
  2. 2.Northwestern UniversityChicagoUSA

Section editors and affiliations

  • Elena Shabliy
    • 1
  1. 1.Divinity SchoolHarvard UniversityCambridgeUSA