Showing posts sorted by date for query TARIFFS ARE A TAX. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query TARIFFS ARE A TAX. Sort by relevance Show all posts

Tuesday, June 09, 2026

China’s Subsidy Machine Is Reshaping Global Capitalism

ALL CAPITALI$M IS STATE CAPITALI$M

  • Governments are pouring record amounts into strategic industries, with global subsidies reaching $108 billion as countries try to secure supply chains.

  • China is outspending the West by a wide margin, providing firms with 3–8 times more state support than OECD peers and helping Chinese companies dominate sectors such as semiconductors and solar panels.

  • The result is a growing global subsidy race, as Western countries respond with tariffs and incentives while debating whether free-market capitalism can compete against China's state-backed industrial strategy.

The COVID-19 pandemic and the geopolitical conflicts to follow exposed severe weaknesses in global supply networks, prompting governments, caught off guard and complacent, to pour money into critical sectors like semiconductors, critical minerals, and pharmaceuticals to prevent future shortages and reduce dependence on geopolitical rivals. Consequently, governments across the globe have increasingly been doling out state subsidies to local firms in a bid to secure supply chains, accelerate the transition to green energy, and protect domestic manufacturing against aggressive foreign competitors. A landmark report by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has revealed that global state subsidies have surged to a total of $108 billion, good for an average of 1.3% of company revenues across 15 key industrial sectors and the highest level since the 2008-2009 financial crisis. But China takes this game far more seriously, giving the state natural resource power the West only dreams of, and making this the onset of what could be a subsidy race that changes the rules of capitalism in order to compete with Beijing.

According to the OECD, Chinese firms in strategic sectors received between three and eight times more state support than competitors in OECD countries over the past 20 years, giving Chinese firms a huge leg up in highly competitive markets. Indeed, OECD estimates that this massive government aid--spanning direct grants and below-market loans-- drove roughly 60% of Chinese companies' global market share gains over the past two decades. Chinese companies receive subsidies equivalent to roughly 2.5% of their revenue, compared to just 0.3% seen by firms in peer nations like Japan and South Korea.

The disparity is most extreme in the semiconductor and solar panel industries, with China's booming semiconductor sector receiving government subsidies equivalent to ~10% of revenues in recent years, compared to 2% of revenues for the global semiconductor sector. China's state-backed investment vehicles, including "Big Fund III" established in 2024, are channeling roughly $47.5 billion into advanced logic and memory capacity. And, Beijing’s largesse is driving massive growth here: China's integrated circuit (IC) exports surged by 83.7% year-over-year to $103.5 billion in the first four months of 2026, reflecting a massive expansion in domestic chip manufacturing capabilities driven by billions in state-backed investments and soaring domestic demand.

Chinese memory firms are now challenging global industry leaders: Domestic players like Yangtze Memory Technologies Corp (YMTC) and ChangXin Memory Technologies (CXMT) are rapidly taking market share and preparing for major public listings to fund further expansion, with YMTC poised to become the world's third-largest NAND flash producer after South Korea’s Samsung (OTCPK:SSNLF) and SK Hynix. Despite global trade restrictions, Chinese firms are achieving important breakthroughs: Chinese engineers have reportedly developed working prototypes of advanced EUV lithography machines, a critical step toward complete manufacturing self-sufficiency by 2028-2030. Additionally, companies like Huawei are pioneering new "logic folding" architectures to boost performance without relying on traditional miniaturization methods.

China’s solar panel manufacturing continues to receive heavy state funding, helping it to dominate the global market regardless of short-term market conditions.

State-backed Chinese subsidies averaged nearly 3.2% of annual firm revenues, enabling manufacturers to heavily outinvest competitors and secure over 80% control of the entire photovoltaic supply chain.

This generosity has incentivized Chinese producers to expand manufacturing under any market conditions. China's annual solar manufacturing capacity has reached approximately 1,200 GW, nearly double the total global installation demand. According to the OECD, this aggressive support has resulted in subsidy-fueled overcapacity and driven the average selling price of solar panels down by 90% over the last decade and a half, often forcing panels to be sold below the break-even point.

But while it may give states more power to wield, the OECD warns that these ongoing, large-scale subsidies are fueling global industrial overcapacity, artificially depressing international prices and undercutting firms that are actually better and more innovative.

And overly generous government subsidies have backfired on Chinese companies before. Whereas the overcapacity and subsequent price cuts have made solar energy highly affordable globally and driven historic deployment records in emerging markets (such as a 176% jump in Chinese module exports to Africa), it has also resulted in severe financial distress, declining profitability and heavy domestic consolidation for Chinese solar companies. To address those problems and maintain some balance, Beijing has begun to phase out support. For instance, the Chinese government reduced and fully abolished the 9% Value Added Tax (VAT) export rebate on photovoltaic products, while battery energy storage systems saw their export tax rebates reduced from 9% to 6%, with a full phase-out expected by 2027.

Meanwhile, Western nations and trading blocs are increasingly trying to come up with ways to keep China’s clean energy hegemony in check with its own incentives. But more often, with retaliation. Most recently, the U.S. unveiled significant levies across China’s renewable sector products, including 50% tariffs on solar cells (whether or not assembled into modules) and strict actions against Chinese steel, aluminum, and advanced batteries. The Trump administration has also announced a 100% punitive tariff on Chinese EVs, making entry into the American market prohibitive. Additionally, the European Commission has adopted definitive countervailing duties of up to 35.3% on BEVs from China, valid for five years. These are applied on top of the standard 10% vehicle import duty.

The uncomfortable reality is that Western economies assumed for decades that private capital, comparative advantage, and open markets would determine the industrial winner. However, China has spent that time building national champions with patient state capital, cheap financing, protected domestic markets, and long-term strategic planning. Tariffs can slow the flow of Chinese products across borders, but little else. The West’s biggest economies now face the choice of whether to try to compete with China on similar terms or whether there is still faith in a private market free-for-all to operate in the national interest.

By Alex Kimani for Oilprice.com


New Geometry Of Innovation: China’s Path From Peripheral Outpost To The Technological Core Of Global Change – Analysis

 IFIMES
By Paweł Gałecki

The global economic architecture is undergoing one of the most significant transformations since the Industrial Revolution, and its epicenter is shifting from Western decision-making centers toward dynamic Asian ecosystems. China, which for the past four decades has been perceived in the economic consciousness primarily as the “world’s factory” – a place of cheap production, mass export, and global supply of components – is steadily evolving toward a model based on knowledge, research and development, and co-creation of technology. This fundamental metamorphosis is not merely a consequence of a natural economic cycle, but the result of a deliberate, long-term state strategy, supported by growing confidence from international corporations, academic institutions, and geopolitical partners from different continents. Statements by leaders of global technology corporations, strategists, and research experts clearly indicate that the narrative of China as merely an assembly site has been consigned to history. It has been replaced by a reality in which Beijing, Shanghai, Suzhou, and Shenzhen are becoming laboratories of the future, where solutions are born and then exported to the markets of Europe, North America, Africa, and the Middle East. This shift carries consequences for business models, supply chain architecture, regulatory standards, and long-term competitiveness strategies.

China as a Global Innovation Hub: Philips and Bosch Redefine the Future of Technology and Industry

Royal Philips, a Dutch conglomerate with more than a century of presence on the Chinese market, is an excellent example of strategic evolution. The company’s CEO, Roy Jakobs, recently stated unequivocally that China has transformed from a key market into one of the global centers of innovation. This assertion is not a marketing claim but a reflection of a deeply rooted operational strategy, whose pillar is the slogan “In China, for China, for the world.” Philips has built a comprehensive value chain in the Middle Kingdom: from advanced research and development, through production, commercial operations, sales and services, to strategic partnerships within the local healthcare ecosystem. Last year the group announced the establishment of the China Research and Innovation Headquarters in Beijing, which acts as a coordinator for regional R&D centers and an accelerator for localizing medical solutions. At the same time, the Suzhou facility integrates R&D functions, manufacturing, and global export, while Shenyang specializes in the development of computed tomography, serving as a global innovation center in this field. Such geographic and functional distribution of competencies demonstrates that China has ceased to be a peripheral outpost and has become a technological core generating value for more than a hundred countries where Philips provides its services.

Jakobs emphasized that the vast Chinese market and rapidly developing digital infrastructure create unique conditions for scaling innovations, which is crucial for the medical technology sector, where deployment time and accessibility of solutions can determine patients’ lives. The Chinese healthcare sector is currently undergoing a qualitative transformation: from models based on scale and reactive disease treatment toward proactive health management, therapy personalization, and continuous diagnostics. Artificial intelligence acts as a catalyst in this metamorphosis, enabling the processing of large medical datasets, optimization of hospital processes, and the development of telemedicine. By combining the global capabilities of corporations with China’s speed of adaptation and solution scalability, Philips intends to deepen cooperation in digital health, AI-based solutions, medical imaging, and green healthcare. Deep rooting in the local ecosystem, strengthened by investments in building capacity for medical personnel and alignment with China’s policy frameworks for sustainable development, becomes a strategic choice that allows the company to remain resilient and to influence both locally and globally.


A parallel but equally significant transformation is observed in the automotive sector, where Robert Bosch GmbH sees in China not only the largest and most dynamic market in the world, but above all a key source of technological innovation. Markus Heyn, member of the management board and chairman of Bosch Mobility, at the International Motor Show in Beijing in 2026 stressed that the group has full confidence in local domestic demand and research potential, which is reflected in the concentration of resources and prioritization of the Chinese market. A symbolic proof of deepening cooperation and the shift from supplier-recipient relationships to a value co-creation model is the joint development with a Chinese manufacturer of a low-voltage power solution. This system was designed specifically to meet the growing demand for computing power in vehicles, which are becoming increasingly software-integrated and dependent on advanced electronic systems. This solution will be developed and put into mass production in cooperation with Chinese customers, illustrating a new paradigm of collaboration where technologies are co-designed from the ground up rather than merely adapted to local specifications.

In 2025 Bosch Mobility achieved sales in China at the level of 122.3 billion yuan, which translates to about 17.83 billion US dollars and represents an annual growth of 4.9%. Importantly, about 70% of these revenues were generated by Chinese brands, which proves that local manufacturers have become the main driving force of innovation and consumers of advanced solutions. Bosch supported about 300 models of Chinese brands entering foreign markets. This path of knowledge transfer – from China to the rest of the world – is groundbreaking because it reverses the traditional direction of technology flow. For the German giant, China is currently the place where, outside Europe, the largest workforce engaged in the development of new technologies is located, and local R&D competencies, a global innovation network, and close cooperation with partners allow parallel development in electrification and intelligent transformation. Concentration on the local market and continued investment in expanding technological reach prove that the future of the automotive industry will be shaped in Chinese laboratories and production halls, and business success will depend on the ability to integrate with the local innovation ecosystem.

China–Saudi Arabia Strategic Partnership and the Rise of a Multipolar Innovation Economy

Economic and technological cooperation between China and Saudi Arabia constitutes another pillar of the new architecture of global value chains, based on mutual transfer of competencies, long-term partnerships, and a strategic development vision. Rayan Al Amoudi, executive director for strategy and business development at Nesma Infrastructure & Technology and chair of the China-Saudi Arabia Technological Innovation Center, points out that bilateral relations long ago exceeded the boundaries of trade and engineering contracts and have evolved toward cooperation encompassing technology transfer, production localization, joint investments, digital transformation, and AI development. The Saudi firm focuses with Chinese partners on areas such as smart cities, critical infrastructure, energy, and digitization of operational processes, which perfectly align with the national modernization agenda. The contemporary Saudi market no longer seeks only ready-made imported products for Saudi Arabia but expects technology to come with the partner, enabling the building of local competencies, knowledge transfer, and independence from a pure consumption model. The pace of corporate cooperation has significantly accelerated, and Chinese technology companies, such as Huawei, have made a deep impression with their expansion, solution quality, and ability to deliver complete systems. Local perception of Chinese technology has markedly improved: more and more government institutions and companies realize that they offer an optimal price-to-quality ratio, fully capable of meeting the requirements of advanced infrastructure and digital projects.


Looking to the future, Saudi Arabia and China see strong cooperation opportunities in green infrastructure, water treatment, digital transformation, and AI data centers. Saudi Arabia’s geographic, energy, and political advantages make it highly competitive in building regional artificial intelligence hubs, and local firms expect to play a larger role in these projects by leveraging Chinese experience and technologies. Saudi Vision 2030 proves highly compatible with China’s Belt and Road Initiative, and deepening exchanges in technology, industry, education, and people-to-people contacts opens broad prospects for economic cooperation based on mutual gain and long-term stability.

The global economic order is ceasing to be dominated by a one-way flow of technology and capital and is moving toward a networked, multipolar innovation ecosystem in which China evolves from the role of end producer to a strategic partner co-creating standards, funding research, and scaling solutions.

The dynamics of European investment and technological cooperation with China are taking on particular strategic significance in the context of growing trade tensions, export restrictions, and customs measures along the European Union – United States – People’s Republic of China axis. While Washington consistently tightens trade restrictions, imposes protective tariffs on Chinese goods, introduces anti-subsidy mechanisms, and promotes a “de-risking” strategy aimed at reducing dependence on Chinese supply chains in strategic sectors, the European Union is in a difficult position of balancing between protecting its own industry, implementing the Green Deal objectives, and maintaining access to key technologies and markets. European giants such as Philips and Bosch are not withdrawing from China; on the contrary – they are deepening localization of research, co-creating products, scaling innovations, and treating the Chinese ecosystem as a source of solutions exported globally. Customs actions and trade barriers may, in the short term, lengthen supply chains, raise operating costs, and force restructuring of business models. However, at the same time these same mechanisms compel companies to greater flexibility, production localization in multiple regions, diversification of partnerships, and investments in compliance with new climate and digital standards.


European investment in China, as well as partnerships with Middle Eastern countries, show that the future of global trade will not be based on isolation and protectionism but on managed interdependence, where tariffs, regulations, and technological standards will become negotiating tools and quality filters rather than absolute barriers. For companies this means the necessity of building resilient, multipolar value chains with operational redundancy and localization of key competencies. For the European Union – balancing between strategic autonomy and openness to cooperation that accelerates economic and climate transformation. For China – continuing the transformation toward a knowledge-based, innovation – and sustainability-driven economy that will constitute a stable pillar of the new economic architecture of the twenty-first century.



The article presents the stance of the author and does not necessarily reflect the stance of IFIMES.


About IFIMES

IFIMES – International Institute for Middle-East and Balkan studies, based in Ljubljana, Slovenia, has special consultative status with the Economic and Social Council ECOSOC/UN since 2018. IFIMES is also the publisher of the biannual international scientific journal European Perspectives. IFIMES gathers and selects various information and sources on key conflict areas in the world. The Institute analyses mutual relations among parties with an aim to promote the importance of reconciliation, early prevention/preventive diplomacy and disarmament/ confidence building measures in the regional or global conflict resolution of the existing conflicts and the role of preventive actions against new global disputes.

View all posts by IFIMES →

AU

Ex-CIA agent created fake spy program to amass $40M gold stash: reports

Stock image.

A former CIA official who was caught hoarding $40 million worth of gold bars allegedly created a “fake” classified intelligence program that US federal investigators say was used to channel government funds for personal gain, according to media reports.

David J. Rush, the former CIA employee, was arrested last month and charged with theft of public funds after FBI agents discovered 303 gold bars valued at roughly $40 million, along with about $2 million in cash and dozens of luxury watches, stashed in his Virginia home.

The search was conducted after the CIA became suspicious of his past military history, including his claim of being part of the Navy Reserve, and tipped the Bureau to act. Before his arrest on May 19, Rush had reportedly worked as a CIA officer for 17 years.

The Washington Post, citing US officials with knowledge of Rush’s investigations, reveals that Rush had created a fraudulent operation dubbed as the “special access program” into which he used to convince another agent to transfer the money. The New York Times also reported the findings.

‘Made-up contract’

According to both publications, Rush allegedly brought at least two CIA colleagues on the fraudulent operation and persuaded one of them to transfer the cash and gold into the program. To convince them, he claimed the money was to keep the government running in the event of a catastrophic event, such as destructive weather or a military attack, the reports said.

“He made up a contract,” one of the officials told The Washington Post.

However, it was not clear how the ex-CIA officer was able to create the program and obtain the funds without involving superiors in the agency.

According to court documents released following his arrest, Rush had received “a significant quantity of foreign currency and tens of millions of dollars in gold bars for work-related expenses” between November 2025 and March 2026. When conducting an internal review, the CIA could not locate these funds, it said in the document.

In response to the charges, Rush’s attorney, Jessica Carmichael, argued that many of the government’s allegations remain unproven, and some are unrelated to the charge currently before the court. For instance, the discovery of gold bars was “basically a non-issue”, Carmichael told reporters, stating that his client never claimed ownership of the bullion.

“This is about $65,000 worth of time card fraud,” she said.

Following a detention hearing last week, Rush was ordered to remain in jail until his trial, as a US District Court ruled him to be a flight risk.


India’s gold tariff hike fuels smuggling revival, squeezes banks and refiners

Stock image.

India’s sharp increase in gold import tariffs is fuelling a resurgence in smuggling that could exceed 100 metric tons this year, as soaring grey market margins allow smugglers to undercut banks and refiners of the precious metal, industry officials and bullion dealers said.

India, the world’s biggest gold market after China, more than doubled import tariffs to 15% in May to curb demand, cut the trade deficit and ease pressure on the rupee. But the move has created an opportunity for smugglers who are able to offer prices legitimate importers cannot match, they said.

The grey market discount has gone beyond $200 per ounce, or more than 4%, said a Mumbai-based bullion division head at a private gold importing bank, adding that banks were unable to offer even a $10 discount, let alone one of three digits. He declined to be named because he was not authorized to speak to media.

The recent resurgence in the grey market suggests illegal imports could exceed 100 tons in 2026, said another dealer who also declined to be identified because he was not authorized to speak to the media.

Four other dealers interviewed by Reuters shared the view that illegal gold imports could exceed 100 tons in 2026.

At current prices, 100 tons of gold would be worth about $14.35 billion, implying roughly $2.65 billion in lost tariffs and sales tax.

Smugglers can offer steep discounts because they do not pay taxes on gold, including import tariffs and goods and services tax that total 18.45%, the bullion dealers said.

“There’s a margin of more than 2.5 million rupees ($26,121.25) on bringing in a one-kilo bar, which is roughly the size of an iPhone. It is natural that people will try to make quick bucks,” the second dealer said.

“Even if grey-market operators sell at a 4% discount, they are still making a killing,” said a Kolkata-based bullion dealer.

Gold smuggling fell from 156.1 tons in 2023 to 69.2 metric tons the following year, and declined further in 2025 to 20.4 tons after India cut import duties on gold.

Before the duty cut, an average of 108 metric tons of the precious metal was smuggled into the country each year over the previous decade, according to data compiled by the World Gold Council.

India imported 45.6 tons of gold in April, but imports may have halved in May as banks and refiners scaled back overseas purchases amid deep discounts, said a Hyderabad-based bullion dealer.

Hefty discounts in the grey market have disrupted legal trade, pushing domestic discounts on legal gold to more than $100 an ounce as stocks imported before the duty hike are sold at steep discounts, making refining uneconomical, said James Jose, managing director of refiner CGR Metalloys.

New Delhi levies a 0.65% lower import duty on gold dore, a semi-pure alloy, than on refined gold, but the alloy has also been affected by the tariff change.

“Gold refiners typically operate on margins of around 0.65%. With discounts now well above that level, refiners have little incentive to import dore,” Jose said.

(By Rajendra Jadhav; Editing by Mayank Bhardwaj and Kate Mayberry)

 

Debt cycle points to stronger case for gold price: Sprott



Stock image.

Gold’s long-term bull market is increasingly being driven by a force larger than inflation, interest rates or geopolitical tensions: the world’s growing debt burden.

That is the central thesis of Sprott’s latest market outlook, which argues that investors are witnessing the later stages of a decades-long debt cycle in which rising government borrowing, persistent deficits and mounting interest costs are beginning to undermine confidence in sovereign debt markets.

As governments accumulate liabilities faster than economies can grow, policymakers face difficult choices between fiscal austerity, higher inflation, financial repression or some form of debt monetization, the asset manager said.

In such an environment, gold’s role changes, as the report highlights. Rather than simply serving as an inflation hedge, the metal becomes a store of value independent of governments and financial systems.

Sprott argues that the world is moving toward a regime where preserving purchasing power matters more than generating yield, creating a favorable backdrop for gold over the long term.

Central banks are voting with their reserves

According to Sprott, one of the strongest signals supporting gold comes from central banks themselves.

Official sector purchases reached 244 tonnes during the first quarter of 2026, extending a buying trend that has persisted for several years. At the same time, some countries have reduced holdings of US Treasuries and other sovereign debt instruments to raise liquidity during periods of market stress.

Sprott highlights Turkey’s recent actions as an example. Faced with rising energy-import costs, the country liquidated most of its Treasury holdings while largely retaining gold reserves through swap transactions rather than outright sales. The distinction is significant. Treasuries were treated as transactional assets that could be sold when cash was needed, while gold remained core collateral.

The broader trend suggests central banks increasingly view gold not as a speculative asset but as a strategic reserve. Amid growing geopolitical tensions, sanctions risks and concerns about long-term currency stability, gold offers something sovereign bonds cannot: an asset with no counterparty risk.

This sustained central-bank demand has also helped establish a durable floor beneath the gold market, with purchases often accelerating during periods of price weakness.

Bond markets are flashing warning signs

The report argues that the most important development in global markets is occurring not in gold but in government bonds.

Across major economies, yields have climbed sharply despite efforts by central banks to ease monetary conditions. In the United States, long-term Treasury yields have risen to levels not seen since before the global financial crisis, while similar moves have occurred across Europe, Japan and other developed markets.

Traditionally, lower policy rates helped pull bond yields down. That relationship is beginning to weaken. Investors are increasingly demanding higher compensation for inflation uncertainty, growing debt issuance and concerns about fiscal sustainability.

 U.S. 10-year Treasury term premium, weekly. Source: Sprott

The US illustrates the challenge. Federal debt has climbed to roughly 120% of GDP, while annual deficits remain near 5% of GDP and are projected to increase further. Interest payments on the debt are approaching $1 trillion annually and continue to rise as governments refinance obligations at higher rates.

According to Sprott, investors are beginning to focus less on central-bank policy and more on the long-term ability of governments to manage debt loads. The result is rising term premiums, higher borrowing costs and growing questions about the future role of sovereign bonds as safe-haven assets. As confidence in debt-backed assets weakens, demand for hard assets such as gold tends to strengthen.

Gold’s structural bull case remains intact

While gold faces short-term headwinds from rising yields and periodic liquidity pressures, Sprott believes the larger forces supporting the metal remain firmly in place.

The report describes an emerging environment characterized by fiscal dominance, where governments become increasingly constrained by debt levels and rising interest costs. Policymakers may be forced to prioritize financial stability and debt management over strict inflation control, creating conditions that historically lead to currency debasement and negative real interest rates.

At the same time, mine supply growth remains limited while central banks continue to absorb a significant share of newly available metal. This combination of constrained supply and steady official-sector demand strengthens the market’s underlying fundamentals.

For Sprott, the current gold market is not simply reacting to inflation or geopolitical headlines. It reflects a broader reassessment of monetary assets in a world where debt continues to expand faster than confidence in the financial system.

If that debt cycle continues along its current path, gold’s role as a store of value may become increasingly important—not only for central banks, but for investors seeking protection from the long-term consequences of rising deficits, growing debt burdens and the gradual erosion of purchasing power.

In the short term, gold remains subject to market conditions such as inflationary pressures from the US-Iran war. On Tuesday, the metal extended its decline to about $4,230/oz., once again erasing its gains for the year.

China’s PBOC adds gold again as bullion remains under pressure


The People’s Bank of China headquarters in Beijing – Image courtesy of Wikimedia Commons

China’s central bank extended its gold-buying streak in May, adding to holdings as prices of the precious metal remained under pressure.

Bullion held by the People’s Bank of China rose by 320,000 troy ounces last month, according to data released on Sunday. The latest addition extended its buying streak to 19 months, the longest since at least 2015, when the PBOC began publishing more regular updates on its gold reserves.

Gold edged lower in May, marking a third consecutive monthly decline after it hit a record in late January. Persistent inflation concerns and expectations for higher-for-longer interest rates triggered by the war in the Middle East have weighed on the appeal of non-yielding assets.

Global central-bank purchases have been a key pillar of support for bullion in recent years. Goldman Sachs Group Inc. said last month it expects the buying to be stepped up as geopolitical developments are likely to reinforce a push to diversify reserves.

(By Jessica Zhou)


Monday, June 08, 2026

Could tackling climate change and levelling inequality go hand in hand?

The world can raise income, reduce inequality and limit global warming, according to an ambitious roadmap presented this week by economists in France. Making the case for a radical transformation of economies and lifestyles, they call on rich countries to slow growth, phase out fossil fuels and tax the wealthiest to help poorer countries fund development and mitigate the effects of climate change.


Issued on: 06/06/2026 - RFI

The Makoko shantytown in Lagos, Nigeria's commercial capital, where the gap between rich and poor is stark. © AFP - PIUS UTOMI EKPEI

By:RFI
ADVERTISING


Published on Thursday by the World Inequality Lab, the Global Justice Report presents a vision of a fairer world built within the planet's limits.

Based on data from around the world, it makes the case that it is possible to “reconcile planetary habitability with wellbeing for all” – but only by making deep structural changes. These include rapid decarbonisation, sharp reductions in wealth disparities and shifts in consumption patterns, particularly in high-income countries.

Co-directed by French economist Thomas Piketty, the Paris-based research group proposes a long-term scenario in which people around the world earn an average monthly income of around €5,000 by 2100. Currently, that figure ranges from roughly €290 in sub-Saharan Africa to nearly €4,600 in North America.

Under the plan, the share of global wealth held by the poorest half of the world’s population would rise from just 2 percent today to 30 percent, while the proportion held by billionaires would fall dramatically.

At the same time, the researchers argue, global warming could be limited to 1.8 degrees C – well below current trajectories that exceed 4 degrees.


A reforestation assistant measures a newly planted tree in a field damaged during illegal gold mining in Madre de Dios, Peru, on 29 March 2019. @ AP - Rodrigo Abd


They say this requires three major shifts: a rapid phase-out of fossil fuels in favour of renewable energy; rebalancing economic activity away from carbon-intensive sectors such as manufacturing and transport towards services like education and healthcare; and significant changes in diets, including cutting back on meat, to allow for large-scale reforestation.

The report also calls for a reduction in working hours in wealthier regions, alongside efforts to equalise incomes both within and between countries.

According to its authors, this would mean near-zero per capita growth in richer economies, while poorer regions would grow faster to close the gap.

Taxing the rich

To finance the transition, the economists propose the creation of a “global justice fund”, initially funded through steep taxes on the wealthiest individuals – up to 20 percent annually on billionaires’ fortunes and income tax rates of up to 90 percent.

Over time, the fund would evolve into a global sovereign wealth mechanism, redistributing resources to support both social development and climate mitigation.

Spending from the fund would average more than 10 percent of global GDP annually between 2026 and 2060, with a strong focus on the Global South. Allocations would be tied to both social and environmental conditions, with priority given to health, education and energy transitions.

Demonstrators carry banners with pictures of France's biggest billionaires during the traditional May Day march in Paris on 1 May 2021. © REUTERS - GONZALO FUENTES

With geopolitical tensions rising and international cooperation on the decline, the report's proposals may struggle to gain political traction.

The authors acknowledge resistance from wealthy individuals and governments is likely, and suggest that an initial coalition of willing countries could impose tariffs on non-participants.

They point to the dramatic reduction in inequality and working hours in 20th-century Europe as evidence that transformative change is possible.

The publication coincides with WIL's World Inequality Conference in Paris, where researchers and policymakers are set to debate the findings.

Sunday, June 07, 2026

UK

One hundred days of turpitude

JUNE 7, 2026

The End Fuel Poverty Coalition has tracked the energy price crisis, called on the Government to act and warned that the damage to household finances will be significant.

Today marks the first 100 days of the US-Israeli military action against Iran, which triggered the UK’s second major energy price crisis of the 2020s. 

The conflict has driven fossil fuel prices to fresh highs. Currently UK Natural Gas is around 38% higher and heating oil is 80% higher year on year. It has locked in a huge rise in energy bills from 1st July. At the same time, energy companies posted £26.2 billion in profits in just the first three months of 2026, and key figures linked to the energy industry saw their wealth grow. 

KEY FACTS (click on the link for source information)

July 2026 Ofgem average energy bill price cap increase13.5% / £221 per yearendfuelpoverty.org.uk
Gas unit rates (quarter-on-quarter, July Ofgem cap)Up 28%endfuelpoverty.org.uk
Typical household bill vs winter 2020/21Up 79%endfuelpoverty.org.uk
Cumulative extra household energy costs since 2021 (ECIU)£4,800endfuelpoverty.org.uk
Energy industry profits (Q1 2026, global)£26.2 billionendfuelpoverty.org.uk
Energy industry profits (Q1 2026, UK operations)c.£3 billion / £102 per UK householdendfuelpoverty.org.uk
Increase in the stock market value (market capitalisation) of 15 leading energy firms (26th Feb to 29th May)£52.4 billionNew analysis
Combined increase in value of shares of 10 energy CEOs (26th Feb to 29th May)£6.6 millionNew analysis
Combined wealth of 16 energy-linked Sunday Times Rich List individuals£74.2 billion (up £2.8bn in a year)endfuelpoverty.org.uk
Households potentially spending 10%+ of income on energy from 1st Julyc.13.5 millionNew estimate
Public saying energy firms are morally wrong to profit from Iran crisis74%endfuelpoverty.org.uk
Public support for Windfall Tax vs oppositionTwo to oneendfuelpoverty.org.uk
UK adults who have become more interested in home energy technology since the Iran conflict19.3 millionendfuelpoverty.org.uk

Simon Francis, coordinator of the End Fuel Poverty Coalition said:“Behind every percentage point on the Ofgem price cap is a household whose direct debit is about to go up and an energy firm whose profits already have. 

“One hundred days on from the start of the Iran conflict, the bill for Britain’s dependence on fossil fuels is landing on doormats across the country. The only people who benefit are the drill-more and bill-more brigade who would keep us hooked on gas to heat our homes, even after the North Sea industry has finished extracting the last drop of gas from the UK basin.

“Households need to know what support is coming, and they need a credible long-term plan that means the next foreign conflict or market shock does not send their bills even higher.”

He added: “The Iran conflict, like the Ukraine invasion before it, is a reminder that as long as our homes run on gas, our bills will be set by decisions made in Riyadh, Moscow and Washington. So while there is a cost to acting on climate change, the cost of not acting is even greater and is a cost already felt in energy bills.

“Staying on gas forever is not viable. Firms have already extracted 90% of commercially viable gas from the North Sea while posting billions in profits, and import dependence will only rise as the basin ages. Even industry figures admit that geological reality.

“But we cannot accept a transition that simply swaps one form of profiteering for another. The move to clean energy must not become a fresh opportunity for the market to extract profits from people who can least afford it. The benefits of change must flow to households, not disappear into the pockets of energy giants.

“A key policy that will deliver the transition is the Warm Homes Plan. This is the right vehicle for change, but delivery must be done right. We are calling on the government to adopt a Warm Homes Guarantee to underpin the Plan built around four commitments: real warmth and wellbeing outcomes, independent advice households can trust, strong rights and redress when things go wrong, and a measurable reduction in energy costs.”

Jonathan Bean, spokesperson for Fuel Poverty Action said: “Their billions come from our bills. This obscene profiteering from oil wars needs to stop, and our Government needs to focus on moving to renewables to give us greater independence and security. The benefits of cheap-to-produce wind and solar energy aren’t being harnessed to bring down our bills.

“The Government must take action to fix the rigged electricity market, cut excess grid and network profits, rapidly expand access to solar power and batteries, and give everyone access to the cheapest tariffs and free excess energy that is being wasted on  sunny and windy days.”

Tessa Khan, executive director of Uplift, said: “The cost of living crisis – high energy bills, rising food prices and the cost of filling up the car – are all being made worse by soaring oil and gas prices. That’s why accelerating the transition to renewables is just common sense now.

“And yet some politicians still want to lock the UK into decades more oil and gas dependence, despite the fact every new drilling project deepens the climate crisis and does nothing to alleviate the many costs being borne by households. New developments like Rosebank are not compatible with safe climate limits. It’s beyond time we take climate risks seriously and stop fuelling the crisis with new oil and gas drilling.”

Timeline of the Iran conflict impact on Uk energy bills

Phase 1: Immediate Shock (Late February to early March 2026)

The conflict triggered an immediate market response:

  • Wholesale gas prices rose 36% year-on-year by 3rd March, hitting levels not seen since 2023.
  • Heating oil costs surged 39% year-on-year.
  • Heating oil prices more than doubled in under two weeks, from 63.1p to 128.1p per litre.

Gas and electricity bills were protected until 1st July by the existing price cap, but the End Fuel Poverty Coalition warned the real risk lay ahead: if elevated prices persisted, they would feed directly into Ofgem’s May decision on the July cap. Around 1.5 million off-grid households, concentrated in rural areas and Northern Ireland, had no such protection.

Phase 2: Escalation and UK Government response (March 2026)

As the conflict deepened, gas prices spiked 124% month-on-month and 65% year-on-year by 19th March. Energy firm shares rose close to 10%, even as the FTSE 100 fell.

The Government announced a £53 million heating oil support package. EFPC welcomed it but warned it was limited in scale and slow to reach those suffering immediately.

On 18th March, EFPC wrote to ministers with an emergency support framework, including:

               •             A new Alternative Fuel Support Scheme for off-gas households

               •             Targeted unit rate reductions from July if the cap rose significantly

               •             A national energy debt relief scheme

               •             Reforms to Cold Weather Payments and the Warm Home Discount

By 20th March, projections pointed to a massive July increase what EFPC called a “Trump Tax” representing a 90% rise on pre-crisis levels.

Phase 3: Limited ceasefire (April 2026)

A ceasefire was announced on 8th April, but EFPC was clear: the damage was already done. Gas prices remained 38% up year-on-year and heating oil costs 78% above 2025 levels. Oil, LPG and gas had spent over five weeks at elevated levels, and all households would feel the impact from 1st July. The Resolution Foundation estimated the conflict would leave the typical working-age household around £480 worse off.

As the Government announced a further raft of policies designed to help the public move away from gas for heating, the crisis also accelerated a shift in public attitudes. Survation polling for EFPC found that 35% of the public (19.3m people) have become more interested in home energy saving technology since the Iran conflict began. The polling also found 77% agreed that “history just keeps repeating itself with energy prices” and 72% felt that reliance on oil and gas leaves the UK vulnerable to global price shocks.

Phase 4: Profits revealed (May 2026)

While households braced for higher bills, energy companies posted £26.2 billion in global profits in Q1 2026, with around £3 billion from UK operations: equivalent to £102 for every household in the country. Key figures include Equinor (£7.19bn), Shell (£5.07bn), TotalEnergies (£4bn) and BP (£2.4bn, more than double the year before).

EFPC’s analysis of the Sunday Times Rich List found the combined wealth of 16 energy-linked individuals grew by £2.8 billion in a year to £74.2 billion. A Survation poll found 74% of the public believed it was morally wrong for energy firms to profit from the Iran crisis, with support for the Windfall Tax running at two to one right across the country.

Phase 5: Energy bills rise (May 2026)

On 27th May Ofgem confirmed a 13.5% price cap rise from 1st July: £221 on the average annual bill, driven by gas unit rates up 28% on the previous quarter. Household bills are now 79% higher than before the energy crisis began in winter 2020/21. EFPC warned that any chance households had to reduce debts or build reserves before winter would be wiped out, and that the poorest neighbourhoods face a double burden: higher bills and homes seven times more likely to overheat in summer.

The way forward

One hundred days of higher prices and higher profits have left millions of households worse off through no fault of their own. The public have delivered a clear verdict: 77% say history keeps repeating itself on energy prices, and nearly 20 million people are now actively looking at ways to cut their exposure to fossil fuel markets. 

The Government must match that appetite for change with action, confirming bill support for the coming winter, scaling up clean energy to get households off the fossil fuel rollercoaster and fixing the electricity pricing system so the benefits of homegrown renewables are felt in household bills, not just on energy company balance sheets.

Image: https://www.amherstindy.org/2026/05/20/opinion-the-golden-opportunity-of-president-trumps-war-on-iran/ Photo: : AEBetako Gobernua, Rawpixel. (CC0 1.0 Universal)