BackHome
Refresh: OffView Personal Schedule
Session Submission Summary

Sustainable financing for education: why should tax justice be part of the solution

Tue, April 16, 8:00 to 9:30am, Hyatt Regency, Floor: Pacific Concourse (Level -1), Pacific L

Group Submission Type: Formal Panel Session

Proposal

Sustainable Financing for Education: Why should Tax Justice be part of the solution?

This panel explores potential solutions based on increased domestic resource mobilisation through progressive taxation in order to meet the growing financing gap needed to achieve Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 4 in a fair a sustainable manner. In 2010, the EFA Global Monitoring Report team calculated a financing gap of US$26 billion. This funding gap would increase from $26 billion to $38 billion each year after extending the education goal to include lower secondary school. Ultimately, the responsibility for financing Education for All falls on national governments. While many governments in poor countries are already demonstrating a strong commitment to funding education, the papers will argue that they could raise more money by broadening their tax base – for example, by reducing the prevalence of harmful tax incentives or tackling tax avoidance. In 2016 the Education Financing Commission produced a report called The Learning Generation which stressed that 97% of financing for education must come through domestic resource mobilisation. However, in 2017 and 2018 most of the energy of the Commission has been focused on filling the 3% international financing gap rather than taking action on the 97%.

The first contribution, by David Archer, analyses Global financing mechanisms: Global Partnership for Education, Education Cannot Wait, International Finance Facility for Education, Education Outcomes Fund. It argues that this proliferation of initiatives threatens to fragment the sector and further distract attention from the desperate need to focus on enhancing domestic financing. It will defend that GPE has the best model in terms of using international support to leverage deeper domestic financing commitments (with $30billion pledged by developing countries at its recent replenishment). But even here, GPE is too narrowly focused on the share of budgets spent on education and does not do enough to promote action on the tax base. It then presents ActionAid Gender Responsive Public Services framework. ActionAid is researching how different developing countries can broaden their tax base in a progressive way, producing briefings on everything from trade and excise, VAT, corporate taxes, wealth and property taxes, taxes on the informal economy, capital gains tax and tax avoidance etc.. Addressing tax issues and macro-economics, to pursue more expansionary policies to invest in education can help us build common ground with other public services (rather than fighting over relative shares of the national budget). This is what we do with ActionAid’s framework for Gender Responsive Public Services which connects effective delivery and sustainable financing.

The second contribution, ‘Why is tax Justice an alternative to privatisation of education?’, a multi-country study by Maria Ron Balsera, presents the findings from two phases of a multi-country project. It argues that we need to ‘talk tax’ when exploring avenues to tap the education financial gap, using Pakistan, Ghana, Kenya and Uganda as case studies to analyse the effect of the inadequate financing of education and to explore sustainable and equitable solutions. Drawing from data collected through surveys and participatory action research in each of these countries, this presentation reveals the levels of education cost borne by families both in public and private schools as well as the revenue lost to tax incentives. It concludes that the disparity of education opportunities entailed by market-based approaches disqualifies privatisation as a sustainable strategy to expand access to education. Therefore, it is necessary to improve the financing of public education by increasing the size, the share, the sensitivity and the scrutiny of the education budget to reach the goal of inclusive and quality education for all.

The third contribution, by Asmara Figue, presents the findings from the project Breaking Barriers: ensuring access to free, quality public education. This project seeks to address some of the key barriers that prevent children, especially girls and vulnerable children from enjoying their right to free, quality, inclusive public education in Malawi, Mozambique, Nigeria and Tanzania. Included in the barriers are: discrimination, inadequate financing and the proliferation of private, low-cost schools. Through a combination of participatory local research and desk research at national and international levels, the ActionAid country offices involved in the two projects are committed to gathering evidence to support effective advocacy and campaigning for free, quality, inclusive public education – especially for girls, children with disability and other marginalised groups - including on the role of private providers in education. The research is expected to provide insights into factors including:
• The extent to which children’s right to education is being fulfilled at school level (as compared with government commitments laid out in legal and policy frameworks);
• The impact of the spread of low-cost private education provision on children’s access to free, quality public education (especially for girls and marginalised children);
• Amounts lost by governments each year to harmful tax incentives and how much of this money could be used to finance free, quality, inclusive public education for out of school children across the 4 countries.

Sub Unit

Chair

Individual Presentations

Discussant