Still, somewhere inside this difficult moment, there’s a sense that the ground is shifting in a way we can no longer ignore. The incentives have changed, as you mention, and so has the global mood — and maybe this is where the possibility sits. We’ve all spoken for years about “locally led development,” but we’ve dragged our feet or built parallel structures that unintentionally weakened the very institutions we claimed to strengthen. Now, when external resources are thinning at record speed, local leadership isn’t just a good ideal — it’s the only stable anchor left.

What stood out to me most is the reminder that countries are stepping up, even with limited space to maneuver. Nigeria increasing its health allocation in the middle of a crisis is a rare kind of political courage. Ghana reorganizing health delivery around integrated primary care networks shows that system thinking doesn’t always need massive external pushes. And Tanzania digitizing teacher development so effectively that almost all educators participate regularly — that’s a quiet but powerful example of what can happen when technology is woven into a system instead of pasted onto it.

A big challenge, though, is fragmentation. For years, global development flowed through vertical lanes — one donor for HIV, another for malaria, another for nutrition. Useful, yes, but it often carved health systems into disconnected pockets. If we are serious about “holistic” approaches, then we finally have to let go of the comfort of silos and build funding, data, and delivery models that treat populations as whole people instead of categorized diseases.

And the call for alignment around country plans feels especially timely. In the absence of USAID, every remaining partner now has a bigger responsibility to coordinate rather than compete, to listen before prescribing, and to let country leaders set the map. Leaders like Dr. Pate show what strong stewardship can look like, but even the best plans fail when donors pull in opposite directions.

Your point about rethinking technical assistance is also overdue. The classic model — heavy external staffing, parallel reporting structures, long project cycles — doesn’t fit a world running on reduced aid and fast-moving technologies. Lightweight coaching models, country-led peer networks, Helpdesk systems, local TA hubs… these feel like the kinds of ideas that make sense now, not in some future white paper. They respect local expertise without romanticizing it, and they bring efficiency without losing depth.

If anything, this moment almost forces us to rethink who holds knowledge, who gets to decide priorities, and how evidence moves across borders. And maybe, for once, the global development community has to practice the humility it keeps advocating for — to listen more closely to local institutions, to accept slower timelines when needed, and to step back where it has historically stepped too far forward.

What you’ve outlined isn’t just a response to a funding crisis. It’s a blueprint for a quieter, sturdier kind of development — one where systems can breathe, adapt, and stand on their own legs even when global winds change direction overnight. And perhaps that’s the most hopeful thread running through all of this: the idea that the future of development might finally shift from dependency to durability, from fragmentation to integration, and from external agendas to country-shaped pathways.

A challenging moment, yes — but also a rare chance to build something more grounded than what existed before.

Thank you for this—I endorse your comments.

The reduction of international development finance necessitates that developing countries enhance domestic revenue mobilization. However, low tax compliance, elite resistance, and administrative weaknesses pose challenges. A fair tax system must balance equity, efficiency, and practicality while addressing globalized elite incomes and brain drain concerns. Below is a multi-pronged approach informed by contemporary literature and policy innovations.

1. Progressive Income and Wealth Taxes
Implementing progressive income taxes targeting high earners can reduce inequality while generating revenue. The elite’s comparison to global salaries complicates this, as higher rates risk capital flight. To mitigate this, Piketty (2014) advocates for a global wealth tax, but national alternatives include temporary solidarity surcharges on top income brackets (IMF, 2019). Complementing this, a net wealth tax (e.g., 1–2% on assets above $1 million) could target immovable assets, though robust valuation systems are critical (Zucman, 2015).

2. Property Tax Reforms
Property taxes are underutilized but potent, as real estate is immobile. Successful reforms in Colombia and Kenya involved digitizing land registries and decentralizing collection (World Bank, 2018). Linking property taxes to local services (e.g., infrastructure) can boost compliance (Bahl & Bird, 2008).

3. Broadening VAT with Safeguards
VAT dominates developing countries’ revenue but is regressive. Exempting essentials and implementing cash transfers (e.g., South Africa’s VAT-zero-rated food items) can enhance equity (Keen & Lockwood, 2010). Digital VAT on e-commerce (e.g., Kenya’s digital service tax) captures revenue from multinationals (OECD, 2021).

4. Curbing Tax Evasion via International Cooperation
The OECD’s Automatic Exchange of Information (AEOI) helps track offshore assets, yet developing countries often lack capacity to utilize this data. Technical assistance to adopt AEOI and the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework’s global minimum tax (15%) can curb profit shifting (IMF, 2023). Bilateral agreements to tax expatriates, as proposed by Birdsall (2006), could replace impractical brain drain taxes, with destination countries sharing a portion of emigrants’ taxes.

5. Digital Taxation and MNE Reforms
The OECD’s Pillar One reallocates taxing rights to market jurisdictions, aiding developing nations (OECD, 2023). Unilateral digital service taxes (e.g., Nigeria’s 6% levy) offer interim solutions but require multilateral coordination to avoid trade disputes.

6. Strengthening Tax Administration
Investing in digital infrastructure (e.g., India’s GST Network) reduces evasion and corruption (Fjeldstad & Heggstad, 2021). Mobile payment systems (e.g., Rwanda’s EBMIS) formalize informal sectors, broadening the base.

7. Addressing Elite Resistance and Brain Drain
Elite bargaining is key; earmarking tax revenue for education and healthcare can legitimize higher rates (Moore, 2008). Exit taxes on high-net-worth individuals emigrating, as in the U.S., could deter tax avoidance, though enforcement requires bilateral cooperation.

Conclusion
A fair tax system demands a mix of progressive direct taxes, efficient indirect taxes, and international collaboration. Administrative modernization, transparency, and equity-focused spending are critical to ensuring compliance and public trust. While historical proposals like brain drain taxes faced practical hurdles, contemporary tools—digital taxation, AEOI, and global minimum taxes—offer feasible pathways.

References

Bahl, R., & Bird, R. (2008). Subnational Taxes in Developing Countries.

Birdsall, N. (2006). Globalization and the Brain Drain.

Fjeldstad, O., & Heggstad, K. (2021). Building Tax Culture in Developing Countries.

IMF. (2019). Fiscal Policy and Inequality.

OECD. (2021). Digital Taxation: Policy Developments.

Piketty, T. (2014). Capital in the Twenty-First Century.

World Bank. (2018). Property Tax Reform in Developing Countries.

Zucman, G. (2015). The Hidden Wealth of Nations.

This holistic approach balances domestic reforms with global solidarity, ensuring developing nations can sustainably finance their development agendas.

Well thought and timely ideas to really adapt with the very rapid dynamics on the Global Situation. Great to see the urge on supporting country led programs which also has demand creation with nimble “approach’ . While moving forward hoping to see leadership ,social and economic ecosystem as an important element of our programs not only by impact of the work starting from initiations as we may be in the aftermaths of crises and backlogs . kudos!

Something that I have spent a life time working on; from an adviser in various country government Ministry of Agriculture. In addition to analysing country government budgets. To work with the Save the Children Country offices to advocate for budgetary increase. In addition to comparing the resource envelope outlined in the sectorial strategy, with the budget with the auditor general’s report (Report of the Country Government’s annual audit of government accounts (Government audit). On going work!

Thanks for this great initiative in terms of proposals to adapt any situation in terms of support..