On 14 April 2026 at the IMF spring meetings a civil society policy forum discussed Making IMF Tax Policy Work for People. The basis for the discussion was a report published by Oxfam earlier in April 2026 analysing the tax advice given by the IMF in its Article IV reports to countries between 2022 and 2024.
IMF Article IV reports are annual economic reviews of the member countries’ economies, analysing the fiscal and monetary policies pursued and projecting growth prospects. The reports are issued after discussions with the member countries and normally focus on how to sustain economic growth, manage inflation and mitigate fiscal risks. Often the IMF includes tax advice as part of the discussion on maintaining fiscal stability or creating fiscal space for necessary reforms.
The Oxfam report noted that tax on wealth was mostly missing from the tax advice given by the IMF in the Article IV reports, despite the potential for increasing government revenue and fighting inequality. Only 3% of more than 1,000 tax recommendations made by the IMF reports in the relevant period focused on taxing wealth and the income from wealth. Of a total of 1049 tax recommendations in the Article IV reports examined, only 30 focused on net wealth taxes and the taxation of capital gains.
The Oxfam analysis found that 52% of the IMF tax advice to high-income countries was progressive. while 59% of tax advice to low- and lower-middle-income countries was regressive. A progressive tax system ensures that those with higher income and more wealth pay proportionally more taxes than lower income groups. For example, the IMF advice on personal income tax, property tax and net wealth tax, which can be seen as progressive, was contained in reports to high-income countries to a much greater extent than to low and lower-middle income countries.
Middle- and low-income countries received most of the indirect tax advice (excluding environmental tax) given in the IMF reports. Indirect taxes such as VAT can be seen as regressive as consumers generally pay the tax at the same rate, with some exceptions, and the tax does not address inequality. Low- and middle-income countries received 55% of the VAT advice given in the IMF reports. A reason given by the IMF for the prevalence of VAT advice to lower income countries is that informality is prevalent in their economies. These countries also lack the administrative infrastructure to collect more revenue from direct taxes; and they therefore rely on VAT to lessen the effect of the informal economy on tax collection. The Oxfam report points out, however, that an important function of the IMF is capacity building. The IMF could increase its capacity-building efforts to build up the capacity of developing country tax administrations to collect more revenue from direct taxes.
The Oxfam report also points out that, although the IMF acknowledges the importance of tax policy for addressing inequality, its tax advice relating to inequality was given to high-income countries much more often than to low- and lower-middle-income countries. There is medium or high inequality in 90% of low- and lower-middle-income countries, so they are more in need of tax advice on the issue. In the case of gender inequality, around 10 percent of the IMF’s recommended tax reforms addressed the issue, and most of this advice was contained in only a few sentences.
The Oxfam report concludes that the IMF should fundamentally reform the way in which tax policy is included in its economic reviews. The Article IV reports should place inequality at the centre of its fiscal advice, focusing on revenue-raising policies that increase the progressivity of tax systems. The IMF should also discourage the reliance by lower income countries on consumption taxes and other regressive measures.
