The United Nation’s Secret Tax Plan

REPRINT from the Mattea Merta – Substack by Mattae Marta.

A small, little-known UN agency called the International Maritime Organization (IMO) is working towards the implementation of a global shipping-fuel tax, a concerning development for those who place a high value on freedom and the sovereignty of nations.

The most disturbing element of this tax is that it would remove one of the only measures of accountability nations have in holding the UN to account.

And here’s how:

At present, the UN heavily relies upon governments to fund their operations globally, but if a new funding stream was created and their reliance was removed, the UN would be able to push money towards any agenda or group it desired to without the ability for governments to step in and say “we don’t think so”:” think woke curriculums, “peace” operations, police, bureaucracy, social-engineering, (skies the limit in this regard).

Additionally, this move would also take “global governance” to a whole new level. But, that’s for another day.

The Tax and Its Threats

The overarching issue that needs to be addressed is the threat this “tax” is to national sovereignty, and, of course, it’s being ushered in under the guise of “climate responsibility.”

From the onset, I want to highlight three of the most concerning facts that you should know about the tax:

The Biden administration supported the tax plan.

Americans would bear the majority of the financial burden.

The plan would grant the UN immense power by creating an independent revenue stream, detaching the globalist entity from the abysmal level of accountability it currently has to the nations who fund it.

As someone who deals with the UN regularly, this news is deeply concerning.

In addition to the previously stated reasons, this IMO effort is yet another attempt at instituting a universal tax, advancing a “climate agenda” that threatens the sovereignty of nations and solidifying a global governance structure.

On the first point, what many people don’t know is that the UN has, since its inception, sought to establish a universal tax system in order to fill its coffers.

Secondly, national sovereignty has been placed in the crosshairs of the climate-change agenda and in the context of the IMO’s tax, we see this playing out a little differently than in more conventional situations.

The IMO tax would place external constraints on a country’s autonomy, economic policies, and governance. Here are just a few examples how:

1. A global carbon tax, administered by an international body such as the UN, would require nations to align their fiscal policies with globally set rates and regulations.
2. To implement a global carbon tax, an international authority would likely need enforcement powers, such as monitoring emissions, auditing national compliance, or imposing sanctions for non-compliance.
3. Energy policy is a cornerstone of national sovereignty, as it underpins economic stability, security, and independence. A global carbon tax could force nations to shift away from domestically available energy sources toward costlier or less reliable alternatives, dictated by global climate priorities.

Some Background, It’s Important

Countries who become members at the UN are required to pay for their seat at the table but they don’t necessarily get a say in what their money goes towards.

When a nation joins the UN, their money gets distributed for the operation of UN agencies. These agencies are divided into two funding categories; voluntary and involuntary.

Nations have no option when it comes to funding UN agencies in the “involuntary” category, but get to choose whether or not they will contribute to “voluntary” agencies.

Agencies included in the “involuntary” category usually aren’t as controversial as “voluntary” agencies.

“Voluntary” agencies are highly problematic as they push the majority of woke agendas that get reported on, additionally, these agencies most often go against the UN’s own mandates (we’re looking at you, UNFPA, UNESCO and UNWRA) and are rarely held accountable.

On the rarest of occasions, these UN branches are called out when a government disapproves of their operations and subsequently withdraws funding (the US being our most recent example). This is one of the only ways to hold the UN system to account.

Thus, the UN’s dependence on government funding is a blessing for the nations of the world, and a curse for the UN.

Former US Ambassador to the UN under President Obama, Samantha Powers, highlighted this point whilst speaking with the Council on Foreign Relations:

“When I encounter people who have questions about the U.N., I encounter—and perhaps many of you on the call do as well—a surprising amount of misunderstanding, given how long this organization has been with us, 72 years now, going on. There’s still a sense that the kind of U.N. is an actor in its own right with an engine, a bank account, even—some people even think an army of its own. And, of course, that’s not at all true.

The success of the U.N. and the limits of the U.N. to perform a constructive role in the world that we need it to perform, those limits and that extent is defined by member states—of which there are 193—and very specifically by the powerful member states, specifically the permanent members of the Security Council—the United States, Britain, France, China, and Russia … I mean, these are countries that invest a huge share of the resources that get spent every year by the U.N., whether on U.N. kind of core infrastructure like the building, the headquarters, the salaries, the secretary-general and his staff, or humanitarian funding, or peacekeeping missions … And so, while the U.N. is an actor in its own right … all those people work and do what they do because of the investment of member states. So even when the U.N. is an actor in its own right, it’s at the mercy of the generosity of and the investments made by countries like ours. So that’s the U.N. as an actor, where that dependency exists.”

Firing On All Cylinders

Adding fuel to the fire, the United Nations’ International Court of Justice (ICJ) is preparing to issue what it claims to be binding legal obligations on nations for their so-called “climate change” responsibilities.

This case will be one of the most important in the institution’s history—a clear sign of their intent to enforce climate policy by judicial decree.

Don’t be fooled, this isn’t about tackling global emissions—it’s about ushering in a new era of centralized, unaccountable control.

In addition to these efforts, back in September of 2024, the UN touted its plans to become UN 2.0 at the “Summit of the Future” where a document was produced called the Pact for the Future which seeks to strategically have the UN infiltrate every area of society including climate policy and taxation.

Based upon these instances (and others unmentioned), it appears as though the UN is, as it has in the past, working on all fronts to advance a global governing system under the banner of “climate-change” and “protecting the planet.”

Supporting Factors of Importance

The United States is currently leading the charge in the removal of funding to the UN, first through President Trump’s Executive Order which stripped funding to radicalized UN agencies and now through a bill introduced by Senator Lee that would remove the US from UN treaties and potentially remove the UN’s headquarters from New York City.

The UN knows that when the US moves in one direction, other nations are sure to follow, this is a terrifying prospect for the UN to face.

If we focus in on the US further, we know that President Trump has been a consistent critic of climate alarmism, going so far as to label it a manufactured crisis used to justify expanding globalist authority.

He isn’t wrong.

Thankfully, he understands the game and sees past the deception and threats and so do many in the halls of the US government.

However, the government is only one point of influence in our society, we the people have our work cut out for us in working to ensure that not only America, but the world, doesn’t slip any further into the hands of globalists.

TAKE ACTION

As someone who worked in the halls of government, I know how critically important it is for your politicians to hear from YOU!

So please, take three minutes of your day and contact your federal Member of Parliament or Congress Member, bringing their attention to the International Maritime Organization’s net-zero framework and call on them to take a stand against it!

Want to take it a step further?

Contact your country’s mission to the United Nations (simply plug into your internet browser “[your nation’s name] mission to the United Nations”), telling them to stand against the International Maritime Organization’s net-zero global emissions framework.

I thank you in advance for working with me to stop the attack on our nation’s sovereignty!

Thank you for your support.

If you appreciate the work we do to spread the good news of Jesus Christ, please consider giving a gift to help us continue this work. Maranatha!