Connect with us

Finance

G20 waters down experts' climate finance report, despite UN pressure to act

Published

on

G20 waters down experts' climate finance report, despite UN pressure to act

A climate and finance report by independent economists was toned down after feedback from G20 nations, even as the UN says they must all slash emissions

As UN chief António Guterres called on the G20 to “lead” on climate, Climate Home can reveal that the group of big countries watered down a report by top economists on how the financial system should shift to enable climate action.

Guterres made his comments by video at the launch of the United Nations’ Emissions Gap Report which showed that, under their current policies, the G20 countries as a group will fail to meet their 2030 targets to cut planet-heating emissions.

Separately, Climate Action Tracker has found that no G20 country’s policies are compatible with limiting global warming to the Paris Agreement goals of either 1.5 degrees Celsius or “well below” 2C.

“The largest economies – the G20 members, responsible for around 80% of all emissions – must lead,” Guterres said on Thursday.

Advertisement

At COP16, countries clash over future of global fund for nature protection

He spoke as officials from G20 climate and finance ministries and central bankers gathered in Washington DC to attend a meeting of the G20 Taskforce on a Global Mobilization against Climate Change (TF-CLIMA), an initiative of the Brazilian G20 presidency aimed at bringing climate and finance officials out of their silos to talk about tackling climate change.

One of their tasks is to react to a report the taskforce commissioned from a group of 12 independent experts, led by economists Vera Songwe and Mariana Mazzucato, on how the G20 countries can shift their financial systems towards tackling climate change.

Brazil’s Secretary for Climate, Energy and Environment André Aranha Corrêa do Lago told a briefing for journalists on Wednesday that the experts were requested to do a “strong report”, going beyond what the G20 can agree to in a joint declaration. It was “important to leave as a legacy a document that shows that we believe that more is needed”, he said.

The report, published on Thursday, lists five “myths” blocking climate action, including that it will slow economic growth and that governments lack the resources to fix climate change and should leave it to the market. It recommends that G20 governments should implement green industrial strategies, reform the global financial system and scale up financing for climate projects.

Weakened after criticism

However, according to a draft of the report from September 4 seen by Climate Home, the final, public version was watered down in response to critical feedback from G20 governments through their negotiators.

Advertisement

Comparing the earlier and later versions, there was a weakening of various points – from criticism of the G20 to warnings over climate impacts, praise for a billionaires’ tax for climate and calls for central banks to help fight climate change.

References to “G20 inaction” were replaced with “G20 inertia”, and the line “each year the destruction to the planet is harsher than the last” was deleted. A reference to a “stark increase” in global temperatures was softened to “a temperature increase on this scale”.

European Central Bank holds back plan to boost climate finance for Africa, Latam

Information in support of Brazil’s proposal for a 2% tax on the wealth of billionaires worldwide was also cut, including a description of the idea’s popularity with “electorates around the world”. An observation on the proposal’s “relatively straightforward” nature to implement was replaced by “questions over the feasibility of implementation”.

The September draft said France, Spain and South Africa supported the wealth tax proposal “while the US opposes it”, but this was deleted from the final version. The US has not made its position on the tax clear in public.

In addition, a recommendation that central banks and supervisory and regulatory bodies should mitigate climate-related financial risks and help mobilise private finance for green investments was modified with the caveat “within their mandates”.

Advertisement

A source with knowledge of discussions told Climate Home that the recommendations on central banks had been criticised by the US, EU and France, and some developing countries.

Just transition?

On the same day, the UN Emissions Gap report warned that the 1.5C goal will be gone within a few years unless all countries collectively commit to cut 42% off annual greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 and 57% by 2035 in their next round of national climate plans due by next year – and back them up with rapid action.

The report showed that global greenhouse gas emissions set a new record high of 57.1 gigatonnes of CO2 equivalent in 2023, a 1.3% increase from 2022 levels, with rises in sectors from power to transport and agriculture. Guterres said emissions needed to fall 9% each year to 2030 to meet the 1.5C limit and “avoid the very worst of climate change”.

In a warring world, Azerbaijan’s COP29 truce appeal draws fire as “PR exercise”

The report said all G20 governments must step up efforts and “do the heavy lifting” by reducing the group’s collective emissions – accounting for 77% of the global total – dramatically.

But it argued that stronger international support and more climate finance will be essential to ensure that climate and development goals can be realised fairly across G20 member countries, as well as globally.

Advertisement

The G20 includes some developing countries – like India, Indonesia and Brazil – that, despite being large and rising emitters today, have relatively low levels of emissions per capita and have historically contributed far less than rich, industrialised nations to global warming.

In response to a question from Climate Home, UN Environment Programme Executive Director Inger Andersen told journalists that the Emissions Gap Report recognises that some countries have a higher ability to move first, but emissions cuts are needed by all G20 nations.

“Every G20 country, irrespective of where it stands on the long historical trail, has an opportunity to lean into this investment opportunity and change its emissions structure,” she said. UN chief Guterres has nonetheless called on the wealthier ones to stretch and do even more, to leave space for those who will find it harder to meet net-zero emissions by 2050, she added.

Anne Olhoff, chief scientific editor of the report, noted that all G20 countries apart from Mexico, have made pledges to reach net-zero emissions later this century. She said those that have yet to peak their emissions – China, India, Indonesia, Mexico, Saudi Arabia, Republic of Korea, and Türkiye – should do so as soon as possible, and then start cutting them rapidly in order to meet their net-zero targets.

(Reporting by Joe Lo; additional reporting by Megan Rowling; editing by Megan Rowling)

Advertisement

Finance

AI readiness, skills gaps top concerns of finance leaders

Published

on

AI readiness, skills gaps top concerns of finance leaders

Finance professionals expect artificial intelligence (AI) to significantly disrupt the profession over the next two years, but few feel equipped to harness the full potential of those tools.

New data from the AICPA and CIMA’s Future-Ready Finance: Technology, Productivity, and Skills Survey Report revealed a significant gap between finance professionals’ expectations of AI’s impact and their organisations’ readiness to adopt it.

The majority of respondents (56%) said generative AI has become the most prominent skills gap for their organisations in 2025. Overall, IT/tech skills also emerged as a leading priority (47%) this year, despite being considered a secondary concern (20%) in 2021.

“This highlights a strategic shift towards using advanced technology as a means of enhancing value and efficiency, rather than simply supporting operations,” the survey said.

However, many organisations are still struggling to shift gears. The survey found that while 88% believe AI will be the most transformative technology trend in accounting and finance over the next 12 to 24 months, only 8% said their organisation is “very well prepared” to manage this transformation.

Advertisement

The AICPA and CIMA surveyed more than 1,400 members in senior finance and accounting roles globally in August and September.

The biggest barrier to technology adoption for companies this year was a lack of human capital, skills, and talent (50%), followed by safety and security concerns (47%) and doubts about technology maturity (42%).

“The advance of AI tools in the last two years is enabling a paradigm shift in how finance teams operate and the work they can do to generate value for their organisations,” Andrew Harding, FCMA, CGMA, chief executive–Management Accounting at the Association of International Certified Professional Accountants, said in a news release. “While professionals recognise the potential on offer, many today feel underprepared and under-skilled. There’s a clear gap between anticipating disruption and taking action.”

To address skills gaps in finance teams, organisations favoured internal training programmes (62%) ahead of external training programmes (45%) and hiring new talent (35%), according to respondents. On-the-job training was ranked the most effective upskilling approach (61%) amongst finance professionals.  

Internal training can be flexible, hands-on, and adaptive, often developing through experimentation and adjustment. But while hiring can be seen as a reactive strategy that does not solve the industry-wide skills shortage, the survey said, it is often a necessary step for driving innovation, especially when internal capabilities are limited.

Advertisement

Other key findings from the survey:

Productivity deficits hold back adoption. Lack of skills (41%) and low motivation (37%) were the top barriers to productivity, the release said, followed by incompatible technology systems and poor coordination in tech implementation (both at 32%).

Skills shortages extend beyond gen AI. Broader technology skills (AI, big data, cloud, Internet of Things, robotics) remain a concern (37%), alongside data and analytics (36%), the release said. Significant gaps also persist in areas such as communication, influencing, and critical thinking (33%) and business partnering (32%).

Learning preferences should guide skills strategy. “The dominance of internal training and the strong preference for on-the-job learning indicate a clear path forward,” the survey said. “Strategic investment must be channelled into practical, accessible, and continuous upskilling programmes and collaborative projects to bridge the readiness gap and unlock productivity gains.”

— To comment on this article or to suggest an idea for another article, contact Steph Brown at Stephanie.Brown@aicpa-cima.com.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Finance

Chicago finance committee approves alternate budget proposal without mayor’s controversial head tax

Published

on

Chicago finance committee approves alternate budget proposal without mayor’s controversial head tax

CHICAGO (WLS) — A Chicago City Council committee approved an alternative budget plan brought by a group of alderpersons on Tuesday.

A group of alderpersons presented the plan, which more than half of city council members are currently supporting, during Tuesday’s Finance Committee meeting.

ABC7 Chicago is now streaming 24/7. Click here to watch

The substitute budget ordinance faced scrutiny from supporters of Mayor Brandon Johnson’s budget during the hearing, which lasted several hours.

The alternate budget group is looking to build support for their plan even as they put additional council meetings on the schedule, including meetings this weekend and on Christmas Eve.

The Finance Committee meeting revealed some new revenue options for the 2026 budget proposal and tweaked some others.

Advertisement

It includes raising the plastic shopping bag tax from $0.10 to $0.15, and a pilot program to put advertising on bridge houses as well as light poles.

RELATED | Chicago City Council revises alternative budget proposal, mayor defends head tax as deadline looms

It officially gets rid of the corporate head tax, which has been a major source of contention since Johnson first presented his budget plan. The mayor and his allies are insisting that corporations pay more.

“What you have here is balancing the budget with fines and fees and taking out the corporate head tax. I want to hear your rationale to do that,” said 25th Ward Ald. Byron Sigcho-Lopez.

“Our proposal, in terms of new revenues, impacts businesses at 84% and individuals at 16%. I want everybody to take a look at this for a minute,” said Budget Committee Vice Chair Ald. Nicole Lee.

Advertisement

The alternative budget group says this plan is 98% in line with Johnson’s. Still, some of his allies were frustrated at not seeing the numbers sooner.

READ MORE | Chicago budget discussions reach stalemate, raising possibility of 1st-ever city government shutdown

“This is our first time reviewing this. This is incredibly disrespectful,” said 35th Ward Ald. Anthony Quezada.

There were also questions about the alternate plan to sell off outstanding debt to raise nearly $90 million. The city comptroller cautioned against it.

“I would say is that I would not. I would not rely on $89 million in this budget. This has never been done by any state,” said Chicago Comptroller Michael Belsky.

Advertisement

But supporters are defending this plan as worthy of consideration calling projections conservative and balanced.

“The group that’s worked on this has spent hundreds of hours bringing in the majority of the city council to talk about this,” said 19th Ward Ald. Matt O’Shea. “We relied on the advice and counsel of budgetary experts.”

The alternative budget plan passed out of finance committee 22-13. Its next stop is the Budget Committee on Wednesday.

It is clear that this breakaway group is flexing its muscle. What’s not clear is what the mayor’s next move will be.

But we now have city council meetings planned for Thursday, Friday, Saturday, and then, Tuesday and Wednesday of next week.

Advertisement

Johnson issued a statement on Tuesday evening, saying, “As the leaders of the Alternative Group made clear throughout their presentation, the Secret Budget that passed out of the Finance Committee this afternoon is substantially similar to the proposal we introduced more than two months ago.

At our insistence, the Alternative Group agreed to restore the cuts they made to youth employment, and they removed the proposal to double the garbage tax. They have finally conceded to some degree, the point that I have made from the beginning: that corporations must pay their fair share in order to protect Chicagoans at this moment.

Unfortunately, at the behest of certain corporate interests, they chose to replace a tax on the largest corporations with $90M+ in “enhanced debt collections” on everyday Chicagoans. This seems to be in direct contradiction with their expressed desires to shift the financial burden away from working people.

Not only is this proposal immoral, it is simply not feasible. There is no way to sell off Chicagoans’ debts that would yield that amount of revenue. If passed as is, this proposal would likely result in a significant midyear budget shortfall and leave Chicagoans vulnerable to deep cuts to city services.

We will spend the next few days with our budget, finance, legal, and policy teams reviewing these proposals. Chicago cannot afford a government shutdown when we are making so much progress growing our economy and reducing violent crime to historic lows.

Advertisement

Tomorrow, the Budget Committee will review their proposal publicly so that Chicagoans can understand exactly what is in this Secret Budget.”

Copyright © 2025 WLS-TV. All Rights Reserved.

Continue Reading

Finance

The Boring Revolution: How Trust and Compliance Are Taking Over Digital Finance – FinTech Weekly

Published

on

The Boring Revolution: How Trust and Compliance Are Taking Over Digital Finance – FinTech Weekly

In digital finance, trust and compliance are becoming the true drivers of scale. An op-ed by Brickken CEO Edwin Mata examines why regulation is shaping the sector’s next phase.

Edwin Mata is CEO & Co-Founder of Brickken.

 


 

Discover top fintech news and events!

Advertisement

Subscribe to FinTech Weekly’s newsletter

Read by executives at JP Morgan, Coinbase, Blackrock, Klarna and more

 


In digital finance, we love noise. New apps, tokens, and “disruptive” models get all the airtime. Yet, the real inflection point is unfolding in the most unglamorous corner of the industry: compliance, governance, and record-keeping.

Regulation is not the backdrop to innovation. It is the mechanism through which the sector becomes investable, scalable and credible. Today’s inflection point is defined not by a new consumer product but by whether digital assets can meet the governance expectations that global finance takes for granted.

Advertisement

 

Regulation as the Moment of Maturity

Traditional finance learned this a long time ago. Modern capital markets only became investable at scale after securities laws in the 1930s forced transparency, continuous disclosure, and enforcement, restoring confidence after catastrophic failures. The US Securities Exchange Act of 1934 didn’t kill markets; it gave them the legal scaffolding to grow into the backbone of global savings.

Crypto and digital assets are now entering a similar “boringly serious” phase. In the EU, the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation, or MiCA, is designed to give legal clarity to crypto-asset issuers and service providers. For institutional compliance teams, that kind of predictability is far more important than whichever buzzword happens to dominate a conference stage.

The impact on capital flows is already visible: 83% of institutional investors plan to increase allocations to digital assets with regulatory clarity as a key driver of that enthusiasm. Clear rules don’t strangle innovation, they compress uncertainty and lower the risk premium that has kept cautious money on the sidelines.

 

Advertisement

The Boring Revolution Behind Institutional Capital

That’s why the real story in digital finance is a “boring revolution.” The work that actually matters now is the industrialisation of KYC and KYB, AML monitoring, standardized reporting, on-chain and off-chain reconciliation, governance workflows, and provable rights attached to digital instruments. The industry still loves to obsess over the next shiny app, but the real bottleneck is whether institutions can trust the rails beneath the interface.

RegTech has quietly reframed compliance tooling as an edge rather than a punishment. Technology-driven compliance improves risk assessment, fraud detection, and overall competitiveness because it lets institutions scale digital finance without losing sight of their exposure. That is where the durable upside sits, in making digital assets behave like a serious asset class, not a speculative game with good branding.

From the vantage point of building tokenization infrastructure, the pattern is consistent. When institutions evaluate real-world-asset tokenization, they don’t begin by asking which chain you use or how “decentralized” it is. Their focus is not the chain. It is whether ownership, entitlements, corporate actions and governance can be evidenced, enforced and audited in ways that align with securities law and accounting standards. If those foundations are sound, the rest of the architecture becomes negotiable.

You can see the same shift in where venture money is going. Over 70% of digital asset investment now targets institutional and infrastructure-focused platforms, up from just 27% a decade ago; the funding narrative has pivoted away from consumer speculation toward institutional plumbing. 

That is not a romantic story, but it is the kind that tends to survive more than one market cycle.

Advertisement

 

From Flashy Apps to Trustworthy Systems

Banks and large asset managers are adjusting their priorities accordingly. Governance, risk management, and compliance modernisation are stressed as core investment themes, especially as new digital-asset rules and prudential standards come into force. Digital finance is being pulled into the centre of regulated balance sheets and internal control frameworks.

At the same time, some institutions now describe digital assets, including tokenized bonds and money-market funds, as a “mainstream subject” for their clients. We explicitly link the shift from fringe to mainstream to better regulatory frameworks and institutional-grade infrastructure rather than retail hype. The catalyst is not design; it is the underlying certainty that these instruments carry governance, accounting treatment and supervisory oversight consistent with established financial products.

This is the narrative inversion digital finance still struggles with. For a decade, the space behaved as if UX, community and tokenomics could overpower everything else. That era produced experimentation, but also a long tail of ungoverned projects that institutional capital simply cannot touch.

If digital finance wants to sit alongside public equities, investment-grade debt and regulated funds, the front end has to be the last question. What matters is whether the system can prove who owns what, under which rules, and with what recourse when things go wrong. That’s the baseline requirement for anyone managing real risk.

Advertisement

 

Compliance as Product, Not Overhead

The opportunity for fintech founders now is to treat compliance engineering, data governance and risk architecture as core product. The firms that take regulatory expectations seriously, encode them into workflows, and expose them as reliable platforms will become the quiet chokepoints of the next cycle. Regulated entities won’t integrate ten different “innovative” front ends if each one creates a new audit headache; they will integrate the boring rails that make their auditors and supervisors more comfortable, not less.

Collaboration with regulators is becoming central to this shift. Around the world, supervisory authorities are establishing innovation pathways, industry working groups and controlled testing environments that allow technical design and regulatory expectations to evolve together. This model may disappoint purists who prefer unbounded experimentation, but it is the only credible way to align programmable financial systems with the governance, risk and reporting obligations of real-world finance.

The irony is that the least glamorous corner of digital finance is where the most durable value will be created. The “boring revolution” is the recognition that trust, compliance and governance are not obstacles to innovation but the substrate on which the next generation of financial systems will quietly compound.

 

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending