Dear Editor,

When Category 5 Hurricane Melissa tore across Jamaica last October, it did more than uproot trees and strip zinc from rooftops. It exposed, once again, the fragility of our infrastructure, the vulnerability of our farmers, and the precariousness of our economic gains.

Roads were washed out. Schools were shuttered. Small businesses counted losses they could scarcely afford. And now, as the dust settles and the waters recede, a difficult question looms: Should Jamaicans shoulder new taxes to finance national recovery? It is not an easy conversation. In fact, it may be one of the most politically sensitive post-hurricane debates.

On one hand, the argument for new taxes is grounded in fiscal realism. Disaster recovery is expensive. Refurbishing schools, restoring electricity grids, repairing farm roads, and assisting displaced families require significant capital. While international aid and concessional loans may offer temporary relief, they are not limitless. Jamaica has worked hard over the past decade to stabilise its debt-to-gross domestic product (GDP) ratio. A heavy reliance on borrowing risks reversing those gains and re-entangling the country in unsustainable debt.

A carefully structured, temporary recovery levy could generate domestic revenue while preserving fiscal sovereignty. Rather than placing the nation’s future in the hands of external lenders, Jamaica would be investing in itself. Moreover, if such a levy were progressive — asking more from higher-income earners, large corporations, and sectors less affected by the storm — it could embody the principle of shared national responsibility. In times of crisis, solidarity must be more than a slogan. Despite the improvements at the Tax Association of Jamaica (TAJ), it has long been argued that the State agency needs to be more aggressive and deliberate in achieving compliance, especially among delinquent individuals and companies who seek to evade paying taxes.

There is also the longer view. Hurricane Melissa is not an anomaly. Climate change is intensifying storms across the Caribbean. If new tax revenues were earmarked not just for rebuilding what was lost but for constructing climate-resilient infrastructure – fortified coastal roads, improved drainage systems, renewable energy grids – Jamaica could shift from reactive recovery to proactive resilience. The question would not merely be how we rebuild, but how we rebuild better.

In 2024, we had Hurricane Beryl, which left considerable impact on southern parishes. Last year Hurricane Melissa ravaged many parts of Manchester, St Elizabeth, Trelawny, Hanover, Westmoreland, and St James. Not before long we will be in the hurricane season again. Given the devastation we experienced over the past two years, we must think about sustainable infrastructure that can withstand adverse weather conditions.

The case against new taxes is equally compelling.

For many Jamaicans, the hurricane struck at a time of already-mounting economic pressure. The cost of living remains high. Informal workers, small farmers, and micro-entrepreneurs operate on thin margins. To ask households struggling to replace damaged furniture, restock goods, or repair roofs to pay more in taxes could deepen hardship. Consumption-based increases, such as adjustments to general consumption tax (GCT), would disproportionately affect low-income families and rural communities. A recovery strategy that worsens inequality is no recovery at all.

Small and medium-sized enterprises — a cornerstone of our economy — face particular vulnerability. Many are underinsured or uninsured. Some may never reopen. Imposing additional tax burdens during this fragile period could stifle economic revival and prolong unemployment, which dipped to unprecedented levels prior to Hurricane Melissa.

There is also the matter of trust. Public confidence in how funds are managed cannot be assumed. If citizens believe that new tax revenues will be absorbed into bureaucratic inefficiency or diverted from their intended purpose, resistance will be swift and justified. Transparency, accountability, and clear sunset clauses are not optional; they are prerequisites.

Jamaicans must know precisely how much is being collected, how long the measure will last, and where every dollar will go. We have seen on numerous occasions how public officials misappropriate or mismanage our tax dollars without any penalties.

The political implications are equally significant. Introducing new taxes in the aftermath of disaster risks appearing insensitive. Citizens may reasonably ask whether existing budgetary reallocations, public sector savings, or targeted tourism levies could suffice. Others will argue that the global north, whose emissions disproportionately drive climate change, should bear greater financial responsibility for Caribbean recovery.

So where does this leave us?

The debate is not about whether Jamaica needs resources to rebuild; it undoubtedly does. The question is how those resources are mobilised and who bears the burden.

Finance Minister Fayval Williams recently outlined a raft of new taxes — something we were not accustomed to hearing for almost a decade. But here we are. Nonetheless, new taxes should be temporary, progressive, and transparently administered. They must shield the most vulnerable while asking proportionately more from those with greater capacity to contribute. And they must be tied explicitly to resilience-building, not merely reconstruction.

Alternatively, if the Government opts to avoid new taxation, it must present a credible plan detailing how recovery will be financed without jeopardising fiscal stability or future development.

Hurricane Melissa has forced us to confront uncomfortable realities about climate vulnerability and economic resilience. The path forward requires both compassion and pragmatism. Recovery cannot rest solely on loans, nor can it come at the expense of those already struggling.

Rebuilding Jamaica is not simply a financial exercise. It is a test of our commitment to fairness, accountability, and collective strength. The true measure of leadership now will not be in how quickly we announce policies, but in how wisely — and justly — we implement them.

Oneil Madden

maddenoniel@yahoo.com