WHO 20% membership fee hike slammed for hurting taxpayers聽
FILE IMAGE
A consumer group criticized the latest World Health Organization mandatory membership fee increase – the second consecutive 20% hike in membership dues within its budget, which states approve on a biennial basis.
“While global healthcare systems buckle under the strain of underfunding, growing waitlists, and staff shortages, the WHO is busy redirecting hundreds of millions of dollars into flexible, unaccountable funding streams it controls without oversight,” according to the Consumer Choice Center, an international non-partisan consumer advocacy group that champions smart policies fit for growth, promotes choice, and embraces tech innovation.
Historically, the WHO’s budget was made up of voluntary contributions that typically come strictly designated by donors for specific programs, but these membership fees, known as assessed contributions, provide the WHO with flexible funding it can allocate with full control.
“Unlike voluntary contributions from nations that are earmarked for specific health programs, assessed contributions allow WHO leadership—particularly Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus—almost free rein in how the funds are spent,” CCC said.
“That might explain why more money is being used to upgrade the WHO’s Geneva headquarters than to fight polio. Or why senior staff enjoy perks such as $33,000-per-child education allowances—enough to fund lifesaving HIV treatment for 110 South Africans for a full year. Meanwhile, the average cost of WHO’s 301 most senior staff totals nearly $130 million annually—roughly $432,000 per person, including generous benefits and allowances,” CCC added.
Following the financial strain on the WHO triggered by the US withdrawal from the agency, WHO member states approved a 20% increase in membership fees as they endorsed the Organization’s 2026–2027 budget of US$ 4.2 billion during the 78th World Health Assembly held in Geneva on 20 May 2025. For 2026 and 2027, this will amount to an additional US$120 million per year, drawn straight from member-state taxpayers around the globe.
Among the plans for the WHO budget spend is the building extension for the agency’s headquarters in Geneva, the most expensive city in the world for construction. Geneva is also the venue for the upcoming 11th Conference of Parties to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control in November, which has also come under scrutiny for lack of transparency and impartiality.
“It’s time to stop pretending that the WHO is a lean, targeted health response team,” CCC said. “It has become, in too many respects, a bloated bureaucracy more focused on expanding its institutional footprint than solving the world’s most urgent health problems.
The WHO recently terminated the contract of Dr. Takeshi Kasai, former head of its Western Pacific Regional Office (WPRO), headquartered in Manila, following an internal investigation into allegations of abusive conduct. The WHO confirmed that its findings showed misconduct, and the termination followed a vote by member states of the region.
Dr. Kasai, who had led WPRO since 2019, was accused in earlier reports of fostering a toxic work environment, including making derogatory remarks toward Filipino staff.
WHO’s regional directors wield considerable autonomy and authority, contrary to the usual practice in other UN agencies, with the Western Pacific office alone overseeing 1.9 billion people across 37 territories. The WHO has not released details of the internal investigation but confirmed last year that Dr. Kasai was placed on leave and temporarily replaced by WHO Deputy Director-General Zsuzsanna Jakab.
Dr. Saia Ma’u Piukala, a public health leader from Tonga, assumed office as the new regional director in February 2024.
The situation has brought renewed attention to the governance structure of the WHO and the level of oversight applied to its regional leadership as the organization prepares for major global policy discussions.
To put the opportunity cost of WHO’s bloated bureaucracy in perspective, the CCC estimates that the $120 million in membership dues to be shelled out by member states each year could directly fund healthcare for 15,000 Germans, 40,000 Poles, 82,000 Georgians, 100,000 South Africans, and 500,000 Indians.
“Even more troubling, this shift toward “core funding” is part of a deliberate WHO strategy: to move away from specific, donor-driven initiatives and toward general budget increases it can spend at will—on salaries, travel, and yes, real estate,” CCC said. CCC criticized how these funds are being funneled in a top-heavy administrative structure with minimal transparency and questionable accountability, instead of being poured in pandemic preparedness or child vaccination programs.
After stepping up as the WHO’s top donor following the US decision to leave the international organization, China has expressed its uneasiness with the planned membership fee increase.
“China does not have clear information on the specific amount of assessed contribution increase or how it will be calculated for the coming year,” China’s representative told the WHO Executive Board during the 78th WHA. “It is difficult for any country to agree to such a plan under such opacity.”
The CCC urged national governments to refuse further increases to assessed contributions until the WHO commits to radical transparency reforms, trims senior compensation packages, and rededicates itself to programmatic funding that puts patient care first.
“We owe that much to the people who are actually sick—and not just those with corner offices in Geneva,” the CCC said. “The WHO doesn’t deserve a raise. The world’s patients do.”
