Gov/en/Portal:R&D/Open-Call:Reverse Abuse

💡 In simple words: This is an early idea, not a contest yet. One day we may invite clever people everywhere to design smart, legal ways to handle money that help ordinary people and small producers — instead of only the very rich. For now there is no deadline: it is something we want to explore, and anyone can already share suggestions on the Discussion tab.

⚠️ Not yet approved. This page describes a proposal that is still under community review. It is documented here so it can be discussed, improved and endorsed.

💬 Submit a proposal — open to all. No email needed: just log in, then post your ideas and links in the Discussion tab of this page. You can then raise a Request for Feedback (RFF) to draw attention to your proposal and get community feedback.

Open Call: Reverse Abuse — Legal Financial-Optimization Ideas

Open Call (preview, theoretical) — part of the Reverse Abuse programme · uses the Open Call method

A framework of creative ideas of all types

This page is part of a broader framework of Open Calls for creative ideas of all types — open calls to build programmes that connect and make several kinds of contracts interact: production contracts, transformation contracts, transport contracts, and many others. These contracts are used as the building blocks to assemble programmes.

In other words, this is an Open Call for programmes. Reverse Abuse is offered here as one disruptive example — which is not a joke: it is meant to show that, in this project, imagination can be in power, as long as everything stays within a lawful framework. There are many options and a wide field of possibilities through this approach. Other Open Calls of the same family include, for instance, Open Calls for markets (assembling the contracts that let a whole market segment exist).

Nature	Theoretical / prospective idea — exploration only
Deadline	None for now — to be launched later; no commitment that it will be implemented
Already open	The Discussion tab — to suggest orientation, framing, limits, and other Open Calls
Theme	Advanced legal financial optimization, redirected to users and small producers
Scope	Very open — to everyone, to all lawful structures and ideas
Finality	A transition measure, not an end in itself
What matters most	The principle, the quality criteria and the success criteria (below)

What this call explores

This Open Call invites the community — and eventually the world — to imagine advanced, fully legal financial-optimization structures, of the kind normally reserved for the very wealthy and large multinationals, but re-oriented so that value flows to users, small producers and the commons.

It is, above all, about using packages of contracts to show the interrelation between the different stages of a global, ecosystemic production within a market segment — tea, for example, as an illustrative segment that could be deployed in a pilot experiment. But it could be anything else: the scope is deliberately broad. Everything here is prospective and theoretical, with no guarantee of implementation.

The principle follows the Reverse Abuse logic: same legal tools, opposite direction. Everything imagined must be lawful — legal optimization, not tax fraud and not money laundering — and must serve a non-profit finality.

A transition measure, not a finality

This is explicitly a transition measure, with a single purpose: to help evolve the culture of financial-flow management and to reduce the low accountability of large companies. It is a phase of transition, not an end goal. Once the broader culture shifts, the mechanism has done its job.

Illustrative examples (starting points, not limits)

These examples are given only to spark ideas. The call is open to everything lawful.

• The "Buy, Borrow, Die" / securities-backed loan method. Wealthy individuals (a method publicly associated with figures such as Elon Musk) avoid a taxable sale by borrowing against their own appreciating shares or stock options instead of selling them: the loan is not taxable income, no capital-gains event is triggered, and they keep ownership and voting rights. Reverse Abuse variant: a company that goes through an IPO whose shares are owned by the users, with a clear, transparent appreciation in value on the market — but user-owned — so the same liquidity-without-sale mechanics benefit the community rather than a single founder.

• Securities-backed lending for collective treasury planning. The same lending structures used for private inheritance-tax planning, applied instead to user-owned cooperative treasuries, to unlock liquidity for producers without dismantling community ownership.

• User-owned holding & supply-chain repatriation structures. Entities with the same legal statutes as multinationals (holdings, cross-border structures) but with non-profit finality, used to repatriate margins back to producers via compensation funds and syndicates — as described in the parent Reverse Abuse programme.

Additional lawful examples are welcome and encouraged — this list is a starting point, not a boundary.

Why a public Open Call (later)

When it is eventually launched, this call will also have a strategic-communication purpose within Prototype 1: to demonstrate, in a way that is communicable in mainstream economic media, that the financial techniques associated with extreme wealth concentration can be turned into a credible, lawful alternative that serves the many.

The principle, and the quality & success criteria

What matters most is not the calendar but the principle and the criteria. A good idea, when the call opens, should aim to:

• Principle: use only lawful structures; serve a non-profit finality; repatriate value to users and small producers.
• Quality criteria: clarity of the contract package; how the different stages (production, transformation, transport…) interrelate; legal soundness and the jurisdictions involved; transparency and auditability; full AI-transparency disclosure if AI tools were used.
• Success criteria: it shows a credible, communicable alternative; it strengthens the accountability and fairness of financial flows; it is reusable as a programme template across other market segments.

Timing & cycles (still under reflection)

There is no deadline at this stage. Whether evaluation later follows a seasonal cycle (one option, in the spirit of the general Open Call method) is just one possibility under reflection — it is not the key to success. For now, this remains an idea to be explored within the Prototype 1 research-and-development programme.

---

See also: Reverse Abuse · Open Call · Exit to Community · Programmes