Gov/en/Portal:R&D/Open-Calls:Reverse Abuse
💡 In simple words: This is an early idea, not a contest yet. One day we may invite clever people to design smart, legal ways to handle money that help ordinary people, not only the rich. Suggestions welcome on the Discussion tab.
🎯 In 20 seconds (scientific summary): A theoretical, prospective Open Call within the Reverse Abuse programme: invite lawful financial-optimization designs, of the kind used by multinationals, re-oriented so value flows to users, small producers and the commons. No deadline, no implementation guarantee; the Discussion tab is already open for framing suggestions.
| Open Call Status | |
|---|---|
| Wave | Second Wave (Draft) |
| Status | Not launched yet |
| Members / Commission | Undetermined (Under construction) |
| Chairperson | TBD |
| Facilitator | TBD |
| 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) |
Sophisticated financial engineering exists, and today it mostly serves those who can already afford it. Rather than lamenting this, WikiDeal asks a constructive question on behalf of its users: could the same lawful instruments be redesigned so that a tea farmer, a cooperative or a user community benefits? This page previews an Open Call meant to gather exactly those ideas, openly and transparently, from anyone willing to imagine them.
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).
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 strengthen the accountability of large companies. The point is systemic, not personal: the current low accountability is a property of the ecosystem, and the mechanism aims to change the ecosystem. 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.
Who does what
- Anyone can already post suggestions on the Discussion tab: orientation, framing, limits, or ideas for sibling Open Calls.
- Contributors would, once the call launches, submit contract-package designs.
- Legal experts and the community would review lawfulness, transparency and non-profit finality before anything moves forward.
Why a public Open Call (later)
When it is eventually launched, this call would 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