Following the reading of Ghana’s 2022 budget statement, there have been numerous debates about the proposed E-levy – and a large section of the populace has since registered its displeasure at it. Government has however assumed a seemingly uncompromising posture toward implementation of the proposed E-levy. Many have argued that government’s posture smacks of desperation.
Of course, without giving it much thought, one would come to the realisation that this appears to be an all-or-nothing kind of battle for government. What we are experiencing is the natural reaction of a state bedevilled by self-imposed penury. It is the result of continuous fiscal irresponsibility and an ill-inspired manner of living. This piece discusses the proposed levy in the light of our prevailing tax policy, our economic state as a nation, and our vigorous pursuit of the ‘kamikaze’ button in our digital inclusion agenda.
E-Levy – What is it?
The E-levy is a proposed tax on specified electronic transactions. According to the E-levy bill, the levy is proposed at a rate of 1.75 percent on the value of mobile money transactions between mobile money accounts on the same electronic money issuer (EMI), mobile money transactions between mobile money accounts on different EMIs, and transfers from bank accounts to mobile money accounts.
It also encompasses transfers from mobile money accounts to bank accounts and bank transfers on digital platforms or applications originating from a bank account from one individual to another.
While it has recently emerged that government might be willing to adjust the levy’s rate downward in response to pressure from the minority in parliament and the general public, one can only be certain of the percentage of tax when the enabling legislation is passed.
Tax Policy Considerations
According to the latest statistics published by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Ghana’s Tax-to-GDP ratio currently stands at 13.5 percent.1In less sophisticated language, this means that the amount of tax collected in Ghana expressed as a percentage of the total value of goods and services produced in the country stands at 13.5 percent.
This is below the African average rate of 16.6 percent. A relatively higher tax-to-GDP ratio signals a robust internal revenue generation machinery, whereas a lower percentage indicates the exact opposite. While I admit that our tax-to-GDP ratio should be higher to support our economic transformation dreams, any approach that sacrifices or even ignores other important signals of economic growth may lead us to the proverbially misleading glitter.
In the just-ended fiscal year, the Ghana Revenue Authority (GRA) has itself announced that it met and surpassed its revenue mobilisation target. In an economy saddled with COVID-19 era problems, this achievement must be commended. The actual target for 2021 was GH¢57.055billion.
The GRA ended up collecting GH¢57.32billion. What makes this achievement even more spectacular is that the target for the year was not adjusted downward during the mid-year review as has become customary over the last couple of years. Additionally, the revenue generation resulted in a 26.3 percent growth over the previous year’s revenue – the highest annual growth rate in a decade.2 Clearly, it appears we have the men to collect taxes.
When one looks at the breakdown of the revenue mobilisation according to the tax types, it reveals an interesting fact. To illustrate this point better, let us consider these statistics: our Domestic Direct Taxes accounted for 46.1 percent of the revenue generated. Domestic Indirect Taxes made up 23.8 percent and Customs and International Trade Taxes accounted for 28.1 percent of our revenue.
The biggest contributor to our tax revenue is direct taxation. Ironically, in a year when the GRA reminds us of its stellar achievements that outshine all other achievements over the last decade, it is shocking to find out this much tax was collected from a tax-paying population that does not even constitute up to 10 percent of the population.
According to the recent population and housing census, Ghana’s tax penetration rate stands at less than 10 percent. This was also reported in the budget statement. By implication, less than 10 percent of the population contributes to Ghana’s direct domestic revenue generation. It is amazing that such a fraction of Ghanaians is responsible for the marvelous performance of the GRA this year, as touted by the Authority itself. One can only imagine how much more taxes could be collected by just doubling the tax penetration figure. It is safe to conclude here that an increase in the number of direct taxpayers would significantly impact our revenue mobilisation agenda.
Logically, one would wonder how we can achieve such an increase in the number of registered taxpayers in such a short space of time. Another anticipated comment would be the observation that introduction of the E-levy will expand the tax base and invariably achieve the same purpose. The answer to the first preempted question is fairly straightforward.
Last year, the GRA announced that they were phasing out individual Tax Identification Numbers (TINs) and replacing these with the Ghana Card ID number. According to the Authority, the number of people registered by the National Identification Authority (NIA) as part of the mass registration exercise as at October 5, 2021 was over 15 million, representing 84.3 percent of Ghanaians over the age of 15.3 In the past year, so much progress has been made with integration of the Ghana Card into essential parts of the economy.
As it stands, one cannot start a business without a Ghana Card. Recently, the Bank of Ghana announced that effective July, 2022 the Ghana Card will be the only allowable ID for transacting business with banks and Specialised Deposit Taking Institutions (SDIs). These efforts have invariably widened the tax net in a relatively short time. The Commissioner -General of the GRA himself has stated that this move will enable organisations to share important data and rope-in eligible taxpayers, especially in the informal sector.4
To situate this in the context of the figures, according to the 2022 budget statement, Ghana’s population stands at 30.8 million people with 42.8 percent belonging to the adult population. Of this number, only 2,364,348 people – representing less than 10 percent of the total population, were registered as taxpayers as at August 2022. Also, of this number only 2,364,348 people, representing less than 10 percent of the total population, were registered as taxpayers as at August 2021.
Again, only 45,109 entities are registered as corporate taxpayers while 54,364 persons are registered as self-employed taxpayers at the GRA. Obviously, these statistics did not factor-in the mass Ghana Card registration and automatic expansion of the tax net as a consequence of the policies and decisions that have followed the mass registration. Considering these same figures in the aftermath of a complete migration from traditional TINs to the Ghana Card ID number, we will be looking at potentially quadrupling the figures for corporate and individual taxpayers in the books of the Revenue Authority.
The point being made here is that the tax net has already been expanded significantly with the migration from traditional TINs to the Ghana Card ID Number, and it is only going to get better with time as complete integration is pursued.
For a Revenue Authority whose men appear to have been on their best performance in a decade, collecting over GH¢26million from a narrow net of direct corporate and individual taxpayers, collecting an excess GH¢6.9billion from a significantly wider tax net should be the easiest task. If we pursue increased revenue mobilisation in this manner, we will be killing two birds with one stone; we will be effectively distributing the tax burden proportionally and advancing equity of tax collection as well as preventing the almost tragic consequences of this proposed E-levy.
E-Levy: the Antithesis of Digital Inclusion
Ghana’s digital payments ecosystem has recorded significant growth over the last couple of years. The ease and flexibility associated with these payments make patronage of mobile money and other payment services quite organic. According to the Bank of Ghana, the value of digital transactions in Ghana grew by 120 percent from February 2020 to February 2021 – indicating a threefold increase relative to the 40 percent increase from February 2019 to February 2020.
The total value of digital transactions for 2020 was estimated to be over GH¢500 billion compared to GH¢257billion in 2019 and GH¢ 78billion in 2016. As of October 2021, there were 18.4 million active mobile money accounts – more than seven times the number of registered taxpayers.5 This is great news for a country poised to advance digital inclusion and promote a cash-lite economy. What a cashless economy does for us is reduce the central bank’s cost of cash production and transportation, as a huge section of the economy will thrive on alternative payment channels.
It is thus clear that – contrary to pedestrian comments that seem to suggest the only advantage of a cashless economy is increased convenience – real economic considerations exist for the commitment of emerging and developed economies to the cash-lite agenda. There are also immense benefits for revenue generation efforts. Last year, the GRA migrated to a completely digital payment infrastructure. The feat of surpassing last year’s revenue mobilisation target has been partly attributed to this transition by the GRA. One would then wonder why government would risk losing a significant number of patrons of digital payment services by introducing a levy that has been proven elsewhere to cause a sharp decline in patronage of alternative payment methods.
In Uganda, for instance, a tax on mobile money services was reduced from the initial rate of 1 percent to 0.5 percent following public outcry. The effect of this tax was nevertheless felt when months later the value of transactions dropped by a whopping 24 percent.6 Further research suggests that although at face value the idea of an E-levy might seem like a quick fix to broadening the tax net, the long-term effects may significantly erode our tax revenue.
A certain study by Njuguna Ndungú on the effects of a similar tax on the digital inclusion landscape of Kenya makes the finding that increased taxation on mobile phone-based transactions may not expand the tax base, but rather may result in less and less tax revenue in the future. In other words, a higher tax rate on low-level retail electronic transactions which come from low-income earners that are sensitive to transaction costs may discourage the use of mobile phone payments. These taxes are targetting mobile transactions because of their high volume, but in reality the value per transaction is so low that even a low tax has a disproportionate effect on the cost.7
Although the proposed bill suggests the levy will not apply on transactions that do not exceed a cumulative value of GH¢100 in a day, it is nevertheless a regressive tax as the value of GH¢100 in today’s economy is so insignificant that most transactions will exceed the threshold. The tax is regressive because it imposes the same amount on Mobile Money payments between two individuals transacting in a Ghanaian market place like the Dome Market as it does to high net worth corporations transferring funds between and among themselves using a digital channel.
While these two corporations might be willing to bear the extra cost for convenience, the trader and customer stationed at Dome would rather revert to cash transactions to save the last penny. In what the economists term as inelastic demand, the patronage of these alternative payment platforms will experience a sharp decline as a result of the increased costs associated with digital payment transactions. Typically, this is easier in our environment because of the alternative, cash payments. In sum, patronage of digital payment systems will drop significantly – thus affecting the digital payments ecosystem.
Other Issues
It must be noted that government’s revenue generation efforts will be significantly threatened. What government fails to realise is the fact that even though payment of taxes and other government charges have been apparently excluded from the ambit of the levy’s application, this will be inconsequential to the decline in payment of taxes through digital platforms. People will simply not utilise those platforms; which implies that payment of taxes through these platforms will become secondary and needless to many of these taxpayers.
The proposed levy also exposes taxpayers to economic double taxation. Firstly, the base of this tax is not income; it merely identifies money being transferred and places a tax on that amount. The money involved may be money that has already been taxed at another level. Let us consider the scenario wherein Akua buys a meal at Santoku. Her bill is GH¢200 and includes all statutory levies (VAT, COVID-19 levy, Tourism levy etc.). She chooses to pay via electronic means, then government lays claim to an extra portion of her money. In essence, the same amount of money has been taxed twice.
It could even get more complex if she is paying from a card linked to her salary account that has already been subject to income tax. This scenario explains why most commentators regard the levy as a needless burden on the already burdened citizenry. The million-dollar question still remains unanswered: Why put already compliant taxpayers through a layer of extra burden when millions of Ghanaians who could be paying direct taxes continue to enjoy a holiday?
Conclusion
This author is of the firm conviction that the E-levy is a lazy approach to raising money to service our budget. For a price of GH¢6.9billion – which at this point appears unrealistic due to circumstances like delay in the passage of the Act and possible reduction in the rate of the tax – it is a very cheap altar on which to sacrifice the gains made in our digital inclusion agenda and promotion of the cash-lite agenda.
As demonstrated, more money could be raised for government expenditure by simply putting our ‘Awardwinning’ GRA to work and going after direct taxes – especially with the Ghana Card expansion efforts. Also, other tax types like the property tax regime await exploitation and could use efforts from our revenue mobilisation apparatus.
Although a majority of Ghanaians, the author included, are opposed to the E-levy in any form, our opinions seldom count when government is as determined as it is now. We may be hitting a self-destruct button. Time will tell.
References
1 OECD et al. (2021) Revenue Statistics in Africa and the Caribbean, 2021, OECD Publishing, Paris.
2 GRA Notice Published on January 14, 2022.
3 https://citinewsroom.com/2021/10/over-15-million-citizens-registered-for-ghana-card-nia/
4. https://www.myjoyonline.com/replacing-tin-with-ghana-card-helping-banks-to-share-data-rope-in-eligi ble-taxpayers-gra/
5 Summary of Economic and Financial Data (November 2021) Published by the Bank of Ghana
6 https://qz.com/africa/2042851/tanzanias-new-mobile-money-tax-is-hurting-businesses-and-people/
7 Taxing Mobile Money Transactions in Kenya; Lessons for Africa, August 2019 (https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Taxing_mobile_transactions_20190806.pdf)
The author is a lawyer with the law firm, Law Temple. He is also a graduate assistant at the University of Ghana School of Law where he assists the tax and criminal law teaching teams. His areas of focus are dispute resolution, taxation, criminal law, fintech regulation, intellectual property law and commercial law.
Email: [email protected]
Phone number: 0209947083
