URA commissioner General Doris Akol said the tax body is keen on stopping outflows arising from smuggling, among other activities.
Kampala- Uganda Revenue Authority (URA) has pledged to support the campaign to end the Illicit Financial Flows (IFFs) that are draining the country’s economy as well as that of the continent.
The ‘Stop the Bleeding’ campaign seeks to end plunder from the African continent.
IFFs are illegal movements of money or capital from one country to another.
At the weekend, Ms Doris Akol, the URA Commissioner General told Daily Monitor that they will certainly support the campaign that was recently launched in Uganda.
“Yes (we shall support the programme) part of [our plan to] increase domestic revenues is stopping IFFs outflows, especially those arising from smuggling, trade, misinvocing, transfer pricing and other forms of aggressive tax planning. URA is already involved in some aspect of curbing IFFs,” she said.
Africa, according to the High Level Panel report released last year, loses more than $50 billion (about Shs165 trillion) annually in illegal capital outflows.
Much of this money is lost through illegal activities supported by multinationals.
However, civil society organisations such as Southern and Eastern African Trade, Information and Negotiations Institute (SEATINI), Action Aid and Civil Society Budget Advocacy Group (CSBAG) have been at the centre stage of fighting the outflow that they put at more than $509m (Shs1.5 trillion) annually out of Uganda in particular.
The amount lost is more than or equivalent to 60 years of budget for government agencies such as the National Bureau of Standards, an institution mandated to, among other things, get rid of substandard and potentially life-threatening counterfeit products flooding the country.
It is also nearly a half of the budget allocated to key sector ministries such as that of Agriculture.
The campaign was launched in Kampala last month to advocate for policy reforms that can empower institutions such as URA to mobilise more taxes from multinationals.
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Regulation (EU) 2016/1076 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 applying the arrangements for products originating in certain states which are part of the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) Group of States provided for in agreements establishing, or leading to the establishment of, Economic Partnership Agreements1, and in particular Article 2(3)(b) thereof,
(1) The list of beneficiary countries for duty-free and quota-free imports into the Union is established by Annex I to Regulation (EU) 2016/1076.
(2) Kenya had not taken the necessary steps towards ratification of its interim Economic Partnership Agreement concluded in 2007 and consequently, in accordance with Article 2(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1528/20072, and in particular point (b) thereof, ceased to be covered by the market access arrangement permitted under Regulation (EC) No 1528/2007, as from 1 October 2014. This removal resulted from Regulation (EU) No 527/20133.
(3) Kenya, the Union and its Member States concluded negotiations on a comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement on 16 October 2014. Kenya, therefore, met the condition of Article 2(2) of the Regulation and was consequently, through Regulation (EU) No 1387/20144, added to Annex I to the Market Access Regulation as from 25 December 2014.
(4) The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 22 of Regulation (EU) 2016/1076 to amend Annex I to that Regulation so as to remove a region or state from that Annex. In particular, that applies where the ratification of an agreement which has permitted a region or state to be included in Annex I has not taken place within a reasonable period of time so that the entry into force of the agreement is unduly delayed.
The Income Tax Amendment Bill 2016 was passed by Parliament and sent to President for his assent. In May 2016, the President sent it back to Parliament asking them to reconsider the controversial proposal regarding “exempting employment income of Members of Parliament EXCEPT Salary”