By

Tom Odhiambo

Every year the government releases a national economic survey.

This document indicates the annual national economic performance. It shows which sectors of the economy had grown the previous year, and which ones had stagnated or declined.

It also estimates how the economy would look in the future, considering a range of local, regional, and global factors.

The Economic Survey is collated by the Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (KNBS).

The Survey looks at the various parts of the economy including Economic Performance; Employment, Earnings and Consumer Prices; Money, Banking and Finance; Public Finance; International Trade and Balance of Payments; Agriculture Sector Review; Environment and Natural Resources; Energy Sector; Manufacturing Sector Review; Construction Sector; Tourism Sector; Transport and Storage; Information and Communication Technology; Education and Training; Health and Vital Statistics; Governance, Peace and Security; Gender, Economic and Social Inclusion etc.

As incoherent as the report appears in some places (exactly what is ‘Health and Vital Statistics’?), it is one of the best statistical and narrative representations of the performance (real and projected) of the national economy in a period of one year.

This report allows the reader to peek into how the growth or decline of virtually every sector of the economy. For instance, if one wishes to know how many primary and secondary schools there are in Kenya, including their learner enrollment and the number of teachers in these schools, the Economic Survey provides these details.

If you are looking for data on access to health – how many people have a health institution near them and can actually get medical care, this report will give you a clue.

But one of the details in this report which every Kenyan should be interested in are the statistics on county income and expenditures. This section of the report, for instance for the 2021 Survey, is barely more than 3 pages.

Yet, these pages have the statistics on how much money the local government receives in a year from the central government, and how it spends the money. Indeed, the statistics for 2021 show that the distribution of funds to the counties is fair.

For example, the 8 billion shillings Garissa County is projected to get in the financial year 2020/2021 compares quite favourably with the 9 billion shillings that Kisumu County will receive. The 12 billion shillings for Nakuru County isn’t far from the 11 billion shillings that Narok County will receive.

Yet, an examination of how the counties spend the revenues shows that compensation for employees, made up of salaries, allowances and social contributions alone, is way higher than the other three significant expenditure categories: use of goods and services; acquisition of nonfinancial assets; and acquisition of financial assets.

There is no doubt that county governments are hardly investing in capital projects that would improve the quality of life of their citizens.

Too much money is being spent on utilities, printing, advertising, transportation, training, hospitality supplies etc. Less money is being put in building schools, hospitals, supporting local industries or building roads etc.

Which is why Kenyans need to read the annual Economic Survey. It is not every day that statistics such those found in the Economic Survey are found in the media. Actually, this Survey is hardly discussed in the public media.

There will be a few pages summarizing its contents when it is launched. Such summaries will look at, say, the state of the education, health, environment, and the energy sectors.

The reports will isolate what the media editors think are the key issues in the selected sector. But the reporters will hardly provoke a public debate on the issues raised.

In other words, beyond the immediate circles of specialists and (academic) researchers, this vital document on the state of the national economy hardly even reaches the target audience.

Even though it is freely available online, it is hardly cited in general discussion on the economy in the course of the year.

However, this is the document that should inform all the economic policy proposals by the politicians campaigning for right now. This is the document that those wishing to govern the country or lead the counties should be consulting.

For instance, for the governors of the counties, it will show them how much money they may be able to collect locally; how much money is projected to be transferred to their counties; how many citizens they will likely spend money on in a year; what development projects they should invest in etc.

The Survey will guide them as they make their local economic projections.

Considering that local governments don’t have their own functional bureaus of statistics, the Survey comes in handy.

Because it projects what the local economies are based on, what they are producing, how they are producing it, the value of the produce, the distribution of the production, the revenues earned from the produce, what these economies could produce in the future etc, the Survey is a quick reference tool for short term and long-term planning.

Thus, the local government, for instance, can plan how to best expand the tax net and grow its revenues.

The resultant growth in revenues should reflect in better quality of services and goods available to the locals, which in turn should increase productivity, and better quality of life.

It is not by chance that the 2021 Survey includes a section, ‘Gender, Economic and Social Inclusion.’

The section underlines the importance of spending more money on groups that have previously been excluded from mainstream economic activities such as women, the youth, people with disabilities, people from previously marginalized regions etc.

These individuals too pay taxes and are just as productive as the others who are favored by the traditional systems of resource distribution.

What the Survey shows is how the government of Kenya has attempted to address the economic disadvantages that have created inequalities in the country, including providing economic stimulus to specific groups, social protection schemes and gender-responsive budgeting.

But if the statistics that explain these key national and local micro- and macro-economic issues don’t get into the mainstream of national discourse, how will the country ever create an economically equitable society? The writer teaches at the University of Nairobi. Tom.odhiambo@uonbi.ac.ke

Courtesy: The Star Newspaper Kenya

By

Tom Odhiambo

I doubt that there is a country in the world where the receiver of revenue is a friend of the taxpayer. Not many individuals will willingly invite the taxman to take a share of their income or wealth.

Indeed, there are individuals and institutions all over the world whose only job is to help individuals evade paying tax partially or in total. Yet tax, like death, is a sure guest in every household in today’s economy.

Taxes come indirectly or directly; they are immediate or deferred; they hardly discriminate between the poor and the rich (even though the rich may actually pay less tax compared to the poor); they are all over, from the marketplace to school to church etc; and they are absolutely necessary in order for the economy to function.

Every taxman would be happy if all citizens paid their due taxes. If all citizens filed their tax returns, the Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA) would be happy. But that is the ideal situation. In the real world, not so many Kenyans file their tax returns.

In fact, most do not record what they earn in a fiscal year, mainly because they are in informal employment or work in small businesses with poor record keeping. But it may also be because of erratic earnings or simple disinterest.

Therefore, it is difficult for such individuals to respond to the call by the KRA for them to pay taxes. This situation can be found across many poor countries in the world.

In a case where the majority of the citizens don’t pay formal taxes on their income, it is the job of the taxman to convince them to do so. This is why KRA runs a campaign every year urging Kenyans to pay taxes.

The campaign seeks to convince Kenyans that their taxes pay for government services and public goods – roads, hospitals, schools, police services, markets etc. One can only imagine how KRA manages to persuade more Kenyans to register as taxpayers and duly pay their taxes.

But it was recently reported in the media that KRA would seek to know the sources of wealth of Kenyans who post photos of ‘their’ material possessions on social media.

Kenya’s chief taxman was reported by the Standard newspaper saying, “In the social media, we have some people posting some nice things. You would see some posting nice houses, cars, taking their families to nice places and so on. Here, we are not sleeping, when we see those, we see taxes.”

Well, KRA was suggesting that it was interested in the lifestyles that individuals led compared to the wealth they publicly declared to have or the tax they pay to the state.

So, what did it seek to do to address this situation? Spy on Kenyans online? Or summon them to explain their wealth and prove that they were tax compliant? How would they enforce such measures? Wasn’t KRA likely to end up chasing a wild goose? Does KRA even have the capacity to monitor such online activities?

There is no doubt that people who live beyond their known sources of income should explain how that is possible. Indeed, many individuals can afford to buy property and pay for services that the income they are known to earn would not support.

The so-called celebrities, who seem to have been the primary target of KRAs statement, do sometimes post on social media what they claim to be their material possession and photos of ostentatious consumption. But do they really live such a lifestyle? Can they afford the luxury goods that they pose next to?

It is not surprising that this announcement led to jokes, humor, and satire from Kenyans online.

Kenyans mocked KRA by creating comical skits of the KRA as the unseen eye, watching over any Kenyan who might wish to indulge in any luxury.

For instance, having a soda or a cup of coffee after a meal was depicted as likely to lead to KRA requesting for information one’s earnings that would allow him to drink soda or tea in these economically difficult times.

KRA was painted as nosy, intrusive, and idle.

Why would a government agency whose employees are among the best paid Kenyans wish to troll taxpayers online, chasing after individuals who post images of themselves next to expensive cars (not necessarily theirs), drinking seemingly expensive whisky (most likely contraband), and wearing bling bling (definitely fake)?

Kenyan celebrities would probably be the worst example to use when seeking to audit the lifestyles of individuals who seem to live beyond their means. Most of them are merely ‘showing off’ other people’s cars, houses, or even clothes and jewelry.

Thus, Kenyans weren’t necessarily outraged that KRA wished to check on their tax compliance by doing a lifestyle audit.

Many Kenyans felt humored. They found it incredibly funny that instead of the taxman finding better ways of encouraging or enforcing tax compliance, they would issue what seemed like threats.

Not so many rich people actually flaunt their wealth online. Tax cheats or evaders would not necessarily show off what they possess and how they spend their money. They would most likely not post public photos of themselves on expensive yachts or helicopters; or on expensive beach hotels; or wearing diamond or gold rings.

KRA’s announcement is a case of doing the right thing the wrong way. The number of Kenyans on social media is actually small compared to the whole population. The number of ‘rich’ Kenyans who often show off their wealth in public is quite negligible.

Was this not a missed opportunity by KRA to get Kenyans to debate more on the need for rich Kenyans to pay more taxes?

Couldn’t KRA have used this chance to start a public debate on social media about more effective ways of paying tax for Kenyans who are not in formal employment but who still make good money without paying tax; and also, how Kenyans could track the use of their taxes by the government online?

The writer teaches at the University of Nairobi. Tom.odhiambo@uonbi.ac.ke

This year’s State of Tax Justice 2021 updates the findings of our inaugural 2020 report, which provided the first comprehensive, near-global statistics for revenue losses due to cross-border tax abuse by multinational companies and by individuals hiding assets and income streams offshore. This year, we find annual tax losses of US$483 billion worldwide.

By

Tom Odhiambo

Title: Imposing Standards: The North-South Dimension Global Tax Politics; Authors: Martin Hearson; Publisher: Cornell University Press; Year: 2021; Pages: 247.

Electronic Access: Free Download, Use the free Adobe Acrobat Reader to view this PDF file.

In today’s globalizing world, it is near impossible for any country not to have some kind of business with some other country. The countries of the Global South are more or less forced into relationships with countries of the Global North because of the flow of money for investment down south.

International foreign direct investments (FDI) are touted as one root out of the poverty trap that is strangulating the Global South.

Thus, government officials from poor African, Asian, and Latin American countries travel the world or hand out brochures at conferences, promising multinational corporations and individual investors of benefits should they set up shop in their countries.

Bilateral tax treaties, therefore, are written because the investing country desires to protect the economic rights or benefits of their citizens in the global south countries.

The states receiving the investments are, on the other hand, convinced that they are taking care of their benefits. They tend to believe that by signing these treaties, they are entering into a special and exclusive relationship with the other country.

As Martin Hearson shows in his book, Imposing Standards: The North-South Dimension to Global Tax Politics (Cornell University Press, 2021) thousands of such treaties have been signed. Some of these treaties are decades old but still determine how cross-border investments and taxation are treated between the signatory countries.

There is enough literature to show that in the cases of the signed treaties between countries from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and those from the global south, the latter hardly gain much.

The poorer countries of the global south may get some multinational to invest locally, but they have little leverage over the transfer of earnings back to the investor’s country of origin. The treaties are largely designed to avoid double taxation.

This means that there is a lot of concessions granted to the companies from the rich countries by the governments of the poor countries. Why?

Of course, government officials who negotiate these treaties are under pressure to attract investment. They know that they are competing with other countries for the same investment. They may even have an idea of what the other countries are offering the investor.

But they also know that the investors and those negotiating on their behalf are prepared to extract the most beneficial terms to them.

So, the government reps sit at the negotiating table probably knowing that the other side of the table is better prepared, and because it has the money that the government needs, it won’t accept unfavorable conditions.

Actually, Hearson shows in Imposing Standards that often the government negotiators are poorly skilled, unprepared or just don’t have the technical skills needed for high level negotiations. Why would this be so?

In some cases, this situation happened or happens because of the nature of government employment where patronage could have led to staffing of important offices with less skilled but connected individuals.

Also, bilateral trade agreements can involve lengthy discussions on several clauses of the treaty. Unless those representing a given government are experts in treaties, especially in relation to taxes and taxation, the government will likely end up being shortchanged.

But even more important is the fact that the negotiators from the OECD countries would most likely be highly qualified, better remunerated and some of them seasoned in the business. The terms of engagement between the two groups could also have been predetermined by history plus theory and practice from the Global North.

How does some poorly paid, inadequately trained, and unmotivated civil servant negotiate with such a team, under such conditions?

As Hearson shows in the case of Zambia, such circumstances once led to:

In other words, without better qualified, knowledgeable, and motivated negotiators, African countries will continue to lose out when it comes to signing bilateral tax treaties.

Imposing Standards reminds everyone who is concerned about the nature and methodology of bilateral tax treaties that they are historically and innately skewed against poor countries of the Global South, especially African ones.

It is not just that Africa is undeveloped, has lesser qualified negotiators and is more subject to political changes that affect such treaties, it is also that in many cases, the investing companies pay expatriate workers better than the locals.

This arrangement means that they do transfer more resources back to their home countries more easily because of reduced tax rates. African countries have very little leeway to renegotiate or repudiate these treaties because, in the first place, they signed them voluntarily.

Recourse to a court of law in case of a dispute or to a private arbitration is often expensive and paints the poor country in bad light. Such a country would be seen as unreliable and a risk for investors.

Considering the power of the OECD countries, for instance, it is easy for an African nation, for instance, to become an investment pariah. No country wishes to be described as such.

There is no doubt that bilateral tax treaties will continue to disfavor countries of the Global South. The wealthier nations of the Global North will continue to naturally take care of their interests, and thus, ‘impose standards’ on others.

But the poor countries need to train their negotiators, pay them well, establish institutions that will train local manpower in tax law and negotiation skills.

Yet, probably the most important skills would be to imbue their citizens and officers with patriotism, so that they don’t just concede to unfavorable terms by investors because they don’t seem to care or have been promised some other benefits but refuse to accept standards designed elsewhere being imposed on their countries.  

The writer teaches at the University of Nairobi. Tom.odhiambo@uonbi.ac.ke

BY

Tom Odhiambo

The government of Kenya (GoK) seems very determined to plug the debt hole that it has dug itself into in the recent past. Balancing its budget seems to be so taxing that it has decided it might as well tax Kenyans out of water and off the fire, in a manner of speaking.

The government is convinced that since Kenyans have to drink water – or bathe and cook with it – and since they must eat – and so cook their food – it shall seek to share with them the money they use for buying water and energy for cooking.

GoK has been entertaining proposals to levy more taxes on water but has gone ahead to simply overtax cooking gas.  

Indeed, those who cite tax as one of the certainties of life make a very important point. But it seems as if the Kenyan taxpayer has to literally pay for every little item they use in life. Undoubtedly water and gas or paraffin are essential commodities in millions of households in this country.

This makes them a sure source of tax income for the taxman – it is near impossible to avoid using water at all and in one way or another, a modern household will have to cook, using paraffin or cooking gas. In fact, kerosene is also used for lighting by millions of Kenyans who can’t afford electricity or solar power or any other means of lighting their homes.

Well, the government may claim that it needs more money in order to deliver potable water or to get electricity connected to Kenyans. But does it have to impose more taxes on water and paraffin, for instance, whilst lowering taxes on, say, solar power products?

No. it doesn’t. Isn’t water basic to human survival? It is used in nearly all every manufacturing process. The claim that water is life needs no proof. Water scarcity is now a source of serious human conflicts all over the world.

East Africans need not look farther than the dispute between Ethiopia and Egypt over the Great Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD) in Ethiopia, which the Egyptians claim will affect the lives of millions of its citizens.

Thus, it does not matter the socio-economic class of a Kenyan, she or he needs water, in abundance, every day. But what is hardly reported in the media is that poor Kenyans pay more for water than those who are well-off.

They just don’t pay more in the real cost, thus more taxation; they may pay more in terms of the cost to their life of using unsafe water.

How? Because potable water is expensive, they may resort to use cheaper water whose source they may not know – could be untreated borehole water or water from polluted rivers. This double jeopardy is directly related to the impact that extra taxation on water has on its costing, sourcing, distribution and use.

But probably what is more important for the ordinary and often economically struggling citizens is the fact that lack of water is a life and death situation for a majority of them. Little or no water could lead to drought, poor crop harvests, starvation, and death.

Taxing water increases the cost of producing and distributing food, which negatively impacts the livelihoods of millions of rural and urban poor.

Yet, the government has sworn to protect the basic rights of its citizens. Water is, therefore, an important human rights issue.

Why would any government wish to ignore a basic right that the United Nations General Assembly acknowledged in its Resolution 64/292, which noted the significance of water and sanitation in realizing all the other human rights?

Without clean drinking water, which can also be used for cooking, bathing, washing and such other human needs, we cannot even begin to talk about any other human right.

As for the imposition of more taxes on paraffin and cooking gas, the government, again, ignored the fact that it was taxing many Kenyans who are struggling to make ends meet.

Cooking gas is primarily less a polluter than firewood or charcoal. It is also used by thousands of middle or aspiring middle class Kenyans. These working Kenyans economically support millions of poorer fellow citizens, relatives, friends, and colleagues.

Taking more money out of their pockets harms those who depend on them. It also pushes them to consider using alternative sources of energy – in this case charcoal and firewood become the immediate substitutes.

How can a government that has declared its intention to go ‘green’ tax more a product that is integral to its green economy agenda? Shouldn’t the government of Kenya be subsidizing the delivery and use of cooking gas?

Shouldn’t the government be encouraging home builders to set up cooking gas storage facilities in new housing blocks as well as distribute it to all units within the block?

Considering that the cost of cooking using electricity is still prohibitive in this country, shouldn’t the government relax taxes and taxation of the clean cooking gas?

The tragedy of having extra taxes on paraffin is that it has a direct impact on the quality of life of millions of Kenyans who use it for cooking and lighting. Millions of households light their homes using kerosene. Such families have no money to buy candles or solar energy products or gas for lighting.

These families count among most poorer Kenyans, mostly living in the countryside and in the underprivileged neighborhoods of their urban centers. For such families, they can only resort to using firewood for lighting when they can’t afford kerosene or gas.

What to do? All Kenyans, but especially the civil society, should push for the government of Kenya to acknowledge that water is a basic human right, which impacts the enjoyment of all other rights. Water should be free, especially where the citizens are too poor and don’t use much of it.

Or at the least, if it must be taxed, such tax should be negligible and mostly meant to be used to maintain the facilities that ensure the water is collected, treated, and distributed to its users.

As for cooking gas, the government needs to exploit the potential opportunities for getting local cooking gas, packaging, and distributing it to buyers. Also, concerned parties should look for a resolution that is sensible to all of us, The writer teaches at the university of Nairobi. Tom.odhiambo@uonbi.ac.ke

(PHOTO CREDITS: YouTube-@Terrence Creative)

By

Tom Odhiambo

The world is one big Pandora’s box. There are just too many secrets in the world, especially around money and wealth such that even the Pandora Papers have barely scratched the surface of illegally acquired wealth by politicians or individuals connected to governments.

On their website, the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) claims the following about its findings summarized in the Pandora Papers:

“The most expansive leak of tax haven files in history reveals the secret offshore holdings of more than 300 politicians and public officials from more than 90 countries and territories in the Pandora Papers. The trove of more than 11.9 million confidential files shows how presidents, prime ministers, royals, elected officials — and some of their family members and closest associates — stash assets in a covert financial system with the help of firms who establish companies in secrecy jurisdictions. Explore the biggest political names uncovered in the data (the emphasis is theirs).”

ICIJ goes on to state that “The Pandora Papers reveal how 35 current and former world leaders and other powerful political figures, as well as their closest associates and immediate family members, use secrecy jurisdictions around the world.”

Considering the hype that the Pandora Papers received in the media one would have imagined that they would reveal secrets about the ‘money matters’ of more than the 300 plus politicians, their families and associates that they discuss. In other words, the Pandora Papers are a bit underwhelming.

For there are just too many individuals all over the world who have illegitimately made their money – one of the ways being avoiding to pay due taxes – and who have stashed it abroad.

In fact, there are so many ways of laundering proceedings of illegal money that one doesn’t really even need to hire expensive lawyers to hide the owner’s name and those of his or her beneficiaries behind tens of front companies.

Many Kenyans – and Africana, especially West Africans – know about ‘wash wash’ guys. These are definitely con artists, as illustrated in a recent Kenyan comedy Terence Creatives’ “Tunatumia Kemikal” but they are also money launderers.

They promise innocent Kenyans that they will ‘wash’ your money and make it multiply. If you give them 1 million legitimate shillings, they will double it. Of course, in public debates about ‘wash wash’ the victims are laughed at.

They are seen as gullible, as greedy and losers – yet they are also dreaming of making it in life like the recently poor politicians or civil servants who are now stinking rich. Sure enough, they lose a lot of money in these get-rich-quick schemes.

Yet these con artists’ schemes serve other hidden and often darker systems. They more or less provide a near legitimate conduit for ‘washing’ dirty money by tax avoiders back into the system.

It works in a seemingly complex way, but it really isn’t. The ‘wash wash’ guys con some naïve Kenyans of their legitimate earnings. The scammers have a thick protective layer which means that however daring they are, they are unlikely to be arrested and charged in a court of law.

Only a few foolish ones of the fraudsters – those who aren’t willing to share the cake broadly – end up in court.

The more successful ones then lead a ‘flashy’ life of driving expensive flashy cars; wearing designer attire; gregariously eating; drinking in expensive restaurants; sloshing around in pubs; and living in exclusive neighborhoods.

By their lifestyle they establish a network of followers – pretentiously rich, newly rich, and old money. They naturally become ‘influencers’, ‘foreign investors’, ‘budding entrepreneurs’, ‘successful businessman or woman’ and so forth.

And just like that, the scammers set up high end pubs, restaurants, casinos, barber shops, boutiques, and car yards etc. They would naturally have local co-shareholders.

What started off as a scam becomes the source of initial capital for very glamorous looking businesses. Remember that these individuals didn’t pay a cent in taxes after robbing some poor individual of their money by pretending to either double it or make a quick profit for them.

Now that their ‘legitimate’ business has other investors, they will most likely declare loses every other year in order to avoid taxes. In the end, they will receive offers from a foreign investment group. Which is where the Pandora Papers come in.

The foreign investor is most likely a local big man who had stashed his loot in some foreign company. The politician, civil servant or businessman connected or related to government officers, will bring back to the country the illegally acquired wealth in the name of investing in a local company.

She or he may not even be a director of the company that is investing locally. Her or his proxy will earn the dividends from the investment and probably reinvest it locally or send it back abroad. There is a high chance that such an individual will make efforts to avoid paying taxes.

And the cycle continues.

Therefore, what often appears as some simple scam, which the local media advises locals to avoid, ends up as a source of illicit wealth, which is then used to probably create shell corporations that perpetuate the original scheme of tax avoidance.

It may not make sense in the beginning, but a closer look will reveal that for individuals who haven’t made enough money from tax avoidance or evasion or stealing or exploiting their offices to seek bribes, ‘wash wash’ can easily be a conduit to ‘reinvest’ locally and establish a legit business, which may fully, partially, or not pay taxes.

The point that needs to be emphasized is that the initial capital came from illegitimate sources. Shouldn’t such an individual forfeit the entire wealth acquired so far?

Pandora Papers claim to have unearthed the shady dealings of significant public figures and their relatives and associates.

Someone may ask, so what? These are powerful men and women. They can damp down the reporting of the Pandora Papers in their countries. They can control the public debate about the whole report or parts that touch on them.

Indeed, one of them is reported telling the ICIJ when asked to comment, “I don’t know what you are talking about, and I can’t make any reply.”

One imagines that this particular individual isn’t just playing safe; he is also performing his powers as someone who knows that such a report won’t affect his public image or lead to prosecution or damage his moral standing.

He knows that there are enough and more damaging ‘wash wash’ scams in his own society for him to worry about reports of expensive lawyers, shell companies and bank accounts in Switzerland or wherever.

The writer teaches at the University of Nairobi. Tom.odhiambo@uonbi.ac.ke

By

Tom Odhiambo

Title: Framing Feminist Taxation; Publisher: Global Alliance for Tax Justice (GATJ); Authors: GATJ; Publication Date: June 2021; Pages: 53.

Electronic Access: Free Download, Use the free Adobe Acrobat Reader to view this PDF file.

When one speaks the word ‘feminist’ it often conjures images of a woman or women who are ready to fight ‘patriarchy’, in a manner of speaking. In fact, in many parts of Africa the word is taken to mean women who are ready for a confrontation with men and other women in any subject that touches on women’s rights or lives.

To claim to be a feminist suggests a battle, a war, a cause to fight for. In many cases, African feminists – women or men – tend to speak eloquently and act stoically about the rights of women in the society in which they live. Thanks to the global rights movement, there are feminist activists nearly in all parts of Africa.

Yet, the language and pursuit of human rights tends to throw fog on the finer details of everyday human struggles. The discourse and practice of human rights, for instance, is often not translated into the minutiae of economic, political, cultural, social, religious, or spiritual rights for women in specific communities.

Even where human rights defenders isolate the task at hand as particular rights to do with women, say the right to go to school for the girl child or the right to access maternal health care – the concerned individuals and institutions gloss over or do not link the lack of these rights to institutionalized economic marginalization.

Yet, struggles for human rights need to see the bigger picture in which a range of practices and institutions interconnect to cause one deficiency or another. For instance, how does tax affect women’s livelihoods, lives, and socio-economic, political, cultural, personal or even gender rights.

Reading Framing Feminist Taxation (2021) a tax guide based on experiences from Uganda, one realizes the urgency of looking at and understanding how tax and taxation affect women from a multi-sectoral perspective if not perspectives.

This guide is divided into four parts: Introduction to International Financial and Tax Architecture; Feminist Perspectives and Principles; Feminist Economics: Reimagining the Economic and Tax Systems; From Plans to Actions – An Advocacy Guide for a Feminist Taxation Framework to Fulfill Women’s Rights.

In the first section, the authors outline the need for knowledge on who or what institutions run the global financial system and how these individuals and organizations determine global or local economies plus their tax regimes.

It is important that fighters for and defenders of women’s rights should know how the IMF or African Development Bank or the African Union, a few of the organizations mentioned in this section, make decisions that impact local industries, commerce, taxes and lives of all and sundry.

Considering that taxes and taxation affect savings, investments, and livelihoods, how do the policies and actions by such organizations affect women’s lives in the short and long runs?

The second section reprises the old question of power equation in society. What is power and how does it manifest itself? How does such power affect economic production, collection of public revenue, distribution of such revenue or the tax burden for women and men; for the poor and the rich; for the abled and the disabled.

Framing Feminist Taxation notes that power appears in at least three forms:

1. Visible power – that which one sees and feels in public such as held by politicians or bureaucrats, or as held by heads of households or clan heads, even heads of criminal gangs, a majority of them tend to be men,
2. Hidden power – this about the agenda setters or influencers or members of a caste or economic group,
3. Invisible power – which is the capacity of individuals or institutions or any other force to shape people’s views, beliefs, needs, biases etc, such as is done by social media these days or even religious or political leaders through rituals and doctrines.

The third section reminds readers of the seeming deliberate inattention to women’s economic productivity by orthodox economics.

Although it is not a new claim, Framing Feminist Taxation reinforces the argument that traditional methods of measuring economic production in a country, Gross Domestic Product and Gross National Product (GDP and GNP) do not consider the amount of time, resources and the productivity of women who work every day in the houses or homes they live in.

Raising children, cooking, cleaning the house, maintain the home etc are hardly factored into the measures of economic production and growth. Most of these are duties are performed by women.

Section Four is an outline on what can and should be done to make women suffer less from taxes and taxation. Here, the authors of Framing Feminist Taxation root for action rather than more policy formulation. They argue that from a feminist taxation perspective, there is need for more campaigns for tax justice for women’s rights.

They note that individuals and groups need to identify a problem and thoroughly analyze it; think through the advocacy approaches, such as engagement with the media, directly demand action from policymakers and holders of power, mobilizing the public to leverage pressure, and use of digital communication and online media; engage with other women’s organizations to learn from their experiences and also seek support; target specific organizations – public and private, local or international – in the advocacy campaigns, among others.

One of the key lessons Framing Feminist Taxation offers is the need to rethink the traditional approaches to tax and taxation where women are concerned. For instance, why would, for instance, any African government zero rate, computers, or solar equipment but tax paraffin, which is used by a majority of poor households for lighting and cooking?

Why do governments continue to tax women more than men when they tax a married couple as a single unit? In such cases, the woman’s income is treated as a ‘second’ earner, thus suffering a higher tax burden, when they are also likely to be earning far less than the husband.

A feminist approach to taxing the couple would prefer them to be taxed separately – yet the intersection of culture, economics and social practice predisposes the woman to almost a career and lifelong disadvantage. Why? Simply because she is married but also working.

But to change the way the world sees women, taxes and taxation will also mean to literally change the way societies educate the young.

A feminist approach to tax and taxation needs to adopt a multidisciplinary and holistic approach that seeks not just to empower women and advocacy groups to be alert to the networks and processes that overtax women and underspend on their needs.

Such an approach will have to be ever vigilant for the insidious nature of economic exclusion, disadvantage and alienation through socialization, acculturation, education, and other practices of everyday life.

The writer teaches at the University of Nairobi. Tom.odhiambo@uonbi.ac.ke

The East African Tax and Governance Network (EATGN) is proud to launch two studies namely: REVENUE OBLIGATIONS AND CIVICS IN EAST AFRICA – A Human Rights Based Approach to Tax Justice plus ECONOMIC SUSTAINABILITY IN EAST AFRICA – Framing the Linkages Between Public Debt and Tax Justice.

Publication of these works is a culmination of EATGN’s ambition to facilitate the conduct of human rights public debt management research in understanding its linkage to tax injustice in East Africa. EATGN hopes to spur interest from academia, policy makers, faith-based groups, private sector, and civil society organizations (CSO), to understand and advocate for better tax policies within their spheres of influence to achieve sustainable development goals (SDGs).

Download: Revenue Obligations and Civic in East Africa | Economic Sustainability in East Africa. Visit our Publications page.

PHOTO CREDITS: Global Initiative Against Transnational Organised Crime

Today, the artisanal and small-scale gold mining (ASGM) sector is governed by increasingly comprehensive legal and regulatory frameworks and is reliant on transnational supply chains that connect rural mining operations to international gold hubs. However, the increase in illicit activities in gold-rich markets has undermined the potential for this precious commodity to be a catalyst for development in these regional African markets.

Effective responses to illicit activity in gold markets must seek to navigate the tension between combating criminality while maximizing the gold sector’s development potential. This requires a nuanced analysis of market dynamics, supply chains and networks. This study unpacks the factors that shape and drive the East and Southern African gold markets.

Research covered multiple countries, providing insights into national and regional market dynamics and trade flows. The cross-border regional dynamics of illicit gold supply chains means examination of this issue requires applying a wide lens. South Sudan, Uganda, Kenya and Zimbabwe were selected for field research, with some limited research conducted in South Africa.

PHOTO CREDITS: Transparency International

Our favourite whistleblowing film would be an unthrilling, action-free short. In it a whistleblower uncovers wrongdoing, reports it anonymously without fear of retaliation and gets on with their day. They can do so because whistleblowers worldwide are valued and fully protected. Boring, wonderful and guaranteed to put a smile on a corruption fighter’s face.

Unfortunately this is not the experience of most whistleblowers, many of whom risk their jobs, freedoms and even their lives to expose wrongdoing. Their bravery has saved countless lives as well as billions of dollars, and there are some fantastic films that show what they can go through as they do the right thing; from the discovery of wrongdoing to the inner conflict about whether to expose the truth to the aftermath of their shocking revelations.

Here are the eleven best films about whistleblowers that we’ve seen. Let us know if we’ve missed a great one.