My position on E-levy has not changed – Seth Terkper

Seth Terkper has responded to false reportage

He said, his position on the levy has been the same

He said, he has not endorsed the E-levy

Seth Terkper, a former Finance Minister, has indicated that, he has never changed his position on the government’s controversial Electronic

Read full articleTransaction Levy (E-levy).

In a statement copied to GhanaWeb, Terkper wrote that, Ghana’s tax structure has not had any tax instrument that taxes savings and investments since its launch in 1983.

He described, the E-levy as the “most nuisance of nuisance taxes”.

“Ghana's Tax Structure: In the four decades since the launch of the Economic Recovery Programme or Structural Adjustment Programme (ERP/SAP) in 1983, Ghana has not had a tax instrument that taxes savings and investments,” he said.

Seth Terkper continued: “Taxing savings and investment: In a recent tweet, I quizzed: what difference does it make if Ghanaians kept their savings (which may have attracted taxes already) under their pillows, or in a bank or in a “e-wallet” (purse) on their phones?

“In the case of the pillow and bank, they do not pay a tax until the money withdrawn is (a) used to set up a business to turn a profit (income tax) or (b) buy consumer goods and services and pay, mainly, VAT, excise and tariff or customs duty. Why then tax the equivalent savings taken from the phone ‘wallet’ before one uses it to set up a business and make a profit or buy goods to attract the VAT etc?

“E-levy: “most nuisance of nuisance taxes”: I have used this expression already to describe the e-levy because, by taxing “savings” in electronic wallets government is among others:

a. Discriminating against savers using electronic ‘wallets’, instead of banks and pillows, to save. This offends the principle of fairness in taxation.

b. Compelling customers to pay tax on the "wallet" transfers but the same tax does not apply to those using cheques and other conventional means; and

c. Engaging in double or multiple taxations of savings that may have attracted the conventional taxes already (as noted below)."

Read below his full statement: