Month: November 2021

“African leaders have to wake up and tax those who have money” – Winnie Byanyima executive director of UNAIDS 

On 8 October 2021, 136 out of the 140 countries involved the negotiations signed an agreement to tax multinationals. On the surface this seems like a significant achievement. Getting broad international agreement on anything beyond platitudes is almost impossible these days, let alone where the USA agrees to it. However, like most global deals the primary drivers of this deal (and thus the interests it serves) are those of the developed world (particularly the USA) where most of these large multinationals are from.  

Interestingly Kenya and Nigeria have refused to sign the deal, both are not thrilled by the comparatively low tax rate agreed upon and the removal of policy making space that the deal implies.  

Taxes are critical, especially for African states that have a myriad of needs to finance. Africa, does need a multilateral tax deal, but not this one. Rather, what the continent needs is its own deal, that suits Africa’s interests rather than those of Washington and Brussels.  

What is the deal and why is it a problem  

The global tax deal known as the ‘two-pillar solution,’ was initiated by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and aims to counter tax evasion and avoidance, which are increasing under the digital economy. The two pillars of the deal are simple: 

1. Companies with a turnover of more than $17bn and a profitability of more than 10% will have to pay their taxes in the country where they make their turnover,  rather than in the country where their head office is located. 
2. In addition, a minimum tax of 15% on the profits of companies with a turnover of more than $850m will be introduced to limit global tax competition 

The official OECD statement, says that the aim is to “reform international tax rules and ensure that multinational enterprises pay their fair share of taxes wherever they operate.” 

However, there are some significant issues with the deal which are particularly problematic for Africa and are why Nigeria and Kenya have refused to sign on.  

• Most African countries have tax rates that are higher than 15% (in Kenya and Nigeria it is 30%). This reduced rate would reduce revenue collected on corporate profits.

  

• The 15% rate would either create a two-tier tax system where big multinationals have 15% rate and local companies have the higher national rate. Or it would force countries to bring their tax rates down in line with the OECD, again forcing them to give up significant revenue. 
• The OECD tax deal “will require all parties to eliminate all taxes on digital services and other similar measures relevant to all businesses and commit to not introducing such measures in the future.” This closes the policymaking space for African countries in the ICT sector which is impacting (and making money from) almost all the other parts of the economy. Furthermore, as the Financial Transparency Coalition points out “ Oxfam estimates that 52 countries in the global South are likely to be net payers in this deal as a result of having to end their digital taxes. They would be forced to do this in exchange for an uncertain revenue flow from a deal that will come into effect in 2023 at the earliest and is not due to be renewed before 2030.” 

In short, this multinational tax deal does not work for Africa, it will limit our ability to collect revenue from large multinational companies, particularly the behemoths in the ICT sector.  

Bucking the trend 

If the global multilateral tax deal does not work for the continent, then the logical thing is for Africa to forge its own deal. The size, growth and demographics of the African market are significant enough that the big multinational companies (especially tech) are investing heavily on the continent. Pledging billions of dollars in investment, building billion-dollar fibre cables, and investing in new African headquarters. Subjecting these large multinational companies to a consistent tax regime across the continent would not fundamentally alter the attractiveness of the African market or endanger investment or jobs.  

Luckily, for the last several years Africa has been forging the continental free trade area, and this can be used to develop and implement an African multilateral tax deal, that enables the continent to raise more revenue, evens the playing field for African companies and preserves the continents policy making space and this can consist of 3 key elements.  

1. Instead of the 15% proposed by the OECD a 25% tax on multi-national companies of more than $17bn and a profitability of more than 10%. African countries would be allowed to charge lower rates for companies whose beneficial ownership is located in Africa.  
2. A climate tax on imported goods that have a high carbon footprint in their production. Rather than begging the developed world for funds for the green transition and to mitigate the impacts of climate change, it can be raised by taxing carbon imported onto the continent from those same countries.  
3.  A tax on transfer pricing to prevent companies (especially extractives companies) from using clever accounting to minimise their tax exposure on the continent. 
   

African taxes in African markets 

As I have written about before Africa needs tax revenue, if we are ever to throw away the begging bowl and end the dependency on aid, we must be reliant on revenues raised on the continent. Like Kenya and Nigeria, I do not believe that the OECD tax deal is good for the continent. It limits our ability to raise that much needed revenue and limits the policy space available to make tax policy in the future in effect outsourcing African tax policy to the developed world.  

What is needed is for Africa to forge its own multilateral tax deal, one that is aimed at raising revenue, stopping tax evasion and illicit flows out of the continent, and protecting and enhancing African enterprises. This will not be easy, African countries have found it extremely hard to develop and implement multilateral tax policy. This does not mean that it is not worth trying.