Tag: tax

2023 from an African policy perspective: opportunities amidst global headwinds and risks.

There is an old joke about Russian history, that every chapter ends with the sentence “and then it got worse.” Its an apt joke when thinking back on 2022 and looking ahead to 2023. In large part because Russia making things worse has been a feature of the last 12 months and will continue to be so in 2023.

From an African perspective, 2022 was a tough year. Just as the world was opening up and getting control of the Coronavirus, Russia invaded Ukraine sparking off a geopolitical and energy crisis, stoking already rising inflation to alarming levels. This prompted western central banks to respond by raising interest rates and the value of the dollar soared, hurting Africa by increasing the cost of all imports, fuel and food included.

And then it got worse.

2023 will be another tough year in many respects. Inflation, energy turmoil, China’s economy will not prop up the global economic growth and, geopolitical competition between the US, China, and Russia will continue play out in Africa.

Thus, policy makers on the continent must navigate these global headwinds. However, as I have written about before, there is opportunity in crisis and if policy makers on the continent are brave enough and imaginative enough, a bleak global picture can be turned into one of green shoots for Africa.

The Economy – growth can be found

The economic challenge facing Africa this year is not to be envied. Inflation will continue to be a significant problem across most economies continuing to make food, fuel, electricity and other necessities more expensive straining households and businesses alike. Debt crises already in progress in Ghana and Zambia are likely to spread to other countries on the continent who have over borrowed and spent irresponsibly. Sluggish global growth (or recessions) will drag down growth on the continent. Add to this Africa’s two largest economies, Nigeria, and South Africa, will be focused on two general elections.

Thus, policy makers have two goals. First, to navigate a tough economic environment. This must involve blunting inflation through a combination of short-term interventions that protect citizens and business from the worst impact and long term strategies to fix structural issues that make Africa vulnerable to imported inflation (you can read a more detailed analysis here). Second is the debt problem, like Zambia, countries at risk of debt crises must proactively engage their creditors, and bond holders to get ahead of crises and maintain confidence in their economies and if possible, get some debt forgiven or terms changed to make their payback less burdensome. In addition long term debt frameworks should be put in place to end the cycle of debt accumulation, crises, begging, and forgiveness, otherwise, in another decade we will be back in the same place. Finally, the need to cut unnecessary spending and combat corruption is obvious but I will not spill any more ink on the subject.

The second economic imperative is to find growth, and this is where imagination and boldness is needed. If growth is not going to be driven by the global economy, borrowing or government spending we must find it with innovative policy home, domestically and regionally, and there are a number of strategies that can be employed.

  • On the regional front, this is the perfect opportunity to double down on the African Continental Free Trade Agreement (AfCFTA), to build continental trade links that can be alternative source of growth. If this is aligned with the strategic investments in areas like warehousing  intra-African trade could be significantly stimulated.
  • An area of untapped potential is tax reform. Our complex, badly policed tax systems leak revenue and offer opportunity for corruption. Reforming our tax systems and moving towards an African multinational tax consensus could unlock revenues for governments and unleash the potential of African business.
  • Reforming domestic credit policies to unlock lending to MSME’s and small farmers could unlock the significant potential of Africa’s small businesses and small farmers that could drive employment, business growth and agricultural productivity.
  • Finally, International capital markets will be distorted for some time with many unwilling to invest in Africa. It will thus be important to put in place policies that encourage domestic investors (e.g., pension funds, mutual funds, etc) to engage with and invest in African businesses and commodities.

Global economic conditions will be unfavourable for some time. However, I firmly believe that should not hold Africa back. With intelligent and creative economic policy, Africa can stoke growth in its domestic and regional economies.

Geopolitics – wary opportunity

This is a subject I have written on previously. The world is changing, the USA is more focused on competition with China and containing Russia, and this great power competition will be played out on the continent as well. The EU and Britain are concerned with solving domestic issues such as immigration and energy access and this will shape their approach to Africa. And there is rise of regional powers (India, Japan, Brazil, turkey, Australia, Saudi Arabia etc.)  who will all be interested in expanding their relationships with the continent.

From a geopolitical perspective, Africa first must be wary. During the cold war we became a playground for superpower competition and that cannot be allowed to happen again, African interests must come first, adventurism must be resisted.

However, this also opens opportunities. If we can understand the interests and goals of various geopolitical players, we can use that to our advantage where interests are aligned. For example:

  • As the US and West seeks to diversify its supply chains and sources of raw materials outside of China, Africa could use this to attract investment into alternative industrial supply chains in Africa, and better deals for raw materials especially the rare earths, cobalt, and lithium critical for electronics.
  • Deeper engagement with the middle powers and attracting their investment could give Africa an alternative source of investment outside of China and USA and dilute their influence.
  • Strategically leveraging the fifty-four votes at the UN and other global bodies could be used to put African voices in strategic places (the UN security council, G20, COP, IMF etc.) to help shape the global agenda.
  • Critical issues, like immigration in Europe or the need to offset carbon emission in the middle east or Australia can be used to leverage investment in critical areas on the continent. E.g., immigration can be stopped with job creation, or carbon emissions could be offset by green energy in Africa. Where can the funding for that come from?

2023 – tough but doable

2023 will be a tough year not just for Africa but the world. This is should not be an excuse for a lack of progress and development on the continent. We must use our own agency and through policy. With intelligent, forward looking and sometimes creative policy, we can achieve positive results despite an unfavourable global environment. In crisis and adversity there is opportunity, it is time for Africa to start taking advantage of those opportunities and 2023 is the perfect time to do so.

Africa needs its own tax deal  

“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.
    average corporate tax rates in Africa and select markets https://home.kpmg/za/en/home/services/tax/tax-tools-and-resources/tax-rates-online.html
  • 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.  

Core features for African Post-Covid-19 economic stimulus packages.

The global coronavirus pandemic has not only put public health and health systems under threat it has undermined livelihoods, businesses, and economies across the continent. As a result, many policymakers are turning their attention to how to get those economies started again, as they shift from the public health response. Some countries such as South Africa and Kenya have already released details on their stimulus packages. Each African country will need to come up with a package that works for them specifically. However, as diverse as these packages may be there are some core features and opportunities that I think apply to most if not all African states. That will not only aid in jumpstarting their economies but lay a foundation for long-term growth through tax reform, building social safety nets, and putting money in the right places. African states may not have the financial firepower that the developed world has deployed to keep their economies alive, but with some creative and bold policymaking African governments can not only jumpstart their economies out of the Coronavirus malaise but also lay the foundations for long term growth.

Investing in the right places

There are two sectors, agriculture, and the informal economy, that define sub-Saharan African economies, and will require specific focus in any form of stimulus.

Agriculture is the foundation of the African economy. At least 60% the population of sub-Saharan Africa are smallholder farmers, and about 23% of sub-Saharan Africa’s GDP comes from agriculture. Stimulus measures aimed at the agriculture sector are critical. This should include

  • Subsidies for inputs (fertiliser, seed, pesticides, etc.) for farmers, that will ease the cost of farming in a tough year.
  • Heavy investment in small farmer training and education that will enhance the skills and productivity of small farmers.
  • Investment in rural infrastructure such as warehouses and rural roads that improve farmer incomes cut the cost of storing and moving goods from farm to market, making those goods cheaper for consumers.
  • Facilitating through guarantees the provision of credit to businesses along the agricultural value chain that provides services to farmers, move agricultural goods or process agricultural goods.

Boosting agricultural incomes, productivity, and efficiency, will not only help drive growth out of the crisis but also help make food cheaper and more plentiful for consumers. In short, an agriculture targeted stimulus could be the foundation for long term food security

The second critical sector is the informal sector. The IMF has estimated that on average the informal sector contributes between 25% and 65% of GDP in Sub-Saharan Africa with Mauritius and South Africa at the low-end under 25% and Tanzania (over 50%) and Nigeria (over 60%) at the other end, and that the sector accounts for between 30% to 90% of non-agricultural employment.

For the informal sector, the key to a stimulus lies in cheap credit (or grants if the government can afford it). Many informal businesses have been subjected to weeks or months of low business volumes (or none at all) due to restrictions put in place to control the virus. This means they do not have working capital, to reopen and restart they will require this capital, and cheap credit is a quick and effective means of providing it. Governments can provide credit to Micro and small enterprises (as most informal businesses are) through existing channels that the informal sector already uses, such as mobile lending, cooperatives, savings groups, and microfinance institutions. Restarting the informal sector is critical to ensuring that people have jobs and incomes, livelihoods that do not just keep the economy turning but the food on tables and kids in school.

Combined the agriculture and the informal sector account for at least 40% of most African economies and are the primary providers of employment. The design of any African economic stimulus must have a significant focus on these two sectors if it is going to have any significant impact.

Tax reform

Some countries have introduced a set of tax cuts to ease consumer pain and help save businesses money. While tax relief will help a bit, outside of South Africa the tax base of most African countries is simply not big enough for tax cuts to have a big simulative effect.

However, taxes are a problem across the continent. African governments, do not collect enough taxes relying on a narrow base of taxpayers paying into a system riddled with tax loopholes, breaks and exemptions. Furthermore, the crisis will put millions out of work and cut the revenues of businesses significantly. However, as the American saying goes, never let a good crisis go to waste. This crisis presents a perfect opportunity for African governments to pursue genuine tax reform, that will help broaden the tax base and mobilize domestic funding for development rather than debt.

We can do this by reforming the tax system to make it, simpler. Make it easy to pay, easy to track and hard to confuse, this can be done through a combination of.

  • Removing existing individual and corporate tax breaks and exemptions while bringing down headline corporate tax rates.
  • Removing transfer pricing loopholes that allow large corporations to avoid paying local taxes.
  • Put in place new frameworks that will assess the proposed and existing tax breaks based on their verifiable impact. In other words, the impact of existing tax breaks should be clearly evident in the data and the justification for a new tax break should also include clear indicators on if it is working. This would prevent the myriad of loopholes creeping back into the system

Getting more companies in the tax net, on an evening playing field while doing away with all the complexity that enables the avoidance of taxes will broaden the tax base. This can be accompanied by a marginal lowering of headline rates as there will be more people and companies paying taxes. A smaller burden on more people will result in less stress on consumers and companies and higher tax revenue when the post-crisis recovery starts.

Safety Nets

One thing the crisis has done is put severe stress on the safety nets and support systems that most Africans rely on. Those with jobs, both formal and informal, often support their immediate and extended families. Foreign remittances (migrant workers sending money back home) has grown by ten times in the last 2 decades. This is a critical source of income and support for millions around the continent and in many countries is one of the largest sources of foreign currency and inward investment. Domestic and international transfers which essentially form our social safety nets are being ravaged. As the domestic economy sheds jobs and opportunities, incomes whether formal or informal will be cut or lost entirely. Internationally, as we have already seen job losses will be immense, and African migrants will be part of that and the World Bank expects international remittances to fall by 23%. Millions around the continent will be without vital support from struggling friends and families and governments must step in. This can take one of two forms:

  1. Give people money. Cash transfers (as I laid out in a previous post) are simple and effective and in a crisis potentially lifesaving. In Togo the government has deployed a cash transfer program called Novissi targeted at people whose daily income is no longer guaranteed due to disruptions caused by the Coronavirus crisis, using existing mobile money platforms. The cash transfer does not fully replace people’s incomes, but it does provide a lifeline, ensuring that people do fall into desperation. It also shows that a mass cash transfer program is possible and need not break the bank.

 

  1. The second option is to invest heavily and quickly in the provision and delivery of key services. Ensure that critical needs such as power, healthcare, sanitation are provided cheaply or free as widely as possible and that critical income-generating venues such as food markets can run with social distancing and sanitary measures in place, that would ensure income generation but also keep people safe.

Neither of these two solutions (or a combination of both) should be short term solutions. Building viable social safety nets is a key need across the continent and if included in a stimulus package, they could be the basis for long term remaking of the social contract across the continent. Without putting in place viable safety nets to replace the informal ones that are being worn thin by the pandemic we may see more people forced into desperate poverty, which would set endanger millions more lives and threaten social stability.

Speed is key

 

The primary goal of any stimulus plan is to move an economy out of a crisis or recession. To do so the stimulus must be deployed quickly before too many businesses and consumers go broke or permanently change how they do things. In deploying their stimulus programs, African governments must ensure that they are deployed quickly. Businesses need credit before they go bankrupt, farmers need inputs before the next planting season and people need to eat today not next quarter. Getting a stimulus package out of government treasuries and into the economy as quickly as possible will amplify its effectiveness.

The right type of stimulus

 

No two stimulus programs will be the same, African economies are diverse and the priorities of each government differ. However, there are common features across the continent that will need to be addressed. With limited resources, we must be smart and bold. That requires putting our resources where the majority of African’s earn their livelihoods in the agricultural sector and informal economy. Making sure that vulnerable communities whose livelihoods have been decimated or support systems undone, get adequate support. And it is an opportunity to reset a tax system that is not fit for purpose to one that can raise the resources we need to fund our long-term development.

African economies need a jumpstart out of what the IMF is calling “an unprecedented threat to development”. As we design our stimulus programs, we must do so in a way that does not just tick the boxes of orthodox economic thinking but addresses the realities of our economies and looks to the future.

 

 

After the crisis: driving Africa’s post-Coronavirus recovery

Right now, and understandably so, African governments are focused on dealing with the immediate health crisis presented by Covid-19. Preventing the spread of the disease among African populations and treating those who are already sick, are the priority of government right now. However, eventually, this crisis will pass, public health authorities will eventually manage to control the spread of the disease and effective treatment measures (or vaccines) will be developed. When the crisis is over its negative economic impact will become clear, and African governments will need effective strategies that to foster economic recovery in the short term and a medium to long term strategy to fix the fragilities in African economies exposed by the crisis.

The economic impact of the crisis

For Africa, this crisis will have many effects on the economy.

  • For oil and commodity-exporting countries, the fall in prices will drastically cut their tax revenue as well as related incomes within the economy.
  • Disruptions to trade will hit manufacturers and projects on the continent as they cannot get enough of the components or raw materials they need. Similarly, retailers who import goods to sell may run out of stock. Combined this will drive inflation and possibly force manufacturers or projects to shut down.
  • Disruptions to trade will also hurt those economies such as Kenya, Ethiopia, SA, and Ghana who export agricultural goods and produce, where the majority of the population is involved in agriculture, falling prices and exports will hurt incomes of both businesses and households.
  • The tourist industry, which is a top income earner in several African economies will be severely hurt by the travel restrictions and quarantines on the primary tourist markets in the USA and Europe. Across the continent’s tourist destinations, hotels, conferencing destinations, resorts, parks etc, will be bleeding money and jobs. While the continent’s airlines will be suffering massive losses as passenger numbers plummet.
  • A global economic downturn will shift investor sentiment, international investors will be warier of investing in Africa and we are already seeing the impact as stock markets across the continent register large falls as international investors withdraw their funding.
  • In China (which is now Africa’s largest trading partner and investor) the government will be more focused on economic recovery at home. Meaning that some of the expected Chinese investment on the continent will likely be delayed.

Short term response – kickstarting the economy

For all African economies, the combination of a global economic slowdown and the economic impacts described earlier will decrease both private sector activity and public sector revenues and spending. In an environment where most African governments were already struggling with large debts and deficits, what can we do kickstart the economy once the crisis is over.

Forget spending focus on tax

The first impulse of much African government will be to spend, to use the government’s ability to spend large amounts of money to create demand within the economy. Frankly, this won’t work in Africa at least over the short term. This is because African governments are incredibly inefficient (and often corrupt) so it not only takes a while for governments to spend money it also means that the not all the money intended for a specific purpose necessarily reaches it. Secondly, the money has to be found, which for many governments on the continent is a problem.

A short-term policy response intended to kickstart the economy must be something that is quick and has an immediate impact on the bottom lines of businesses and people’s pockets and the best tool for that at the moment is taxes and credit. For businesses, the key is helping them preserve cash flow so they can make it through the worst and drive a recovery.

  • There are a lot of taxes and fees that are levied on the short term (monthly, weekly, or daily) income of businesses (especially SME’s) such as turnover taxes, or licenses. Governments should consider waiving these for short term (3 to 6 months), that will enable businesses to preserve cash flow.
  • Statutory payments to public social safety net schemes e.g. health insurance, social security etc. which are usually paid by businesses on behalf of employees could be waived for the short term which would make it cheaper for businesses to retain people in employment.
  • Work with banks and the wider financial sector to come up with solutions (e.g. invoice discounting backed by government bonds) that would ensure that all pending government bills are paid quickly. This would put money in the pockets of companies that business with the government quickly, which will help ensure there is cash flowing through the system.

For individuals and households, the highest impact thing government can do to put money in pockets and help demand recover is again taxes, specifically VAT, which is often levied on (almost) everything. If VAT can be waived, for the short term, on critical items that people commonly buy (food items, data and mobile phone credit, soap, water, electricity) it will give people some extra money which they can spend on other things, and help drive the recovery of aggregate demand within the economy.

Long term response – long term growth and resilience

The crisis has exposed some key fragilities in African economies. But, as the Americans like to say, never let a good crisis go to waste, in other words in crisis there is an opportunity. Africa can use the opportunity of this crisis to build in greater resilience and the foundations of long term growth into its economy.

Trade

Africa can take advantage of the fragility that has been exposed in global supply chains. Companies both in Africa and globally will be looking to diversify their supply chains so that in future they are not as widely disrupted by a crisis in a particular part of the world (namely China).

With its significant labour pool, government focus on industrialization and improving infrastructure Africa offers a potentially attractive location for diversified supply chains.

For African companies specifically, governments would do well to focus on those goods and products whose production and distribution has been disrupted and encourage their production in Africa. Taking advantage of the soon to be active Africa Continental Free Trade Area, African based supply chains could prove to be more resilient for African producers and consumers than those based abroad. Investing these would not only foster resilience but create jobs and income as well.

FDI

As happened after the global financial crisis Central Banks in the developed world have responded by cutting interest rates, as a result, yields on government bonds are close to zero or in negative yield territory. This will likely be the case for some time after the crisis has passed as Central Bank’s try to fuel a quick recovery. As a result, investors from these markets will be looking for higher yields from their capital, which they cannot get at home. This will give them a greater appetite for risk with the payoff being higher returns, Africa will present multiple opportunities for these investors to try and take advantage of with their greater risk appetites. If we identified the right project’s and opportunities (such as privatisations or stock market flotations) that would benefit from these flows, and package them right we can direct this money to places where it will have a long term positive impact.

Domestic investment

International capital markets will be distorted for some time after this crisis, by central bank and government stimulus policies. It will thus be important to put in place policies that encourage domestic investors (e.g. pension funds, mutual funds, etc) to engage with and invest in African businesses and commodities.

Structural reform

Crises offer governments the opportunity to address issues that would otherwise be politically impossible to address. For instance, a public health crisis emphasises the need for Universal Health Care, an expensive proposition which government are not usually brave enough to attempt. However, a health crisis offers the opportunity for a fundamental reshaping of the health sector. The same goes for government finances, its hard to take away MP’s perks, the cars of senior civil servants, cancel the vanity project of politicians. However, a public health and economic crisis can serve as a valid reason to cut the fat that will not elicit too many questions or a fightback.

Conclusion

Just as we cannot afford to be lax in how they respond to the crisis, African governments cannot be lax in how they deal with its economic consequences. Otherwise, an economic crisis will follow swiftly on the heels of the public health on. If we do not have a strategy to deal with it we may end up with an economic crisis that disrupts more lives than the Coronavirus.

As I have suggested in this article there are tools that the government can use over the short term to put more money in the hands of businesses and individuals. This can help spark a recovery. Over the medium, to long term, there are a number of policies that government can pursue to equip Africa economies with the tools they need to weather future crises as well as lay the foundations for a more robust African economy.

Crises suck, we have to ensure they don’t last longer than is necessary.

Give the People Money: Ending African Poverty with a Basic Minimum Income

“In this new century, millions of people in the world’s poorest countries remain imprisoned, enslaved and in chains. They are trapped in the prison of poverty. It is time to set them free… Overcoming poverty is not a gesture of charity. It is the protection of a fundamental human right, the right to dignity and a decent life” – Nelson Mandela

In my first post I outlined what I see as the goal of development. Which is to give everyone ability to live their lives with dignity. Which means an adequate and improving quality of life, economic opportunity and security, physical security and good governance. The antithesis of this is poverty, and ending poverty is Africa’s core developmental challenge.

Poverty, as defined by Professors Lilian Chenwi and Danwood Chirwa is ‘a state in which a person is unable to live a long, healthy and creative life, nor to enjoy a decent life worthy of self-respect and respect of others’ [1]. The simpler definition is having to live on less than US$ 1.9 a day. According to the World Bank approximately 43% or 330 million African are living in poverty.

Poverty is hard, grinding and often degrading. It manifests its itself in hunger and malnutrition, poor health, lack of education, and social and political discrimination. Poverty is often self-perpetuating, with those born into it often remaining in it because of the lack of opportunities and resources. Poverty is insecure as those living in it are most likely to be victims of violence and conflict. Poverty is the worst and most degrading form of underdevelopment, consigning its victims to unnecessarily harsh lives and wasting their potential. If nothing else, then Africa’s development must be defined by how it pulls its people out of poverty and allows them lead fulfilling lives and reach and exceed their potential.

To end poverty, we have to empower the people living in it. Those living in poverty are not there by choice, it is an accident of birth and circumstance. They lack the resources and the opportunity to climb out of poverty. The solution is thus simple, to provide Africa’s most underserved citizens with these resources and opportunity and we can do that by giving them money. By ensuring that every person living in poverty has a Basic Minimum Income (BMI), which they can use as they see fit to improve their lives. There is growing evidence from Africa that this works. That a BMI not only enables people to improve their circumstances but also to invest in their futures and it has positive impacts on health, education and security. If Africa is serious about ending poverty, then we have to seriously consider the option of a BMI.

Basic Minimum Income – the concept and evidence

The concept

A BMI is a relatively simple idea. It is a cash transfer that gives everyone in society who needs it enough money to live on. A BMI aimed specifically at relieving poverty would have 4 key characteristics that separate it from traditional welfare programs:

  • all members of society living below the poverty line are eligible to receive it,
  • the BMI is unconditional, you do not have to work, or go for any training to receive it,
  • it is enough to cover the basic needs of those who receive it,
  • It is guaranteed for as long as they are under the poverty line.

At its core the BMI is about guaranteeing a minimum standard of living throughout society through cash transfers to all those who for whatever reason are below the poverty. By its nature it is not discriminatory as it is available to all, neither does it subject the poor to the humiliations and bureaucratic nightmares of means testing, forced job hunts or training that are the hallmarks of modern day welfare systems.

The evidence

A BMI or some variant has or is being tried in various places across Africa, most notably South Africa, Namibia and Kenya, and the results show that not only does a BMI reduce poverty it also has significant impacts on the health, education, security and quality of life of those who receive it.

In South Africa the Social Security Agency (SASSA) distributes what are called social grants. Which are cash payments given to the most vulnerable groups in society and there are seven types of grant that the agency gives out.

Research done on the impacts of the social grant system has shown a number of significant impacts. First that social grant system has been sufficient to lift many households out of poverty (page 37 of this study). Second, the research shows that the grants in particular the child support grants have been crucial in reducing poverty in women headed households and empowering them in their homes and communities. Furthermore, the child support grant has enabled parents to be more positively involved in their children’s education, such as reading to them and helping with school work and ensure that their children were properly nourished and received healthcare. UNICEF studies has further shown that the child support grant has had a positive impact on school attendance and healthcare as well as reducing risky adolescent behaviour such as unprotected sex, drug and alcohol abuse and criminal activity.

In Namibia, in 2008 they piloted one of the worlds first basic income projects called the Basic Income Grant (BIG) in the Otjivero settlement and Omitara town. Both of which were noted for high rates of poverty, insecurity and poor health. The grant was simple, each person would get a monthly unconditional cash grant of 100 Namibian dollars (about US$7). With the grants for those under 21 going to their primary care giver, which was usually their mother. The report on the impacts of BIG shows details its positive impacts which are notable not only for being positive but also for how many areas of people’s lives it impacted.

  • Severe poverty was reduced by 54% and food poverty was reduced by 56% in one year.
  • There was a 36.5% drop in crime in crime in the areas where BIG was trialled.
  • Just six months after BIG was introduced child malnutrition dropped by 52%.
  • Drop-out and non-attendance rates at schools went from 30-40% to 5% after the introduction of BIG as parents were now able to pay school fees.
  • In contradiction to the arguments that a basic income would discourage work employment actually rose by 9% after the introduction of BIG.
  • BIG also helped people start and grow their own small businesses, as the extra income was used by people to start and/or invest in their own businesses as well increasing demand in the area as people now had some money to spend.
  • BIG also allowed people to save and invest in their futures. 40% of those who received the grant saved it. 31% used some of the money to fix their homes, 9% invested in livestock and 11% paid back debts.

Unfortunately, in 2010 due to politics the program was ended and essentially forgotten. What stands out is that it was able to achieve so much in reducing poverty and improving living standards over such a short period of time.

In Kenya a U.S. based charity called Give Directly which champions unconditional universal income cash transfers, trialled them in a village in Western Kenya between 2011 and 2012. With recipients receiving around US$ 274 over the course of the year, and the results are very similar to those in Namibia:

  • The transfers significantly reduced hunger, 30% overall and 42% for children.
  • The transfers enabled the recipients to invest in livestock and their own small businesses. With income from livestock increasing by 48% and income from self-employment increasing by 38%.
  • The transfers increased consumption and thus economic activity in the village.
  • The transfers led to increases in the psychological well-being of the recipients and their families.
  • Notably (again), despite the assertions of many critics the transfers did not increase spending on alcohol, tobacco or gambling.

The examples in South Africa, Namibia and Kenya show remarkably positive impacts not just in poverty reduction but in improving healthcare, education, the well-being of children, women’s empowerment, employment, security, small business start-ups and growth, and long-term savings and investment. Furthermore, the predictions that “they would just spend it on booze and gambling and entrench laziness” were also shown to wrong. These results show two things first that poverty is not a result of being lazy or bad, rather it is a result of being stuck in a poverty trap, where the lack of resources (namely money) prevents people from being able to live with dignity and plan for the future. Secondly, the impoverished are not stupid, given the resources and the opportunity they can and will make the right choices for them, their families and their communities.

How can we do this in Africa?

If the evidence shows that a BMI is an effective and empowering tool for poverty reduction in Africa the question then becomes, how can we do it? The usual response is that we can’t. That African nations do not have resources to fund such a program given the high levels of poverty on the continent and that governments have to invest in a number of areas such as infrastructure, education, healthcare, security etc. which over the medium to long-term will reduce poverty. My response to this is threefold, first, that poverty is an issue now and every single day for hundreds of millions of Africans. Secondly that short-term significant decreases in poverty will not increase economic growth but make it more sustainable over the long-term and third if we get creative we can find the money for BMI.

Finding the money

One idea for funding a BMI is called a negative income tax. The idea is that a progressive income tax system be implemented where people earning below a certain income threshold receive a payment from the government rather than paying tax to the government. This is offset by those who earn above the threshold who pay progressively higher taxes depending on their income. However, this requires a broad and deep income tax system which due to the lack of formal employment on the continent many African countries do not possess.

My personal preference is not to tax the income of Africans, but to tax the profits of those making money off of Africa, through more efficient and increased resource and foreign profit taxes. In a previous post I discussed how through reforming its tax systems, African countries could get more tax revenues from the extraction of natural resources and the profits made by foreign corporations in Africa. For too long Africans have not benefited from the wealth of their land that helps fuel the global economy and the profits made in Africa by global corporations are spirited away to the benefit of shareholders in New York or London. If African nations taxed those profits and resource extraction properly, much if not all of the money needed to fund a BMI could be found, governments would be able to continue to fund all the other things they use ordinary tax revenue for and the people of Africa would finally see the benefits of the fruit of their land. Furthermore, as the examples show a BMI would itself increase the tax revenue of governments. With disposable incomes people would be able to buy goods and services, save, invest and start businesses all of which are taxed by governments around the continent. And as people rise out of poverty, and their incomes grow and become more secure they can be gradually taken off the BMI, which would over time reduce the size of the payments that governments would have to make.

Africa will rise when we end poverty

The English writer Eli Khamarov once said that “poverty is like punishment for a crime you didn’t commit”. The hundreds of millions of Africans living in poverty are the victims of this cruelty, and through no fault of their own they have, as Nelson Mandela put it, been deprived of “a fundamental human right, the right to dignity and a decent life”. Since independence African leaders and policy makers have unfortunately made choices and implemented policies which have failed to break and, in some cases, caused and entrenched the cycle of poverty on the continent. However, Africa need not be defined by its poverty, Africa does not have to be the basket case of the world. There are still options and policies, like BMI, that our leaders and policy makers could make that could end poverty in Africa.

Some may ask, why this policy? East Asia and the West pursued the traditional poverty eradication path of industrialisation and this is what Africa is trying. However, there are two key issues of pursuing poverty eradication through economic growth and industrialisation. First, industrialisation takes time, even the quick industrialisation of East Asia took at least 3 decades. Secondly industrialisation is a painful and unequal process. In both East Asia and the West industrialisation has been accompanied by highly unequal distribution of wealth, terrible labour conditions and it hasn’t pulled everyone out of poverty, hence the need for social safety nets. And to this day there remains pockets of citizens in the worlds most industrialised economy who live in relative poverty. In addition, a BMI does not mean you must abandon a nations aspiration for industrialisation or socio-economic growth, rather I believe it would speed it up. It would help push people out of poverty now rather than in 30 years. It would ensure that no one is left behind by a changing economy. And importantly to the process of industrialisation would create a significant number of people with disposable income who will be able to buy locally produced goods and services.

The evidence shows that when empowered, when given the resources and the opportunity Africans living in poverty can and will rise. The solutions to the unfulfilled potential of our continent lies not in SDG’s, or debt fuelled infrastructure or the benevolence of the developed world, but in giving our people the tools to fulfil and surpass their own potential. To do that we must invest in them, we must address our central developmental challenge of poverty by ending it. To do so we have to be creative and brave. Exploring and implementing policies like a basic minimum income is a way to do so. Ending poverty in Africa will turbocharge economic and social growth, and it will also allow hundreds of millions of Africans to live lives of dignity, and if nothing else, that is development.

[1] The Protection of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in Africa (2016), edited by Danwood Mzikenge Chirwa, Lilian Chenwi, p.12-13

Africa needs taxes not aid

Revenue collection is the one which can emancipate us from begging, from disturbing friends… if we can get about 22 percent of GDP we should not need to disturb anybody by asking for aid….instead of coming here to bother you, give me this, give me this, I shall come here to greet you, to trade with you. – Yoweri Museveni, President of Uganda

In 2014 Zambia exported 59% of its copper to Switzerland, yet a look at Switzerland’s import and export statistics shows that they barely imported any copper and barely anything from Zambia[1], it is likely that most of this copper ends up going to China or other markets. What’s happening is that mining companies operating in Zambia are taking advantage of transfer pricing. Transfer pricing is where a subsidiary of a multinational company from one jurisdiction sells goods or services to a subsidiary of the same multinational company in another jurisdiction. Multinationals will most often use transfer pricing to shift profits into tax havens and low tax countries such as Switzerland. In the case of Zambia’s copper, mining companies such as Glencore sells copper mined in Zambia by its Zambia based subsidiary to the company’s trading arm incorporated in Switzerland at lower than market prices. The Swiss based trading arm then sells on the copper to the world market at market prices. The results of the transaction will mean that Glencore’s Zambia subsidiary will generate lower profits, minimising the tax payable to the Zambian authorities, while Glencore’s Swiss trading arm will generate the majority of the profits from the sale of copper, making these profits taxable in Switzerland, which as stated earlier is a low tax country. This strategy isn’t illegal, but what it does is minimise the taxes that are paid to the Zambian government and maximise the profits that these companies can make.

What happens to copper profits and taxes in Zambia is neither new nor unique. The UN economic commission for Africa High Level Panel on Illicit Financial Flows[2] estimates that “over the last 50 years, Africa is estimated to have lost over 1 trillion dollars in illicit financial flows, this is roughly equivalent to all of the official development assistance received by Africa over the same timeframe.”  Currently, they estimate Africa is losing more than $50 billion annually which is double the aid that Africa receives per year.

Across the continent African governments are once again getting caught in a debt trap (you can read a previous post on that here)  and are struggling to raise revenue and are having to increase taxes on the poor and working classes. In South Africa the latest budget included a 1% rise in VAT among others, Niger is currently experiencing mass protests against new tax raises on common goods, Kenya , Zambia and other nations across the continent are considering or implementing similar tax hikes. These measures will hit the poor hardest as they will raise the prices of the goods such as fuel, food and clothing that they need the most.

Not only is Africa getting bilked of its taxes, African governments are trying to make up the difference on the backs of the poor. This needs to change, multinational corporations and international investors will be a part of Africa’s growth story and they will (or already are) make fantastic profits from it, it is only fair that Africans get their fair share. And now is the perfect time to enact policies that would give Africa a fair share. Across the world tax evasion is key issue, Europe is cracking down on tech companies that use tax avoidance strategies, and three years ago the G20 vowed to fight tax avoidance[3]. Rather than swimming against the tide, Africa would likely have allies in a quest to implement fair taxes.

Tax revenues and profits where they are made

Recently the EU proposed a new technology tax. For several years EU countries have been trying to deal with a tax avoidance problem, like Zambian copper, big multinationals would base their intellectual property in tax havens and have their European subsidiaries pay “royalties” for use the of it, essentially transferring profits made in Europe to tax havens. The most prolific users of this strategy have been the technology companies and thus the EU has decided to propose a 3% tax on the revenue generated made by these companies in the EU as opposed to profits. The main idea behind this tax is that companies should be taxed in the country’s where revenues and profits are made and not in tax havens, providing a simple solution that African countries should adopt.

Make taxes simpler; the Norwegian example

In the 1970s Norway started exporting oil and gas, in the 40 years since this industry has added over 1.1 trillion dollars to the Norwegian economy, which is almost the size of the combined economies of Sub-Saharan Africa. In 1990 Norway established a sovereign wealth fund to invest its oil revenues today it is now worth over 1 trillion dollars. One of the key tools they have used to benefit from their natural resources is tax, in Norway, companies drilling for North Sea oil pay a 78% tax rate on income, though it includes deductions for losses and investment they are simple and easily implemented and assessed by the government. In addition, Norway taxes entities not specific assets, once again this simplifies the system considerably (you can read more about Norwegian petroleum taxes here).

By contrast if you looked at laws or production sharing contracts around Africa on mining or oil and gas, they are complex, and contain different types of taxes levied on the companies, the mineral, the license etc. This complexity allows these tax systems to be gamed and avoided. African policy makers would do well to look at how Norway taxes the companies that extract its oil and gas and consider a similar system. A system that is simple, easily enforced and taxes the extractives industry on our terms. If we did this Africa could finally be in a position to get significant taxes from the extractives industry and like Norway plough those profits back into the continent.

Expand expertise

This policy is simple, but its subject matter is not. The global tax system and strategies used by multinational corporations are incredibly complex. Companies employ armies of lawyers and accountants to look for loopholes and provisions that will allow them to lower their tax bill, and African countries cannot match up. Thus, on this issue African nations need to come together and the AU or Africa Development Bank (AfDB) provides the perfect venue for doing so, to create an African Tax Centre. This is not a new notion, the AfDB already has the African Natural Resources Center, which was created to help African countries build capacity in natural resource management.   The African Tax Centre could have a similar mission consisting of two goals, first to pool African expertise on taxes and assist national governments in identifying and stopping tax avoidance and second to help train and build the capacity of African revenue collection authorities. Over time as the capacity of African countries to administer and collect taxes increases they will be able to close off the avenues used by multinational corporations to avoid African taxes.

More Taxes less dependency

Taxes are a decidedly unsexy topic and bore most of us senseless. However, they are crucially important, the roads, schools, hospitals and police services that Africa needs must be funded somehow. For too long Africa has relied on aid and debt to provide a substantial portion of this funding, but aid comes with conditionalities set by foreign powers and can only be spent on things they deem important, and debt if not wisely used or with a bit of bad luck can be more burdensome than helpful. The only other option is taxes, but African governments must change their tax focus, today most African countries collect their revenues from those fortunate enough to have formal employment and Value Added Taxes, these taxes place their burden on those who can least afford it, meanwhile global corporations and investors are spiriting away over 50 billion dollars of prospective revenue. It is time for Africa to adopt policies that would end these practices, by taxing profits where they are made, reforming extractives taxes to be simpler and more effective and building the expertise needed to close the loopholes.

Africa is the final frontier of the commercial world. Over the last two decades big multinationals have sought to tap into the African market in technology, telecoms, mining, agriculture, healthcare (the list goes on), which are all very profitable now and will only get more so. The world both needs the resources under Africa’s soil and wants to take advantage of one of the world’s last untapped markets, thus the business case for doing business on the continent will not disappear as some people ominously warn whenever the prospect of higher and more efficient taxes are raised.

If Africa is ever to choose its own development path, if it is to decide its own destiny, it will not be done through depending on the generosity of others, it will be through its own money. If there is one policy Africa should be able to get behind it is that Africa needs taxes not aid.

[1]https://wits.worldbank.org/CountryProfile/en/Country/CHE/Year/2016/TradeFlow/EXPIMP/Partner/all/Product/72-83_Metals

[2] https://www.uneca.org/iff

[3] http://www.oecd.org/tax/g20-finance-ministers-endorse-reforms-to-the-international-tax-system-for-curbing-avoidance-by-multinational-enterprises.htm

African foreign policy: looking west together

It is clear that we must find an African solution to our problems, and that this can only be found in African unity. Divided we are weak; united, Africa could become one of the greatest forces for good in the world. – Kwame Nkrumah

Africa’s history with the West (when I refer to the west I am referring to Europe and the USA) is a tortured one. Slavery, colonialism, neo-colonialism, Cold War proxy conflicts all colour a set of relationships where the West still holds the upper hand. Whether it is trade, security, or healthcare policy, through aid, loans, the IMF, the World Bank, the WTO Africa still gets raw deal on the international stage.

The West however, is in a peculiar moment, both Europe and America are turning more insular. In America this is embodied by Trumps ‘America First’ policies which are alienating allies and narrowing American interests and engagement around the world. Sec. Tillerson’s recent trip to Africa was centred on security and criticism of China, but unlike previous administrations there was no Power Africa or PEPFAR (The President’s Emergency Plan For AIDS Relief) nor much talk about democracy or development, clearly the US agenda on the continent has narrowed. Europe is grappling with Brexit, populist right-wing politics, holding the EU together, a retreating America and a resurgent Russia. Their major engagement on the continent also centres around security with the addition of stemming the flow of migrants. Some in foreign policy circles see this shift inwards from the west as a problem for the continent. That without western money and support the war on terror will lag, aid and development funding will shrink and advocacy for democracy and human rights will be blunted. However, I see this as an opportunity, the perfect time for Africa to start playing a greater role on the world stage and pursuing its key interests. Africa can only do this if it works together, no one African country has the clout to be a player on the world stage but acting in concert as a continent Africa can make real changes to the terms on which the rest of the world deals with it and benefit people around the continent.

Too small to matter

Sub-Saharan Africa has a combined GDP of $US 1.5 trillion[1], which may seem large but is less than half of the US$ 3.9 trillion[2] spent by the US government last year. The largest economy in Africa is that of Nigeria with a GDP of US$ 404 billion[3], the most valuable company in the world is Apple with a stock valuation of over US$ 900 billion[4]. I cite these figures to illustrate a point, individually on the world stage African countries are economic rounding errors, Africa is largely talked in terms of natural resources or as a market with potential. The fundamental issue with this is that African economies operate in a world where the rules of the game are still dominated by Western nations and institutions. Trade rules are governed by the WTO, banking rules by western regulators, investment treaties are lopsided against developing nations, and development spending and their associated policies conform to priorities and ideals of the states that fund institutions like the World Bank. That African nations operate at a disadvantage on the world stage is not news, the key issue is what policies can African nations adopt to rectify this.

A united front: trade, tax and investment

While Africa is currently a bit more than just a drop in the ocean in terms of economic size, the continents GDP is projected to grow to approx. US$ 30 trillion[5] over the next 40 years and Africa will matter. However, the continent cannot afford to wait that long, the lopsided terms investment with which Africa deals with the west will continue to siphon off much-needed income and asset ownership off the continent, and trade rules continue to limit policy options (such as protecting infant industries) for African governments. Individually African nations have no hope of changing the status quo, as a continent with a smart policy approach at a time where western engagement in the world is limited by their own domestic focus, things can start to change.

Getting African countries to act together is a well-known headache. Africa has for over fifty years heard big talk from leaders on broad pan-African cooperation, numerous regional and trade blocs and the OAU and AU with ambitious agendas, though they never seem to get too far. In my view this is because African leaders have bitten off more than they are willing to chew with ambitious programs which have neither the political support, funding or organisational capacity to succeed. Rather than overambitious agendas, it may be more productive if African countries coalesce around a defined set of issues which are cross cutting and beneficial to all, making it easier to form and maintain a joint agenda. When it comes to a prospective joint African foreign policy to the west there are 3 issues which cut across all countries and which they could stand to benefit from; trade, taxes and investment treaties.

Trade, taxes and investment treaties.

Trade – unfair terms of trade faced by African countries, taxes – the inability to tax profits made in Africa and investment treaties which unfairly disadvantage African states in international arbitration and de-emphasize the link between FDI and development. These may seem narrowly economic and non-people or development focused agenda, however these issues have real impacts on people’s lives and livelihoods. Unfair terms of trade put African farmers and businesses at a disadvantage and restrict the policies that government can employ to support private sector growth. The ability of global corporations to avoid and transfer taxes off the continent means Africa loses out on more than US$ 50 billion[6] a year in tax revenue. If that were an African economy, it would be the 10th largest on the continent. Bilateral investment treaties which are an agreement establishing the terms and conditions for private investment by nationals and companies of one state in another state, protect the investments of foreign companies from what they see as unpredictable local courts and politics, forcing disputes to be settled in international arbitration centres which usually rule in favour of the investor over other concerns such as development, the environment or labour rights.

Why these three issues? First, these are three issues upon which the West is still the most influential, if we can force changes in western policy it can change the way others around the world and key institutions engage with Africa. Secondly these are three issues which can be connected to wider and more pressing concerns that the West has around security and migration. With better terms of trade and fairer investment, Africa has a much better chance at creating more and better jobs, governments will have more development policies open to them, and more revenue will allow governments to invest more in job creation, and anti-terrorism initiatives. Third, with tax evasion a priority even in the West making tax evasion in Africa part of the narrative is not an impossibility. Finally, this set of issues is narrow enough and beneficial enough to most African states that a coherent negotiating position can be built out of it.

So, what exactly is it that Africa should be aiming for with this new focused foreign policy. On trade the goal is twofold, first shielding African farmers from the hefty agricultural subsidies that western farmers get and allows them to dump cheap produce on the continent and second is loosening the rules that stop African nations from adopting industrial policies such as infant industry protection and product imitation that both the West and East Asia used. On taxes, the goal is to tax profits where they are made with the goal of ensuring that money made on the continent pays its fair share. On the investment treaties it would be impossible to change them whole sale rather the goal would be to insert clauses that make protection of the environment, labour and development into the body of the treaties rather than just as principles in the preamble.

To achieve these goals African countries would have to present a united front, combining their influence, negotiating teams and knowledge to match those of western nations. Crafting and deploying public narratives in Africa (that together they are fighting to free the continent from restrictions and better the lives of African citizens) and in the West (that doing this wont cost strained public finances anything and has the potential to stop the migrants and contain the security threat).

For too long African foreign policy has either been a tool for the West or the weak entreaties of states wielding no influence. The West is weaker and less united than it has since at least the 1930s, facing challenges externally while dealing with internally divisive politics and social cleavages. This is the perfect time for Africa to start changing the status quo, to start changing the terms on which the West sees and deals with Africa. To do so Africa must look West but do so together, around a common set of focused objectives that everyone can rally around and that would resonate with the wider public at home and abroad. Even if only half the agenda succeeds it would be a victory for the continent and the first step towards an African foreign policy agenda finally free from its western past.

 

 

 

[1] https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.CD?locations=ZG

[2] https://www.cbo.gov/publication/52408

[3] https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.CD?locations=NG

[4] https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-apple-stocks/apple-market-value-we-may-need-a-bigger-chart-idUKKBN1D20BQ

[5] http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/africaatlse/2013/12/05/african-wealth-will-double-every-decade-for-generations-to-come/

[6] https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2015/feb/02/africa-tax-avoidance-money-laundering-illicit-financial-flows