EAC Common Revenue Management Model

Traders have blamed payment of taxes at every border point for increased cost of doing business. Border delays and the absence of laws to settle disputes and promote integration have also been cited as hindrances to the opening up of trade in East Africa. 

Well thats about to change.

The East African Community (EAC) 5 Heads of State have endorsed a revenue management model where tax will only be collected at the point of entry and imported goods transported to the final destination without stopping at national border points for customs charges or inspection. 

This approach is similar to that used in the South African Customs Union.

The decision raises hope for a speedy formation of a regional customs authority that would handle the smooth flow of goods across borders — handing traders an opportunity to save up to 15 per cent in extra transit costs that come with delays.

“The Summit adopted in principle the destination model of clearance of goods where assessment and collection of revenue is at the first point of entry and revenues are remitted to the destination partner states subject to the fulfilment of key pre-conditions to be developed by the high level task force,” the heads of state said in a communiqué at the end of a recent regional summit in Arusha.

Though the EAC launched its customs union in January 2010, disagreement over collection and sharing of revenue has frustrated efforts to establish a regional customs authority, slowing down cross-border trade. “We hope the decision brings some change this time by ending the controversy that has been with us for three years now,” Peter Njenga, a logistics officer said.

Kenya has been particularly reluctant to adopt the model that would see the Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA) lose control of close to 35 per cent of its present annual collections. Some member states want the revenue be used to finance projects of common interest such as roads or power generation.

However, Kenya has further hardened its position as it would mean losing a large proportion of tax collection at a time when it faces huge budgetary challenges as it implements the new constitution.

In Nairobi, opposition to a regional customs authority has also come from the port of Mombasa, a key entry point, with Kenya Ports Authority maintaining that extending the facility’s function to include collecting customs revenues will further delay the discharge of cargo given the current levels of congestion.

The setting up of a common revenue authority for the EAC has also been delayed due to the fact that Burundi had not fully emerged from the ravages of a civil war and required time to set up sound national institutions to manage public finances.  For instance in 2008, just one year after it joined EAC, Burundi became the only country in the region to ever report loss of revenue from free movement of goods under the customs union protocol.

This position has since changed with the Burundian President Pierre Nkurunziza recently saying the country is ready for higher stages of integration after hiring the services of Trade Mark East Africa (TMEA) to set up new revenue administration institution—Office Burundais des Recettes.

Article From Business Daily 

South Africa's Skills Shortage Dilemma

There is no doubt that the conundrum of an acute skills shortage alongside mass unemployment constitutes the most critical issue threatening the future of South Africa. This year the country has recorded a growth rate of 2.7% and the unemployment rate is about 33%, including those who have given up looking for work. Seventy percent of those unemployed are said to be under the age of 35. A woman leaving school in Limpopo stands a one in eight chance of ever getting a job. 

The skills shortage and high unemployment interact with each other in a devastating way. It is insightful to note that SA’s key problem is how it is going to maintain the growth rate it needs to feed its growing population. SA won’t be able to use the method employed by the Southeast Asian ‘tigers’ of using cheap labour to undercut its export competitors while it grows its economy and expands its skills base, because its labour unions will prevent that.

One solution is to develop a skills-training model based on systems that have been used for years in Germany, Switzerland and several Scandinavian countries. This would involve not only vastly improving the education system but also integrating it with a system of apprenticeships. 

The essence of the German education system is that it is channelled into different streams. There are three streams, actually, but for our purposes we need focus only on two — an academic and a vocational stream. Students should be given a choice, after passing, say, grade 9 or 10, whether they want to continue in the academic stream and go on to university, or learn a vocational skill through an apprenticeship programme. 

Those who drop out of high school earlier should also have the opportunity of entering an apprenticeship course. 

These apprenticeships should be wide-ranging, from becoming a skilled baker or hairdresser, to a motor mechanic, a construction worker or an electrician. A student deciding to enter an apprenticeship must find an employer who will take him or her on to train for the career the individual has chosen — which is usually three years. 

During that time, the student will spend part of his time gaining practical on-the-job experience working for the employer, and part of it attending classes at a vocational school. The classes will focus mainly on the technical side of the job; the shop-floor work on the practical side. Running records have to be kept by both the employer and the vocational school instructors so that the training can be co-ordinated. 

The apprentices are paid a small salary throughout the apprenticeship period, which usually goes up a little each year as their skills advance. At the end, they have to write an exam run by the Chamber of Commerce and Industry. When they pass that they are qualified as a skilled professional in the chosen work category — and receive a certificate testifying to that. 

School-leavers in SA today have no craft certification of any sort, which makes getting that critical first-time job in the face of sceptical employers faced with labour regulation requirements cruelly difficult. 

However salary is the thing that troubles the trade unions. 

But the suggestion of how to get around this political problem is to enact a law establishing that the apprenticeship period falls under the Department of Education, not the Department of Labour. 

The Congress of South African Trade Unions actually recognises the need for on-the-job training at lower pay, but it has become so entrenched in its commitment to the principle of "decent work" that it can’t lose face by backing off from it. 

Classifying an apprenticeship as part of an individual’s education may be a way around that difficulty, because the labour regulations could remain unchanged and become applicable to the apprentice only after he has graduated from his apprenticeship. 

A further advantage of the German system is that, after successfully completing a full apprenticeship course, a student can continue at the vocational school for another year or two to acquire higher certification as a "master" baker, mechanic or whatever, which rates as the equivalent of matric — thus opening the way to go to university and, beyond that, to a graduate school of business for an MBA. 

SA's graduates would then be able to seek a job in management with the special advantage of knowing what life is like for workers on the shop floor and earning their respect in turn for having that knowledge. 

Flexibility is the essence of any such system, so that German students from the academic stream can also switch to become apprentices after passing matric if they so wish, enabling them to follow the same route to a job in management. 

SA is going to need skilled workers every bit as much as she needs to reduce the unemployment rate. 

Original Article by Allister Sparks: Business Day

Geographical Indications Bill Kenya

Business Daily reports that Kenya's Industrialization Ministry along with the Kenya Industrial Property Institute (KIPI) are currently reviewing the Geographical Indications Bill (GI) which will provide a legal framework for safeguarding products like tea, coffee, and handicraft by expressly attributing them a sign or appellation of origin.

A geographical indication is a sign used on goods that have a specific geographical origin and possess qualities, reputation or characteristics that are essentially attributable to that place of origin. Most commonly, geographical indications include the name of the place of origin of the goods such as agricultural products which typically have qualities that derive from their place of growth/production and are also influenced by specific local factors, such as climate and soil. Geographical indications may be used for a wide variety of products, whether natural, agricultural or manufactured.

Meanwhile an appellation of origin is a special kind of geographical indication. It generally consists of a geographical name or a traditional designation used on products which have a specific quality or characteristics that are essentially due to the geographical environment in which they are produced.  The concept of a geographical indication encompasses appellations of origin.

Whether a sign is recognized as a geographical indication is a matter of national law and as such geographical indications are protected in accordance with international treaties and national laws under a wide range of concepts, including trademark laws in the form of collective marks or certification marks, laws against unfair competition, consumer protection laws, or specific laws or decrees that recognize individual GIs.

The GI Bill is expected to help certify Kenyan products and market them exclusively in the speciality market, a strategy that will help distinguish Kenyan goods from those of other countries.  The likely scenarios once the Bill is enacted include marketing of origin-specific Kenyan exports such as Kericho tea, Mt Kenya coffee, Maasai jewellery, and Kisii soapstone carvings.

The draft GI Bill also proposes that producers and regulatory firms can apply to be custodians of a location specific trademark. Thus, the Kenya Tea Development Agency may apply to register tea variety trademarks.  Certification trademark of Kenyan products will avoid situations where foreign parties attempt to register such goods in other countries.

GI's are protected at the international level through a number of treaties mostly administered by World Intellectual Property Organization WIPO which provides for the protection of geographical indications, most notably the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property of 1883, and the Lisbon Agreement for the Protection of Appellations of Origin and Their International Registration. In addition, Articles 22 to 24 of the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) deals with the international protection of geographical indications within the framework of the World Trade Organization (WTO).

Meanwhile Article 43 of the EAC Common Market Protocol has provisions on co-operation in Intellectual Property Rights of which geographical indications are included (Art 43.2(f)).

Nigeria's Trade Policy Reforms

National Treatment and Kenya's Land Reform Following the New Constitution

Kenya has over time proved to be the preferred investment point in the East African region due to its strategic location and free market economy which places no significant restriction on the movement of foreign currency in and out of the market.  However there is one important change to the investment environment since the promulgation of the new Constitution of Kenya (the 'Constitution') found in Chapter Five Part 1 on Land and Environment.

The Constitution was brought into law on August 27 2010 and inter alia sets the reform agenda for better governance. In general the new Constitution will lead to the creation of new institutions that will promote good governance and in turn boost investor confidence. 

However, in one aspect, the Constitution contains articles that now limit the period that a foreigner may hold land to 99 years (Article 65 (1). This includes any company which has any element of foreign shareholding.  The Constitution also provides that any interest in land that is currently held by foreigners which is in excess of 99 years will have the term reduced to 99 years and freehold land will be converted to 99 years leasehold interest (Article 65(2)). Investors have indicated to Government that limiting the interest period to 99 years will not be conducive to foreign investors looking to invest in Kenya. There is also no provision for compensation to foreigners in the Constitution. The Constitution gives Parliament a time frame of eighteen months for the enactment of legislation relating to land and it will be interesting to see the impact the legislation will have on the business environment.

In the WTO Trade in Services context, Kenya made horizontal commitments in the Uruguay Round on market access in Mode 3 requiring that for commercial presence investors should establish their business locally.  There are however no horizontal limitations on national treatment to which limitations on foreign ownership of land would be reflected. In the sectors where Kenya has undertaken specific commitments, Telecommunications services, Financial services (including banking and insurance), Tourism & Travel related services and Transport services (air and road), mode 3 national treatment commitments are in some cases left unbound. However in the hotels and restaurants category, arguably a sub sector to which land is a determinant, Kenya has completely liberalised mode 3 both in the WTO GATs context and the EAC Common Market Services Schedule (Annex V).

Additionally, in the EAC Common Market Protocol, Article 13 on the Right of Establishment and Article 14 on the Right of Residence are relevant to the land question.  To the extent that they relate to access to and use of land premises, these provisions are subject to Article 15 which provides that land issues shall be governed by the national policies and laws of Partner States. Hence even in the common market, one could say that national treatment has not been extended to the land issue especially as it relates to establishment (investment).  

Bileateral Investment Treaties (BITs) Coming Back To Bite

Published by TIA

See related blog post on ICSID. 

African governments once rushed into signing Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) to encourage FDI. Lawyers are however now calling for new models.

With much of Africa’s investment coming from abroad, how governments manage complaints from foreign companies is a vital determinant of the business environment. For decades, foreign investors depended on diplomatic protection from home governments in their overseas adventures, which occasionally gave rise to “gunboat diplomacy”. The US, for example, sent troops into Latin America 34 times to settle commercial disputes.

Since the 1960s, and spiking in the 1990s, a more formal investment approach was attempted in the form of bilateral investment treaties (BITs). These state-to-state agreements establish how governments handle investors from each other’s country, covering fair and equitable treatment, security, and compensation for expropriation, in assets but also, in some cases, in shares, stocks, bonds and other modalities. While BITs infringe sovereignty, in that disputes are settled in international tribunals and not domestic courts, many developing countries saw them as a way of signalling their attractiveness for foreign investment.

The number of treaties has grown exponentially, to around 2,500 today. The number of claims is growing too. Philip Morris, Total, Mobil, Shell, Siemens and Cargill have all taken states to arbitration, with Sri Lanka suffering the first award against a developing country in 1990. Twenty-six percent of new claims in 2010 had an African or Middle Eastern state party involved. In Africa, Zimbabwe, Tanzania, Namibia, Liberia, Algeria and Senegal have all faced actions. There are likely to be more disputes in areas such as mining, water and agriculture, according to Mahnaz Malik, an investment arbitration lawyer at the Chambers of Arthur Marriott QC at 12 Gray’s Inn Square. She warns that events such as the Arab Spring can generate a flood of claims.

But so far, South Africa is arguably the most prominent in the African context. Pretoria signed 30 BITs post-1994 to attract private investment. The new government had inherited a society that was among the most unequal in the world, where the vast majority of black South Africans had been excluded from meaningful economic activity under apartheid. As part of a set of initiatives to redress this inheritance and to meet the government’s constitutional obligation to create a more open and equitable society based on human rights, Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) programmes were initiated.

In 2007, a group of investors from Italy and Luxembourg filed a claim at the Convention of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), arguing that South Africa’s 2002 Minerals and Petroleum Resources Development Act (MPRDA) contained provisions that amounted to expropriation of their mineral rights, thus violating the BITs South Africa had signed with both countries. The MPRDA, a separate piece of legislation from BEE that aims to transform the minerals industry in South Africa, requires that holders of mineral rights undertake equity or equity-equivalent obligations; requirements emerging from consultations between the government and relevant parties, including representatives of the claimants. The South African government defended the MPRDA by arguing that it protected existing mineral rights and allowed for their uninterrupted use so long as companies also met the government’s wider transformational obligations in some accepted combination. In a punitive judgment, the Icsid tribunal dismissed the claimant’s case, ordered them to pay the legal costs of the South African government, and prevented claimants from bringing any such action again in future.

On the basis of similar reviews conducted internationally, notably, in the US, Norway, and certain Latin American states, South Africa launched a lengthy BIT review, the conclusion of which is that the country will not enter any new treaties unless there are “compelling economic reasons”, says Xavier Carim, deputy director general of the international trade and economic development division of South Africa’s Department of Trade and Industry. “The very fact that narrow, shortsighted commercial interests can subject progressive and laudable government policies to international arbitration, the outcomes of which are unpredictable, creates unacceptable risks that can have a chilling impact on legitimate public policy making,” he says, noting that there have been inconsistencies in the rulings taken by tribunals over similar cases.

It would be simplistic to characterise BITs as simply giving rise to clashes between progressive government policy and corporate interests. In some cases, such as a SOABI v. Senegal dispute, the problem was a largely technical disagreement over terms and conditions of a low cost housing programme.

In Zimbabwe, cases have been brought in objection to the ruling Zanu-PF party’s arbitrary and at times violent land reform programme. Broad and ambiguous terms have been a central problem of many agreements, says Jansen Calamita, senior research fellow in international trade and investment law at the British Institute of Comparative and International Law. “BITs are an agreement by the host state to accept the application of external standards to determine the legality of its actions – standards above and beyond the state’s constitution and national law. If the standards agreed are not clear – as they largely are not – it will be left to tribunals to give meaning and effect to those standards.”

Some lawyers believe the first wave of BITs were signed too fast, with text penned by a closely-knit group of Western lawyers. The majority of BITs reflect the texts developed to promote the 1960s anti-communist, post-decolonisation protection agenda for European investors, says Ms Malik. She believes capacity to understand complex investment law issues is not always present in developing country negotiators. She notes that the imbalance becomes more acute as negotiations are often based on the developed country’s model. In a speech at the London School of Economics, Randall Williams of the South African Trade Department claimed to have seen negotiators making agreements without the presence of a lawyer.

Latin American governments have come out strongly in opposition to prevailing norms. In 2009, Ecuador’s vice minister of foreign affairs, Lautaro Pozo, said BITs reflected a “fifty year old ideology” and that many countries signed them without sufficient understanding of their implications. BITs did not, in his reckoning, reflect the objectives of developing states, especially on issues of the environment and human rights.

In one case, Philip Morris tried to sue Uruguay for copyright infringement when it ruled that cigarette packets needed to carry health warnings. Bolivian President Evo Morales claims that international arbitration offends state sovereignty, with Bolivia, Ecuador and most recently Venezuela denouncing Icsid, the Washington-based arbitration body, part of the World Bank Group, which settles nearly half of claims. India and Mexico have both refused to be party to the Icsid Convention, and Brazil has not ratified any BITs.

Others are more upbeat. “I think the backlash against investment treaties is overstated,” says Anthony Sinclair, a partner at law firm Allen & Overy. “Countries continue to sign these treaties at a rate of about 50 a year.” Mr Sinclair acknowledges there is “fine-tuning and recalibrating” of text, especially in terms of public interest regulation. “At the same time, countries are in search of growth, for which foreign investment is key.”

There is no credible analysis proving the effect of BITs on investment, which would be very hard to quantify. Furthermore, BITs are not the sole determinant of investment. China is a prolific signatory, but continues to invest in countries without BITs – in contrast to Germany, where risk insurance is only issued to companies if they are operating in a country with a German treaty. Yet whenever governments and investors are discussing major cross-border investment, “everybody” on both sides is talking about investment treaties, Mr Sinclair claims.

The focus on treaties should not draw attention away from domestic reforms which could lessen the investment risk. Guinea-Bissau has undertaken domestic reform, turning a single court system dealing with everything from divorces to commercial disputes, into a more differentiated structure with commercial courts run by appropriately trained legal teams and judges, says Raimundo Pereira, speaker of the Parliament of Guinea-Bissau. Nonetheless, bilateral frameworks do appear to be of growing importance to investors.

Despite the frustrations, there is little that can be done about existing treaties until they expire, at which point clearer text can be negotiated, or countries can withdraw. Pulling out of active treaties altogether is unlikely. Even South Africa has not done so, given the diplomatic downsides. The goal of African legal teams is to improve the text in future agreements.

To date, many African governments employed international law firms to advise on treaties. While this helps buffet their expertise in negotiations, capacity-building of African government lawyers is needed. Rukia Baruti recently founded the African International Legal Awareness (AILA) programme, which in late 2011 organised a week long BIT training workshop. Participants included lawyers from Liberia, Ghana, Uganda, the Gambia, Egypt and South Africa. Baruti organised the workshop, held in London, after attending an investment conference in Mauritius, where many African attendees were unfamiliar with investment treaty arbitration.

“By building capacity and increasing awareness of the consequences of concluding investment treaties, African states will, before signing such treaties, carefully examine the meaning and consider the provisions. This would go a long way to avoiding disputes involving African states.”  Mr Sinclair speaks approvingly of AILA, in which his firm participated. “There is no shortage of good will on the part of international lawyers to contribute on a pro bono basis. The issue is whether there are enough people with sufficient inspiration and energy, like Rukia, to organise these activities. Otherwise busy lawyers in firms or chambers, or in academic careers, may not be able to produce something like this themselves.”

Aila has since been approached by African governments to deliver training in-country. Similarly, the International Institute for Sustainable Development has conducted training courses for African government officials in country and at a regional level.  It is important to note that while bilateral treaties have been overwhelmingly North-South in the past, that is changing in reflection of growing South-South economic interaction. Current BITs between developing countries include Mozambique-Indonesia, Djibouti-China and Eritrea-Uganda. South-South deals provide a platform to create more development-orientated texts, but often the European template is copied over. Regional treaties on the other hand tend to create more bespoke texts.

“I have found that debate is healthier in regional dynamics compared to a bilateral context,” says Ms Malik. A recent COMESA Agreement treaty contains more nuanced obligations than those found typically in bilateral treaties, she claims, including provisions to allow tribunals to take greater account of the development status of the host state. The COMESA treaty also omitted the full protection and security standard, a controversial feature in many BITs which puts hefty responsibilities on states. Algeria was taken to tribunal to pay damages related to civil unrest during the civil war. Similarly, Congo faced a claim for riots on the streets of Kinshasa.

The COMESA treaty, and new model texts, exhibit the potential for designing modern templates, says Ms Malik. “It shows African countries that they are not tied to the old European model. It paves the way for innovation in terms of making the treaties better balanced.”

Published by TIA : 05 March, 2012

The EU Single Market Services Directive

The Directive on Services in the Internal Market (the Services Directive 2006/123/EC) was adopted in December 2006. The Directive liberalises the internal EC services market in that it requires Member States to abolish discriminatory requirements, such as nationality or residence requirements, and particularly restrictive requirements, such as “economic needs” tests (requiring businesses to prove to the authorities that there is a demand for their services). It also requires the review of other burdensome requirements which may not always be justified (such as territorial restrictions or minimum number of employees).

The EU member States were provided a three-year transitional period to transpose the Directive into national legislation. However, several member States missed the end-2009 deadline, and work to implement the Directive continued throughout 2010. The Directive requires the Member States to simplify procedures and formalities that service providers need to comply with. In particular, it requires Member States to remove unjustified and disproportionate burdens and to substantially facilitate: the establishment of a business, i.e. cases in which a natural or legal person wants to set up a permanent establishment in a Member State, and the cross-border provision of services, i.e. cases in which a business wants to supply services across borders in another Member State, without setting up an establishment there. 

During 2010, the Commission was monitoring the implementation by the member States, of both the new legal frameworks adopted in order to implement the Services Directive as well as their efforts to establish operational "Points of Single Contact" (PSCs), notably the online portals providing businesses with information about the requirements and procedures to be complied with, and the "Internal Market Information Systems" facilitating administrative cooperation between the authorities of the member States. The PSCs are certainly the most visible benefit of the Services Directive for businesses. They are meant to become fully fledged e-government portals allowing future entrepreneurs and existing businesses to easily obtain online all relevant information relating to their activities (applicable regulations, procedures to be completed, deadlines, etc.) with the ability to apply online and across borders. 

Although the vast majority of the member States have chosen to implement the general principles and obligations of the Directive through a single act, implementation of the general principles has been carried out through several acts in France and Germany. In addition, all member States have had to amend or abrogate existing legislation to ensure conformity with the provisions of the Directive.

The Services Directive does not harmonize national legislation applicable to the services sector, but obliges member States to screen their authorization schemes to ensure that they are maintained only if non-discriminatory, justified by an overriding reason relating to public interest, and proportionate.

The Services Directive applies to the provision of a wide range of services – to private individuals and businesses – barring a few specific exceptions. For example, it covers: 

distributive trades (including retail and wholesale of goods and services) 

the activities of most regulated professions (such as legal and tax advisers, architects, engineers, accountants, surveyors) 

construction services and crafts 

business-related services (such as office maintenance, management consultancy, event organisation, debt recovery, advertising and recruitment services) 

tourism services (e.g. travel agents) 

leisure services (e.g. sports centres and amusement parks) 

installation and maintenance of equipment 

information society services (e.g. publishing – print and web, news agencies, computer programming) 

accommodation and food services (hotels, restaurants and caterers) 

training and education services 

rentals and leasing services (including car rental) 

real estate services 

household support services (e.g. cleaning, gardening and private nannies). 

The Services Directive does not apply to the following services, which are explicitly excluded:

financial services 

electronic communications services with respect to matters covered by other community instruments 

transport services falling into Title V of the EC Treaty 

healthcare services provided by health professionals to patients to assess, maintain or restore their state of health where those activities are reserved to a regulated health profession 

temporary work agencies' services 

private security services 

audiovisual services 

gambling 

certain social services provided by the State, by providers mandated by the State or by charities recognised as such by the State 

services provided by notaries and bailiffs (appointed by an official act of government). 

The Commission has not drawn up concrete plans to cover the other excluded services. Services activities are in any event always subject to the EC Treaty provisions, notably the fundamental freedoms of establishment (Article 43) and free movement of services (Article 49). The Services Directive applies only to EU (EEA) citizens and legal entities established in the EU (EEA), and does not oblige member States to consider changes applicable to non-EU services suppliers. 

Kenya To Establish the Nairobi International Financial Centre

Kenya hopes to position itself as a financial services hub similar to other financial hubs in the world e.g. London, New York, Dublin, Mauritius and Johannesburg.

Towards this end, finance minister Hon. Uhuru Kenyatta has launched a committee that will guide the establishment of the Nairobi International Financial Centre (NIFC), whose key task will be integrate the domestic financial sector to others in the region and globally. The committee will come up with proposals on the preferred type, financial implications, funding options and an implementation plan for the centre. The Steering Committee for Nairobi International Financial Centre was gazette is now operational.

The term “international financial centre” (NFIC) is often used interchangeably with “tax haven” or “secrecy jurisdiction,” although the latter terms have more negative connotations. Scholars generally label as “tax havens” those territories that offer favourable tax regimes and bank secrecy laws designed to attract foreign investors.

An International Financial Center is part of Kenya's Vision 030 and the Vision pointed to Mauritius and the Seychelles as potential models for the Kenyan IFC. It is envisioned that the NIFC may grant tax incentives, including a maximum 10-year tax holiday, along with VAT and customs exemptions.

It is envisioned that the NIFC may grant tax incentives, including a maximum 10-year tax holiday, along with VAT and customs exemptions.  However the international Financial Center will transform the economy, but observers warn it could contribute to illicit financial flows, inequality and a lack of transparency.

Meanwhile, in the regional context the World Bank has provided funding for the development of the  EAC Financial Sector Development & Regionalization Project and Financial Services is one of the 7 trade in services sectors to be liberalized under the EAC Common Market Protocol on the Free Movement of Services.

Setting up of the NIFC along with legal and institutional reforms are some of the projects envisioned for the financial sector under the country’s economic blueprint — vision 2030 — along with banking sector consolidation, pension reform and increasing diaspora remittances. 

The NIFC would also have a separate legal and judicial framework that would attract companies to set up shop.

See related story here.

EAC Financial Services and Double Taxation Avoidance Treaty

The 9 year EAC Financial Sector Development & Regionalization Project, funded by the World Bank is a welcome development.   A strong regional financial sector is needed to underpin an effective common market and build a single financial services market for the region.  The development of a regional financial services sector, will also benefit the establishment of a monetary union and single currency.  In addition, the EAC region stands to gain by trading on a regional stock exchange, i.e a single East African Stock Exchange and furthermore, the harmonization of the financial services sector will play a key role in unlocking the removal of barriers for the free movement of capital across the EAC region- as provided for by the Common Market Protocol. 

In related news, the EAC region has apparently not implemented the Treaty on Avoidance of Double Taxation. The Double Taxation Treaty would allow income generated in any of the five member states to be taxed only once but lack of implementation has given national revenue bodies the legitimacy to maintain the status quo with revenue authorities making double claims for revenue earned in each individual country.

Why Investors are Flocking to Mauritius

Foreign companies with an eye on Africa’s emerging markets are apparently flocking to Mauritius to incorporate local subsidiaries in a move that could deny more than a dozen African governments billions in corporate taxes and position the island nation as the region’s economic hub.

Possibly the the range of incentives available to foreign firms in Mauritius. This includes a 15 per cent charge on a company’s taxable income such as business or trading profits. This amount is half the almost 30 per cent rate that other countries in the region apply to  similar income.

Foreigners living in Mauritius are also apparently spared royalty taxes compared to other countries in the region who in some cases tax at the rate of 20 per cent.  In addition, Mauritius has more than 30 double taxation treaties with African countries alone and has recently entered into Investment Promotion and Protection Agreements (IPPAs) with its double taxation partners.

Finally an efficient judicial and dispute resolution mechanisms has also given Mauritius an edge over the competition in Africa, with the The World Bank’s Doing Business 2011 report, ranking Mauritius’ judicial system as the best in Africa in terms of reforms aimed at facilitating business and investment transactions.

See related full article here.

The Future of African Remittances

Did you know that the remittance service landscape in Africa is dominated by two international money transfer operators that control in excess of 60 percent of the remittance access points across Africa? In addition, because of exclusivity agreements between international money transfer operators and their mainly commercial bank partners, other types of institutions are largely excluded from the market due to regulations that limit non-financial institutions from playing a meaningful role in remittance services markets in most African countries.

International remittance flows to sub-Saharan Africa currently exceed 30 billion dollars annually, while on a global basis, remittances are estimated to have exceeded $315 billion in 2009. In SSA, they affect as many as 25 million recipient households, and have the potential to significantly reduce poverty and stimulate growth. Over the past decade, remittances have evolved from a miscellaneous trade accounting item into a widely recognized flow of foreign financing that often exceeds FDI and ODA to many African countries.

Recognizing the impact that remittances have on development, policy makers and development partners in many other regions have invested substantially in measures to leverage their potential. Worldwide, remittances are now better tracked, transaction costs have declined, and recipients are being integrated into the financial system, giving them more productive options to use their money, thereby leveraging development impact for the communities where they live.

Unfortunately, much of this progress in remittances has not yet reached Africa. However this is slowly changing especially in light of a useful World Bank initiative in collaboration with national central banks of Kenya, Ethiopia, Uganda- to address the Future of African Remittances (FAR).

For instance, the cost of sending remittances to Africa still exceeds 10-15 percent for many countries and reaches 20-25 percent for remittances sent within Africa, which are of growing importance given migration patterns. Reducing transaction costs by only 5 percentage points could increase total resources available to the recipient households by as much as US$ 1.5 billion per year.

In addition, only 20 percent of African households have access to formal financial services and remittances are often relegated to informal transmission channels, which are less secure and even more costly. Promoting product innovation and improving payment services tailored to the needs of the recipient households (especially in rural areas) offers a win-win solution. Households can use remittances as an asset to access formal financial services and benefit from safer and cheaper remittance transfers, while banks and other financial institutions can mobilize a higher share of the remittances to fund private sector investment.

The Future of African Remittances Program aims at strengthening the market for remittance transfers through the following efforts:

• • Technical assistance for regulatory reform targeting the remittance services market
• • Technology development incentives for products linking remittances to financial products (housing, insurance, savings and investments), with a focus on mobile software applications
• • Knowledge exchange with advanced remittance markets in Asia and Latin America
• • Training for regulators on best practices for regulating remittance markets and fostering innovation
• • Financial literacy and encouragement programs for first and last mile remittance product uptake

In combination with rapid innovations in mobile technology in Africa, remittances present a unique opportunity to expand access to finance and lift thousands of communities out of poverty.

More information on the African Remittances Program can be obtained here.