Friday, August 31, 2012

The Case for Zero Rated Inputs in Zambian Agriculture

Zero rating implies that goods are taxable but at a 0% rate. What would be the point of this? The significance of zero rating is that it allows businesses claim back their input taxes in acquiring these goods from suppliers for sale. In light of the financial reforms preventing use of foreign currency in Zambian trade, this may be a necessary measure to prevent the agricultural sector from suffocating from the effects of high production costs. 

High costs of production are partly attributable to the high cost of inputs, 90% of which are imported. The instability of the Zambian Kwacha has meant that to minimise price fluctuation in the consumer market, agro-suppliers have in the past conducted trade with exporters in more stable foreign currencies. Anti-dollarisation has implied a need to buffer consumer prices by higher percentages to minimise losses attributable to inflation. This has seen food prices rise astronomically and the trend is set to continue if mitigating measures are not put in place.

A proposed mitigating measure might be a zero rating tax policy for agro-suppliers. The proportion of the market price that is buffered to account for currency valuation fluctuations would be significantly reduced by the ability of the suppliers to reclaim taxes paid on importing the goods in the first place. The buyer, who in this case is the farmer, also wins because such an instrument implies that they too pay no value added tax on 
these goods. These lower prices then trickle down to the rest of us in the form of lower food prices.

A caveat exists in that zero rating reduces revenue for the government so it has to be used in conjunction with alternative revenue sources. The policy has been tried in South Africa's agricultural sector and has so far proved to improve the welfare of the poorest in society without impacting negatively on other households. It has also lent itself to a transformation of a retrogressive Value Added Tax on other goods to the creation of a more progressive structure.

Granted, the economic structure of South Africa is greater advanced than that of Zambia but there is no harm in mapping and modifying best practice to suit our own economic climate. Now this in my opinion would do a better job of putting 'more money in our pockets' without robbing others blind.

Related Posts:

  • The Lusaka Stock exchange update  Friday 2nd March, 2012 DAILY COMMENTARY FOR THURSDAY 01st FEBRUARY,2012 The index closed at 3,878.13 points ,up by 0.06% from Yesterday's close of 3,875.63. A total of 3,519,762 shares were transacted in 30 trad… Read More
  • Zimplats not about grabbing – Tsvangirai By Jenni Evans There is no grabbing or nationalisation of investments in Zimbabwe, Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai said in Joburg on Thursday. “You can't nationalise investments, you can't grab property – that is very c… Read More
  • The Lusaka Stock exchange update  Monday 5th March, 2012 DAILY COMMENTARY FOR THURSDAY 02nd MARCH,2012 The index closed at 3,880.24 points ,up by 0.05% from Yesterday's close of 3,878.13. A total of 203,048 shares were transacted in 13 trades wo… Read More
  • Copper Bull Streak Extends to Longest Since October on Demand: Commodities By Nicholas Larkin Copper traders are bullish for a fourth consecutive week, the longest streak since October, as manufacturing strengthens from China to the U.S. and stockpiles decline to the lowest in … Read More
  • Fitch downgrades Zambia's economic outlook By Chiwoyu Sinyangwe  GLOBAL rating agency Fitch has downgraded Zambia's economic outlook from stable to negative a few months before the country's planned US$700 million Eurobond is issued. But finance minister Alex… Read More

1 comment:

  1. The issue, from my layman understanding is that the government is all about gain not loss..As much as this will benefit the population through cheaper food and a reduction in inflation in the long run.

    ReplyDelete