The cost of 50 % tax on Senator Keg - 3.4 billions and illicit brew deaths

[gout]

• Tweet

how not to legislate...how not to tax

n 2004 the government granted a remission of 30 % on excise duty on beer made from sorghum, and increased it to 100 % in 2006. This allowed beer made from locally produced sorghum to be sold at Ksh 16. per 300 ml per glass (equivalent of $0.20), approximately the same price as most illicit brews. This was meant to promote the use of locally produced raw materials (sorghum) while encouraging consumers of illicit brew to switch to hygienically prepared beer. This tax break boosted sales of legal beer made from sorghum, and allowed government to collect some of the tax lost from sale of illicit brews. In September 2013, a new tax regime came into force through the Customs and Excise Act that introduced excise duty on beer made from sorghum, millet or cassava at 50% of the rate charged on other beverages on top of the 16% VAT that the beer attracts. This brand of beer from sorghum was initially introduced to woo drinkers of illicit brew to a more hygienically prepared brew.

http://www.tegemeo.org/index.php/component/k2/item/263-findings-on-the-implication-of-excise-duty-on-sorghum-value-chain

Tegemeo says between 2009 and 2012 EABL increased sorghum buying from 474 tonnes to 12,715 tonnes, a 26-fold increase.
The brewer has now cancelled contracts with farmers and at the moment is stuck with 13,000 tonnes of sorghum.

http://www.businessdailyafrica.com/Keg-excise-tax-costs-sorghum-farmers/-/539552/2477300/-/owokri/-/index.html

http://www.nation.co.ke/business/seedsofgold/Review-sorghum-beer-tax-/-/2301238/2522708/-/7e4bunz/-/index.html

http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/m/?articleID=2000142154&story_title=Sorghum-farmers-facing-Sh3b-loss-as-brewers-shy-off-deal-due-to-new-tax

[RV Pundit]

A sad story indeed for the whole value chain.

[Omollo]

There should be an Administration Act pronto! This is the most lame excuse I have ever encountered in my life. That a mandarin can not tell the difference between two products therefore he taxes both highly! This is extreme administrative prejudice that consumers and citizens must be protected from. It is not the responsibility of the citizen to imbue the mandarin with knowledge on how to tell the difference between non-taxable and taxable products! That is the height of arrogance!

I have no idea why somebody did not go to court to have this tax removed since the mandarins have admitted that they have no intention of levying it but only do it because they find themselves stupid! Let the court determine if official stupidity forms sufficient grounds to impose a heavy unwarranted penalties on citizens.

NB I am still opposed to alcohol but I can't suffer official idiocy and arrogance!

[gout]

such a joke ..... but have seen EABL guys grinning during those taxpayers 'awards' day instead of asking hard question or lobbying

There should be an Administration Act pronto! This is the most lame excuse I have ever encountered in my life. That a mandarin can not tell the difference between two products therefore he taxes both highly! This is extreme administrative prejudice that consumers and citizens must be protected from. It is not the responsibility of the citizen to imbue the mandarin with knowledge on how to tell the difference between non-taxable and taxable products! That is the height of arrogance!

I have no idea why somebody did not go to court to have this tax removed since the mandarins have admitted that they have no intention of levying it but only do it because they find themselves stupid! Let the court determine if official stupidity forms sufficient grounds to impose a heavy unwarranted penalties on citizens.

NB I am still opposed to alcohol but I can't suffer official idiocy and arrogance!