Virginia Palmer

The United States Ambassador to Ghana, Virginia Palmer, has indicated the need for Ghana and the United States to engage over tariffs and explore other ways to maintain the lowest tariffs given the relationship between the two countries.

Interacting with some journalists after meeting the Ministry of  Trade and other stakeholders, yesterday in Accra , she said  though  she appreciated the concerns about the 10% tariff was brought to her attention, she believes, it will be beneficial to Ghana and her competitors.

She said, “I had a great meeting with the Minister of Foreign Affairs. We talked about how the relationship with Ghana is very strong and how we can keep it that way. We also discussed the details of these global tariffs and explored areas where the United States and Ghana can improve trade relations and maintain the lowest possible tariff regime.”

The announcement of 10% tariff imposed on commodities exported from Ghana and some other countries last week by the President of the United States, Donald Trump sparked discussion in many sectors including the private and public sectors of its potential impacts to businesses.

By Ebenezer K.Amponsah

Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo

Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo has submitted her response to three petitions calling for her removal from office.

The responses, which were submitted to the President and the Council of State last Friday, paves the way for the continuation of the consultation process with the Council of State in accordance with Article 146(6) of the 1992 Constitution.

President John Dramani Mahama had given the Chief Justice 10 days within which to respond to the three separate petitions calling for removal, although it is unclear what allegations have been levelled against her due to the confidentiality demanded by the process.

If the Council of State finds merit in the allegations against the Chief Justice vis-à-vis her responses, a committee would be set up by the President to inquire into the petitions and recommend to him whether the Chief Justice ought to be removed from office.

The Committee, according to Article 146(6), must consist of “two Justices of the Supreme Court, one of whom shall be appointed chairman by the President, and three other persons who are not members of the Council of State, nor members of Parliament, nor lawyers.”

Three petitions were filed earlier this year for the removal of Justice Torkornoo as Chief Justice, and the President forwarded them to the Council of State for consideration.

The Chief Justice then wrote to the President requesting copies of the three petitions seeking to remove her from office.

Justice Torkornoo, in her request to the President, had highlighted the decision to forward the petitions to the Council of State without giving her copies, to provide her an opportunity to respond to the allegations made against her.

The request to the President and copied to the Council of State, its Chairman Doe Adjaho as well as former Chief Justice Sophia Akuffo, who is also a member of the Council of State, indicates that the rules of natural justice demand that the accusations made against her in the said petitions must be brought to her attention.

It also indicates that no defendant can be subjected to a trial unless the preliminary process of receiving their response has been adhered to as provided for under Article 19, Article 23, and Article 296 of the 1992 Constitution, and all decisions in Ghana’s jurisprudence.

Just a day later, the President forwarded the petitions to the Chief Justice and gave 10 days to respond to them.

A letter signed by Calistus Mahama, Secretary to the President, indicates that the Chief Justice’s response will facilitate the consultation process initiated by the President, who has forwarded the petition to the Council of State in accordance with Article 146(6) of the 1992 Constitution.

The letter further indicates that the President has assured the Chief Justice that due process will be followed in dealing with the petitions, and she will be given a full and fair opportunity to be heard on the allegations contained in the petitions.

Again, it points out that each page of the petitions would be marked as ‘RESTRICTED’ due to the confidentiality associated with the process and the fact that the Chief Justice’s request to the President found its way into the media.

Meanwhile, the President has acknowledged receipt of the Chief Justice’s preliminary response to the petitions seeking her removal from office.

BY Gibril Abdul Razak

The Director-General of the National Disaster Management Organization (NADMO), Major (Rtd) Joseph Bikanyi Kuyon, has clarified the mandate and operations of the Anti-Flood Taskforce recently established by President John Dramani Mahama.

According to Major Kuyon, the primary purpose of the task force was not to directly implement flood mitigation measures but to conduct a rapid assessment and identify areas in the capital most vulnerable to flooding.

Speaking on the Citi Breakfast Show on Tuesday, April 8, Major Kuyon explained that the task force’s role was observational and advisory. It was tasked with providing the President with firsthand information on flood-prone areas, particularly in preparation for the upcoming rainy season—a time traditionally associated with destruction, displacement, and loss of life in Ghana’s urban centers.

“The taskforce formed by the President was only to go around and confirm the risk reality of some areas. They finished their work and briefed him, and then he [the President] went round to assess the situation himself.

“The rest of the job is the responsibility of NADMO,” Major Kuyon stated. “And NADMO does not work alone. It collaborates with the Meteorological Service, the Ghana Armed Forces, the Ghana National Fire Service, and any other state agency involved in disaster risk management.”

The Anti-Flood Taskforce was formed on March 12 as part of a renewed national effort to improve disaster preparedness and flood mitigation.

Chaired by Stanislav Xoese Dogbe, the taskforce’s focus was on tackling and minimizing the ongoing problem of urban flooding, particularly in Accra and other low-lying areas that are regularly affected by heavy rains.

Explore the world of impactful news with CitiNewsroom on WhatsApp!

Click on the link to join the Citi Newsroom channel for curated, meaningful stories tailored just for YOU:
https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VaCYzPRAYlUPudDDe53x

No spam, just the stories that truly matter! #StayInformed #CitiNewsroom #CNRDigital

The Deputy Minister for Roads and Highways and Member of Parliament for Tamale North, Alhassan Suhuyini, has led efforts to swiftly repair the malfunctioning Agric traffic lights in Tamale, one of the busiest intersections on the Tamale-Bolgatanga highway.

The malfunctioning traffic lights had caused significant vehicular congestion and were linked to a number of minor accidents in recent weeks, raising public concern. In response, a social media campaign calling for immediate action gained traction, prompting the MP to intervene.

Acting through the Ministry of Roads and Highways, in collaboration with the Department of Urban Roads in the Northern Region, Hon. Suhuyini facilitated the repair works to restore order and improve road safety in the area.

During a working visit to inspect the progress of the repairs, Suhuyini urged residents to take ownership of the infrastructure by protecting it from vandalism and theft.

“Yes, it is installed by the highways authority, but it is serving our purpose. So, when a vehicle hits it, we should take the number and report it to the appropriate authority so that they can also take part in the maintenance and repair.

“Also, when people attempt to steal the cables, let us not just look on and think that it is government property. Because it serves all of us,” he stated.

He also commended all stakeholders, including the Urban Roads Department and engineers involved, for their swift response and dedication to restoring the traffic lights.

Gregory Afoko

THE TRIAL of Gregory Afoko, who is accused of murdering the then Upper East Regional Chairman of the New Patriotic Party (NPP), Adams Mahama, has taken a long adjournment as the Attorney General (AG) Dr. Dominic Ayine is said to be taking another look at the case.

Justice Marie-Louise Simmons, the presiding judge, before adjourning the case yesterday indicated that the information from the prosecution pointed to the fact that the Attorney General was considering what to do about the case.

The prosecution was expected to call its next witness in the retrial following a hung jury in the first trial.

But both the prosecution and the defence lawyers approached the judge after which Justice Simmons adjourned the case to May 30, 2025.

Gregory Afoko was released from prison on March 28, 2025, nearly ten years after he was first remanded.

This was after his two sureties were able to meet all the conditions of the GH¢500,000 bail granted him by a High Court in Accra on February 21, 2025.

Afoko was arrested for allegedly pouring acid on Adams Mahama, leading to his death.

His lawyers have tried since 2015 to secure bail for him, but various courts had turned down the request.

However, on February 21, 2025, a High Court presided over by Justice Marie-Louise Simmons granted him bail in the sum of GH¢500,000 with two sureties who must be justified.

Third Trial

He is currently on a third round of trial after the first trial was truncated in 2019 by the Office of the Attorney General following the arrest of Afoko’s alleged accomplice, Asabke Alangdi, who fled the country after the incident in May 2015.

The second trial ended on April 27, 2023, with a seven-member jury presenting a verdict that shocked many.

The jury by a 4:3 decision found Gregory Afoko not guilty of conspiring to murder the late Adams Mahama, but unanimously found his co-accused, Asabke Alangdi guilty of the same offence.

The jury however, by 4:3 decision found the two accused persons not guilty of the substantive charge of murder, thereby resulting in a hung jury and a retrial by a different jury.

While Afoko is facing a retrial as a result of a hung jury, Asabke Alangdi was sentenced to death by hanging after he was convicted by the court based on the jury’s guilty verdict on the charge of conspiracy to commit murder.

Part of the prosecution’s facts state that “The deceased returned home around 11:10 p.m. in his pick-up vehicle when the suspects poured the substance suspected to be acid on his head, face and other parts of his body and fled on a motorbike.”

BY Gibril Abdul Razak

The Director-General of the National Disaster Management Organisation (NADMO), Dr. Joseph Bikanyi Kuyon, has announced that unauthorized structures will be demolished as part of intensified efforts to combat flooding across Ghana, particularly in Accra.

Speaking on the Citi Breakfast Show on Tuesday, April 8, 2025, Dr. Kuyon emphasized that addressing the country’s persistent flooding issues will require difficult but necessary decisions, including the removal of illegal structures and the dredging of critical water channels.

“To solve a problem, there must be some discomfort, so people will have to incur some displeasures based on the actions that will be taken to ensure that the rest of us are safe. Some structures will have to be pulled down,” he said.

Dr. Kuyon warned that restoring the natural flow of water bodies is crucial to avoiding severe consequences for affected communities.

“Those who have started filling these places will have to stop, and we will dredge these places to restore them to their original state for them to play the role they are supposed to play because the ecosystem is disturbed.

“If you don’t restore it, what it means is that the lives that are in this system will suffer. So, there will be dredging, there will be demolishing, and we have to do it when we have to ensure that the flooding that is envisaged is effectively managed,” he stated.

While acknowledging that Accra often takes the spotlight in flooding discussions due to the scale of the problem there, Dr. Kuyon clarified that other parts of the country are also affected.

“Flooding is not only peculiar to Accra, but it is because we see a serious problem in Accra that is why the conversation is always centred around Accra,” he said.

Responding to concerns about the fairness and technical basis for the impending demolitions, he assured that the process would not be arbitrary.

“We don’t demolish with a layman’s eye. We [have] engineers, technocrats who are going to be part of this team, [and they] are going to advise. Where structures are supposed to be pulled down, they will. Where it is possible to redirect the direction of water, and not necessarily tamper with people’s property, that will be done,” he added.

Akosua Manu

Amid ongoing discussions about suspicious flights allegedly linked to drug trafficking at Kotoka International Airport (KIA), Akosua Manu, former Deputy CEO of the National Youth Authority and recent parliamentary candidate for the New Patriotic Party (NPP) in the Adenta Constituency, has raised concerns regarding inconsistencies in the Government Spokesperson’s statements.

Akosua Manu took to social media platform X to address the issue, pointing out a discrepancy in the aircraft registration numbers presented by the Government Spokesperson, Felix Kwakye Ofosu.

She noted that the aircraft under scrutiny bears the registration number N823AM, while the Member of Parliament (MP) for the Abura-Asebu-Kwamankese Constituency, referenced a different aircraft, N864AM.

In her post, she questioned: “Why is the aircraft number different? The one in discussion is N823AM. The one you have posted has N864AM.”

This query comes in the wake of allegations made by Rev. John Ntim Fordjour, Member of Parliament for Assin South and Ranking Member of the Defence Committee, concerning the arrival of two suspicious flights at KIA. These flights are suspected to be involved in drug trafficking and money laundering activities.

President John Dramani Mahama has since directed security agencies to collaborate with Rev. Fordjour to investigate these claims thoroughly.

However, this directive remains unclear, as Mr. Kwakye Ofosu has pre-empted the investigation by insisting that the flights were not involved in any illegal activities, contrary to the allegations made by Rev. Ntim Fordjour. Security analysts have raised concerns about the prejudicial nature of the comments made by the Government Spokesperson.

The government has yet to respond publicly to Akosua Manu’s inquiry about the differing aircraft numbers. This inconsistency has sparked further debate and calls for clarity regarding the details of the flights in question.

In a related development, Blessed Sogah, Regional Adviser for Anti-Money Laundering, Counter-Financing of Terrorism, and Anti-Corruption at the United Nations Office on Drugs and , and Kodjo Attisso, have both indicated that the allegations must be thoroughly investigated. This position aligns with the United Nations’ zero-tolerance policy for organised crime and underscores the need to address such controversies promptly and decisively.

The latest allegation follows a BBC Africa Eye investigation published in March, which identified Ghana as an emerging drug trafficking hub. The report has the potential to tarnish Ghana’s reputation as the gateway to Africa and a business hub for legitimate enterprises.

Ghana has witnessed two instances of the abolition of tax on lottery winnings- first in 2017 and more recently in 2025- and in both cases, the process appears to have been marked by legislative challenges.

The recent repeal of the withholding tax on lottery winnings commonly referred to as the “betting tax” sparked widespread excitement among lottery participants. Yet, beneath the celebrations lies a nuanced legal and fiscal question: has the repeal abolished taxes on lottery winnings entirely, or solely removing the withholding obligation at payout?

In 2017, betting tax was abolished under the Income Tax Amendments (No.2) Act, 2017 (Act 956). It was reintroduced in 2023 under the Income Tax (Amendment) Act, 2023 (Act 1094). Subsequently, in March 2025, the Income Tax (Amendment) Act, 2025 (Act 1129) was passed to abolish it again.

The question is, has the betting tax been properly abolished, or is it merely a drafting issue in both the 2017 and 2025 Acts? Is income from betting, taxed elsewhere within the tax laws even though it is deleted from the list of items classified as investment income?

From a strictly legal and tax policy perspective, the signed repeal specifically removes the requirement for withholding taxes at the point of payout for lottery winnings. The critical technical distinction to consider is whether this repeal extends beyond withholding obligations to the overall taxability of lottery income under the Income Tax Act. While President’s signature formally ended the withholding tax regime, there remain complex and technical consideration.

This article examines whether lottery income remains taxable, either as business income or as isolated transactions, despite the recent repeal.

LOTTERY AND BETTING IN GHANA – HISTORICAL CANVAS

Gambling is as old as society itself, and on the colonial Gold Coast, it took many forms, including informal betting houses, underground lottery schemes, and street-corner wagering. In the early days of Ghana’s independence, as the nation was building its legislative identity, it faced a surging challenge of unregulated gambling, and lotteries were spreading rapidly. Yet, these activities benefited unscrupulous operators, threatened to drain the hard-earned resources of ordinary Ghanaians, and deprived the state of valuable revenue streams.

Ghana sought to consolidate its fragmented gambling laws from the colonial rules when two legislative frameworks on lotteries were introduced: the Lotteries Betting Act, 1960 (Act 31) and the National Weekly Lotto Act, 1961 (Act 94). Together, these laws structured how these activities were conducted in Ghana. Act 31 was a robust legislative response aimed at criminalising unauthorised lotteries and regulating gaming activities under strict state oversight.

Recognising that lotteries, if well-managed, could serve as a significant revenue source, the National Weekly Lotto Act (Act 94) was passed in 1961, creating a state monopoly over lottery operations. Act 31 firmly declared most lotteries unlawful.

From the early Acts of 1960 and 1961 and subsequent enactments such as the District Weekly Lotto Regulations, 1989 (LI 1482), to the comprehensive reforms in 2006, the National Lotto Act, 2006 (Act 722) was passed, and the Department of National Lotteries (DNL) gained autonomy. It became known as the National Lottery Authority (NLA), with a sole mandate to regulate, supervise, conduct, and manage the National Lotto. As technology advanced and new forms of gaming emerged, The Gaming Act, 2006 (Act 721) was passed.

TAXATION OF LOTTERY AND GAMBLING IN GHANA
Under Ghana’s Income Tax Act, 2015 (Act 896), taxable income is broadly categorised into three primary sources: Employment income, Business income, and Investment income. Each source is distinctly defined and taxed accordingly. The General rule is that unless an income is specifically exempted under the law, any income accruing to a person will fall under one of these three categories.

Employment Income (Section 4) includes all payments, benefits, or gains arising from an employment relationship, such as salaries, allowances, bonuses, and benefits in kind.

Business Income (Section 5) comprises profits or gains from any trade, profession, or vocation, including sales, fees, asset disposals, and business-related receipts.

Investment Income (Section 6) refers to returns generated from holding or investing in assets, including dividends, interest, rent, royalties, and lottery winnings.

Thus, since 2015, Ghana has recognised lottery winnings as an investment. A country’s tax system choice strongly influences the inclusion of lottery or gambling income. For countries with a worldwide nature of their tax system, gambling winnings are, in principle, subject to tax whether they arise from windfall (occasional transactions) or a professional gambler.

The Tax base is only on the winnings. Losses incurred in gambling are not deductible because each gambling occasion is a separate event, so gambling losses arising on one occasion cannot be deducted against gambling winnings derived on another occasion. These restrictions presumably reflect administrative difficulties of verifying gambling losses.Even in the case of a professional gambler, gambling losses for the year can be deducted only to the extent of gambling income.

Most countries tax lottery or Gambling income as occasional income (a windfall), and some countries consider gambling income taxable only if the gambler can be found to be in the business of gambling. For example, in Germany, the gambling income of a professional card player is taxable as business income, while gambling income from TV shows is taxable as other income.

When Act 896 was passed, lottery winnings were taxed at a withholding rate of 5% on the winning amount under 1st Schedule Par 8(1)(b)(viii). Regulation 24 of the Income Tax Regulations, 2016 (L.I. 2244), defines winnings from lottery to include gaming, betting, and any game of chance.

In 2016, the Income Tax Amendment Act, 2016 (Act 907), exempted the first GHS 2,592, and any excess winnings exceeding this amount were taxable at a withholding rate of 5%. In 2017, the National Lottery Authority (NLA) submitted a proposal to the government for the scrapping of taxes as a means of attracting more mainstream operators, leading to the passage of the Income Tax Amendments (No. 2) Act, 2017 (Act 956). Act 956 provided as follows: “ Section 6 of Act 896 amended: The Income Tax Act, 2015 (Act 896) referred to in this Act as the principal enactment is amended in section 6 by the deletion of subparagraph (iv) of paragraph (a) of subsection (2)”. The amendment sought to delete from the list of items classified as investment income under Section 6.

THE 2023 RE-INTRODUCTION OF 10% WITHHOLDING TAX

Par. 458 of the 2023 Budget Statement provided as follows:
“Mr. Speaker, stakeholder engagements for the review of taxation on betting and gambling, and other games of chance, which commenced in 2021, were concluded.”

A tax on Gross Gaming Revenue will replace Corporate Income Tax and VAT in 2023, and a token withholding tax on winnings will be introduced”. The Income Tax (Amendment) Act, 2023 (Act 1094) was then passed to re-introduce 10% withholding tax on lottery.

WHY WAS WITHHOLDING TAX USED TO COLLECT THE TAX ON LOTTERIES?

Withholding tax is globally recognized as an efficient method for collecting taxes on investment income, as it enables tax authorities to capture revenue directly at source. This ensures full compliance with tax laws and reduces administrative burdens on both taxpayers and tax authorities. Rather than allowing the taxpayer to self-declare the income from the investment, the person making the payment deducts the tax upfront. It is familiar with investment incomes such as dividends and lottery winnings.

In many jurisdictions, including Ghana, this system often operates as a final withholding tax, meaning the amount withheld at the source fully satisfies the tax liability on that income, and the recipient bears no further filing obligation to the tax authorities.

Ghana’s Income Tax Act, 2015 (Act 896), reflects this international best practice. Under Section 115, the Act imposes withholding tax on specified investment incomes and under Section 119, it classifies most of this income, including dividends and notably, lottery winnings, as final withholding payments. At best, this approach ensures that windfall incomes, such as lottery winnings, which have a high rate of evasion and non-compliance with self-declaration, are taxed fully and immediately at source through deduction, with the net amount paid to the person.

THE 2025 ABOLISHING OF WITHHOLDING ON LOTTERY

Paragraph 258 of the 2025 Budget statement provided as follows: “Mr. Speaker: (i) we will abolish the 10% withholding tax (WHT) on winnings from lottery, otherwise known as the ‘Betting Tax.’

The Income Tax (Amendment) Act, 2025 (Act 1129) was passed to amend Section 6 of Act 896, excluding winnings from lotteries from the items that must be included in calculating investment tax.

HAS IT BEEN PROPERLY ABOLISHED? A call for clarification of technical issues

I think, with all intents and purposes, both the 2017 repeal and the 2025 repeal aimed to exempt income from betting, but there could be some issues with the way the law was drafted. It should have been placed under “Exempt Amounts,” which means the income is not taxable at all.

From a tax policy perspective, an income is either taxable or exempt. If it is taxable, it comes as either as employment income, business income, or investment income. Section 133 of Act 896 defines exempt amount: “exempt amount means an amount exempt under Section 7, 57, 59, or 111, or the Sixth Schedule”.

From the historical account of taxing lottery winnings, parliament have deleted lottery winnings as an item of investment income by amending Section 6. It technically means that parliament categorically does not state that the income is exempt, but only providing that it is not part of investment income after its deletion.
If it is not investment income under Section 6 following deletion and it is also not exempt under Section 7, then what is the nature of the income from a lottery win?

My view is that the repeal primarily abolished the obligation on lottery operators to deduct withholding tax at the source from lottery winnings. It does not inherently exempt lottery income from taxation under the Income Tax Act 2015 (Act 896).

Under Act 896, lottery or betting income could still potentially fall within the definition of taxable income, either as business income (if the individual regularly participates in betting activities as a business or trade) or as income from isolated transactions.

If an individual’s betting activities constitute a consistent and organized trade or business, the income derived from such betting may still be taxable as business income under section 5 of Act 896. Even if winnings are occasional or isolated, they may still be subject to tax assessment. This is more so when section 133 defines business as follows:
“business” (a) includes (i) a trade, profession, vocation or isolated arrangement with a business character; and (ii) a past, present or prospective business; but (b) excludes an employment”

Thus, while the withholding tax aspect has been repealed, it does not automatically exempt betting or lottery winnings from being taxed altogether.

CONCLUSION

Parliament should clearly distinguish between abolishing the withholding tax mechanism and exempting the underlying income from taxation. From a tax law perspective, unless specific exemptions are provided in the repealing legislation or explicitly amended in the Income Tax Act, 2015 (Act 896), lottery winnings are considered taxable income, not subject to withholding tax, but rather to other income tax.

Winners must declare and pay the appropriate tax under existing provisions of the law. Failure to do so will amount to tax evasion. It is therefore crucial that the parliament examines the repealing legislation closely to confirm if the repeal explicitly exempts betting income entirely or merely eliminates withholding tax responsibilities, leaving the broader income tax obligations intact.

My concluding question is, does the repeal also mean that a professional gambler engaged in the gambling business of betting is exempt from tax? What about those who hit a jackpot? What about other forms of TV shows and Promotional winnings?

By: Francis Timore Boi Esq [[email protected]]
The writer is a Tax Consultant and a member of the Chartered Institute of Taxation Ghana.