Category Archives: PUBLIC POLICY

2025 OECD Rules Update on Remote Workers: Tax Insights on Cross-Border Human Capital Management.

The 2025 OECD Model Convention Update on the International Taxation concept of Permanent Establishments(PE) has fundamentally redefined Human Capital and Workforce Management in the context of cross-border remote working. 

These changes, which African nations like Uganda are expected to localise as domestic tax law, widens cross-border tax risk exposure for Multi-National Enterprises(MNEs) beyond commercial presence through physical offices. The news rules recognise the notion of commercial presence through human capital and remote workers working from a home or a similar place in another jurisdiction.

This opinion critically analyses the PE concept and its application to cross-border remote working in the context of Uganda’s current PE law, and further discusses the likely implications of the update from two perspectives:

First, the implications for global and regional firms and technology start-ups scaling across borders, with emphasis on emerging human capital management complications likely to arise once African countries, including Uganda, localise the update into domestic tax law.
Secondly, the opinion discusses the advantages it offers to tax administrations(OECD Member nations and nations that eventually localise the update into domestic law), particularly on combating tax avoidance by multinational enterprises (MNEs).

For the non-technical readers, I will be returning to explain the concept of a PE in simple terms but below are the new changes in brief:

The New Test: A PE is now strongly indicated if an employee works from a home office in State A for 50% of their total working time for their Non-Resident employer in State B AND there is a commercial reason for their presence in state A (e.g, servicing local clients and time-zone alignment). The changes have explicitly rejected cost saving or employee convenience as sole justification for remote cross-border working.
Impact on Tax Administration: The update is a powerful anti-avoidance tool for Tax Authorities, allowing them to assert taxing rights based on functional substance rather than just legal form(e.g work-from-anywhere contract clauses permitting cross-border remote working), materially expanding the tax base beyond the current 183-day Service PE rule.

Headache for MNEs and Tech Start-ups: The new rules transform low-cost, agile market testing for tech start-ups into a high-cost compliance burden for start-ups and other regional businesses trying to enter new markets and to scale across-borders. 

The rules will likely result in immediate, non-negotiable Payroll, Social Security, and Immigration risk above Corporate Income Tax, aggressively eroding the limited cash runway of young scaling companies, and rope companies into a more complex compliance matrix.

Navigating Foreign Income Taxation in Uganda: Key Tax Insights on Offshore Asset holdings

In the last quarter of 2025, a significant number of Ugandans in the diaspora alongside resident High-Networth taxpayers with offshore interests received emails from the Uganda Revenue Authority (URA) conveying a directive that might be signaling the end of “Offshore Anonymity” for Ugandan Taxpayers

In the emails, URA informs taxpayers that it has received information indicating that “you have earned foreign income or gains” and that “Preliminary analysis indicates that one or more foreign financial accounts or assets associated with your name and TIN”

The taxpayer are then given seven days to review and regularize their tax affairs before commencement of a formal investigation.

This is not routine correspondence, but rather one that marks a new phase in Uganda’s tax administration, one defined by unprecedented financial transparency and access to foreign financial information regarding the commercial activities of taxpayers.

The notices confirm that Uganda has fully operationalized the global data-exchange framework built around the OECD’s Multilateral Convention on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Tax Matters (MAAC), following the Uganda Parliament’s enactment of the Convention on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Tax Matters (Implementation) Act, 2023.

Under this framework, Foreign Jurisdictions volunteer taxpayer information on income generating asset holdings, transactions that might have resulted in taxable gains, emoluments subject to tax in Uganda, among other categories of information relevant to tax administration.

KRA Vs Sendy: Kenya’s High Court VAT Precedent Threatens East Africa’s Gig Economy and Digital Commerce Growth.

Kenya’s High Court has recently delivered a Key decision in the battle over VAT in the ride-hailing/digital platform economy, that risks far-reaching ripple effects across East Africa’s digital commerce landscape. 

The landmark decision fundamentally reclassifies digital platforms as primary suppliers of gig-economy services for VAT purposes. This brings them fully into the VAT net and forces gig workers/entrepreneurs and small merchants into VAT compliance, with potentially far-reaching consequences for the growth, structure, and taxation of the East African digital economy.

The immediate tax implication is that we now have two VATable transactions in every ride or delivery processed through a digital platform operating a similar business model. These are;

Supply from motor vehicle owner to tech platform (input VAT for the platform)

Supply from tech platform to end consumer (output VAT to the tax authorities on full final consideration paid by the end consumer)

This new reality is problematic from a commercial point of view, taking into consideration the nature and level of tax sophistication of most African economies.

The other immediate implication is that thousands of gig-economy participants have been hit with a VAT compliance shock overnight, and the reason is simple; e-commerce platforms lose input VAT if they trade with non-compliant taxpayers. Exposure to commercial activities of too many Non-VAT Traders or informal taxpayers makes the platform’s business model commercially unviable and wipes out margins.

Uganda’s Tax Exemption for Start-Ups: Key Insights for Entrepreneurs.

This fiscal year’s tax amendments included certain key amendments that have been hailed as a critical step in the right direction for tax administration, and particularly the tax exemptions provisions targeting start-ups and similar fledgling businesses.

​The amendment introduced new tax law aimed at fostering and supporting well formalised entrepreneurship, in the form of an income tax exemption for Uganda Citizen owned businesses started after 1st July 2025, for three-years.

Its practical application however requires a precise understanding of how the Uganda Revenue Authority (URA) interprets “new business,”, “associated entities,” and “Compliance” among other tax nomenclature. Yes, as with all incentives, the opportunity lies in the detail. This article seeks to address this detail.

Investing in Uganda; Tax Planning and Why Tax Should Lead Your Market Entry Strategy

The decision on corporate structure, i.e, whether to register a subsidiary vs. branch, Financing questions, i.e debt vs. equity, tax residence/domicile/location of holding entities are all strategy questions which are informed by tax considerations. 

Choosing the wrong structure can expose the investor to; Transfer pricing risk, Withholding tax inefficiencies, Loss of treaty benefits, Double taxation and generally, tax inefficiency and a higher tax burden across different tax heads.

But what happens when the company is set up in a way that causes preventable tax leakages or unnecessary friction with the tax authorities?

For any foreign investor entering the Ugandan market, undertaking corporate legal structuring advice without any input from a tax practitioner is a grave mistake.

While the structure may be viable on paper, it might ignore certain critical elements of transfer pricing regulation, international tax treaty benefits and domestic tax compliance aspects that might later work against the investor and require a costly restructuring process.

2025 TAX AMENDMENTS; PROPOSED STAMP DUTY AMENDMENTS DO NOT CURE DEFECTS IN THE LAW

The Minister proposes an amendment to Schedule 2 to the Stamp Duty Act, to provide for nil duty for an agreement or memorandum of agreement executed or received in Uganda.

I need to warn at this point that Taxpayers better not celebrate just yet. This is because, the proposed amendment if passed into law might not in fact take away this liability. The Stamp Duty Act as it currently stands is littered with overlapping levies and one of these is the one the Minister proposes to do away with.

The tax sought to be done away with might still be brought home to a taxpayer by enforcing another provision. That other provision happens to be item 52 of Schedule 2 of the Stamp Duty Act, which levies Stamp Duty of a similar amount(Shs. 15000/=) on a RECEIPT as defined by section 2, for any money or other property the amount of value of which exceeds Shs. 50000 /=.

Section 2 of the Act defines the RECEIPT as follows;

“RECEIPT” includes a note, memorandum or writing whether the note, memorandum or writing is or is not signed with the name of a person,

(a) by which any money, or any bill of exchange, cheque or promissory note is acknowledged to have been received;

(b) by which any other movable property is acknowledged to have been received in satisfaction of a debt;

(c) by which a debt or demand, or any part of a debt or demand, is acknowledged to have been satisfied or discharged; or

(d) which signifies or imports the acknowledgment;

The definition of a receipt under that Section is so wide that it in fact includes and indeed refers to what essentially is an agreement and a Memorandum of an agreement.

Money Lending Regulation: Key Insights for Lenders and Borrowers

Institutions or money lenders are now under a mandatory obligation to allow borrowers at least five working days after signing a lending contract, to revoke or terminate the contract by written notice delivered to the institution or money lender.

The revocation termination is effective if the borrower repays the full amount of the loan at the time of cancellation of the contract and any other administrative charges, or fees which have been reasonably incurred in arranging the loan and these must not exceed two percent of the value of the loan.

The informal sector and URA’s struggles with widening the tax base.

“Trading through companies is much more technical and with recent increased enforcement from the regulators, this means entities can no-longer get away with non-compliance as has been the case, and yet tiny businesses can’t absorb the steep compliance costs (both with URA and URSB).

I have in the past advised owners of tiny enterprises to stick to sole proprietorship or partnerships as business vehicles until it becomes absolutely necessary to incorporate, in which case those businesses can be sold to corporations in consideration for equity.”