Uganda: Trade and investment implications of Budget Speech, 2009.
Description
l.k kiiza
12.00
On 11 June 2009 the Budget Speech was read to the Parliament of Uganda by the Minister for Finance, Planning, and Economic Development. This speech included a number of proposed provisions that may have trade and investment implications.
1. Enacting an (unspecified) Amendment to the Investment Code.
2. Import duties will be remitted on specially designed tourist vehicles imported by licensed tourist operators.
3. Import duties will be remitted on spare parts of certain industrial machinery imported by registered manufacturers, under the condition that the parts in question are not resold or used for any other commercial purpose other than the replacement of a worn-out part.
4. Other that motor vehicles, import duties will remitted on equipment and other inputs imported by licensed firm engaged in oil, gas, or geothermal exploration.
5. To promote the dairy industry heat insulated milk tanks will be exempt from import duty.
6. Import duties will be remitted on film equipment.
7. "Because of the importance transport plays in the value chain for business and in the current times of economic downturn the EAC Ministers further decided to grant remission of import duty from 25 percent and apply 10 percent for trucks of carrying capacity of 5 tonnes and above, for one year for Uganda, Tanzania and Rwanda." EAC ministers "also agreed to grant remission of import duty on trucks of carrying capacity of over 20 tonnes from 25 percent and apply 0 percent for Uganda, Tanzania and Rwanda for one year."
Any Evidence-Based Deliberation:
| Question | Result |
|---|---|
| Is there anything in the public record to suggest that evidence of the effectiveness of the proposed measure was considered during official deliberations? | Don't know |
| Is there any evidence that alternatives to the proposed measure were considered? | Don't Know |
| Is there anything in the public record that suggests that empirical evidence informed the comparison across the alternatives available to government? | Don't Know |
| Was such evidence identified? | Don't Know |
| Is such evidence publicly available? | Don't Know |
| Did the official decision-maker in question provide an explanation as to why a chosen measure was favoured over alternatives? | Don't Know |
| Is there any evidence to suggest that potentially affected trading partners were consulted before the measures were taken? | No |
| Is there any evidence that safeguards have been put in place to ensure that implementation of the initiative is transparent and non-discriminatory? | Don't Know |
| Did the government state its intention to review the measure within one year of implementation? | No |
Date Discovered: 20/08/2009
Implemented: Yes
Date of inception: 11 Jun 2009
GTA Evaluation: Amber
Source:
Ministry of Finance, Budget Speech for 2009/10, http://www.finance.go.ug/docs/Budget%20Speech_FY2009_10_Final.pdf
Government Response:
- 647 reads
