Case file ITA-2016-BETTING-REPEAL
Withholding tax on winnings from sports and pool betting repealed
Highest rung reached: Verified lawLaw: read in a statutory textExemption removed · Relief
2 points pending verification
- Why the section was repealed; the 2017 Act put it back (ITA-2017-BETTING15).
- The FY2016/17 budget speech and its forecast for the measure; URA's FY2016/17 report prints no measure-level table.
Law
- Principal Act
- Income Tax Act (Cap 338), enacted as Act 11 of 1997
- Amending Act
- Income Tax (Amendment) Act 2016 (Act 20 of 2016) (verified)
- Provision, revised numbering (2023 revision)
- pending verification
- Provision, numbering before the revision
- s. 118C of Cap. 340
- Principal Act dates
- commencement 1997-07-01
- Amending Act in force from
- 1 July 2016 (assented 19 November 2016; gazetted 30 December 2016)
- Tax heads and taxpayers affected
- Withholding tax. Betting companies and people who win bets.
- Status
- Legal: repealed or replaced. Implementation: pending verification.
The wording in force
as at 2016-07-01
10. Repeal of section 118C of the principal Act. Section 118C of the principal Act is repealed. Verified law: Wording or a date read in a statutory text, with the version and page named.[ACT-ITA-2016-20, PDF page 5, s. 10]
Redline pending verification
Reason
Stated objective pending verification
Revenue
Amendment-level revenue contribution not reliably quantified.
- Rung 1
Observed change
Observed: A value or event as an official source records it, copied without calculation.- Collections for the tax heads affected are drawn on the story page, from URA's annual data books. Before and after is never presented as this amendment's effect.
- Rung 2
Official forecast
Official forecast: What MoFPED or URA said a measure would raise, or why it was made, before the year began.Missing. No official forecast for this measure was found in the budget documents or URA reports read. The budget speech and the Finance Bill memorandum for the year would settle it (MoFPED).
- Rung 3
Reported yield
Reported yield: What URA attributes to a measure after the year. An official attribution, not a causal estimate.Missing. URA's annual revenue reports read for the register attribute no yield to this measure. URA's measure-level policy tables, where they exist, would settle it (URA Research and Planning).
- Rung 4
Static or modelled estimate
Modelled estimate: A mechanical or model calculation, with every assumption shown.Missing. No estimate made. A static estimate needs the taxable base before the change (volumes or values by product), which the register does not hold.
- Rung 5
Causal estimate
Causal estimate: An effect identified by a stated research design against a comparison group.Missing. No study with a defensible identification strategy was found for this amendment.
- Rung 6
Wider impact
Interpretation: A reading of the evidence, by a named source or by this register.Missing. No source read for the register describes effects on prices, compliance cost, investment or equity.
What is known, what is uncertain, and what would settle it
- Known: only the collections of the tax heads affected.
- Uncertain: official forecast, reported yield, static or modelled estimate, causal estimate, wider impact; and 2 open points below.
Pathway
From the amendment to its wider consequences. Select a link to read what supports it. No money is drawn along the chain, because no flow along it is measured.
Verified: A source read for the register documents this link.
The provision is read in the ULII consolidated text.
- amendment: verified. The provision is read in the ULII consolidated text.
- mechanism: verified. An exemption withdrawn, so the base grows.
- implementation: no evidence. No source read dates its implementation.
- response: no evidence. No source read describes how taxpayers responded.
- outcome: no evidence. No reported yield or estimate.
- wider: no evidence. No source read measures wider effects. No evidence found is not evidence of no effect.
Consequences
Graded against ten criteria. No composite score: a reform that raises money can still be regressive or costly to comply with, and one that loses revenue can serve a legitimate aim. Revenue effectiveness is graded by a stated rule; the rest only where a source speaks to them.
What worked
No criterion graded effective on the evidence read.
What did not
No criterion graded ineffective or counterproductive on the evidence read.
Open or not evaluated
Revenue effectiveness
The measure was not meant to raise revenue, or its direction is unknown.(graded by rule)
Not evaluated
Legal clarity and certainty
No source read for the register speaks to this criterion.
Not evaluated
Administrative feasibility
No source read for the register speaks to this criterion.
Not evaluated
Compliance cost
No source read for the register speaks to this criterion.
Not evaluated
Efficiency
No source read for the register speaks to this criterion.
Not evaluated
Investment and competitiveness
No source read for the register speaks to this criterion.
Not evaluated
Vertical and horizontal equity
No source read for the register speaks to this criterion.
Not evaluated
Distributional effect
No source read for the register speaks to this criterion.
Not evaluated
Implementation quality
No source read for the register speaks to this criterion.
Not evaluated
Unintended consequences
No source read for the register speaks to this criterion.
Not evaluated
Afterlife
Linked records
- Withholding tax of 15% on winnings from betting reverses this record. The 2016 Act repealed the withholding tax on betting winnings; the 2017 Act put a 15% withholding tax back. (verified)[ACT-ITA-2016-20, PDF page 5]
No Tax Appeals Tribunal or court decision on this provision is on record yet. That is not evidence that none exists.
Pending verification
- Why the section was repealed; the 2017 Act put it back (ITA-2017-BETTING15).
- The FY2016/17 budget speech and its forecast for the measure; URA's FY2016/17 report prints no measure-level table.
Sources
ACT-ITA-2016-20
Income Tax (Amendment) Act, 2016 (Act 20 of 2016)
Parliament of Uganda; Uganda Printing and Publishing Corporation. 2016-12-30. Covers In force from its commencement.
Desktop/Tax legislation Amendment Acts/Income Tax (Amendment) Act, 2016.pdf
Status: verified. Pages confirmed for this record in the source audit: 5 (PDF).
Acts Supplement No. 15 to the Uganda Gazette No. 88, Volume CIX, dated 30 December 2016. Read in full (6 pages). Assented to on 19 November 2016, in force from 1 July 2016.