BY Daniel Bampoe
The Member of Parliament for Tano North, Dr Gideon Boako, has intensified his criticism of the government’s digital Value Added Tax (VAT) collection policy, arguing that its application to online betting platforms and other cross-border digital services could impose additional financial burdens on consumers while creating what he describes as unfair treatment for Ghanaians living abroad.
Dr Boako, in separate comments on the policy, has questioned the implications of the Ghana Revenue Authority’s (GRA) real-time VAT collection system, particularly its application to foreign digital service providers and transactions made with Ghanaian bank cards outside the country.
The legislator argues that charging the effective 20 per cent tax on digital services used by Ghanaians could amount to a return of the betting tax abolished in April 2025, even though the two taxes apply to different transactions and operate under separate tax arrangements.
His criticism comes as the GRA rolls out a system to collect taxes on qualifying cross-border digital services, including online platforms used for entertainment, betting, and other internet-based activities. The new collection system took effect on October 15, 2026, according to the MP and the accompanying report.
The GRA maintains that the arrangement is intended to improve the collection of existing statutory taxes rather than introduce a new tax rate. The effective rate remains 20 per cent, comprising 15 per cent VAT, a 2.5 per cent National Health Insurance Levy and a 2.5 per cent GETFund Levy.
However, Dr Boako insists that the impact of a tax policy must be assessed by examining what consumers will actually pay, rather than simply whether the government describes it as a new tax or a collection mechanism for existing statutory obligations.
Betting Platforms Could Face Renewed Tax Burden
In his earlier comments, Dr Boako criticised the application of the effective 20 per cent digital VAT to online betting platforms such as Betway, arguing that the arrangement could recreate some of the financial consequences associated with the betting tax previously abolished by the government.
The government scrapped the 10 per cent withholding tax on betting and lottery winnings in April 2025. That tax was imposed on players’ winnings, while the current digital VAT arrangements concern qualifying digital services and are legally distinct from the tax previously charged on betting proceeds.
The MP nevertheless argues that consumers could face additional costs when using digital platforms if the applicable taxes are passed on to them through transaction charges or higher prices.
He maintains that describing the policy as the collection of an existing tax does not eliminate its potential impact on the pockets of ordinary Ghanaians.
For users of online betting platforms, the distinction between a tax on winnings and VAT on a qualifying digital service is important. The two mechanisms do not necessarily tax the same transaction, and the extent to which consumers bear the cost of the digital VAT will depend on the applicable rules and how service providers implement the charges.
Dr Boako has urged the government to consider the economic implications of the policy, particularly for young people and consumers who rely on digital platforms for entertainment, business and other online activities.
MP Raises Concerns Over Ghanaians Living Abroad
In a separate argument, Dr Boako has questioned how the digital VAT system could affect Ghanaians studying, working or temporarily residing outside the country.
He contends that a Ghanaian student in the United Kingdom or the United States who purchases a digital service using a Ghanaian bank card could be charged the applicable VAT, even where the service is consumed outside Ghana.
According to the MP, the policy could affect students who depend on bank cards belonging to their parents in Ghana to pay for online subscriptions and other digital services while studying abroad.
His concern centres on the possibility that the payment instrument used for a transaction could influence whether VAT is charged, even when the person purchasing or consuming the service is physically outside the country. Dr Boako argues that such an outcome would place an additional burden on Ghanaians living abroad who continue to rely on Ghanaian financial accounts to meet their digital service expenses.
He has contrasted this with the possibility that a foreign diplomat living in Ghana could purchase digital services using a bank card issued in their home country and potentially avoid the charge.
Using that example, the MP argues that the policy could produce an unequal outcome in which Ghanaians abroad face charges while some foreign residents in Ghana may not.
However, whether VAT applies to a particular transaction cannot be determined solely by the nationality of the cardholder or the country that issued the bank card. The applicable tax rules, the customer’s location, the nature of the service and the transaction’s treatment under the collection system are all relevant considerations.
The MP’s example therefore raises questions about how the GRA determines the location of a digital consumer, identifies taxable transactions and handles payments made with foreign-issued cards.
We Just Hate Our Own People— Boako
In expressing his frustration, Dr Boako accused the government of introducing a policy that could disadvantage Ghanaians living abroad while potentially allowing some foreigners residing in Ghana to escape the charge.
He wrote: “We have just introduced a tax to punish even Ghanaians living abroad while letting foreigners living in Ghana go free.” He added: “We just hate our own people.”
The comments reflect the MP’s broader argument that the government should examine the practical consequences of the digital VAT policy and ensure that its implementation does not unfairly burden Ghanaian consumers.
His criticism also raises a wider policy question about the relationship between digital taxation, the location of consumers and the use of financial instruments issued in different jurisdictions.
As digital transactions increasingly cross national borders, tax authorities face the challenge of determining which transactions fall within their jurisdiction and ensuring that applicable taxes are collected consistently.
For Ghana, the GRA’s system is intended to improve the collection of taxes on qualifying cross-border digital services. However, Dr Boako believes the implementation must be carefully examined to avoid unintended consequences for Ghanaians who live, study or work abroad.
Government’s Tax Policy Faces Further Scrutiny
The controversy places renewed attention on the government’s approach to taxing digital services and the distinction between introducing a new tax and improving the collection of an existing one.
While the GRA says the effective 20 per cent rate reflects existing statutory taxes, Dr Boako argues that consumers may still experience an increase in their actual expenses where those charges were not previously applied at the point of payment.
His comparison with the abolished betting tax has also sparked a debate about whether the public is being given sufficient clarity on how the new collection arrangements affect online betting transactions.
The two tax mechanisms are legally distinct, but the MP’s concern is that the additional cost associated with digital VAT could undermine the relief consumers expected following the abolition of the 10 per cent tax on betting and lottery winnings.
