Accra, Ghana – The debate surrounding a proposed 0.75 percent charge on mobile money to bank transfers intensified this week as Majority Chief Whip Rockson-Nelson Dafeamekpor firmly rejected comparisons to the controversial Electronic Transfer Levy (E-Levy). Dafeamekpor asserted that the proposed charge, recently suspended by the Bank of Ghana, differs fundamentally in its origin, nature, and legal standing from the government-imposed E-Levy.
The central bank’s decision to halt the planned charge, which was set to take effect on June 1st, followed significant public backlash and concerns raised by various stakeholders. This suspension has since drawn criticism from the parliamentary minority, who question the process and justification provided by the Bank of Ghana.
Distinguishing the Charges
Speaking on the television program PM Express, Mr. Dafeamekpor addressed the Minority’s objections, characterizing their attempts to link the two levies as mere political propaganda. “Look, they are just trying to push that angle for the sake of propaganda because it is not E-Levy, not in form, not in character, not in nature at all,” he stated.
He emphasized that the proposed charge has no relation to the E-Levy and is not a government-backed tax measure. “It is a levy that a private company intends to impose,” Dafeamekpor clarified.
According to the Majority Chief Whip, the crucial distinction lies in the origin and backing of the charge. “I am saying that this is a service fee. It is never in the nature, character, and form of E-Levy,” he explained. He further highlighted that the proposed charge is not backed by law, nor is it sponsored by the government or any government agency, underscoring these as “clear material distinctions.”
Context of the Suspension
The proposed charge was intended to apply to direct transfers from mobile money wallets to bank accounts. Its announcement sparked immediate concern among users and financial sector observers, leading to the Bank of Ghana’s intervention to suspend the policy for further consultations.
The Bank of Ghana’s announcement cited the necessity for additional dialogue with the public and industry players as the reason for the suspension. However, this explanation did not satisfy the Minority in Parliament.
Minority’s Concerns
At a press conference on Tuesday, May 26th, Minority Leader Alexander Afenyo-Markin questioned the central bank’s justification for the suspension. He argued that the rationale of “further consultation” contradicted earlier assurances that significant policy decisions would undergo thorough due process and broad stakeholder engagement prior to implementation.
Afenyo-Markin suggested that fiscal measures of this nature should typically be subject to parliamentary scrutiny rather than being introduced and subsequently withdrawn after public outcry. The Minority’s stance implies a belief that such charges, regardless of their origin, warrant legislative review.
Legal and Procedural Differences
Mr. Dafeamekpor reiterated his position, stressing that the proposed mobile money transfer charge lacks the legal and procedural characteristics of the E-Levy. The E-Levy, enacted through parliamentary legislation, was a government tax policy aimed at raising revenue.
In contrast, Dafeamekpor argued, the proposed charge originates from a private sector initiative, functioning more akin to a service fee levied by a financial service provider. This fundamental difference, he maintained, prevents it from being categorized alongside the E-Levy.
Implications and Future Outlook
The suspension of the mobile money to bank transfer charge highlights the sensitivity surrounding new financial levies in Ghana, particularly following the public resistance to the E-Levy. It underscores the importance of transparency and robust stakeholder engagement in the introduction of any new financial service fees or taxes.
The debate also brings into focus the regulatory oversight of private sector-driven charges within the financial ecosystem. As discussions continue, the key takeaway for consumers and businesses is the ongoing scrutiny of financial transaction costs. Attention will likely focus on the outcome of the Bank of Ghana’s further consultations and whether a revised policy will be introduced, and if so, under what framework. The precedent set by this suspension may influence how future private sector financial service charges are proposed and regulated in Ghana.
Leave a Reply