According to the Prime Minister, the opposition to the property tax primarily comes from individuals who own property abroad. If this assertion holds true, it suggests a significant portion of citizens possess property outside the country.

The Minister of Finance suggests that those opposing the tax may have questionable sources for their wealth, a statement that warrants caution, given the potential for similar enquiries into the financial affairs of politicians. Furthermore, the minister argues that the tax is necessary to fund essential services like water, despite existing payments to WASA (Water and Sewerage Authority) for undelivered services.

The minister also emphasises the costly process of contesting property valuations, ignoring concerns about the professionalism of the valuations themselves.

The tax revenue is purportedly earmarked for regional corporations to improve service provision, raising questions about funds being diverted when placed into the Consolidated Fund instead.

These observations underscore the contentious nature of the property tax debate, fuelled by a lack of transparency regarding valuation methods and a perceived disregard for citizens’ concerns. Addressing these concerns with clearer explanations and a more transparent process could alleviate tensions surrounding the implementation of such laws.

Just my two cents.

Richard Trestrail