Uganda hits Tullow Oil with $407m tax bill

   0   0 AllAfrica, Blog


UPDATE: We have received the following comment from Professor Sol Picciotto, senior adviser to TJN: The Tullow case is interesting because the Tax Tribunal held that a clause in a production sharing agreement signed by a government Minister which gave exemption from taxes could not override the tax legislation, because the Uganda Constitution provides that taxes and tax exemptions must be approved by parliament. A victory for democracy —  at least so far.

Tullow has said it will `robustly challenge’ the ruling. This could be a great issue to campaign on: can  private deal between a company and a Minister override law in a democracy?

Tullow Oil has been hit with a massive $407m tax bill from the Ugandan government over the $2.9bn sale of some of their oil fields to Total.

The figure is reported in The Nation and you can read the full story here.

One of the interesting things about Tullow’s reaction is that they are not claiming that the bill is incorrect, but that a deal reached with the government meant they didn’t need to pay it.

Tullow chief executive Aidan Heavey said in a statement: “Tullow is very concerned by this ruling which ignores a contractual term signed by a Government Minister in Uganda.”

“Tullow is Uganda’s largest foreign investor and a major taxpayer. Over the last 10 years, Tullow has spent $2.8 billion in Uganda and discovered 1.7 billion barrels of oil. This money was spent by Tullow on the understanding that our contracts with the government, which contained important incentives to invest that were vital at a time when no oil had been discovered in Uganda, would be honoured,” he added.

So the Ugandan government cut a deal, like so many other governments have done over the last few years. In Europe these practices are coming under increasing scrutiny after the European Commission has launched investigations into the sweetheart deals reached with companies like Amazon and Apple.

It seems African governments are now coming to similar conclusions about corporate welfare payments to large multinationals.

Related Posts

The Offshore Wrapper: the Panama Papers, one year on

Photos from the Protest outside PwC 1 Embankment Place, part of the Global week of action for tax justiceWelcome to the Offshore Wrapper – your weekly update from TJN.  Happy Paniversary! This week it’s been one year since the Panama Papers were leaked, and a number of organisations around the world have been marking the occasion though the global week of action for tax justice. In London, activists from the TJN and the […]


Protesting PwC: Professionals Without Conscience

Photos from the Protest outside PwC 1 Embankment Place, part of the Global week of action for tax justiceThis week is the global week of action for tax justice and on Wednesday 5th April activists from the Tax Justice Network and Methodists for Tax Justice held a protest outside the London offices of Price Waterhouse Coopers. The global week of action for tax justice is happening one year after the release of the […]


Germany moves forward on corporate transparency

ReichstagThe Bundesrat has today voted to recommend implementing a public register of the beneficial ownership of companies and trusts.  Great news from Germany, as the country takes an important step forward towards corporate transparency.


New estimates reveal the extent of tax avoidance by multinationals

Price Waterhouse CoopersNew figures published today by the Tax Justice Network provide a country-level breakdown of the estimated tax losses to profit shifting by multinational companies. Applying a methodology developed by researchers at the International Monetary Fund to an improved dataset, the results indicate global losses of around $500 billion a year. The figures appear in a […]


Banking Secrecy in China, its related territories and Taiwan

Hong Kong from Sky 100Foreword. The Tax Justice Network is a non partisan network of experts working towards transparency, so we do not take any position about countries’ territorial and political claims. However, we do expect countries with a de jure (legal) or de facto (in practice) influence over other territories, to take responsibility for their power. We point […]


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to Top