When the Burden Falls on the Grass: Uganda’s Tax Debate in an Age of Rising Debt

KAMPALA, Uganda April 3 [SHIFTMEDIA] By any measure, Uganda stands at a delicate fiscal crossroads. With public debt now estimated at a staggering UGX 126 trillion and a proposed national budget of UGX 84 trillion for the 2026/27 financial year, the government faces mounting pressure to finance its ambitions while safeguarding the welfare of its citizens. Yet, as policymakers refine a new set of tax amendments aimed at boosting domestic revenue, a chorus of civil society voices is raising a cautionary flag: in the pursuit of fiscal stability, it is the ordinary Ugandan who risks bearing the heaviest burden.

On a quiet Friday morning in Kampala, advocates under the Tax Justice Alliance Uganda (TJAU) gathered at SEATINI offices to dissect the government’s proposed tax measures. Drawn from a coalition of organizations including the Uganda Debt Network, the Civil Society Budget Advocacy Group (CSBAG), the Forum for Women in Democracy (FOWODE), ACCORD, and the Kampala Capital City Traders Association (KACITA), the group brought together a wide spectrum of perspectives united by a common concern—fairness in taxation.

At the heart of their argument lies a broader philosophy: taxation, they insist, must go beyond revenue collection. It should serve as an instrument of economic governance grounded in what experts term the “4Rs” of taxation—Revenue, Redistribution, Repricing, and Representation. This framework, they argue, ensures that tax systems not only fund government operations but also promote equity, influence behavior, and reflect the voices of citizens.

Jane Nalunga, Executive Director of SEATINI Uganda, framed the debate in stark human terms. Speaking not only as an advocate but also as a taxpayer, she warned of the unintended consequences of fiscal decisions made under pressure. “When elephants fight or make love, it is the grass that suffers,” she remarked—a metaphor that resonated deeply in a country where the majority of citizens live close to the economic edge.

According to draft budget estimates, Uganda’s domestic revenue is projected to reach UGX 44.4 trillion in the 2026/27 financial year, marking a 19.3 percent increase from the previous year. While this signals an ambitious push toward self-reliance, it also reflects a persistent challenge: Uganda has historically struggled to meet its revenue targets. The resulting deficits have fueled a cycle of borrowing—both external and domestic—that continues to swell the national debt.

Civil society actors acknowledge the necessity of domestic revenue mobilization, especially in a context where reliance on external financing carries its own risks. However, they caution that the structure of new taxes matters just as much as their scale. Proposed increases in excise duties on essential commodities such as fuel, cooking oil, and cement, they argue, could have far-reaching ripple effects across the economy.

For many Ugandans, these are not abstract policy shifts but lived realities. In rural communities, where access to healthcare often depends on informal transport networks, even a modest increase in fuel prices can translate into life-altering decisions. Kashiaja Emmanuel of FOWODE highlighted how a proposed UGX 200 increase per litre of petrol and diesel could force expectant mothers to reduce the number of antenatal visits—a quiet but profound erosion of maternal health outcomes.

Similarly, the construction sector—one of the key drivers of employment and urban growth—faces potential strain from a proposed doubling of excise duty on cement. Imelda Namugga of CSBAG warned that such measures could stall housing projects and make home ownership even more elusive for ordinary citizens. The impact, she added, extends beyond economics into social vulnerability, particularly for widows and orphans who may struggle to meet increased costs associated with land transactions.

Beyond the substance of the proposals, civil society groups have also raised concerns about the process itself. The limited timeframe—reportedly as short as two weeks—for public consultation on the draft budget has been widely criticized as inadequate. Nalunga and her colleagues argue that meaningful participation requires time, especially when dealing with complex fiscal policies that affect millions of lives.

Yet, amid the criticism, there is also measured support for certain aspects of the proposed reforms. Increased excise duties on alcohol, gaming, and betting have been broadly welcomed as measures that could both generate revenue and address social harms. Advocates like Moses Talibita have even suggested complementary policies, such as reducing taxes on healthier alternatives like olive oil, to promote public well-being.

This duality—support for targeted measures alongside concern for broader impacts—underscores a central tension in Uganda’s fiscal landscape. How can the state raise the resources it needs without deepening inequality or undermining livelihoods?

For Aloysius Kitengo, a finance program manager, the answer lies in aligning tax policy with principles of equity, fairness, and accountability. “An effective tax system must deliver measurable value,” he noted, emphasizing the importance of ensuring that tax incentives and expenditures translate into tangible public benefits.

As Uganda navigates this complex terrain, the stakes could not be higher. The decisions made in the coming months will shape not only the country’s fiscal trajectory but also the everyday experiences of its citizens—from the cost of a boda boda ride to the price of building a home.

In the end, the debate is not merely about numbers on a balance sheet. It is about the delicate balance between national ambition and human dignity. And as the advocates in Kampala have reminded the nation, when the weight of policy falls unevenly, it is often the most vulnerable who feel it first—and most deeply.