abusesaffiliationarrow-downarrow-leftarrow-rightarrow-upattack-typeburgerchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-upClock iconclosedeletedevelopment-povertydiscriminationdollardownloademailenvironmentexternal-linkfacebookfiltergenderglobegroupshealthC4067174-3DD9-4B9E-AD64-284FDAAE6338@1xinformation-outlineinformationinstagraminvestment-trade-globalisationissueslabourlanguagesShapeCombined Shapeline, chart, up, arrow, graphLinkedInlocationmap-pinminusnewsorganisationotheroverviewpluspreviewArtboard 185profilerefreshIconnewssearchsecurityPathStock downStock steadyStock uptagticktooltiptwitteruniversalityweb
Article

4 Apr 2016

Author:
Faustine Kapama, Tanzania Daily News

Tanzania: Tax tribunal says Acacia Mining evaded tax between 2010 & 2014

"Gold Firm 'Guilty' of Tax Evasion"

London-based giant gold mine company, African Barrick Gold Plc (ABG), has been found to have evaded tax for four years consecutively from 2010 and ordered to pay a total withholding tax amounting to 41,250,426 US dollars (about 82bn/-). In a judgment issued last week, the Tax Revenue Appeals Tribunal noted that ABG, currently known as Acacia PLC, had declared dividends in UK to its shareholders on the income generated from gold mines operated in Tanzania amounting to 412,504,257 US dollars for 2010 to 2013 years of income.

However, it was further revealed that, ABG, which operates Bulyanhulu Gold Mining Limited, North Mara Gold Mining Limited and Pangea Minerals Limited, which operates the Tulawaka and Buzwagi Gold Mines, had declared to have incurred loss in Tanzania, where the three gold mine companies operate. "Indeed, we share the (Tax Revenue Appeals) Board's surprise as to how could this be possible," the Tribunal composed of three members under the chairman of High Court, Judge Dr Fauz Twaib, stated in its judgment dated March 31, 2016...

The tribunal found that the Board reached such conclusion relying on the fact that all the appellant's subsidiaries in Tanzania were loss making and therefore not paying dividends to its shareholders and yet at the same time the ABG has consistently been declaring dividends. "In the circumstances, it is fair to conclude that the respondent's argument that the transactions were simply a design created by the appellant (ABG) aimed at tax evasion was justified," the Tribunal declared.