VZCZCXRO6789
PP RUEHMA RUEHPA
DE RUEHAR #1289/01 3371757
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 031757Z DEC 09
FM AMEMBASSY ACCRA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 8595
INFO RUEHZK/ECOWAS COLLECTIVE
RUCPDOC/USDOC WASHDC 0710
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC
RUEATRS/DEPT OF TREASURY WASHDC

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 ACCRA 001289 
 
SIPDIS 
 
NSC WASHDC FOR MICHELLE GAVIN 
AF/EPS FOR ELLIOT REPKO 
DOC FOR MAC DAS HOLLY VINEYARD 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: ECON EFIN EINV BSSR GH
SUBJECT: GHANA: COKE ON THE ROCKS 
 
¶1. SUMMARY: On November 18, the Minister of Finance and 
Economic Planning proposed a legislative change to the 
GOG's excise tax regime, moving from a specific tax to an 
ad valorem tax at an increased rate.  Responding to beverage 
industry concerns with the proposed change, Ambassador 
proposed a meeting between Coca-Cola and MOFEP to discuss 
the impact on the industry.  The Minister agreed to his tax 
policy experts meeting with the company prior to the 
legislation's enactment in mid-December.  The Minister 
explained two reasons for the change: first, that the 
excise tax regime was performing poorly compared to GDP 
growth and needed fixing, and second, the current system of 
calculating excise tax was too burdensome on MOFEP.  Given 
the current economic malaise and fiscal crisis, the GOG is 
seeking ways to get more creative in enhancing much-needed 
government revenues.  At the same time, Coke feels it would 
shoulder an unfair share of the new, and regressive, tax 
burden.  Post continues to lend its good offices to Coke in 
order to create a mutually beneficial solution to the 
current impasse with the GOG.  There is no evidence that 
the proposed change would be applied in a discriminatory 
manner against U.S. or other foreign products.  END 
SUMMARY. 
 
¶2. Post was approached by Coca-Cola Equatorial Africa 
(Coke's franchise in Ghana) and their Spanish bottler, 
Coca-Cola Bottling Co. of Ghana Ltd., with concerns about a 
bill in Parliament to change the excise taxation system 
that was announced by the Minister of Finance and Economic 
Planning (MOFEP) on November 18.  Coke is worried that the 
proposed change will increase their excise tax burden by 
USD 10-12 million in 2010 and the effective excise tax rate 
would jump from 13 to 20 percentage points. 
 
¶3. In response to a request by the company, Ambassador used 
a previously scheduled opportunity to meet with Minister 
Duffuor to also query the GOG about the proposed change to 
the tax system, and to request that the ministry's tax 
policy unit meet with the firm to hear their concerns and 
hopefully work out a more equitable way to increase GOG tax 
revenue.  Minister Duffuor agreed to make his staff 
available to meet with Coke and talk about the proposed 
changes before they become law.  He admitted that he had 
not consulted with Coke and other affected companies 
because the change was a return from a specific tax back to 
the ad valorem tax system that had been in place until 
2007, albeit at higher rates (20 percent vs a range of 
13-16 percent in 2007).  (NOTE: The excise tax is currently 
GHC 0.056, or USD.038, per liter. END NOTE.) 
 
¶4. The Minister explained to Ambassador the GOG's rationale 
for the change.  First, MOFEP is unhappy with the 
performance of the specific tax.  Duffuor said the share of 
excise tax revenues to GDP over time has not kept pace with 
GDP growth.  Ambassador acknowledged the GOG's need to 
raise revenues as it continues to cope with the effects of 
its fiscal crisis.  He reminded the Minister of the USG's 
past support for the GOG at the IFIs during the global 
financial crisis. 
 
¶5. Second, the Minister claimed that the specific tax in 
use now was difficult for MOFEP to accurately calculate. 
He also asserted that the return to an ad valorem tax would 
be simpler to apply as it is applied to the ex-factory 
price -- basically the wholesale price of the product when 
it leaves the factory.  Duffuor pointed out that the 
proposed changes would correct a previous discrepancy in 
the tax rate for carbonated and malted beverages. NOTE AND 
COMMENT: Coke, representing 94 percent of the carbonated 
beverage market in Ghana, in the past complained to the USG 
of tax discrimination -- their beverages had a higher tax 
than non-alcoholic malted beverages produced by Guinness 
Breweries. 
 
¶6. NOTE AND COMMENT, CONTINUED.  Separately, Econ staff was 
told by a MOFEP tax bureaucrat that their initial plan to 
use the Consumer Price Index (CPI) as the measure of 
inflation for excise tax computation was successfully 
opposed by firms including Coke last year, and the previous 
NPP government substituted the Producer Price Index (PPI) 
in its place -- with a reduction in government revenue, 
given that the CPI reflected a higher rate of inflation 
than the PPI.  It is natural that the GOG would prefer to 
capture more tax through the CPI, and firms would seek to 
reduce their tax burden through use of the PPI.  Coke 
officials told Econ and Comm Offs their belief that the ad 
 
ACCRA 00001289  002 OF 002 
 
 
valorem tax was regressive, more complicated, and seldom 
used by other developing countries.  PriceWaterhouseCoopers 
published an analysis of the GOG budget proposal, which 
said that the re-introduction of ad valorem excise duties 
may lead to increased costs, which will have to be passed 
on either to the producers or consumers, increase 
inflationary pressures, and reduce demand.  It concludes 
that the GOG should consult with industry more closely in 
order to optimize revenue as a whole.  Leaving aside the 
technical tax issues, it is apparent to Post that ministry 
officials are still smarting about the way the issue was 
resolved last year.  However, Post reviewed the proposed 
wording and believes the new taxes would be applied in a 
non-discriminatory manner against all imports and domestic 
products, and against all soft drinks including bottled 
water.  At the same time, the beverage industry feels it is 
taking the brunt of the GOG's efforts to improve its 
balance sheet.  END NOTE AND COMMENT. 
 
¶7. On November 30, Post debriefed Coke on the GOG meeting 
and urged the company to send its tax experts to meet with 
the GOG at the earliest possible opportunity, so that 
meaningful change can be affected before the legislation 
moves too far through Parliament, which must vote on 
pending legislation, including this bill, on December 18. 
The General Manager of Bottling, Conrad Van Niekerk, 
responded that Michael Goltzman, a Public Affairs executive 
resident in Cairo was the most appropriate official to 
visit, but given his current travel plans to Nigeria he 
would be unable to get to Accra until December 7.  The 
Franchise Manager is currently on travel in the U.S.  Van 
Niekerk also mentioned that he had reached out to the 
Spanish Trade Office for assistance with MOFEP, and is 
interested in sharing the PriceWaterhouseCoopers survey 
with the Ministry.  He promised to brief Post on the 
results of these efforts and requested Post assistance in 
arranging a meeting at the appropriate level in MOFEP for 
Mr. Goltzman. Post offered assistance in arranging meetings, 
but stressed that Goltzman should arrive as soon as 
possible, preferably well before December 7, as currently 
scheduled. 
 
¶8. COMMENT: There is no evidence to suggest that the GOG's 
proposed change to the excise tax system is targeted at 
foreign firms, or Coke specifically.  Although Coke's tax 
burden would rise by the re-introduction of an ad valorem 
tax, all bottlers would be hit in the same way, and items 
such as alcohol and tobacco products will rise by an even 
higher rate.  It is apparent that the GOG seeks creative 
ways to improve its tax governance and raise much-needed 
government income as it tries to reign in the rampant 
deficit under austerity budgets.  There is a feeling among 
GOG economic planners that the government restricted its 
expenditures too much in 2009, which excessively hurt 
Ghana's growth rate in an economy that is overly dependent 
on public spending.  The attempt at capturing more tax 
revenues is part of the government's attempt to rebalance 
that equation in 2010, and as such should not be seen as a 
policy to punish U.S. imports.  Coke, reflecting the view 
of domestic bottlers, feels that it would be forced to pay 
an unfair amount in new taxes.  There is still room for a 
win-win scenario if the company can replicate its positive 
government relations in other markets with the tax 
authorities in Ghana.  END COMMENT. 
TEITELBAUM