Mr. Speaker Sir, those were my general comments regarding the expenditure side. I now turn to the revenue and tax policy measures. Let me start with the domestic minimum top up tax. Again, there were comments from Hon. Chiduwa, the Chairperson of the Budget, Finance and Investment Promotion Committee. These were commendations that we have done the right thing by plugging this tax arbitrary problem presented by multinationals who want to pay more taxes elsewhere and not where they are making money from which is Zimbabwe. We are plucking that hole to make sure they comply with the 15% threshold globally.
I will now turn to the levy on sugar. On the sugar issue, I have been focusing on the cancer machines. We are determined that we must create a cancer fund to deal a blow on cancer, at least ameliorate, give some relief to our sufferers whether in the form of affordable diagnostics, drugs and all that. In my previous life, I spent a lot of time studying the economics of HIV. I know a lot about the economics of HIV. One thing that is clear is that it does have some unpleasant comorbidities. One of them is cancer. So, I feel very passionate about the issue, that is why we need to make sure that we have support for our cancer sufferers. I think now the machines at least in Mpilo and Harare are working and if they are not, please let me know. But now, we want to procure a gamma knife. A gamma knife is what is needed to deal with intra cranial cancers in your brain, in your sensitive organs and so forth. We have to move up and make sure we procure the right equipment.
We need this sugar tax to pay for some of these critical infrastructure and drugs. I must say that the original two cents, actually that was a mistake, we made a mistake in that calculation, those are the facts. It should actually be 0.2%, which means that if you have got a can of coca cola, if it is 300ml, it has got about 135 grams of sugar in it, so 0.2 cents, that means an extra seven cents on that can of coca cola, that is what it translates to. I do not think seven cents is a big deal Mr. Speaker Sir. Surely that is affordable, let us support this cancer fund effort.
On the wealth tax Mr. Speaker Sir, again I accept the contributions from the public, from the Portfolio Chairpersons and Members of Parliament that we need to move the threshold. Some Members suggested that the 70 years exemption should be brought down to 65, again I agree with that, that we must exempt the primary residence of an owner of a property – [HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.] – I agree with that, actually it is just that when we announce these things sometimes we use a broad brush but we already had this in mind to make these adjustments when we come to this Statute and make it clear, so the primary resident is secluded. In fact I am proposing a new threshold of US$250 000. I am also proposing a limit as to how much any person can pay. No one should pay more than US$50 000 per annum. That pertains to a property of about US$5 million. In other words, if you have a property worth about that value and beyond, really you should not be paying more than that, there should be a cap somewhere.
On passport fees, we have listened carefully to the contributions from the Portfolio Chairpersons and Hon. Members that the US$200 is on the high side, we agree with that. It is just that when we were having the discussions about modernising our borders, we wanted to be the first country outside Dubai to have an unmanned border post where you can walk in because now we have an e-passport with a chip in it. You can walk in and the gates open your passport is read. You do not talk to anybody. We want that equipment here by end of 2024. We have to be modern. That is what motivated us. It is the kind of thinking to say we need resources to support the Ministry of Home Affairs and we thought that increasing passports was one way to do this. Someone proposed that rather USD120 for an ordinary passport, let us make it USD150. It is a proposal, but for the express passport, the 24-hour passport, anyone who needs it urgently is often those who can afford it. That one should be USD250. I know one Hon. Member who proposed USD350, but let us make it USD250 and I think USD250 is okay.
Continued next page
(141 VIEWS)
