IMANI: Why Kenya must kill the Finance Bill annual tax circus

Every 12 months, Kenyans are forced to participate in a gruelling national ritual. The National Treasury drafts a bulky, jargon-laden Finance Bill, tables it in the National Assembly and invites a weary public to submit feedback.

What follows is a predictable cycle of public outrage, theatrical legislative debates and the inevitable passage of new tax measures that tighten the noose around the necks of ordinary citizens.

In April 2026, the introduction of the Finance Bill, 2026, proved that this annual circus is far from over, with fresh targets ranging from digital payment processing systems to the importation of second-hand clothing.

This persistent, volatile tax regime raises a fundamental question of political and human rights: what profit is there in reading, fighting and adjusting this bill every single year?

The unpredictability of annual taxation destroys businesses, discourages long-term investment and subjects the taxpayer to constant financial anxiety.

A more humane, stable and rights-centric alternative exists. Parliament should pass a comprehensive, five-year Finance Bill aligned with the legislative term, forcing the state to live within its means and shielding citizens from arbitrary, recurring tax hikes.

A five-year fiscal cycle is entirely permissible within current legal boundaries if Parliament chooses to exercise its legislative supremacy.

While the state argues that annual amendments are necessary to respond to fluid macroeconomic shifts, the law provides ample room to pass long-term fiscal frameworks.

The core structures of major revenue laws, such as the Income Tax Act, the Value Added Tax Act and the Excise Duty Act, can be cast in stone for half a decade.

The law can allow for a five-year finance bill that remains static, with strict built-in clauses restricting annual adjustments to minor, strictly defined economic triggers, such as runaway global inflation or unexpected international supply shocks.

Shifting to a five-year horizon would fundamentally alter the balance of power between the government and the taxpayer. It would compel the state to plan responsibly based on fixed, predictable revenues rather than viewing the citizen as a bottomless piggy bank to be raided whenever government spending sprees go out of control.

Additionally, the role of Parliament is to scrutinise, amend and enact the legislation, theoretically acting as a watchdog for the electorate.

However, the current structure treats public participation—a core constitutional requirement and a basic democratic right—as a cosmetic tick-box exercise rather than a meaningful engagement.

Public hearings were conducted across 13 counties, yet in Mombasa, residents faulted the process as a "mere formality," complaining that proposals had not been adequately explained and that leaders were using public participation as a constitutional box-ticking exercise without providing meaningful feedback.

Currently, unchecked government spending, reckless bilateral borrowing and institutionalised corruption are driving the country into a deeper debt trap. The state consistently demands more tax revenue to service loans that yielded no tangible transformation for the public, directly violating the economic and social rights guaranteed under Article 43 of the constitution.

For every Sh100 the national government paid out in the nine months to March 2026, nearly Sh46 went to debt servicing, about Sh40 to recurrent costs and less than Sh10 to development. The Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission estimated that Kenya loses Sh608 billion every year to corruption.

Cushioning citizens' rights against this fiscal onslaught requires bold structural changes. Public participation frameworks must be reformed to give local communities genuine influence over taxation and project funding.

Parliament must actively enforce the fiscal responsibility principles embedded in the Public Finance Management Act, which stipulate that national debt must be kept at sustainable levels.

Ultimately, forcing Parliament to live within a fixed, five-year budget framework is a matter of basic human dignity. It is time to end the annual psychological warfare of the Finance Bill and establish a predictable economy where citizens can plan their futures without the fear of the next fiscal ambush.