The abrupt suspension of USAID funding has thrown the budgets of many dependent nations into disarray and Ghana is no exception. Critical sectors such as agriculture, health, education, and others have long relied on funding “from the American people.”
- A Commendable Intervention, But Is It Enough?
- Taxation of USAID Funds in Ghana: A Critical Assessment
- Beyond the Funding Gap: The Broader Economic Implications
- The Need for a Comprehensive Response
- Proposed Considerations
- 1. Assessing the Revenue Impact
- 2. Economic & Fiscal Implications
- 3. Revenue Mobilization Strategies
- 4. Strengthening GRA’s Institutional Capacity
- 5. Alternative Funding & Stakeholder Engagement
- To What End?
A review by The High Street Journal reveals that between 2015 and 2025, Ghana received a total of $1.55 billion from USAID to support key national initiatives. For instance, the country was scheduled to receive $156 million in 2025 to sustain health, education, and agriculture projects. The fate of several essential healthcare programs including malaria prevention, family planning, maternal and child health, reproductive health, and the fight against HIV/AIDS now hangs in the balance due to this sudden funding shortfall.
A Commendable Intervention, But Is It Enough?
All hope is not lost, at least not for now. President John Dramani Mahama has moved swiftly to ensure that these programs continue.
A directive from the presidency has tasked Finance Minister Dr. Cassiel Ato Forson with mobilizing resources to bridge the $156 million funding gap. The President’s intervention signals a firm commitment to protecting public health and sustaining vital programs despite USAID’s withdrawal.
The directive makes clear that the Ministry of Finance must prioritize critical health programs.
“Of particular concern to the President is the impact of the projected $78.2 million shortfall that will adversely affect key interventions, including malaria prevention, maternal and child health, family planning, reproductive health, nutrition, and the fight against HIV/AIDS, threatening the availability of antiretroviral drugs, testing, and prevention programs,” the directive states.
This intervention is necessary, but it raises larger concerns about Ghana’s heavy reliance on donor funding and the need for a sustainable fiscal strategy.
Taxation of USAID Funds in Ghana: A Critical Assessment
USAID funds are generally exempt from taxation by the Ghana Revenue Authority (GRA) under Official Development Assistance (ODA) agreements between the U.S. and Ghanaian governments. This ensures that aid is not diminished by local tax obligations.
However, the tax-exempt status of specific USAID-funded projects depends on several factors. Some USAID agreements explicitly prohibit taxation, meaning funds remain exempt under agreed terms. The recipient of the funds also plays a role, as government agencies, NGOs, and contractors receiving USAID support may have different tax obligations based on their operational structure. While direct USAID grants are typically tax-exempt, local expenditures such as procurement, salaries, and contracts may still be subject to VAT, withholding tax, or PAYE, unless explicitly exempted.
Beyond the Funding Gap: The Broader Economic Implications
While the government’s intervention is necessary, the USAID funding cut exposes a deeper issue, which is Ghana’s over-reliance on donor funding for essential services. This is not just a healthcare issue; it threatens economic stability, with potential long-term consequences for tax revenue, government operations, and fiscal sustainability.
Beyond direct funding, USAID-backed programs contribute to Ghana’s tax base through local employment, procurement, and business activity. The withdrawal of these funds could reduce GRA’s revenue streams, particularly in sectors that depend on USAID interventions.
Thus, the real challenge is not just replacing USAID funding it is ensuring Ghana’s financial independence from donor aid in the long run.
The Need for a Comprehensive Response
The $156 million intervention is a short-term fix, but Ghana cannot afford to continue patching budget holes with emergency measures.
The Ghana Revenue Authority (GRA) must assess the long-term impact of this funding cut on tax revenue and economic stability. A structured fiscal framework is required to mitigate these effects and safeguard national development.
Proposed Considerations
1. Assessing the Revenue Impact
The withdrawal of USAID funding will have a direct impact on Ghana’s tax revenue. Many businesses, NGOs, and government programs that depend on USAID contribute to tax revenue through corporate tax, income tax, and VAT. With funding cuts, these organizations could experience financial contraction, leading to lower taxable earnings and reduced tax collections.
Local staff employed under USAID-backed projects contribute to the economy through PAYE (income tax), and their potential job losses will further shrink tax contributions. Reduced activity in health, agriculture, and education sectors could also lead to an overall decline in the country’s economic output and tax revenue base.
To quantify the loss, GRA must develop financial models that analyze past tax revenue trends and project potential revenue shortfalls over the next 1–5 years.
2. Economic & Fiscal Implications
A slowdown in USAID-funded projects could lead to reduced economic growth, lower personal income tax collections, higher unemployment rates, and declining business revenues. Additionally, Ghana must identify which USAID-backed projects are most at risk and how to sustain them. Without alternative funding sources, filling the revenue gap may require new borrowing, exacerbating the country’s national debt burden.
3. Revenue Mobilization Strategies
To mitigate the impact of donor funding cuts, Ghana must strengthen its domestic revenue base. Expanding taxation in the informal sector and enhancing property tax collection will help increase government revenues. Flexible tax compliance measures and incentives can also encourage businesses to contribute more effectively.
The government must also optimize tax policies by reducing excessive exemptions for non-critical sectors and introducing targeted levies on luxury goods, digital services, and environmental pollution. Adjusting VAT and corporate tax rates can further boost revenue without harming economic growth.
To enhance trade-related revenue, border security should be modernized to reduce smuggling, while import duty compliance must be strengthened to prevent tax evasion.
4. Strengthening GRA’s Institutional Capacity
Expanding tax audits on businesses at risk of underreporting income, leveraging AI-driven analytics to detect tax evasion, and modernizing digital tax systems will significantly improve compliance. Additionally, real-time financial tracking through bank integration will help capture taxable transactions more efficiently.
5. Alternative Funding & Stakeholder Engagement
Ghana must diversify its donor partnerships beyond USAID by engaging institutions such as the African Development Bank and the European Union. Issuing tax-backed bonds can help finance critical development projects, while Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) can provide alternative funding for healthcare and infrastructure initiatives.
By reducing bureaucratic barriers and promoting fair tax policies, Ghana can also create an investment-friendly environment that attracts more corporate engagement in public services.
To What End?
President Mahama’s swift intervention is commendable but a comprehensive fiscal strategy including tax reform, revenue diversification, and structural economic planning is essential. This is not just a challenge; it is an opportunity to truly implement the “Ghana Beyond Aid” agenda not as a slogan, but as a real economic transformation.
