Ethiopia’s tax exemptions system has come under fresh scrutiny following reports that the country is losing billions of birr annually through poorly targeted tax exemptions.
According to Birrmetrics, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) estimates that these exemptions have created a tax gap exceeding five percentage points of GDP—a scale of loss that could change the entire narrative of fiscal reform.

The claim has triggered a wave of debate about whether the country’s generous exemptions have undermined its ability to mobilize domestic revenue. Although the IMF has not released an official figure publicly, its own research leaves little doubt that Ethiopia’s revenue potential remains severely underexploited.

In its July 2025 report, Ethiopia’s Tax System: Structure, Performance, and Benchmarking, the IMF highlights the country’s low tax-to-GDP ratio and shrinking fiscal space.
Despite solid economic growth over the past decade, Ethiopia collects far less revenue than comparable economies. The report attributes this to three structural weaknesses:

1. A narrow tax base, heavily dependent on VAT and import duties;
2. Generous exemptions and incentives granted without clear evaluation criteria; and
3. Weak enforcement capacity at both federal and regional levels.

The IMF warns that Ethiopia’s revenue system “remains below potential”. As a result, the state struggles to fund health, education, and infrastructure projects; these are sectors that anchor the government’s Growth and Transformation Plan.

Data from the International Centre for Tax and Development (TaxDev) show how serious the slide has been. Between 2014/15 and 2022/23, Ethiopia’s tax-to-GDP ratio fell from 12.4 percent to just 7.5 percent. In other words, the country is collecting almost half as much revenue, relative to GDP, as it did a decade ago.

Analysts point to a combination of factors:

• A slowdown in imports that eroded customs duties;
• Exchange-rate distortions that reduced taxable import values;
• Weak compliance among private-sector operators; and
• The continued use of exemptions as industrial or political tools.

The result is a paradox: even as Ethiopia modernized its tax administration, its overall revenue intake shrank.

Ethiopia’s Ministry of Finance has signaled a willingness to confront the problem. Recent policy measures—backed by the IMF—include a plan to rationalize exemptions, eliminate unjustified tax holidays, and introduce a Minimum Alternative Tax (MAT) to ensure all companies contribute at least a baseline amount.

Officials argue that exemptions should support targeted sectors—such as manufacturing exports or green technology—not serve as open-ended privileges.
Yet reforming exemptions is politically fraught. Many of the beneficiaries are influential businesses and public enterprises; removing their advantages risks backlash from parliament, investors, and local governments.

The government therefore faces a delicate balancing act: raising revenue without dampening investment or employment.

“Untargeted” exemptions—those applied broadly or indefinitely—are among the most damaging forms of fiscal leakage.
They erode the tax base, distort competition, and encourage rent-seeking behavior.
Without sunset clauses, performance reviews, or publication of beneficiaries, such exemptions can quietly drain public coffers for years.

If Ethiopia’s estimated gap truly amounts to 5 percent of GDP, that represents tens of billions of birr in forgone revenue—enough to finance major infrastructure projects or social programs.
The problem is not only economic but also moral: citizens who pay taxes bear a heavier burden while powerful entities enjoy immunity.

Rolling back exemptions requires both technical capacity and political courage.
Tax administrators must be able to track exemptions across agencies, verify eligibility, and enforce clawbacks where abuse occurs.
But Ethiopia’s tax institutions remain overstretched and under-resourced, especially at regional levels.

Politically, exemption reform touches entrenched interests that have benefited from opaque rules. Nevertheless, transparency could prove to be government’s strongest tool. Past attempts to publish a Tax Expenditure Report—listing every exemption and its cost—have stalled for lack of consensus.
Transparency, not new legislation, may therefore be the most transformative step.

Ethiopia’s struggle mirrors a wider African dilemma: how to balance investment incentives with domestic revenue needs.
Across the continent, governments compete for foreign capital by offering generous tax breaks—often without assessing whether they attract genuine long-term investment.
The result is a “race to the bottom” that undermines fiscal sovereignty.

Institutions such as the African Tax Administration Forum (ATAF) and the African Union’s Specialized Technical Committee on Finance have called for continent-wide guidelines on tax incentives.
Ethiopia’s reform effort could thus become a test case for how African economies can modernize their fiscal systems without discouraging private enterprise.

The IMF’s warning and Birrmetrics’ exposé have made one thing clear: Ethiopia cannot afford business as usual.
Reclaiming revenue lost to untargeted exemptions would not only improve debt sustainability but also restore public trust in the fairness of the tax system.

The government’s next steps should include publishing a comprehensive Tax Expenditures Report, introducing sunset clauses for all incentives, and ensuring independent audits of exemption beneficiaries.
If implemented transparently, these reforms could recover billions, strengthen governance, and place Ethiopia on a more sustainable fiscal path.

The stakes are not merely technical—they are developmental.
How Ethiopia manages its exemptions may well determine whether it can finance its ambitions from within, rather than depend on external borrowing.

Aaron M

See Full Bio