Assessing the Dichotomy Between Ghana’s Complex Tax Provisions and Taxpayers’ Rights: Perspective of Section 42 (5) of Act 915 Mandatory Prepayment of Tax Disputes Before Commencement of Litigation

This article critically examines Ghana’s mandatory prepayment rule under Section 42(5) of the Revenue Administration Act, 2016 (Act 915), which requires taxpayers to pay 30% of disputed taxes (or 100% for import duties) before objections are entertained. Secondary data was adopted in analyzing the Supreme Court’s affirmation of this provision in cases such as Richard Amo-Hene v GRA and explores its interplay with Order 54, Rule 4(1) of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules (CI 47), which mandates a 25% prepayment for court appeals. Through a comparative lens, the article contrasts Ghana’s rigid “pay now, argue later” regime with jurisdictions like South Africa (payment suspensions), Nigeria (hardship waivers), and the United States (no general prepayment), highlighting systemic gaps in fairness and accessibility. The study identifies barriers to taxpayer rights, including disproportionate burdens on low-income disputants and opaque waiver mechanisms under Section 42(6). It argues for reforms such as automatic suspension provisions, transparent criteria for waivers, and alignment of CI 47 with Act 915 to eliminate procedural redundancies. The article concludes that Ghana must balance revenue protection with equitable access to justice by adopting internationally informed safeguards against frivolous disputes while protecting genuine taxpayers’ rights.