Maria Eriksson Baaz and Judith Verweijen's research among boat operators on the Congo River has given them a deeper insight into state-society relations in the Central African country

Eriksson Baaz, Maria

Verweijen, Judith

LSE Research Online

Exploring	boat	operators’	perceptions	of	taxation	onthe	Congo	River	#PublicAuthorityMaria	Eriksson	Baaz	and	Judith	Verweijen’s	research	among	boat	operators	on	the	Congo	River	has	given	them	adeeper	insight	into	state-society	relations	in	the	Central	African	country.	This	article	is	part	of	the	#PublicAuthority	blog	series,	part	of	the	ESRC-funded	Centre	for	Public	Authorityand	International	Development.	The	Congolese	state	is	often	called	“predatory”.	Indeed,	it	has	a	long	history	of	extracting	resources	from	its	citizensin	a	variety	of	ways.	These	include	fines	for	real	and	invented	infractions,	service	fees,	and	an	extraordinary	range	of“taxes”,	many	of	which	have	no	legal	basis.	When	speaking	to	Congolese	citizens,	they	are	often	quick	to	denouncethese	imposed	contributions	as	tracasseries	(harassment).	Yet,	as	we	found	in	our	research	among	Congolese	boatoperators	on	the	Congo	River,	perceptions	of	taxation	are	much	more	complex.Similar	to	roads,	waterways	in	the	Congo	are	an	important	source	of	taxation.	Nationwide,	the	number	of	authoritiesimposing	taxes	on	the	waterways	has	multiplied	since	the	Second	Congo	War	(1998–2003),	when	military	actorsintensified	their	presence.	To	address	this	situation,	the	Union	congolaise	des	armateurs	des	baleinières	(UCAB),	theCongolese	Union	for	Operators	of	Whaleboats	(the	type	of	boat	most	in	use	on	the	Congo	River),	called	for	an	officialinvestigation.	This	investigation	found	that	throughout	the	Congo,	no	fewer	that	59	different	taxes	were	levied	byaround	17	different	authorities	at	different	posts.A	whaleboat	on	the	banks	of	the	Congo	RiverImage	Credit:	Molly	Bergen/WCS,	WWF,	WRI	via	Flickr	(CC	BY-NC-ND	2.0)After	pressure	from	UCAB,	an	interministerial	decree	was	adopted	on	19	June	2014	that	abolished	two	thirds	(in	total38)	of	the	taxes	identified.	The	decree	explicitly	prohibited	all	Congolese	security	services,	including	the	navy,	fromimposing	taxes.	Yet,	except	from	the	initial	months,	the	results	of	the	decree	were	rather	meagre	and	taxation	hascontinued	at	more	or	less	the	same	level	as	before.Africa at LSE: Exploring boat operators’ perceptions of taxation on the Congo River #PublicAuthority Page 1 of 3		Date originally posted: 2018-06-11Permalink: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/africaatlse/2018/06/11/exploring-boat-operators-perceptions-of-taxation-on-the-congo-river-publicauthority/Blog homepage: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/africaatlse/While	denouncing	the	system	of	taxation	as	a	whole,	the	boat	operators	we	interviewed	clearly	distinguishedbetween	the	different	taxes	and	taxing	authorities	involved,	seeing	some	as	more	and	others	as	less	legitimate.	Forinstance,	the	presence	and	taxes	of	the	Commissariat	fluvial	(riverine	commission)	and	the	forces	navales	(theCongolese	navy)	were	seen	as	relatively	legitimate.	Yet	the	recouvrement,	a	tax	imposed	by	the	provincialauthorities	at	Mushie,	was	seen	as	completely	illegitimate.	This	relatively	positive	perception	of	the	navy	and	its	taxesis	quite	strange	in	the	light	of	the	bad	reputation	of	the	Congolese	army.	How	then	can	we	explain	these	perceptionsof	taxation?In	a	recently	published	article	co-authored	with	Ola	Olsson,	we	identify	the	different	factors	that,	in	interaction,	shapeboat	operators’	views	and	experiences	of	taxation.	Somewhat	surprisingly,	we	found	that	legality	has	ambiguouseffects	on	legitimacy.	On	the	one	hand,	views	of	different	authorities’	right	to	tax	were	clearly	linked	to	perceptions	oftheir	right	to	be	present	on	the	river,	according	to	official	mandates.	For	example,	to	argue	that	the	marines’	presenceon	the	river	was	justified	and	“official”,	many	boat	operators	referred	to	the	navy’s	legally-enshrined	mandate	toassist	ships	in	distress	on	the	river.	On	the	other	hand,	the	invocation	of	legislation	was	not	systematic.	For	instance,when	speaking	about	the	marines,	boat	operators	rarely	invoked	the	2014	decree,	which	explicitly	prohibits	the	navyfrom	imposing	taxes.	Yet	to	argue	for	the	illegitimacy	of	the	recouvrement	tax,	boat	operators	did	recurrently	invokethe	decree,	indicating	that	it	was	widely	known.	Hence,	notions	of	legality	were	appealed	to	in	selective	and,	at	times,quite	contradictory	ways.In	addition	to	the	navy’s	mandate,	many	boat	operators	saw	taxation	by	the	marines	as	relatively	official–despitebeing	prohibited	by	law–because	they	issue	an	“official”	document	(the	so-called	bulletin	de	bureau	mouvement).This	document,	which	contains	information	about	the	boat,	destination,	and	the	names	of	the	captain	andpassengers,	is	checked	and	signed	at	every	post	by	the	marines.	This	practice	gives	boat	operators	the	idea	thatthey	get	“something	official”	in	return	for	their	payments.But	the	feeling	of	a	“return”,	also	known	as	the	fiscal	exchange	principle,	was	linked	most	strongly	to	the	navy’s	taskof	rescuing	boats.	Given	that	many	boat	operators	overfill	their	baleinières,	shipping	accidents	are	frequent.	Thenavy	is	therefore	seen	to	be	of	a	certain	use.	However,	the	boat	operators	are	aware	that–	like	all	Congolese	stateservants–	the	marines’	salaries	are	very	low.	Moreover,	they	are	generally	ill	equipped.	In	the	boat	operators’	eyes,this	justifies	the	navy	asking	them	for	contributions	both	in	money	and	in	kind	(namely	fuel),	which	allows	the	marinesto	carry	out	their	mandated	tasks.Aside	from	these	forms	of	official	service	provision,	the	navy	was	also	said	to	engage	in	non-official	service	provision.The	marines	are	generally	the	only	authorities	that	have	boats	with	engines.	Therefore,	if	they	allow	a	boat	to	pass	apost	without	paying	to	other	authorities,	there	is	not	much	the	latter	can	do.	Owing	to	the	sensitive	nature	of	thispractice	–	paying	the	navy	to	avoid	paying	other	authorities	–	only	few	boat	operators	confessed	to	engaging	in	thispractice.	Yet	we	suspect	that	it	occurs	on	a	wider	scale	than	was	reported.The	possibility	of	tax	avoidance	is	likely	to	help	foster	a	positive	image	of	the	marines’	presence,	which	in	turn	affectsperceptions	of	the	contributions	they	impose.	This	observation	leads	us	to	conclude	that	the	“fiscal	exchangeprinciple”	should	not	only	be	analysed	in	terms	of	public	service	provision:	private	service	provision	should	be	takeninto	consideration	too.Our	findings	suggest	that	there	is	a	complex	relation	between	on	the	one	hand,	the	perceived	legitimacy	of	taxes,and	on	the	other	hand,	what	we	call	their	perceived	“officiality”	or	the	sense	that	something	is	“official”.	“Officiality”	isshaped	by	a	range	of	factors,	of	which	legislation	is	only	one.	We	should	therefore	avoid	labelling	all	taxation	notsanctioned	by	legislation	a	priori	as	“non-official”	or	“informal”.	Rather,	we	should	carefully	examine	understandingsof	“officiality”	as	held	by	taxpayers	themselves.	Moreover,	due	to	the	complex	and	shifting	nature	of	theseunderstandings,	we	suggest	that	it	is	analytically	more	fruitful	to	speak	of	processes	of	officialisation	(and	de-officialisation)	than	to	approach	“the	official”	and	the	“non-official”	as	binary	concepts.	Grasping	these	processes	iscrucial	for	a	more	nuanced	insight	into	state-society	relations	and	the	workings	of	the	Congolese	state	apparatus	ingeneral.Read	more	about	#PublicAuthority	and	visit	our	website.Africa at LSE: Exploring boat operators’ perceptions of taxation on the Congo River #PublicAuthority Page 2 of 3		Date originally posted: 2018-06-11Permalink: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/africaatlse/2018/06/11/exploring-boat-operators-perceptions-of-taxation-on-the-congo-river-publicauthority/Blog homepage: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/africaatlse/Maria	Eriksson	Baaz	(@MariaEBaaz)	is	Professor	in	Peace	and	Development	Research	at	the	School	of	GlobalStudies	at	Gothenburg	University	in	Sweden	and	Senior	Lecturer	at	the	Department	of	Government,	UppsalaUniversity.Judith	Verweijen	(@judithverweijen)is	an	FWO	Postdoctoral	Research	Fellow	at	the	Conflict	Research	Group,University	of	Ghent	in	Belgium.	The	views	expressed	in	this	post	are	those	of	the	author	and	in	no	way	reflect	those	of	the	Africa	at	LSEblog,	the	Firoz	Lalji	Centre	for	Africa	or	the	London	School	of	Economics	and	Political	Science.	Africa at LSE: Exploring boat operators’ perceptions of taxation on the Congo River #PublicAuthority Page 3 of 3		Date originally posted: 2018-06-11Permalink: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/africaatlse/2018/06/11/exploring-boat-operators-perceptions-of-taxation-on-the-congo-river-publicauthority/Blog homepage: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/africaatlse/

Exploring boat operators' perceptions of taxation on the Congo River #PublicAuthority

http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/90107/1/africaatlse-2018-06-11-exploring-boat-operators-perceptions-of.pdf

Exploring boat operators' perceptions of taxation on the Congo River #PublicAuthority

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

LSE Research Online