Revenue Authorities and their Boards of Management: Recent Developments

This technical note provides detailed information on the semi-autonomous Revenue Authority (RA) governance model for revenue administration. It examines emerging issues with RA boards. Some see the RA role becoming more closely aligned with private sector boards of directors.
READ MORE...
Volume/Issue: Volume 2024 Issue 005
Publication date: August 2024
ISBN: 9798400282881
$5.00
Add to Cart by clicking price of the language and format you'd like to purchase
Available Languages and Formats
Paperback
PDF
ePub
English
Prices in red indicate formats that are not yet available but are forthcoming.
Summary

This technical note provides detailed and updated information on the semi-autonomous Revenue Authority (RA) governance model for revenue administration, a model developed 40 years ago and used by some 35 administrations world-wide. The update is provided through a review of relevant legislation, questionnaire results, and outcomes of a series of seminars. The RA governance model has a unique governance structure that includes a Minister, a board of management, and a Chief Executive Officer - three partners. RAs are set up using specific enabling legislation. Clarity in the language used in the law is critical for establishing the exact roles of the three partners. The board of management is unique in that it usually has a more limited role (due in part to the confidentiality of individual taxpayer information) than a board of directors in a private sector corporation. Emerging issues with these boards are examined, and it is noted that some see the RA board role as becoming more closely aligned with private sector boards of directors. RAs were initially founded on the belief that more nimble HR practices and appropriate funding would result in more robust revenue administration. While it is difficult to establish direct causality between the adoption of the RA governance model and improved revenue administration, practitioners are convinced this is the case and that the HR and funding advantages need to be protected.