On October 8, 2025, Zambia’s Constitutional Court rejected an appeal from Betbio Zambia Limited, operating as BetPawa, and Emerald Bay Limited, known as Betway, to halt the enforcement of a new 10% excise duty on betting stakes. The firms filed this application against the Zambia Revenue Authority (ZRA) and the Attorney General, challenging the tax’s implementation under the Customs and Excise (Amendment) Act No. 11 of 2025.
The companies argued that the excise duty violated the Zambian Constitution, citing issues such as a lack of transparency and inadequate public consultation before the tax was introduced. They warned that the tax could drive operational shutdowns and job losses, given its significant burden on their business operations. The petition highlighted concerns over the tax’s potential to disrupt the economic stability of the sector by imposing what they considered an excessive and ambiguous levy.
In defense, the ZRA clarified that the excise duty was a consumption tax intended to be absorbed by betting players, not the operators. ZRA stressed that the legislation was crafted after comprehensive consultations with numerous stakeholders. According to ZRA, the financial impact claims by BetPawa and Betway were speculative and lacked credible support, particularly from audited financial reports. They asserted that the law’s enactment followed due process and aligned with existing tax principles.
Central to the court’s decision was the “pay now, argue later” principle. BetPawa and Betway had sought an interim injunction to pause the tax application while their constitutional case was heard, arguing that the tax exceeded their gross gaming revenue and was implemented without sufficient notice. The companies also contended that enforcing the tax mid-financial year posed significant compliance challenges.
Nonetheless, the ZRA countered that the tax was legally sound and halting its enforcement would disrupt state functions rooted in constitutional obligations. The authority argued that allowing the injunction would undermine the consistent application of tax laws, a critical aspect of fiscal policy in many jurisdictions. The court concurred, concluding that the petitioners’ concerns did not raise a constitutional issue severe enough to justify delaying the tax’s enforcement.
Lady Justice Judy Zulu Mulongoti delivered the ruling, affirming the legal obligation of the ZRA to collect taxes. She noted that the operators’ private interests could not override the public interest served by state revenue. The court underscored that halting the ZRA’s tax collection role would unjustly prioritize individual business interests over national fiscal needs.
In dismissing the interim injunction plea, the court enabled the ZRA to proceed with the excise duty collection, underscoring that the betting services tax would remain active pending the full constitutional challenge. This ruling reflects a broader trend where courts uphold tax regulations as integral to government revenue collection, despite industry opposition.
While BetPawa and Betway expressed concerns about the potential negative impact on the industry, the court’s decision highlights the significant role taxation plays in national economic policy. This case exemplifies the balancing act between fostering a conducive business environment and ensuring adequate public revenue.
Some industry observers suggest that the introduction of this tax might drive innovation as companies explore new strategies to maintain profitability under increased financial pressures. Others warn that without careful implementation and periodic review, such taxes could stifle industry growth and deter international investment.
The ruling also prompts questions about the future regulatory landscape for the iGaming industry in Zambia. As the constitutional challenge proceeds, stakeholders will be closely watching for any adjustments in the legal framework that could affect market dynamics and competitive practices.
This decision serves as a critical precedent for other jurisdictions considering similar taxes on the betting industry, emphasizing the importance of aligning fiscal policies with constitutional mandates while addressing industry concerns. The outcome of the ongoing constitutional case could further influence future legislative and regulatory developments in Zambia’s gaming sector.
The court’s steadfast position on the matter underscores the principle that legal and regulatory compliance is paramount, even amidst contention from major industry players. For BetPawa and Betway, navigating this complex legal landscape will require strategic adaptation and possible recalibration of their business models to accommodate the fiscal realities imposed by the new tax regime.
Erik Agary is a seasoned writer at True Games Reviews, specializing in gaming, casino games, and interactive entertainment. With a passion for all things digital, Erik dives deep into the latest trends and developments in the gaming world, offering insightful reviews and detailed analysis. His expertise spans across multiple gaming platforms, ensuring comprehensive coverage that resonates with both novice and experienced gamers alike.
4.8/5Golden Play Casino
100 free spins
