Zambia Court upholds 10 per cent betting tax, rejects bold challenge by BetPawa and Betway
Constitutional Court dismisses operators’ bid to halt the newly enacted excise duty, allowing ZRA to continue tax collection.
Zambia.- Zambia’s Constitutional Court has dismissed an application by BetPawa and Betway to stop the government from collecting a newly enacted 10 per cent excise duty on betting stakes. The ruling allows the Zambia Revenue Authority (ZRA) to continue enforcing the tax while the operators’ constitutional challenge proceeds.
The betting firms had challenged the levy under the Customs and Excise (Amendment) Act No. 11 of 2025, arguing it was unconstitutional. They raised concerns that the tax, introduced on August 8, was excessive, unclear and could affect their financial operations.
Oliver Nzala, ZRA Corporate Communications Manager said, in a press release: “The Constitutional Court has dismissed an application by Betbio Zambia Limited (trading as BetPawa) and Emerald Bay Limited (trading as Betway) seeking to restrain the Zambia Revenue Authority (ZRA) and The Attorney General from imposing and collecting a newly introduced 10 per cent excise duty on betting stakes.”
BetPawa and Betway described the tax as “excessive, ambiguous, unimplementable and financially unsustainable” and sought an interim injunction, arguing the burden exceeded their gross gaming revenue, the law lacked clarity and the mid-year introduction made compliance “practically impossible”.
ZRA countered the petitioners’ claims, challenging their financial projections as speculative and unsupported by audited data. Nzala said: “ZRA maintained that the excise duty is a consumption tax borne by betting players, not operators, and that the law was enacted following stakeholder engagement.”
The 10 per cent betting excise duty is part of the newly enacted law, giving ZRA full authority to collect it. The court ruling allows the tax to remain in effect while the constitutional challenge continues, reinforcing ZRA’s statutory mandate and emphasising the public interest in revenue collection.
Public interest prevails in ruling
The court ruled the petitioners had failed to show a serious constitutional issue justifying suspension of the law. Judges reaffirmed the “pay now, argue later” principle and found no evidence that compliance would lead to insolvency. Nzala said: “The Court observed that the obligation to pay tax is not a legal impossibility.”
The court emphasised that public interest takes priority over the private concerns of the betting operators. Nzala added: “The Court emphasised that the Authority has a statutory duty to collect taxes on behalf of the government and that this duty is rooted in public interest which outweighs the private interest of the two betting companies.”
The matter was presided over by Lady Justice Judy Zulu Mulongoti. With the dismissal of the interim injunction, betting players will continue paying the tax while the broader constitutional challenge proceeds.
