Ghana
This report analyses the implementation of the AEOI Standard in Ghana with respect to the requirements of the AEOI Terms of Reference. It assesses both the legal frameworks put in place to implement the AEOI Standard and the effectiveness of the implementation of the AEOI Standard in practice.
The methodology used for the peer reviews and that therefore underpins this report is outlined in Chapter 2.
Overall findings
AEOI legal framework
Ghana’s legal framework implementing the AEOI Standard is in place but needs improvement in order to be fully consistent with the requirements of the AEOI Terms of Reference. While Ghana’s international legal framework to exchange the information with all of Ghana’s Interested Appropriate Partners (CR2) is consistent with the requirements, its domestic legislative framework requiring Reporting Financial Institutions to conduct the due diligence and reporting procedures (CR1) has deficiencies significant to the proper functioning of elements of the AEOI Standard. Most significantly, deficiencies have been identified in Ghana’s enforcement framework.
Overall determination on the legal framework: In Place But Needs Improvement
Effectiveness of AEOI in practice
Ghana’s implementation of the AEOI Standard is partially compliant with the requirements of the AEOI Terms of Reference to ensure the effectiveness of the AEOI Standard in practice. While Ghana is on track with respect to exchanging the information in an effective and timely manner (CR2), there are significant issues with respect to ensuring that Reporting Financial Institutions correctly conduct the due diligence and reporting procedures (CR1).
Overall rating in relation to the effectiveness in practice: Partially Compliant
General context
Ghana commenced exchanges under the AEOI Standard in 2019 on a non-reciprocal basis. In 2022, Ghana commenced exchanged on a reciprocal basis.
In order to provide for Reporting Financial Institutions to collect and report the information to be exchanged, Ghana:
enacted the Standard for Automatic Exchange of Financial Account Information Act, 2018, amended in 2023; and
Under this framework Reporting Financial Institutions were required to commence the due diligence procedures in relation to New Accounts from 1 January 2018. With respect to Preexisting Accounts, Reporting Financial Institutions were required to complete the due diligence procedures on High Value Individual Accounts by 31 December 2018 and on Lower Value Individual Accounts and Entity Accounts by 31 December 2019.
Following the initial Global Forum peer review, Ghana made various amendments to its legislative framework to address issues identified, the last of which was effective from 23 May 2023.
With respect to the exchange of information under the AEOI Standard, Ghana has the Convention on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Tax Matters in place and activated the associated CRS Multilateral Competent Authority Agreement in time for exchanges in 2019.
Table 1 sets out the number of Financial Institutions in Ghana that reported information on Financial Accounts in 2022 as defined in the AEOI Standard (essentially because they maintained Financial Accounts for Account Holders, or that related to Controlling Persons, resident in a Reportable Jurisdiction). It also sets out the number of Financial Accounts that they reported in 2022. In this regard, it should be noted that Ghana requires the reporting of Financial Accounts based on a prescribed list of exchange partners and some accounts may be required to be reported more than once (e.g. jointly held accounts or accounts with multiple related Controlling Persons), which is reflected in the figures below. These figures provide key contextual information to the development and implementation of Ghana’s administrative compliance strategy, which is analysed in the subsequent sections of this report.
Table 2 sets out the number of exchange partners to which information was successfully sent by Ghana in the past few years (including where the necessary frameworks were in place, containing an obligation on Reporting Financial Institutions to report information, but no relevant Reportable Accounts were identified). These figures provide key contextual information in relation to Ghana’s exchanges in practice, which is also analysed in subsequent sections of this report.
In order to provide for the effective implementation of the AEOI Standard, in Ghana:
The Ghana Revenue Authority (the GRA, the tax authority) has the responsibility to ensure the effective implementation of the due diligence and reporting obligations by Reporting Financial Institutions and for exchanging the information with Ghana’s exchange partners and is supported the Bank of Ghana (BOG), the Financial Intelligence Centre (FIC), the National Insurance Commission (NIC), the National Pension Regulatory Authority (NPRA) and the Security and Exchange Commission (SEC);
technical solutions necessary to receive and validate the information reported by Reporting Financial Institutions were put in place by establishing a secured platform for reporting that includes a validation system; and
the Common Transmission System (CTS) is used for the exchange of the information, along with the associated file preparation and encryption requirements.
It should be noted that the review of Ghana’s legal frameworks implementing the AEOI Standard concluded with the determination that Ghana’s domestic legal framework is In Place But Needs Improvement and its international legal framework is In Place. This has been taken into account when reviewing the effectiveness of Ghana’s implementation of the AEOI Standard in practice and where particular identified gaps in Ghana’s legal frameworks directly impact its implementation in practice, these are mentioned below.
Findings and conclusions on the legal frameworks
The detailed findings and conclusions on the AEOI legal frameworks for Ghana are below, organised per Core Requirement (CR) and then per sub-requirement (SR) as extracted from the AEOI Terms of Reference (see Annex B).
CR1 Domestic legal framework: Jurisdictions should have a domestic legislative framework in place that requires all Reporting Financial Institutions to conduct the due diligence and reporting procedures in the CRS, and that provides for the effective implementation of the CRS as set out therein.
Determination: In Place But Needs Improvement
Ghana’s domestic legislative framework is in place and contains most of the key aspects of the CRS and its Commentary requiring Reporting Financial Institutions to conduct the due diligence and reporting procedures, but it needs improvement in relation to the framework to enforce the requirements (SR 1.4). Most significantly, Ghana’s legislative framework does not include rules to prevent the circumvention of due diligence and reporting obligations in all cases.
SR 1.1 Jurisdictions should define the scope of Reporting Financial Institutions consistently with the CRS.
Ghana has defined the scope of Reporting Financial Institutions in its domestic legislative framework in accordance with the CRS and its Commentary.
SR 1.2 Jurisdictions should define the scope of Financial Accounts and Reportable Accounts consistently with the CRS and incorporate the due diligence procedures to identify them.
Ghana has defined the scope of the Financial Accounts that are required to be reported in its domestic legislative framework and incorporated the due diligence procedures that must be applied to identify them in accordance with the CRS and its Commentary.
SR 1.3 Jurisdictions should incorporate the reporting requirements contained in Section I of the CRS into their domestic legislative framework.
Ghana has incorporated the reporting requirements in its domestic legislative framework in accordance with the CRS and its Commentary.
SR 1.4 Jurisdictions should have a legislative framework in place that allows for the enforcement of the requirements of the CRS in practice.
Ghana has a legislative framework in place to enforce the requirements in a manner that is largely consistent with the CRS and its Commentary. However, deficiencies have been identified. More specifically, Ghana’s legislative framework:
does not include rules to prevent all Financial Institutions, persons or intermediaries from adopting practices intended to circumvent the due diligence and reporting procedures as required; and
does not include rules requiring Reporting Financial Institutions to keep records of self-certifications in accordance with the requirements.
These are key elements of the required enforcement framework and are therefore material to the proper functioning of the AEOI Standard.
Ghana should amend its domestic legislative framework to include rules to prevent all Financial Institutions, persons and intermediaries from adopting practices intended to circumvent the reporting and due diligence procedures, rather than just those on whom the AEOI Standard imposes an obligation.
Ghana should amend its domestic legislative framework to require Reporting Financial Institutions to maintain records of self-certifications for at least five years from the deadline to report the information, rather than six years from the date when an account is closed.
CR2 International legal framework: Jurisdictions should have exchange relationships in effect with all Interested Appropriate Partners as committed to and that provide for the exchange of information in accordance with the Model CAA.
Ghana’s international legal framework to exchange the information is in place, is consistent with the Model CAA and its Commentary and provides for exchange with all of Ghana’s Interested Appropriate Partners (i.e. all jurisdictions that are interested in receiving information from Ghana and that meet the required standard in relation to confidentiality and data safeguards). (SRs 2.1 – 2.3)
SR 2.1 Jurisdictions should have exchange agreements in effect with all Interested Appropriate Partners that permit the automatic exchange of CRS information.
Ghana has exchange agreements that permit the automatic exchange of CRS information in effect with all its Interested Appropriate Partners.
SR 2.2 Such an exchange agreement should be put in place without undue delay, following the receipt of an expression of interest from an Interested Appropriate Partner.
Ghana put in place its exchange agreements without undue delay.
SR 2.3 Jurisdictions should ensure that the exchange agreements in effect provide for the exchange of information in accordance with the requirements of the Model CAA.
Ghana’s exchange agreements provide for the exchange of information in accordance with the requirements of the Model CAA.
Findings and conclusions in relation to effectiveness in practice
The detailed findings and conclusions in relation to effectiveness in practice of AEOI for Ghana are below, organised per Core Requirement (CR) and then per sub-requirement (SR) as extracted from the AEOI Terms of Reference (see Annex B).
CR1 Effectiveness in practice: Jurisdictions should ensure that in practice Reporting Financial Institutions correctly implement the due diligence and reporting procedures, which includes a requirement for jurisdictions to have in place an administrative framework to ensure the effective implementation of the CRS.
Ghana’s implementation of the AEOI Standard is partially compliant with respect to ensuring that Reporting Financial Institutions are correctly conducting the due diligence and reporting procedures. More specifically, while Ghana is meeting expectations with respect to collaboration with its exchange partners to ensure effectiveness (SR 1.6), there are significant issues with respect to ensuring effectiveness in a domestic context, such as through having an effective administrative compliance framework and related procedures (SR 1.5). Ghana should continue its implementation process to ensure its effectiveness, including by addressing the recommendations made.
SR 1.5 Jurisdictions should ensure that in practice Reporting Financial Institutions identify the Financial Accounts they maintain, identify the Reportable Accounts among those Financial Accounts, as well as their Account Holders, and where relevant Controlling Persons, by correctly conducting the due diligence procedures and collect and report the required information with respect to each Reportable Account. This includes having in place:
a) an effective administrative compliance framework to ensure the effective implementation of, and compliance with, the CRS. This framework should:
i. be based on a strategy that facilitates compliance by Reporting Financial Institutions and which is informed by a risk assessment in respect of the effective implementation of the CRS that takes into account relevant information sources (including third party sources);
ii. include procedures to ensure that Financial Institutions correctly apply the definitions of Reporting Financial Institutions and Non-Reporting Financial Institutions;
iii. include procedures to periodically verify Reporting Financial Institutions’ compliance, conducted by authorities that have adequate powers with respect to the reviewed Reporting Financial Institutions, with procedures to access the records they maintain; and
b) effective procedures to ensure that Financial Institutions, persons or intermediaries do not circumvent the due diligence and reporting procedures;
c) effective enforcement mechanisms to address non-compliance by Reporting Financial Institutions;
d) strong measures to ensure that valid self-certifications are always obtained for New Accounts;
e) effective procedures to ensure that each, or each type of, jurisdiction-specific Non-Reporting Financial Institution and Excluded Account continue to present a low risk of being used to evade tax; and
f) effective procedures to follow up with a Reporting Financial Institution when undocumented accounts are reported in order to establish the reasons why such information is being reported.
In order to ensure that Reporting Financial Institutions correctly conduct the due diligence and reporting procedures, Ghana implemented many of the requirements in accordance with expectations. However, significant issues were identified. The key findings were as follows:
Ghana has developed a strategy to ensure compliance with the AEOI Standard. The strategy is based on a risk assessment that took into account a range of relevant information sources, such as the information reported by Reporting Financial Institutions, information from AML compliance reviews and information obtained under whistle-blower programs. While Ghana has not yet implemented some key aspects of its compliance plan, it has put a particular emphasis on education and outreach activities to ensure that Financial Institutions understand their obligations. For this purpose, Ghana set up a webpage dedicated to providing information on the AEOI Standard as well as a dedicated email address and phone number that are available to Reporting Financial Institutions. Ghana also actively informs its Financial Institutions about new developments and obligations and regularly conducts seminars and training sessions. With respect to the interaction between Ghana’s AEOI and AML frameworks, Ghana stated that cooperation between the relevant government agencies has started. However, there does not yet appear to be a formalised plan or activity undertaken to ensure that it always results in reporting in accordance with the AEOI Standard.
Ghana has set up an oversight regulatory and compliance committee (consisting of all relevant regulatory agencies) to develop and implement a formalised plan to identify all potential Reporting Financial Institutions to ensure they report as required. The sources of information used to identify potential Reporting Financial Institutions include regulatory information, the national corporate register, and the Foreign Financial Institution list for FATCA purposes. Ghana has contacted several relevant Entities with enquires designed to ensure that Reporting Financial Institutions are classifying themselves correctly under its domestic rules and reporting information as required, as well as its Licensed Corporate Trustees with respect to Entities they manage that might be Reporting Financial Institutions. Ghana will follow up as needed, including through commencing audits where appropriate.
The institution responsible for implementing Ghana’s compliance strategy appears to have the necessary powers to discharge its functions. With respect to resourcing, Ghana has assigned two full-time staff within its Exchange of Information Unit in the GRA to monitor and ensure compliance by Reporting Financial Institutions, who have access to IT systems and tools to conduct risk assessments. Ghana indicated that a total number of eight full-time staff will be assigned to implementing the AEOI Standard. Overall, they appear ready to effectively implement an operational plan to verify compliance with the requirements.
Ghana has carried out some desk-based checks to verify whether the information being reported is complete and accurate (to identify fluctuations in the numbers of accounts being reported), but it has not yet conducted in-depth reviews, including the inspection of records of Reporting Financial Institutions, nor has it yet identified any cases of non-compliance or carried out any enforcement activities. This includes not yet verifying that self-certifications are obtained as required. While Ghana has developed detailed plans to extend its compliance activities and to enforce the requirements, it has not yet begun to implement them in full.
Although Ghana’s Reporting Financial Institutions have not reported any undocumented accounts so far, Ghana has clearly defined procedures to follow up with them when they report undocumented accounts.
Ghana is ready to take effective action to address circumvention of the requirements if such circumvention is detected, although it is slightly constrained by the deficiencies in its legal framework.
It is noted that Ghana does not have a jurisdiction-specific list of Non-Reporting Financial Institutions or Excluded Accounts for ongoing monitoring.
Table 3 provides a summary of the specific activities undertaken, or that are planned to be undertaken, in relation to each of the key parts of the framework described above.
Ghana was not able to confirm that it collects and monitors information on the proportion of Financial Accounts that are reported that include information on the Tax Identification Numbers and dates of birth with respect to the individuals associated with them. These data points are key to exchange partners to effectively utilise the information and are important to developing an effective compliance strategy to ensure the AEOI Standard is being effectively implemented. Ghana was not able to confirm that it correctly collects and monitors information on the number of undocumented accounts reported by its Reporting Financial Institutions. This information is crucial to implementing the requirement to follow up on undocumented accounts.
Feedback was also received from Ghana’s exchange partners indicating that, compared to what they generally experience in relation to the information received from all of their exchange partners, they achieved a relatively low level of success when seeking to match information received from Ghana with their taxpayer database. Furthermore, two exchange partners highlighted issues with respect to the information received such as incomplete information and missing dates of birth. Follow-up discussions confirmed that Ghana is aware of these issues and is seeking to improve the situation.
Based on these findings it was concluded that Ghana is partially meeting expectations in ensuring that Reporting Financial Institutions correctly conduct the due diligence and reporting procedures, including by having in place the required administrative compliance framework and related procedures. More specifically, significant issues have been identified with respect to Ghana’s activities to verify that the information reported is complete and accurate, including with respect to self-certifications, as well as the monitoring of Tax Identification Numbers and dates of birth. Ghana should therefore continue its implementation process accordingly, including by addressing the recommendations made.
Ghana should further implement its overarching compliance strategy to underpin its compliance activities, informed by a risk assessment that takes into account a range of relevant information sources.
Ghana should actively monitor the interaction between its AML and AEOI frameworks to ensure that the collection and reporting of information under the AEOI Standard is in accordance with the requirements.
Ghana should implement its planned verification activities, including the review of records maintained by Reporting Financial Institutions and routinely apply its enforcement mechanisms where non-compliance is identified, including the application of dissuasive penalties and sanctions as appropriate.
Ghana should implement its plans to monitor and verify whether Reporting Financial Institutions are obtaining valid self-certifications as required, including dedicated communication activities, with a particular focus on self-certifications obtained after the opening of a Financial Account.
Ghana should implement mechanisms to identify Reporting Financial Institutions that have undocumented accounts and implement its policy to follow up with them to ensure that the requirements are being complied with.
Ghana should implement systems to monitor the reporting of Tax Identification Numbers and dates of birth by Reporting Financial Institutions to inform its compliance strategy.
Ghana should address the issues raised by its exchange partners.
SR 1.6 Jurisdictions should collaborate on compliance and enforcement. This requires jurisdictions to:
a) use all appropriate measures available under the jurisdiction’s domestic law to address errors or non-compliance notified to the jurisdiction by an exchange partner; and
b) have in place effective procedures to notify an exchange partner of errors that may have led to incomplete or incorrect information reporting or non-compliance with the due diligence or reporting procedures by a Reporting Financial Institution in the jurisdiction of the exchange partner.
In order to collaborate on compliance and enforcement, it appears that Ghana implemented all of the requirements in relation to issues notified to them (i.e. under Section 4 of the MCAA or equivalent) in accordance with expectations. In particular, Ghana received notifications from two partners (representing 3% of its partners) and has successfully processed them in a timely manner. Ghana has resolved one of the issues raised and is in the process of resolving the remaining issue. This is depicted in Figure 1. It also appears that Ghana will notify its partners effectively of errors or suspected non-compliance it identified when utilising the information received.
Based on these findings it was concluded that Ghana is fully meeting expectations in relation to collaborating with its exchange partners to ensure that Reporting Financial Institutions correctly conduct the due diligence and reporting procedures. Ghana is encouraged to continue its implementation process accordingly, to ensure its ongoing effectiveness.
CR2 Effectiveness in practice: Jurisdictions should exchange the information effectively in practice, in a timely manner, including by sorting, preparing, validating and transmitting it in accordance with the AEOI Standard.
Ghana’s implementation of the AEOI Standard is on track with respect to exchanging the information effectively in practice, including in relation to sorting, preparing and validating the information (SR 2.4), correctly transmitting the information in a timely manner (SRs 2.5 – 2.8) and providing corrections, amendments or additions to the information (SR 2.9). Ghana has shown improvement over time and is encouraged to continue its implementation process accordingly, to ensure its ongoing effectiveness.
SR 2.4 Jurisdictions should sort, prepare and validate the information in accordance with the CRS XML Schema and the associated requirements in the CRS XML Schema User Guide and the File Error and Correction-related validations in the Status Message User Guide (i.e. the 50000 and 80000 range).
Six exchange partners highlighted particular issues with respect to preparation and format of the information sent by Ghana (representing 9% of its partners). These generally related to the reporting of closed accounts and the resubmission of corrected files. More generally, one of Ghana’s exchange partners reported rejecting more than 25% of the files received, due to the technical requirements not being met. This has improved over time and is now broadly in line with the general experience of other jurisdictions. It was noted that Ghana has already successfully addressed most of the issues, including some that arose some time ago, and is in the process of addressing the remaining ones.
Based on these findings it was concluded that, overall, Ghana is meeting expectations in relation to sorting, preparing and validating the information. It was also noted that there is room for improvement with respect to working with its exchange partners to address the issues raised. Ghana is therefore encouraged to continue its implementation process accordingly, including in relation to the area highlighted.
Ghana should continue to work with its exchange partners to address the issues raised.
SR 2.5 Jurisdictions should agree and use, with each exchange partner, transmission methods that meet appropriate minimum standards to ensure the confidentiality and integrity of the data throughout the transmission, including its encryption to a minimum secure standard.
In order to put in place an agreed transmission method that meets appropriate minimum standards in confidentiality, integrity of the data and encryption for use with each of its exchange partners, Ghana linked to the Common Transmission System.
Based on these findings it was concluded that Ghana is fully meeting expectations in relation to agreeing and using appropriate transmission methods with each of its partners. Ghana is encouraged to continue to ensure the ongoing effectiveness of its implementation.
SR 2.6 Jurisdictions should carry out all exchanges annually within nine months of the end of the calendar year to which the information relates.
Feedback from Ghana’s exchange partners did not raise any concerns with respect to timeliness of the exchanges by Ghana and therefore with respect to Ghana’s implementation of this requirement.
Based on these findings it was concluded that Ghana is fully meeting expectations in relation to exchanging the information in a timely manner. Ghana is encouraged to continue to ensure the ongoing effectiveness of its implementation.
SR 2.7 Jurisdictions should send the information in accordance with the agreed transmission methods and encryption standards.
Feedback from Ghana’s exchange partners did not raise any concerns with respect to Ghana’s use of the agreed transmission methods and therefore with Ghana’s implementation of this requirement.
Based on these findings it was concluded that Ghana is fully meeting expectations in relation to sending the information in accordance with the agreed transmission methods and encryption standards. Ghana is encouraged to continue to ensure the ongoing effectiveness of its implementation.
SR 2.8 Jurisdictions should have the systems in place to receive information and, once it has been received, should send a status message to the sending jurisdictions in accordance with the CRS Status Message XML Schema and the related User Guide.
Three exchange partners highlighted delays in the sending of status messages by Ghana, representing 4% of its partners. This represents a relatively high proportion of partners. It was noted that Ghana appears to be successfully addressing the issues to ensure that status messages are sent in accordance with the requirements.
Based on these findings it was concluded that, overall, Ghana is meeting expectations in relation to the receipt of the information. It was also noted that there is room for improvement with respect to sending status messages to all of its exchange partners in a timely manner. Ghana is encouraged to continue to ensure the ongoing effectiveness of its implementation, including in relation to the area highlighted.
Ghana should ensure it sends status messages to all of its exchange partners in a timely manner.
SR 2.9 Jurisdictions should respond to a notification from an exchange partner as referred to in Section 4 of the Model CAA (which may include Status Messages) in accordance with the timelines set out in the Commentary to Section 4 of the Model CAA. In all other cases, jurisdictions should send corrected, amended or additional information received from a Reporting Financial Institution as soon as possible after it has been received.
While it is unclear whether Ghana’s approach will ensure that corrected, amended or additional information is provided in a timely manner, it has not been tested and no such concerns were raised by Ghana’s exchange partners and therefore with respect to Ghana’s implementation of these requirements.
Based on these findings it was concluded that Ghana appears to be meeting expectations in relation to responding to notifications from exchange partners and the sending of corrected, amended or additional information. Ghana is encouraged to continue to ensure the ongoing effectiveness of its implementation.