What has been learnt?

Effectiveness/success

How does the initiative define success?

KCCA defines the success of its property tax reform through measurable gains in own source revenue (OSR), with property rates a critical funding stream. Reform has focused on stronger compliance and broadening the tax base, tripling OSR from UGX 30 billion (US$8.2m) in 2010/11 to UGX 90 billion (US$25m) in 2018/19. That year, OSR accounted for 24% of total revenues (40% excluding development partners), with property rates the largest source at 36% – rising to 47% in 2021/22 (Delbridge et al., 2022; Manwaring and Regan, 2024). KCCA projects property tax will reach 50% of OSR in 2023/24 (Haas and Löffler, 2025). This growth in OSR has been complemented by increased contributions from the central government and development partners, reflecting greater confidence in KCCA’s financial management, though revenues remain insufficient to meet the city’s investment and service needs (Delbridge et al., 2022).

Overlap with the ACRC’s conceptual framework and Theory of Change

Two ACRC-identified preconditions for urban reform were particularly salient in Kampala’s property tax reform: elite political commitment and the capacity to build short- and long-term state capability.

From the outset, Kampala’s reform process benefited from high-level political commitment. Although President Museveni was cautious on property tax reform – particularly where it risked voter backlash, as seen in the continued exemption of owner-occupied residences – his broader strategy to wrest control of the city from opposition parties that had dominated Kampala’s politics since 2001 nonetheless created the conditions for reform. Central to this was the establishment of the KCCA in 2011, which, alongside a package of governance changes, provided an enabling environment for strengthening own-source revenues. While President Museveni did not directly drive property tax reform, his support for this institutional reorganisation indirectly enabled it, above all through the appointment of Jennifer Musisi, an experienced technocrat from the Uganda Revenue Authority, as KCCA’s first executive director. Backed by presidential authority and assured funding, Musisi drew on her expertise in tax administration to push through politically sensitive reforms, modernise revenue systems and expand collections within a few years, with property tax forming a central pillar of these efforts (Mukwaya et al., 2025).

The second precondition – state capability – was achieved by fully internalising tax collection, prioritising staffing, continuous training and administrative reform. This included recruiting qualified personnel and upskilling existing staff through regular training and capacity-building embedded in projects and contracts. KCCA also invested in internal capacity across three key revenue functions: it cancelled outsourced contracts to manage tax collection directly, carried out a citywide revaluation and registry in-house – building GIS and IT expertise – and developed its own open-source digital infrastructure via the eCitie platform. Maintained by an internal technical team, eCitie offered an integrated, adaptable foundation for revenue administration. Crucially, reforms remained within KCCA’s existing legal mandate. By improving administration – through digitisation, automation and restructuring functions, such as separating revenue and expenditure – KCCA strengthened governance without requiring legislative change.

How successful has the initiative been?

Assessment of success is defined by KCCA:

• Rising share of own-source revenue: property tax has become Kampala’s most important source of own revenue, contributing 47% of the Kampala Capital City Authority’s (KCCA) own source revenues in 2021/22 (Manwaring and Regan, 2024). This increase reflects both an expanded taxpayer base and improved data accuracy and valuation (Delbridge et al., 2022).
• Growth in property tax revenue: according to KCCA’s audited financials, property rates revenue rose from UGX 11.81 billion in FY2012/13 to UGX 20.27 billion in FY2015/16, and further to UGX 32.39 billion by FY2018/19 (Haas and Löffler, 2025).[1] Accounting for inflation, this represents a real annual revenue increase of roughly 50% between 2012/13 and 2015/16 and roughly 40% between 2015/16 and 2018/19.
• Tax base expansion: the property tax roll remained largely unchanged for many years, with no comprehensive update since 2006. Between 2016 and 2019, however, KCCA significantly broadened the tax base through a citywide mass enumeration, addressing and valuation exercise, covering over 300,000 properties (Manwaring and Regan, 2019).

[1] Real, FY2018/19 prices: property rates revenue increased from UGX 14.87 billion in FY2012/13 to UGX 22.71 billion in FY2015/16, reaching UGX 32.39 billion in FY2018/19 (deflated with UBOS headline CPI, financial-year averages).

Approaches used (expanded from the key information box):

1. Sequenced reform: collection first, valuation later. A common weakness in property tax reform is the disproportionate emphasis on upstream processes – such as property identification and valuation – while neglecting collection. In contexts where collection efficiency is extremely low, such efforts risk being ineffective if not matched by improvements in revenue administration. Recognising this, KCCA adopted a collection-focused approach, demonstrating how revenue gains can be achieved by applying the fundamentals of enforcement and compliance from existing tax bases, while gradually expanding coverage over time.
2. Human capacity development: effective implementation required a critical mass of qualified personnel. To this end, the Directorate of Revenue Collection (DRC) recruited experienced staff, including professionals from the Uganda Revenue Authority and technical directorates within the Ministry of Finance and other agencies. All staff received monthly training and refresher courses on tax and operational guidelines, laying the foundation for further administrative reforms and supporting long-term institutional sustainability (Andema and Haas, 2017).
3. In-house capacity building: with a well-trained team in place, three core components of the property tax system were brought in-house. First, revenue collection – previously outsourced to private firms – was internalised. The DRC cancelled all existing contracts, citing weak oversight, contract enforcement and widespread leakage. Second, digitisation of revenue management was prioritised through the development of the eCitie platform. While initial system automation was supported by external consultants, the contract required full knowledge transfer, including methodologies and source code. This enabled in-house programmers to ensure the system’s sustainability, integration and functionality. Third, property valuation was also conducted internally, rather than contracted out, which reduced costs and broadened coverage beyond high-value commercial properties to include all property types, taxable or not (Delbridge et al., 2022).
4. Simplified taxpayer payment via eCities: a key challenge was rebuilding taxpayer trust and participation. Years of corruption and weak service delivery had eroded tax morale. Behavioural evaluations revealed that simplified and transparent payment systems significantly improved compliance. KCCA responded by focusing on making payment convenient for willing taxpayers, while gradually extending outreach to more resistant segments (Delbridge et al., 2022).
5. Digitised databases and systems: when the new technical staff joined KCCA, the institution lacked basic infrastructure – there were few computers, no intranet and no centralised information system. Digitising revenue management became a top priority. Inspired by Uganda Revenue Authority systems, automation was phased over two years until fully operational (Delbridge et al., 2022). The system comprises dual interfaces for administrators and clients, enabling real-time payment tracking and performance evaluation.

Understanding limitations

Compliance remains low: only 10-11% of properties paid on time in FYs 2019/20-2021/22, due to weak enforcement and low tax morale (Manwaring and Regan, 2024). Residents often do not perceive a clear link between taxes and services received, a challenge worsened by the low visibility of public investments and broader service delivery failures.

Low compliance is compounded by exemptions in the Local Government (Rating) Act: while rental and commercial properties are taxable, owner-occupied residences – about 40% of the total – have been exempt since 2005, leaving collections well below potential, despite progress (Delbridge et al., 2022). The system is further constrained by its concentration in formal areas and by the exclusion of vacant land from the tax base, which limits taxation to buildings and developments and forgoes a significant source of revenue for KCCA (Haas and Kopanyi, 2018).

Although own-source revenues have increased, Kampala’s fiscal autonomy remains constrained. National transfers still account for around 40% of its budget (Haas and Löffler, 2025), while the 2015 Public Finance Management Act recentralised all revenues into a Treasury Single Account, causing delays in remitting OSR collections. Expenditure has also risen, yet intergovernmental transfers remain well below the levels required to meet the city’s capital investment and service delivery needs (Delbridge et al., 2022) perpetuating a cycle where limited resources weaken service delivery and reduce property tax compliance.

Potential for scaling and replicating

Kampala’s experience offers key insights for cities aiming to strengthen revenue administration. Lessons from Kampala’s property tax reform include:

• Commit to long-term reform: significant gains in revenue and administration can be achieved through multi-year reform strategies, even without changes to national tax laws.
• Internalise collection: shifting from outsourced collection to in-house administration proved more efficient for large cities like Kampala, reversing reliance on private contractors. Smaller jurisdictions may still benefit from third-party collection.
• Build skilled teams: recruiting experienced personnel – especially from national agencies – and investing in ongoing, targeted training was essential to transforming administrative capacity and organisational culture.
• Offer competitive pay: adequate compensation is necessary to attract and retain qualified staff, as training alone cannot overcome deep capacity deficits.
• Secure political backing: strong, sustained political support is critical to overcome resistance and implement difficult reforms.
• Use revenue potential analysis: institutionalising analysis and setting transparent revenue targets improves planning and accountability.
• Invest adequately: high upfront investment in IT and administrative systems yields strong returns – Kampala recovered costs within reform cycles.
• Align IT with policy and administration: technology must support, not drive, reform. Systems like billing, payment and communication should be embedded in well-designed policies and institutions, and tailored to match internal administrative capacity.
• Develop an urban cadastre: a reliable urban cadastre, often created through street addressing, supports not just taxation but also planning, zoning and service delivery.
• Revalue regularly: institutionalising revaluation every five years, alongside annual updates and supplementary rolls, stabilises the tax base and reduces resistance to sudden valuation increases.
• Manage tax rate adjustments: following revaluation, adjusting rates temporarily can help mitigate taxpayer resistance without undermining valuation accuracy.
• Pursue comprehensive reform: while this approach was only possible given the re-institutionalisation of the KCCA and may not be directly transferable to other contexts, Kampala’s success stemmed from tackling all major revenue sources, not property tax in isolation. By 2015/16, its six main taxes accounted for 85% of own-source revenue, with property tax playing a growing role (Kopanyi and Franzsen, 2018).