Unlocking Zambia’s Property Tax Potential: A Path Toward Inclusive Reform

Why Property Discovery Matters for Zambia’s Tax System

A recent policy brief by the Local Government Revenue Initiative (LoGRI) examines this challenge, highlighting how current approaches to property discovery leave significant gaps in tax coverage.

The brief argues that a ‘taxation-led’ approach, prioritizing the registration of all properties for taxation regardless of planning status is the most effective strategy to expand and make Zambia’s property tax system more equitable. By generating comprehensive property data and maps, this approach can also accelerate formal planning and registration efforts.

Many sub-Saharan countries face similar restrictions, making this discussion valuable for policymakers seeking to improve property tax coverage and fairness across the region.

Key Messages:

1. The Challenge: Limited Coverage, Lost Revenue. Zambia requires properties to be formally planned and numbered before they can be taxed, leading to sizeable gaps in property tax coverage and revenue collection.

2. The Traditional Approach: Mass Registration and Titling. To address these gaps, Zambia could undertake a mass registration, planning, and property titling campaign. However, this approach tends to be expensive and prone to serious delays.

3. A Smarter Alternative: Legislative Reform. Alternatively, Zambia could amend national legislation to permit the taxation of all properties on state land, regardless of whether they have been formally planned and numbered.

4. The Critical Ingredient: Property Discovery. Regardless of how Zambia proceeds, improving property discovery is essential to strengthen property tax performance; the success of which will depend on political will and public support for reform.

Zambia’s Property Tax System: Where the Gaps Begin

Zambia’s property tax framework is governed by the Rating Act of 2018, which allows taxation only on properties that have been formally planned and assigned a plot number by the Ministry of Lands and Natural Resources. While this was a step forward from the stricter 1997 law requiring full title deeds, it still leaves many properties outside the tax net.

Who’s Left Out?

Three major categories of properties are commonly excluded:

• Unplanned settlements: Many residents live on state land that has not been officially planned or numbered.
• Customary land: Roughly 60–80% of Zambia’s territory falls under traditional authority and is exempt from property tax.
• Planned areas with poor data: Even in planned areas, property subdivisions and weak coordination between agencies leads to missing or duplicated records.

Taken together, these requirements create large gaps in property tax coverage. LoGRI’s diagnostic assessment in three Zambian districts suggests that about 30%of all properties on state land in Livingstone are omitted from the valuation roll, while in Mansa and Samfya, this figure rises to about 50%and 70%  respectively. When a large proportion of properties is omitted from valuation rolls, it not only limits the tax base but also creates inequities and fosters perceptions that the tax system is unfair – leading to taxpayer disillusionment and lower voluntary compliance.

Two Paths to Better Property Discovery in Zambia

Zambia isn’t alone in struggling to identify all taxable properties. Across sub-Saharan Africa, incomplete property discovery is a persistent challenge. To address this, countries typically follow one of two broad strategies: registration-led or taxation-led approaches.

• The Registration-Led Route: Formalize First, Tax Later. This method requires properties and owners to be officially registered before taxation. Zambia currently leans on this model, but it’s proven slow and incomplete. A nationwide registration campaign could help, but it’s expensive and complex. Rwanda offers a rare success story: in 2004, it launched sweeping land reforms, digitising and registering over 10 million parcels. The result? Greater transparency and stronger land governance. Yet even in Rwanda, only about 40% of registered properties are taxed, highlighting the limits of this approach. Why the gap? Many residents avoid registration to escape taxation. And in countries with limited administrative capacity, replicating Rwanda’s success is a tall order.
• The Taxation-Led Route: Tax First, Register Later. This alternative flips the script. Instead of waiting for formal registration, local governments identify buildings and issue tax bills even if ownership or formal planning records are missing. Tax notices can be addressed simply to “The Owner,” encouraging residents to come forward voluntarily. This approach sidesteps the incentive problem: residents can’t avoid taxes by avoiding registration. It also generates valuable data that can support future registration efforts. Freetown, Sierra Leone, embraced this model in 2020, using satellite imagery and ground surveys to nearly double its tax roll from 57,000 to 110,000 properties. Success came from focusing on what’s visible on the ground, rather than what’s formally documented in records and plans.

Lessons Learned and Policy Paths:

Zambia’s struggle with incomplete property discovery continues to limit local revenue and undermine the fairness of its property tax system. To move forward, the government faces two strategic choices: maintain the current legal framework or amend it to allow broader taxation.

Option 1: Maintain the Current Legislation

Under the Rating Act 2018, only properties that are formally planned and numbered can be taxed. If this legislation remains unchanged, Zambia must invest heavily in expanding its land registry and planning systems. The National Land Titling Programme (NLTP), launched in Lusaka in 2014, is a step in that direction. It uses satellite imagery, digital tools, and community meetings to map and verify property ownership. These efforts help improve tenure security and provide a foundation for future taxation. But here’s the challenge: it’s expensive and slow. The Lusaka pilot cost around $90 per land record, while LoGRI’s valuation pilot in Mansa cost just $5 per property. At the NLTP’s current pace of 50,000 titles per year, full national coverage could also take decades, especially in peri-urban areas with complex customary land boundaries.

Option 2: Amend the Law and Tax First

Alternatively, Zambia could revise the Rating Act to allow taxation of all properties on state land, regardless of planning status. This taxation-led approach, successfully used in Freetown, Sierra Leone, would focus on identifying buildings and issuing tax bills even without formal ownership or planning records. This model is faster, cheaper, and more inclusive. It also generates valuable data that can support future planning, service delivery, and titling efforts. However, it must be paired with visible improvements in public services to gain public trust. Taxing communities that receive little in return risks backlash and non-compliance. Implementation could be led by local councils or a central agency like the Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development (MLGRD). While the technical requirements are modest—mainly GIS tools and satellite imagery—strong coordination between national and local actors will be key to success.

Conclusion: Building a Fairer, Smarter Property Tax System in Zambia

Zambia finds itself at a critical juncture in its efforts to enhance property tax collection. The decision between a registration-focused or taxation-focused approach is more than just a technical choice; it is a strategic move with significant implications for fairness, efficiency, and public confidence. While reforms centred on registration offer long-term advantages like more secure land tenure and formal land management, they tend to be slow, expensive, and often beyond the reach of local councils eager to increase their tax revenue. Conversely, a taxation-led approach provides a practical solution: it allows for immediate revenue collection, expands coverage, and creates a foundation for future registration initiatives. However, reform is about more than just systems; it’s also about people.

Reciprocity is a cornerstone of effective tax reform. When residents perceive a direct link between the taxes they pay and the public services they receive, such as improved infrastructure, waste management, or access to utilities, they are significantly more likely to support and comply with new tax policies.