कर धेरै, सेवा थोरै — ढुकुटी भने सधैं रित्तैNepal Collects Taxes on Everything — Yet the Treasury Keeps Running Dry
काठमाडौं । नेपाल सरकारले नागरिकको कमाइमा कर लगाउँछ, किनमेलमा कर लगाउँछ, आयातमा कर लगाउँछ, फोनमा कर लगाउँछ, सिनेमामा कर लगाउँछ, प्रदूषणमा कर लगाउँछ र विलासितामा पनि कर लगाउँछ । डेढ दर्जनभन्दा बढी शीर्षकमा राजस्व उठाउँदै आएको सरकार तैपनि आफ्नो दैनिक खर्च आफैं धान्न सक्दैन । यो विरोधाभास सामान्य होइन — यो नेपालको कर प्रणालीभित्र गहिरिएको संरचनागत रोगको लक्षण हो ।
हिसाब सोझो छ तर चिन्ताजनक छ । आयमा ३९ प्रतिशतसम्म आयकर लाग्छ । प्राथमिक कृषि उत्पादन र औषधि बाहेक झण्डै सबै वस्तु र सेवामा १३ प्रतिशत मूल्य अभिवृद्धि कर थपिन्छ । त्यसमाथि भन्सार महसुल, अन्तःशुल्क, सडक निर्माण दस्तुर, प्रदूषण नियन्त्रण कर, डिजिटल सेवा कर, शिक्षा सेवा कर, स्वास्थ्य जोखिम कर, हरित कर, क्यासिनो रोयल्टी र सिनेमा विकास करसमेत थपिँदा करको फेहरिस्त लामो बन्दै जान्छ । प्रदेश र स्थानीय तहका करसमेत जोड्दा एक नागरिकले कति प्रकारका कर तिर्छ भनेर गन्दा औंला पुग्दैन ।
यति धेरै कर तिर्ने नागरिकले पाउने सेवा सुविधा भने उल्टो दिशामा छ । दक्षिण एसियाकै उच्च आयकर बुझाउने नेपालीले अस्पतालमा औषधि पाउँदैनन्, सडक बर्सेनि भत्किन्छन्, विद्यालयमा शिक्षक छैनन् । यो अवस्थाले प्रश्न उठाउँछ — करको पैसा जान्छ कहाँ ?
देशको व्यापारिक संरचनाले समस्यालाई झन् जटिल बनाएको छ । नेपालको अन्तर्राष्ट्रिय व्यापारमा करिब ९० प्रतिशत आयात हुन्छ । आयातित वस्तुमा पहिले भन्सार शुल्क लाग्छ, त्यसमाथि मूल्य अभिवृद्धि कर थपिन्छ र केही वस्तुमा अन्तःशुल्क पनि जोडिन्छ । यसरी एउटै वस्तुमा तहतहमा कर लाग्दा अन्तिममा उपभोक्ताको हातमा पुग्दा मूल्य महँगिएको हुन्छ । जुन देशले आफूले उपभोग गर्ने झण्डै सबै कुरा बाहिरबाट किन्छ, त्यस देशमा आयातमा कर थुपार्नु भनेको आफ्नै जनतालाई महँगीको भारी बोकाउनु हो ।
अंकहरूले पनि बिग्रँदै गएको तस्बिर देखाउँछन् । अर्थमन्त्री स्वर्णिम वाग्लेले प्रस्तुत गरेको आर्थिक स्थितिपत्रअनुसार आर्थिक वर्ष २०७६÷७७ अघिका पाँच वर्षमा राजस्वको औसत वार्षिक वृद्धिदर १४ दशमलव ९ प्रतिशत थियो । कोभिडपछिका पाँच वर्षमा यो वृद्धिदर ८ दशमलव ७ प्रतिशतमा खुम्चियो । यो सामान्य उतारचढाव होइन — करिब आधा वृद्धि गायब भएको हो ।
कारण खोज्न धेरै टाढा जानु पर्दैन । आर्थिक गतिविधि सुस्त हुँदा व्यवसायको आम्दानी घट्छ, आम्दानी घट्दा आयकर घट्छ, उपभोग घट्दा भ्याट घट्छ, आयात घट्दा भन्सार राजस्व घट्छ । सरकारी प्रतिवेदनहरूले पनि यही चक्र स्वीकार गरेका छन् — आर्थिक शिथिलताले राजस्व परिचालनलाई सिधै कमजोर बनाएको छ ।
यहाँ आएर एउटा महत्त्वपूर्ण कुरा स्पष्ट पार्नु जरुरी छ — करका प्रकार धेरै हुँदैमा सबै नागरिकको बोझ उत्तिकै हुन्छ भन्ने होइन । आयका आधारमा आयकर, उपभोगका आधारमा भ्याट र सम्पत्तिका आधारमा अन्य कर लाग्ने भएकाले सबैले उत्तिकै भार बोक्दैनन् । तर उच्च दर र लामो करको सूची हुँदाहुँदै पनि सरकारले आफ्नो दैनिक सञ्चालन खर्च राजस्वबाटै जुटाउन नसक्नु भनेको प्रणाली नै बिग्रिएको संकेत हो ।
विश्लेषकहरूको निष्कर्ष एउटै ठाउँमा पुग्छ — नेपाललाई थप करको खाँचो छैन, चाहिएको छ करको सोचमा आमूल परिवर्तन । सुस्त अर्थतन्त्रलाई थप थिच्ने दरहरू, सेवा नदिई राजस्व असुल्ने संरचना र घट्दो वृद्धिदरले एउटै सन्देश दिन्छन् — कर प्रणालीको जराबाटै पुनःसंरचना नगरे साँघुरिँदो आधारबाट बढी कर उठाउने प्रयासले समस्यालाई झन् गहिरो मात्र बनाउनेछ ।
Kathmandu. Nepal taxes its citizens on what they earn, what they buy, what they import, what they breathe, what they watch, what they call, and even what they consider a luxury. More than eighteen different categories of taxes and levies flow into government coffers every year. And yet, paradoxically, the government cannot pay its own bills from what it collects. Something, somewhere, has gone deeply wrong.
The arithmetic is straightforward enough to be alarming. Personal and corporate income tax takes up to 39 percent of earnings. A 13 percent value added tax sits on top of nearly every product and service that ordinary Nepalis consume — exemptions exist for basic agricultural produce and medicines, but everything else gets taxed at the counter. Import duties, excise duties, road construction fees, pollution control levies, digital service taxes, education service charges, health risk taxes, green taxes, casino royalties and cinema development fees pile on further. Add provincial and local government levies to the stack, and the total number of taxes a Nepali citizen potentially faces becomes remarkably long.
What makes this particularly frustrating for taxpayers is the return they receive. Nepal's income tax rates are among the highest in South Asia — a region not exactly known for generous tax relief. Yet public services remain thin, roads stay broken longer than they should, hospitals lack medicines and schools lack teachers. Citizens paying among the region's steepest taxes are getting among the region's thinnest services in return.
The country's trade structure makes things worse. Nearly 90 percent of Nepal's international trade is import-driven. Every imported product attracts customs duty first, then VAT on top of that, and excise duty where applicable. The result is that the price of even basic goods gets inflated at multiple stages before reaching the consumer's hand. A country that imports almost everything it uses cannot afford to stack taxes on imports without pushing up the cost of living for ordinary people — which is precisely what has happened.
The numbers tell a story of slowing momentum. Finance Minister Swarnima Wagle's economic status report reveals that in the five fiscal years before 2076/77, government revenue grew at an average annual rate of 14.9 percent. In the five years that followed — the post-COVID era — that growth rate collapsed to just 8.7 percent. That is not a minor dip. It represents nearly half the previous growth momentum disappearing from the system.
The reasons are not hard to find. When economic activity slows, tax revenue follows. Businesses earn less, so corporate tax falls. Consumers spend less, so VAT collections shrink. Imports drop, dragging customs revenue down with them. The government's own reports acknowledge this chain reaction — economic sluggishness has directly weakened revenue mobilization across recent years.
What this reveals is a tax system under structural stress. Having many types of taxes does not automatically mean every citizen bears a crushing burden — people pay based on what they earn, spend and own. But when a government with high tax rates and a long list of tax categories still cannot cover its day-to-day operating expenses from revenue alone, the problem goes beyond collection. It points to a fundamental mismatch between how the system is designed and how the economy actually functions.
The conclusion that economists and analysts are increasingly drawing is uncomfortable but unavoidable — Nepal does not need more taxes. It needs a complete rethinking of its tax architecture. Rates that choke economic activity rather than support it, structures that burden consumers without building services, and revenue growth that has halved over five years all point in the same direction. Without root-and-branch reform of the tax system, collecting more types of taxes from a shrinking economic base will only deepen the problem it was meant to solve.
