Commodities

Permits, privilege, and the price we all pay

By Thamirran Chuciyanthan

Originally appeared on Daily FT

“There will be no permits. The permit culture must end in Sri Lanka.” This was the resounding declaration from President Anura Kumara Dissanayake as he presented the 2026 Budget proposal. The plan to supply vehicles to Members of Parliament (MPs) on a strictly “return-after-term” basis echoes a long-overdue escape from a system that has, for decades, quietly drained public coffers. It is a system that has rewarded privilege over performance, entrenched inequality, and undermined the credibility of the state.

The Advocata Institute welcomes this decision. It is a vital critique of a “permit culture” that is a remnant of a feudal past, not a modern economy. A permit is, by definition, a special approval granting selected groups privileged access to benefits unattainable to the general public. It creates an inherently regressive, two-tier system: one for ordinary citizens, and another for those afforded special treatment.

When we examine the case of vehicle permits in Sri Lanka, the dynamic becomes disturbingly stark.

The anatomy of an exemption

To understand the magnitude of this reform, one must understand the distortionary nature of the “permit.”

According to Finance Ministry officials, since 2020 alone, 25,508 duty-free vehicle permits have been issued to Government employees. Even during the economic constriction of recent years, the flow continued: 6,062 permits in 2024 and 2,043 in 2025.

In Sri Lanka, vehicles are expensive because of import tax – a policy imposed and strengthened by Parliament since the 1960s. Issuing exemptions (permits) is, therefore, a fundamentally flawed rationale. It’s the equivalent of penalising an entire class, with no basis for the punishment to begin with, before releasing the favoured students from sanction – all the while cleverly disguising the exemption as a so-called “benefit”. And who are the first beneficiaries? The very policymakers responsible for the high taxes.

Evolution of privilege: From compensation to commodity

Originally introduced as compensation for low nominal salaries, the permit system morphed into a transferable asset and a reliable source of campaign financing. By importing vehicles at the fraction of its taxable price, or by selling the permit itself, MPs were able to generate substantial profits, untaxed, to fund electoral activities. In the decades that followed, eligibility expanded well beyond Parliament. The privilege was extended to senior civil servants and a wide array of public-sector professionals, including but not limited to doctors, university professors, State engineers, and directors of State corporations.

Eventually, permits had become a normalised perk in the public sector, issued as frequently as once every five years. However, this perk was driven not by performance gains, but lobbying pressure. No circular or audit report has ever tied permit eligibility to measurable performance. Entitlement was purely based on title or years of service, thus, creating a dangerously perverse incentive structure.

The result? Permits turned into a predictable political asset, attached to a significant transferable cash value. As vehicle import taxes increased over the years, the value of the permit increased proportionally. The permit itself became an appreciating asset, detached from its initially stated purpose, and thus began the trading of permits too.

In December 2010, Transparency International Sri Lanka revealed that the majority of 65 newly elected Parliamentarians, including 2 Cabinet Ministers, sold their duty-free vehicle permits for as much as Rs. 17 million each, when adjusted for inflation using Department of Census and Statistics figures, that windfall is equivalent to which adjusted for inflation sits at approximately Rs. 48 million today.

In December 2012, in an event the Sunday Times classified as a “Christmas Bonansa for MPs,” the Government granted permission for MPs to openly sell their duty-free permits. At the time, they sold for Rs. 20 million each, which adjusted for inflation sits at approximately Rs. 50 million today.

Consequently, we saw a worsened repetition of this in 2016.

Nagananda Kodituwakku is an attorney-at-law and rights activist, who formerly headed the Customs Revenue Task Force. On 28 October 2016, he wrote to the Commissioner General of Motor Traffic, naming 75 MPs who imported luxury vehicles, including BMWs, Mercedes-Benz, Land Cruisers and even a Hummer. The total tax waived per MP ranged from Rs.30 million to Rs. 44.7 million. In today’s terms, this range approximately translates to between a staggering Rs. 66 million and Rs. 98.5 million.

The numbers speak for themselves.

Since the permit artificially lowers the price of a vehicle for a specific group, they benefit from a subsidised (concessional) price. The relative price of a vehicle falls for members of this group, so demand rises, but this rise is not attributed to market forces. The sudden rise in vehicle purchases among permit holders is not a reflection of genuine need; it is a rational response to a market distortion. They buy not because they must, but because the tax exemption makes it financially irrational not to.

Mechanics of the loss

When a permit holder imports a vehicle, the State suffers a “double blow” to its revenue stream. First, the Treasury forfeits the revenue at the border. The list of waived taxes is exhaustive and compounding:

1. Customs Import Duty (CID)- Calculated as a % of Cost, Insurance and Freight (CIF)

2. Excise Duty (XID)- Calculated using engine capacity, fuel type, vehicle category

3. Social Security Contribution Levy (SSCL)

4. Luxury Tax (LTMV) – Applied when value or engine capacity exceeds specific thresholds

5. VAT (charged on a cascading* tax base: CIF + CID + XID + LTMV)

*This means this tax is calculated on top of the previous taxes, not just the original value of the vehicle.

Second, the State loses on income tax. In most tax systems around the world, law requires the benefit to be assigned an imputed monetary value, so that it may be taxed, just like income. But Sri Lanka’s duty-free vehicle permits have escaped this entirely.

The cost to the citizen

Sri Lanka’s cascading, multi-layered tax structure drives effective import taxation on most passenger vehicles into the 125%–250% range, with the Vehicle Importers Association of Sri Lanka placing some models in the 200%–300% bracket. It is, by any comparative standard, one of the most punitive vehicle-tax regimes in the world.

The macroeconomic consequences are visible everywhere:

Inequality: Middle-income families are priced out of car ownership; mobility becomes a privilege, not a right.

Inefficiency: High tariffs keep the national fleet old and costly to maintain. Older vehicles burn more fuel, produce higher emissions, and compromise road safety. As a result, public transport absorbs pressure it was never designed for

No industrial rationale: Sri Lanka does not manufacture cars, so these tariffs serve no protectionist purpose. These taxes function solely as revenue extraction, and our citizens and economy pay the price.

Tax compliance deteriorates. Consumer choice shrinks. Economic participation weakens.Productivity sours.

A future without exemptions

The move to a “return-after-term” model is the correct economic and ethical step.

Looking forward, the Government must adopt a centralised fleet-management framework. We should look to models like Australia’s, which utilises a single regulated system ensuring consistent pricing, transparent leasing, and the timely replacement of aging units to reduce maintenance costs.

The President’s declaration promises an end to a distortionary era. However, the future relies on vigilance. Citizens, media, and Parliament must ensure this commitment is honoured through transparent procurement and a permanent end to exemptions. The “permit culture” was a price the economy could never afford; it is time we stopped paying it.

Sources

Duty-Free Permits system under scrutiny | Print Edition - The Sunday Times, Sri Lanka

1991 Public Administration Circular No: 14/91

Scheme for Issuance of Motor Vehicle Permits on Concessionary Terms Nos. 01/2016, 01/20

Transparency International Sri Lanka

UNP MPs silent over daylight robbery: Sale of duty free car permits? | The Sunday Times

List of 75 MPs and their Luxury Vehicle Imports | Colombo Telegraph

Ceylon Public Affairs - Vehicle Import Tax Structure

Chapter 87, Motor Vehicle 2025 Tariff Guide

Quantification of Values for Non-Cash Benefits in calculating Employment Income

Ceylon Public Affairs - Vehicle Import Tax Structure

Chapter 87, Motor Vehicle 2025 Tariff Guide

Quantification of Values for Non-Cash Benefits in calculating Employment Income

Fleet Management - The Morning

Appendix

CCPI | Department of Census and Statistics

“Today” = Oct 2025. For inflation calculations, we chain-link across base changes:

1. Within a base, inflation factor between month A and month B =

Factor = Index(B) / Index(A) (same base series).

2. Across base changes, pick a bridge month that appears in both series. Multiply factors in sequence (“chain link”).

3. Multiply the historical amount by the product of factors to get the “today” value.

(The author is an Economic Researcher at the Advocata Institute. The opinions expressed are the author’s own.)

Milking the Tax System: Why VAT Exemptions Sour the Market

By Tormalli Francis, Research Analyst at Advocata Institute

A VAT-free litre of milk or cup of yoghurt may feel like relief at the checkout, which is in fact a silent distortion of lost revenue, stifled competition, and a marketplace where not all producers compete on an equal playing field. The government’s VAT exemption on locally produced milk and yoghurt is presented as a move to improve child nutrition and support local dairy farmers. On the surface, it appears humane and sensible — after all, what government wouldn’t want to make nutritious food more affordable while reducing dependence on imports?

But public policy, like milk, can curdle if left unchecked.

Milk production in Sri Lanka is a long-standing traditional industry that has endured for thousands of years producing over 500 million litres of milk [1] annually (Figure 1) with more than 130,000 farmers [2] (Figure 2) contributing to the production of milk islandwide. Yet this exemption, packaged with its good intentions highlights a recurring policymaking problem in the Sri Lankan economy: sacrificing long-term efficiency for short-term optics. In reality, VAT exemptions — however well-intentioned often distort the tax system, weaken the fiscal base, and may ultimately harm both consumers and the very farmers they are meant to protect.

Figure 1: Trend of total annual local milk production (Million Litres), 2015 - 2024

Source: Livestock Statistics, Department of Census and Statistics.

Figure 2: Number of dairy farmers by district, 2024

Source: Livestock Statistics, Department of Census and Statistics.

Equal Tax, Equal Opportunity

In a sound tax system, neutrality is essential — similar goods should be taxed in similar ways, and the system should not favor one product or producer over another. Exempting only locally sourced milk and yoghurt breaks this principle. It grants preferential treatment to domestic producers, while imported milk powder which is still a staple in many urban Sri Lankan households remains subjected to VAT. This selective exemption can hinder fair competition, discourage innovation, misallocate resources, ultimately compromising market efficiency.

This distorts market dynamics. Producers of other dairy products such as cheese, butter especially curd face a cost disadvantage, not because of inefficiency, but because of policy. The exemption becomes a de facto subsidy, not through open direct government expenditure but through hidden distortion in the tax system.

A country case example of a similar situation is seen in Georgia [3], where VAT exemptions apply to domestically produced milk and dairy products, but not to imported or reconstituted alternatives.  While intended to support local farmers and consumers, this approach creates an uneven competitive environment. Producers who rely on imported inputs including those making value-added dairy products face rising costs without benefiting from the exemption. 

Such policies also break the VAT chain, as inputs are subjected to VAT and outputs are exempted. This raises production costs, especially for downstream manufacturers, distorts price signals, and leads to inefficient resource allocation across the sector. 

Undermining Revenue for Reform

In the context of Sri Lanka's fiscal challenges and commitments to international financial institutions like the IMF, the Advocata institute emphasizes the importance of broadening the tax base. VAT exemptions reduce potential government revenue, which could otherwise be allocated to essential public services or targeted welfare programs. Maintaining a wide array of exemptions complicates tax administration and undermines efforts to achieve long-term fiscal sustainability.

When tax revenue is eroded by such sector-specific exemptions, this shifts the burden elsewhere — either to other goods or services or to government borrowing. Sri Lanka is in a period of fiscal crisis, with IMF-backed reforms requiring revenue generation. Exemptions reduce tax income from a high-volume essential product, limiting funds for healthcare, education, or infrastructure. Ad hoc policy changes and weak tax administration have been the major contributors towards the decline in tax revenue which have brought in fiscal challenges. A well developed tax system is an efficient revenue instrument, but exemptions and reduced rates erodes its performance. Basic commodities as milk and yoghurt are often the options for exemptions or reductions in most Low Income Developing Countries (LDICs), in 2020 the VAT exemptions in these countries amounted to 1.3 percent of GDP [4]. Revenue loss from such policies tends to outweigh the actual gains for the vulnerable groups.

Better Tools for Better Targets

A key justification for exemption on milk and yoghurt is to improve nutrition and support dairy farmers — by making these products more affordable for vulnerable groups and increasing farmer incomes. The dairy industry has been identified as the priority sector for development among the other livestock sub sectors in the country [5] for its crucial role reducing nutritional deficiencies across all age groups, and serving as a key source of affordable, high-quality nutrition for the population. 

But VAT exemptions are an imprecise way to deliver support. While they aim to make basic commodities more affordable, the Advocata institute highlights that such blanket policies often result in an imbalance as higher-income households benefit more than the intended low-income groups. As a greater proportion of basic commodities are consumed by the richer households, with greater purchasing power as they are likely to capitalise on these tax breaks. This misalignment highlights the inefficiency of VAT exemptions as a tool for social welfare. It is, in essence, a regressive subsidy disguised in the language of progressivism.

With exemptions having a progressive impact, they are poorly targeted ways to help low-income households, showcasing that directly targeted mechanisms will be better tools to address distributional concerns [6]. If the goal is to improve nutrition among the most vulnerable and farmers' livelihoods – Sri Lanka should focus on strengthening targeted, transparent support systems. Direct transfers to low-income households, investment in school milk programs, input subsidies to farmers, and upgrading the dairy industry infrastructure would deliver an efficient and equitable alternative. These measures ensure that support reaches those who need it most—without distorting market signals or undermining long-term efficiency.

Conclusion

Sri Lanka’s VAT exemption on locally produced milk and yoghurt may feel like a compassionate move — and in some ways, it is. But ultimately, it’s a fiscal quick fix, not a structural solution. A neutral tax system with broad based rates and minimal carve outs helps maintain fairness, supports productive specialisation and sustains government revenue. 

If we want to nourish our economy as well as our children, we must move from tax distortion to targeted policy. Milk can be good for the bones, but only when it doesn’t weaken the backbone of the economy.

[1]  Milk Production Statistics. Livestock Statistics. Department of Census and Statistics. Available at: https://www.statistics.gov.lk/Agriculture/StaticalInformation/MilkProduction#gsc.tab=0

[2] Milk Producing Farmers. Livestock Statistics. Department of Census and Statistics. Available at:https://www.statistics.gov.lk/Agriculture/StaticalInformation/MilkProducingFarmers#gsc.tab=0

[3]  Study of Value Added Tax (VAT) Exemption Impact for Increasing the Competitiveness of the Georgian Dairy Sector. Available at: chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://iset-pi.ge/storage/media/other/2021-10-06/32dcec80-2670-11ec-9a47-851d3f3d5dcf.pdf

[4] The Global Tax Expenditures Database (GTED) Companion Paper. A. Redonda et. al. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Christian-Von-Haldenwang/publication/352539392_The_Global_Tax_Expenditures_Database_GTED_Companion_Paper/links/61291b602b40ec7d8bca280d/The-Global-Tax-Expenditures-Database-GTED-Companion-Paper.pdf

[5] Sri Lanka’s Dairy Sector: Where to Move and What to Do – Prediction and a Trend Analysis. D. A. P. R. Damunupola. Available at: chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://sljae.sljol.info/articles/74/files/submission/proof/74-1-413-1-10-20220706.pdf

[6] VAT Exemptions, Embedded Tax,  and Unintended Consequences. World Bank Group. Available at: chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.joserobertoafonso.com.br/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/IDU-8b2c8bb9-1d8f-4d67-b704-8dec2f14a832.pdf