Zambia is about to make a spectacular miscalculation.
While researchers and development practitioners celebrate the potential of linking the country’s digital identity system (INRIS) with tax administration to boost revenue collection, they’re ignoring a fundamental truth: the fastest way to kill digital ID adoption is to make people fear that registration equals automatic tax surveillance.
Sign Up Now for more digital identity insights
A new research paper from Zambia makes the typical techno-optimist case for integrating INRIS with the Zambia Revenue Authority’s systems, arguing this will transform Zambia’s tax system by promoting efficiency, equity, and sustainability. The analysis draws on success stories from Ghana, Uganda, Nigeria, and Kenya to make its case.
But I’ve spent years watching digital ID rollouts across Africa, and the evidence tells a more complex story about what happens when governments prioritize revenue extraction over trust-building.
The Trust Deficit No One Wants to Discuss
Let’s be honest about what we’re really proposing here.
We’re asking Zambians (71% of whom work in the informal economy) to voluntarily register for a digital ID system that will automatically connect them to tax authorities. This isn’t digital inclusion; it’s digital coercion dressed up in development rhetoric.
Research from the International Centre for Tax and Development identifies privacy protection as a critical challenge, especially where trust in the government is typically low. When ID data are shared across government sectors for tax purposes, citizens inevitably view the system as a surveillance tool rather than a service platform.
The African Digital Rights Network has documented widespread citizen reservations about how their data is handled in digital ID systems. In countries like Nigeria and Kenya—often cited as success stories—data breaches and surveillance concerns have undermined public trust. Citizens increasingly see digital IDs as government monitoring tools rather than empowerment technologies.
The Informal Economy Escape Hatch
Here’s what the Zambia research paper doesn’t adequately address: informal sector workers aren’t accidentally outside the tax system—many are there by design. They’ve calculated that the costs and risks of formalization outweigh the benefits, especially in contexts where government services remain inadequate and tax compliance feels like wealth extraction rather than civic contribution.
When you explicitly link digital ID registration to tax identification, you’re essentially telling 71% of Zambia’s workforce: “Get your digital ID and we’ll find you for taxes.” The predictable response won’t be enthusiastic compliance—it will be active avoidance.
Evidence from digital public infrastructure implementations shows that businesses demonstrate reluctance in adopting digital systems when they involve limited trust of and familiarity with technology combined with fear of increased government oversight.
Even when businesses do adopt digital payment systems, they often offset their digital sales with more expenses, leading to a net-zero tax effect.
The False Promise of Seamless Integration
The research correctly identifies institutional coordination as a major implementation challenge, but understates how these challenges compound when you’re trying to link sensitive identity data with revenue collection.
Uganda’s experience offers a cautionary tale. Despite successful data sharing between identity and tax authorities, the system remains vendor-locked and has “hampered scalability and interoperability.”
More troubling is Ethiopia’s recent experience, where massive digital infrastructure investment has coincided with deteriorating economic conditions. As I wrote about Ethiopia’s digital paradox, simply building digital rails doesn’t guarantee development follows. Their national ID program covered only 15.5% of the adult population despite significant investment—partly because citizens remain skeptical of government digital systems.
The Exclusion Multiplier Effect
Digital ID systems already struggle with inclusion challenges, particularly for rural and marginalized populations. When you add tax implications, these barriers multiply. The World Bank reports that less educated and female taxpayers faced barriers to adoption even in mandatory digital tax systems.
In Zambia’s context, where internet usage stands at only 25% nationally (11% in rural areas) and digital literacy remains low, linking ID registration to tax administration creates a perfect storm of exclusion. Rural women, youth, and informal sector workers, precisely the populations that digital ID should include, become the most likely to avoid the system entirely.
Learning from Regional Failures
The research paper cites Ghana’s digital ID integration as a success, but conveniently omits critical context.
Ghana’s system has faced significant resistance, particularly around data governance concerns and questions about how shared data is used across government agencies. Similar patterns emerge across the continent. Early enthusiasm followed by adoption stagnation as trust erodes.
Even India’s Aadhaar system, frequently held up as the gold standard, illustrates these privacy risks. Despite over 1.2 billion registrations, the system faces ongoing legal challenges precisely because of mission creep. It is gradually expanding from identification to surveillance tool.
A Better Path Forward
This doesn’t mean abandoning digital IDs or ignoring domestic revenue mobilization needs. But sequencing matters enormously.
Zambia should focus first on building a digital ID system that delivers immediate, visible benefits to citizens: easier access to banking, healthcare, social services, and government benefits. Only after establishing trust and achieving high adoption rates should gradual integration with other government systems begin.
The research on African ICT policies shows that successful digital transformation requires transparency, privacy and data protection to build public trust. This means implementing robust data governance frameworks before, not after, launching integrated systems.
Zambia’s National Digital Transformation Strategy (2023-2027) recognizes digital identity as an enabler, but the country risks undermining its own digital inclusion goals by prioritizing revenue generation over trust-building. The informal economy represents 40% of GDP precisely because these workers and businesses have found ways to operate outside formal systems that haven’t served them well.
The Development Community’s Blind Spot
Development practitioners need to stop conflating government efficiency with citizen empowerment.
Yes, better tax collection could fund improved government services, but only if citizens trust that their data won’t be weaponized against them. The history of identity systems in Africa—from colonial registration to post-independence control mechanisms—should make us more cautious, not less, about how we design these systems.
Instead of rushing toward integration, Zambia should invest first in digital literacy, infrastructure access, and demonstrating that digital ID registration provides immediate benefits without immediate costs. Trust, once lost, is nearly impossible to rebuild.
This is especially true in contexts where government-citizen relations remain fragile.
The real question is how to prioritize citizen concerns over government needs to maintain the broader digital inclusion agenda and accelerate its momentum.
