Framework for a Strategy of UP Revenue/Resource Mobilisation ...

may have been given. This assessment register should be a public document which anyone can
consult.
d) There should be a register for payments, listing for each plot and plot owner, the final
assessment (i.e. the amount due for the current year), plus any arrears from previous years, the
amount paid in the current year (with date of payment and receipt number), and the amount still
outstanding (see Annex-3 for a sample pro-forma). Such a register enables the UP to identify
immediately who has not paid, and the amount owed, thereby enabling effective follow-up of
on-payers.
e) Tax collection for the current year should start on 1 st July and be completed by 30 th June.
Collections should not spill over into the following fiscal year. Any amount outstanding at 30 th
June should be recorded as an arrear to be collected the following year (with or without
penalty). This helps to clarify what should be paid and when, and helps with accounting for the
year’s revenue.
f) The present system of issuing receipts and recording money received in a register, with details
of the receipt number and date, appears to work reasonably well, enabling cash received to be
checked against receipts (so long as those checks are actually made). However, in addition to
(or instead of) the chronological register of cash received, revenue receipts should be recorded
in the register specified in (d) against the plot number, so that non-payers can immediately be
identified.
g) Money collected should be paid into the bank promptly after checking cash against receipts
issues. Ideally, this should be on a daily basis. Ideally, also, larger payments should be made
directly to the bank, reducing the risk of loss or fraud. This would require a bill to be issued,
which can be taken to the bank. This is now done in some cities and municipalities (e.g. Tongi),
but for UPs it would only be realistic for the largest payments (say Tk.1, 000 and above).
h) Collectors should continue to be employed on the basis of commission. It is commonly claimed
that 15% commission is not sufficient incentive. However, with the higher assessments, and
other steps to improve collection performance, the amount collected should increase
significantly, augmenting the incentive effect. Guidance issued by LGD allows a further 5% to
be allocated to village police, and to reward the best performing collectors, but it is not clear
whether this is being applied at all, and if it is, whether it has any effect. UPs may spend 3% to
remunerate the village police in the ward concerned, 0.5% for the head of the village police
group and a further 1.5% for incentives for the best collection performance among the villages
An alternative would be for the UP to directly employ collectors and pay them out of the
revenue collected. However, that is almost certain to increase collection costs, as they would
15