Commissioner-General of the Guyana Revenue Authority (GRA), Khursid Sattaur said yesterday that his agency was preparing to challenge the High Court order granted last week temporarily forbidding the authority from collecting taxes under the Fiscal Enactments Amendments Act.

In an interview with Stabroek News yesterday, Sattaur said that he was confident that the challenge to the court order would come out in the GRA’s favour.

Sattaur said not all lawyers and doctors had subscribed to the petition and that the majority of professionals were not represented in the court action.

He conceded that collections of the 5% and 10% service fees were not going well because the two main categories of professionals - the doctors and lawyers - had challenged the new law.

He declined to comment further on whether persons should make payments to the GRA, stating that he did not want to be held in contempt of court.

He said, however, that the GRA had means of monitoring professionals, including real estate agents, to determine how much they were supposed to pay.

On October 7, a group of attorneys led by Clarence Hughes SC, Robin Stoby SC, Richard Fields SC and Marcel Crawford SC, on behalf of the Guyana Bar Association and the Medical Practitioners Association, filed writs challenging the legality of the Fiscal Enactments Act.

After hearing the application, Justice Claudette La Bennett issued a conservatory order restraining the Commissioner-General of the GRA and the Minister of Finance from attempting to collect any tax under the Act, or enforcing any of its provisions, until further notice from the Court.

The conservatory order was ordered served on the defendants and the matter was adjourned until November 4.

The plaintiffs’ lawsuit contends that several sections of the Act infringe various articles of Guyana’s Constitution. The bodies claim that Section 6 of the Act - requiring professionals to collect the 5% or 10% service fees and hand them over to the GRA - contravenes Article 140 which prohibits forced labour. The plaintiffs contend that Section 6 constitutes an attempt to force them to labour for the GRA without reward.

The plaintiffs contend too that the magnitude of the increase in fees for practising licences - 2,500% - makes it confiscatory and makes it deprivation of property which is contrary to article 142 of the Constitution. The lack of any consultation with the bodies representing practising professionals in Guyana is contrary to Article 13, which speaks of inclusive democracy involving affected persons in decision making processes, the plaintiffs said.

The plaintiffs are also arguing that Section 13 of the Act gives the minister the power to prescribe a method of making presumptive assessments of lawyers’ incomes for the purpose of levying taxes.

They contended that the principle of separation of powers prohibits a minister from legislating especially where the legislature does not keep effective control of the legislation.