The sharp and highly divisive discussion on the Finance Bill, 2026, has laid bare deep rifts within Parliament and revived recollections of the fatal 2024 anti-tax protests.
For much of Tuesday and Wednesday, the debate became increasingly political, with lawmakers taking positions largely in line with their alliances.
Allies of President Ruto pushed back against what they described as misinformation circulating about the tax laws and the 2026-27 Budget.
The side led by Majority Leader Kimani Ichung’wah, together with partners in the broad-based arrangement under Minority Leader Junet Mohamed, made a forceful defence of the Bill.
Opposition-aligned legislators argued that punitive provisions remained in the proposal, while the Finance Committee, led by Molo’s Francis Kimani, said the Bill had evolved beyond its published version through public participation.
He said the committee had received submissions from more than 100,000 Kenyans.
The often fiery exchange is seen as laying the groundwork for renewed political friction before the second anniversary of the demonstrations.
The debate came only days before scheduled memorial events for those killed in the protests that ended with demonstrators storming Parliament.
An opposition bloc led by Kalonzo Musyoka and Rigathi Gachagua has called for remembrance of the people who died during the 2024 anti-Finance Bill protests.
The anniversary falls on June 25, Thursday next week.
Pressure is mounting, with several Gen Z activists saying they will not accept President William Ruto’s apology, which he issued when announcing a Sh2 billion compensation package for victims.
One activist said on a TV programme yesterday, ‘The true test of the apology will be on June 25, whether we lose one young mind or not, the police need to protect young people.’
The protests compelled Ruto’s administration to withdraw the Finance Bill, 2024, after mass public anger over proposed tax hikes.
As debate on the Finance Bill, 2026, ended in a storm of exchanges, some legislators cautioned that Parliament could repeat the errors that helped trigger the unrest last year.
Kitutu Chache South MP Antony Kibagendi was among those who raised concerns after the discussion on the Bill was brought to a close.
He said, ‘They again want to pass the Finance Bill with numerous oppressive clauses by force. We have been denied an opportunity to debate.’
The disagreement has been driven by different readings of whether the Bill creates new taxes or simply restructures tax administration.
In defending the law, committee chair Kimani described it as a measure meant to modernise the tax system rather than impose fresh levies on Kenyans.
Kimani told the House, ‘The Finance Bill, 2026, is not merely a revenue-raising instrument; it is also a policy reform framework aimed at strengthening Kenya’s tax system.’
He said that, unlike earlier Finance Bills that concentrated on introducing new taxes, the current proposal aims to simplify tax laws, clear ambiguities and improve compliance.
Kimani also moved to ease concerns over several contentious provisions, including those on rental income and mobile phones.
The MP said there is no plan to raise taxes on rental income earned by resident landlords.
He said provisions affecting non-resident landlords only clarify the law already in place.
On mobile phones, Kimani said the committee had turned down proposals to move taxation from importation to activation because the country lacked the systems and legal framework needed for such a shift.
Kesses MP Julius Ruto said the Bill is aimed at widening the tax base rather than increasing the tax burden.
He said, ‘This particular Finance Bill, 2026, has broadly focused on expanding the tax regime rather than increasing it vertically.’
However, opposition lawmakers and several independent-minded MPs presented a sharply different view and mounted a strong resistance.
Kathiani MP Robert Mbui rejected the Bill as punitive and accused the Executive of presenting tax increases as administrative reforms.
Mbui said, ‘I rise to oppose this draconian, punitive, knee-on-the-neck-of-Kenyans Finance Bill, 2026.’
He especially criticised a proposal that would allow the Kenya Revenue Authority to rely on third-party data to determine tax liabilities, saying businesses operate differently and should not be assessed using broad data assumptions.
Mbui also asked why President Ruto’s pledge to give tax relief to workers earning below Sh30,000 had not been included in the Bill.
Relief for low-income earners was a recurring issue throughout the debate.
Kiharu MP Ndindi Nyoro accused the government of making public pledges that were not reflected in the legislation.
Nyoro said, ‘We have seen the head of state talking about exemption of PAYE for Kenyans earning below Sh30,000; that has not been captured here.’
He added, ‘These kinds of roadside declarations are what we need to bring to an end.’
His comments set off one of the most dramatic moments of the debate.
Nyoro alleged that public participants who supported certain proposals, including a controversial 15 per cent tax on second-hand clothes, had been manufactured by the Finance Committee.
The claim drew an immediate rebuttal from committee chair Kimani.
Kimani responded, ‘The member for Kiharu must withdraw the statement he has made. He is saying that the public participants who came to the Finance Committee were manufactured people. We have tabled here the submissions of over 100,000 people across the country. I have no capacity to manufacture 100,000 people.’
Majority Leader Kimani Ichung’wah also stepped in, accusing critics of misleading the public.
He said, ‘I know people want to shout and mislead Kenyans, but we also have an obligation to set the record straight.’
Ichung’wah clarified that proposals affecting PAYE for workers earning below Sh30,000 would be brought separately and were not part of the Finance Bill currently before Parliament.
Another major point of disagreement concerned proposals affecting second-hand clothing, commonly known as mitumba.
Opposition MPs argued that changing the treatment from zero-rating to tax exemption could eventually raise consumer prices because traders would be unable to claim input VAT.
Bumula MP Wamboka Wanami warned that the measures would silently push up the cost of living, saying, ‘My single biggest problem with this Bill is that it hides price increases inside technical tax language.’
Embakasi West MP Mark Mwenje shared the concerns, arguing that changes affecting second-hand clothes and rental housing would inevitably be transferred to consumers.
Supporters of the Bill, however, said those fears were unfounded.
Majority Whip Silvanus Osoro said claims that mitumba imports would attract extra taxes were untrue.
Osoro said, ‘There is nothing that calls for an increase in the percentage of taxes on mitumba imports.’
He also argued that the proposed changes on non-resident landlords were meant to simplify tax compliance, not create new taxes.
The debate underscored wider worries about Kenya’s economic condition and rising public frustration over taxation.
Homa Bay Town MP Peter Kaluma acknowledged that the Finance Committee had handled the Bill in difficult economic circumstances.
Kaluma said, ‘This has been the most difficult Finance Bill to process because it is being done in a very constrained economic environment.’
He noted that broad public participation had guided the committee’s work and praised young Kenyans for actively submitting proposals.
The mention of youth involvement carried added weight because of the role Gen Z activists played in mobilising the 2024 anti-tax protests.
The movement reshaped the political landscape, demonstrated the influence of digitally organised activism and forced the government to back away from key tax proposals.
With memorial events planned and taxation tensions once again dominating public conversation, lawmakers repeatedly referred to the events of the previous year during the debate.
Kitui Central MP Makali Mulu urged colleagues to separate the Executive’s original intentions from amendments proposed by Parliament.
Ugenya MP David Ochieng’ defended the Bill, saying much of the criticism was rooted in misinformation.
Ochieng’ said, ‘This Bill is not just about increasing taxes; it is about making taxation easier.’
Despite strong opposition, the Finance Bill, 2026, passed Second Reading and moved forward with amendments reflecting recommendations from the Finance Committee.
After public participation across 13 counties, MPs removed several contentious proposals, including a 25 per cent excise duty on mobile phones, the proposed activation tax, a planned rise in residential rental income tax from 7.5 to 10 per cent, and a disputed tax on mitumba imports.
The committee also kept zero-rated VAT status for locally assembled phones, electric mobility products, solar equipment and animal feed inputs to support local manufacturing.
It further proposed a review of PAYE bands that could exempt workers earning Sh30,000 and below from income tax, rejected expanded KRA enforcement powers during tax appeals, and endorsed a new tax amnesty programme to improve compliance and revenue collection.