By Adnan Adams Mohammed
Economics Lecturer and Tax Policy Analysts, Mohammed Muntaka Abdul Rahman, has strongly mounted a defense for Commissioner of Customs Aaron Kanor, arguing that public outrage over Ghana’s airport phone-entry rules misdirects frustration at a civil servant who was simply being transparent about the law.
Writing on the fallout, Dr. Abdul Rahman (known as The Kasoa Economist) pushed back against accusations that Mr. Kanor invented an arbitrary policy when warning passengers at Kotoka International Airport that carrying more than two phones could trigger commercial taxation.
”A customs commissioner who declines to tell the public what the rules are is a worse public servant than one who states them plainly and takes the resulting heat. Ghanaians complaining that Mr Kanor ‘targeted’ phone-carrying travellers have the causality backwards. He was explaining, unprompted, exactly what triggers scrutiny, so that people could avoid it. That is transparency, not persecution”, Mohammed Muntaka Abdul Rahman (The Kasoa Economist).
The row erupted following Mr. Kanor’s September 2 remarks advising travelers to cap personal mobile phones to two devices to avoid duty assessments. Critics swiftly attacked the commissioner, claiming he had unilaterally fabricated a two-phone limit.
However, statutory records show the framework rests on firm legal ground. Under Section 17 of the Exemptions Act, 2022 (Act 1083), passenger baggage is exempt from duties unless intended for sale, barter, exchange, or gift. Parliament instructed the Finance Minister to fix specific limits, which materialized in the Exemptions Regulations (L.I. 2514) of November 2025. That instrument formally tasked the Commissioner-General of the Ghana Revenue Authority (GRA) with establishing duty-free quantities.
Addressing the apparent conflict between Mr. Kanor’s initial warning and a subsequent GRA clarification stating extra phones are not automatically taxed, Dr. Abdul Rahman emphasized that both statements align.
”The two statements of the commissioner and the GRA press release were making the same argument in two registers — one blunt, one procedural… Declare, and the rule protects you, or conceal, and it does not”, Mohammed Muntaka Abdul Rahman.
Under the procedural framework, passengers carrying extra devices who declare them proceed to an assessment area. Officers check packaging and ownership to confirm whether the phones are personal. If verified as non-commercial, the exemption stands; if deemed commercial goods, duty is assessed.
The Ghana Revenue Authority also issued statements calling for cooler heads and constructive debate over statutory policy.
”If the Commissioner is wrong, let the facts prove him wrong. If the policy needs clarification, let the GRA clarify it. If the law needs changing, let Parliament change it. But let us not create a country where public officials become afraid to speak about difficult issues because every uncomfortable statement could cost them their jobs”, GRA noted.
”Sometimes the truth is bitter, but bitterness does not make the truth a lie… Listen first. Question respectfully. Debate the policy. But don’t shoot the messenger simply because you don’t like the message.”
The broader constitutional debate has now moved to the courts. Lawyer Jonathan Alua has filed a suit requesting the Supreme Court to declare Regulation 18(2)(b) of L.I. 2514 unconstitutional, alleging it improperly delegates parliamentary power to alter tax rules under Article 174(2) of the Constitution.
Until the Supreme Court rules, L.I. 2514 remains fully operational, with customs officers mandated to enforce baggage screening rules at entry points.
