By Leo Nelson
As debate intensifies over Ghana’s newly introduced 1cedi fuel levy, Professor Patrick Asuming, a Senior Lecturer at the University of Ghana Business School, has stepped forward to urge public support for the controversial measure,
describing the levy as a difficult but necessary step toward rescuing the country’s crisis-ridden energy sector.
His comments come in the wake of the passage of the Energy Sector Levy (Amendment) Bill, 2025, which imposes a GH¢1 per litre tax on petroleum products. The bill was passed by Parliament under a certificate of urgency and has since attracted both criticism and cautious support from various stakeholders.
Prof. Asuming acknowledged the financial burden that the levy would place on consumers, though there’s high living costs. However, he argued that the short-term discomfort was justified by the long-term necessity of stabilising Ghana’s energy sector.
“As Ghanaians, we know the problems in the energy sector.
“We’re better off accepting the GHS1 per litre levy, if it is indeed going to fix the problem, than wait for the whole thing to come crashing down on us,” he advised.
Ghana’s energy sector is facing a severe liquidity crunch, with debts estimated at US$4.9 billion. These debts have crippled the operations of Independent Power Producers (IPPs), disrupted fuel supply chains, and triggered intermittent power outages that threaten business operations and household livelihoods.
Prof. Asuming emphasized that without bold intervention, the entire power sector risks collapse.
“Everybody knows that if we don’t deal with the energy sector problems, we’re not going anywhere.
“We can have all the other big plans—industrialisation, a 24-hour economy. Anything that we’re talking about, we have to address the energy sector,” Prof. Asuming asserted.
This assertion aligns with the government’s argument that resolving the energy crisis is a prerequisite for achieving broader national goals, including the much-touted industrialisation drive and plans to transition Ghana into a 24-hour economy.
Despite his general support for the levy, Prof. Asuming criticised the timing and communication surrounding its rollout. He noted that the government failed to provide adequate information about how the levy would be implemented and how the funds would be managed.
This concern has been echoed by several civil society groups and economic commentators, who argue that the government’s messaging on the levy lacked clarity. Initial announcements led to public confusion over whether the tax applied solely to fuel or included other energy-related services.
Prof. Asuming’s remarks add a nuanced perspective to the growing public discourse around the fuel levy. While some view it as another tax in a long line of burdensome policies, others—particularly within economic and energy circles—see it as a pragmatic move to address a structural crisis.
Opposition parties and consumer advocacy groups have opposed the bill, raising concerns about its passage under a certificate of urgency and warning that the new tax will exacerbate the cost-of-living crisis for ordinary Ghanaians.
Prof. Patrick Asuming’s stance represents the voice of reason in a highly polarized national debate. His support for the levy, balanced with concerns over timing and transparency, highlights the importance of communication in policy implementation.
Ghanaians are not averse to sacrifice—especially if it leads to reliable electricity and economic stability. However, the government is charged to do more to explain how the funds will be managed, when the levy will be lifted, and how the impact will be measured.
If the fuel levy is to succeed, it cannot exist in a vacuum. It must be part of a larger, transparent roadmap that includes cost reduction in energy production, efficiency reforms in the Electricity Company of Ghana (ECG), and efforts to reduce political interference in the power sector.
Only then will the public trust that their sacrifice today will yield a brighter and more reliable energy future tomorrow.