Connect with us

Opinion

IMF folly – Imputed Rental Income Tax

Published

2 years ago

on

By Dr Sirimewan Dharmaratne,
Former Senior Analyst, HM Revenue
and Customs, UK.

While one can only imagine the atmosphere at the discussions with the IMF, what transpires from these meetings, one can presume that there was no resistance or contention to whatever the IMF proposes. The IMF appears to be pretty much dictating the fiscal policies for Sri Lanka to follow. The proposed Imputed Rental Income Tax (IRIT) is a good example how helpless or defenceless Sri Lanka has become to get a bit of money that some oligarchs spend on their yachts. The gravity of this tax is only just gradually sinking in Sri Lanka. Even those in the government, or those wannabes, are clueless as to what this policy is. It is utter stupidity to make statements such as “90% of the property owners won’t be affected” when the policy is not yet even formulated. Without the Sale Price and Rent Register (SPRR), which will be the basis for valuation, it has not been even started, but is required to be completed within a few months. Tax rate has not been determined either. Therefore, it is disingenuous and misleading to say that only 10% of the households will be affected. Further because of the word ‘rental’, some politicians still believe this is a tax on rented properties or on those with ‘commercial value,” whatever that is. But potentially it could be far more sinister!

What is Imputed Rental Income Tax?

This is a highly controversial and nonsensical tax that is imposed in only five countries, namely Iceland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Slovenia and Switzerland. None of these are developing countries and even in Switzerland, there is an ongoing debate on its abolition. The tax is imposed on the ‘imputed’ rental income of your own home after deducting mortgage or loan payments. The imputation is based on the rent that you would have to pay to rent a similar property in that location. Once this is determined, there may be some provision for the homeowner to negotiate the imputed value, based on several other factors. In countries where this is imposed, imputed value is negotiated down to be less than half of the potential rental value.

Proposed SPRR

The IMF has suggested implementing this tax by March 2025, once the SPRR is completed within a few months of this year. This will be a monumental task in the informal and disparate property market that exists in Lanka. Except for some properties in high-rise apartment complexes and a few other high-end properties, mainly in Colombo, most rentals and property transactions occur through personal advertisements on newspapers and online. Their rental rates and selling prices are personal information and are unlikely to be recorded anywhere. Further, each property is unique and no two properties, in the same neighbourhood, are the same. This adds to the complexity of determining overarching rental rates, or sale prices, even for a small confined neighbourhood. Also, rents are negotiated, based on personal acquaintances, actual or perceived ability to pay rent and several other factors that cannot be quantified. Often one finds palatial homes in not so desirable neighbourhoods surrounded by very basic abodes. This will make it extremely challenging for authorities to come up with any credible imputed rent register for a myriad of heterogeneous properties strewn all over the island.

This is very much different to developed countries, where there are whole neighbourhoods with pretty much identical properties. Variation is sale prices and rents are very minor within a neighbourhood. Transaction information on only a few properties is enough to impute the sale or rental value of similar properties. In the UK, for example, there are several online property sites that individuals use as guides to advertise properties for sale and rent. Also, since most homes are mortgaged owned, banks have a record of sale prices and mortgages extended to each property. The government and tax authorities have access to all this information almost in real time.

Is this tax realistic in Sri Lanka?

Despite the ill-conceived optimism of the IMF, this tax is highly impractical in Sri Lanka due to aforementioned reasons and certainly not within the suggested time frame. This is an excellent manifestation of what happens when international organisations run out of ideas and are devoid of any sense of reality of the environment that they are working on. In a highly fractured and heterogenous property market, each property will have to be considered individually to calculate the imputed rent as each property is a unique entity. Further, the rental demand for high-end properties in Colombo and its purlieu are by embassies, international organisations and other foreign establishments that can pay high rents, which are out of reach of many ordinary Sri Lankans. While those who are lucky enough to get such clients may demand high rents, to use them to impute rental value of the adjoining property is not possible. For properties of this nature there is an esoteric and limited client base. For the rest of the country, there is a ‘rent ceiling’ that any property could demand, regardless of how grand it is.

Therefore, any kind of rent register has to be either very individualised or fairly prosaic, mostly based on highly conservative estimates in a very parsimonious information environment. Either way, putting together a useful and credible SPRR would be highly contentious and those with means and connections could influence how much their imputed rent would be. This opens up another avenue for widespread corruption, where valuation offices could easily be the new elite surpassing custom offices.

Is this tax fair?

One of the main arguments against IRIT is that it goes against the very principle of taxation. A tax is imposed on a transaction or when an income is generated. This tax is imposed on a non-income generating asset. As such, it is biased against those individuals who are asset rich but cash poor. Sri Lankan house ownership is unique. Most people strive throughout their working years to build a house that eventually becomes their family home. When they retire and income is drastically reduced, it not only becomes their permanent refuge, but also serves as a launching pad for grown up children until they become independent. Few lucky ones acquire homes through bequeath or marriage. For these individuals’ this tax may not be as unfair as for those who have spent their hard-earned money building or acquiring a property. However, the morality of the tax is still questionable. This tax is penalising people for their enterprise. It is in effect disincentivizing people from investing in their future and the welfare of their children. While tax implications can be taken into account in making a decision about going for a higher paying job, or purchasing an item, no one would know what the future tax is when they start to build their own home. It is completely at the mercy of an imperfect and capricious valuation process. Therefore, if applied regressively, this tax would be unfair on the owners of the existing stock of property and could peril the livelihood of those who are living at the margins, but fortunate enough to have their own comfortable home in a desirable location. Those who are planning to get on the property ladder would be no better off either as they would have to consider some random tax that will be imposed once the property is built or acquired.

Why in this predicament?

The reason that Sri Lanka is in this quandary and has to propitiate IMF is due to years of neglect to implement sensible tax policies. Ridiculously low historic personal income taxes and their ad hoc implementation has given a false sense of prosperity that accustomed the populace to a lifestyle that otherwise would not have been possible. If the taxes have been allowed to increase marginally over the years to reflect the true cost of providing public services, the pain would have been much less. To cover the gap that could not be covered by taxes, all elected governments have been borrowing heavily, primarily to support consumption. Even when borrowed for income generation, gratuitous corruption and egregious decisions have rendered most investments liabilities. All the while the debt has been piling up unabated, and passed on from one administration to another. Economic mismanagement and the maintenance of a bloated, inefficient and corrupt public service have finally nailed the coffin in. While decreasing government expenditure through restructuring and privatisation is facing fierce opposition, agreeing to raise taxes and find new sources for taxation appears to be the only way to convince creditors to lend more. But is it?

Tax Gap – Finding tax leakages

One of the main accusations against pervasive taxation is the inability or unwillingness to clamp down on widespread tax evasion. Different groups point out sources where substantial haemorrhage of tax occurs. However, quantifying leakages of tax revenue has hampered putting forward a compelling case against imposing more debilitating taxes. To realise how extra tax can be collected without imposing new taxes, the government needs to know how much tax is lost and then formulate a comprehensive plan to collect. The method to estimate lost tax is by calculating the tax gap. Tax gap calculates the overall deficit in the tax that is due under full compliance and what is actually collected. It can be broken down by sector, such as tax lost through income tax, corporate tax, excise tax. The concept is fairly straightforward although computationally data driven. Rather than agreeing to every outlandish suggestion that the IMF makes, the government should be able to suggest alternative methods to raise taxes without further burdening the long-suffering public. The way to achieve this is by having people who could hold a conversation at their level. Obsequiousness is seen as a sign of weakness that organisations like the IMF have come to expect in developing countries. Unless the government gets its act together and shows that they could put forward fact-based strong arguments, it won’t be able to defend the public from the wrath of the IMF. Without the knowledge of how much tax is lost and a comprehensive plan to collect it, it is not surprising that only one party dominates these discussions.

Repercussions of Excessive Taxation

Studies done in the UK and other countries have shown that excessive tax burden promotes evasion and evasion is self-feeding. When people see others evade taxes, they are also compelled to do so, especially if they see no action is taken. Since taxes don’t give any direct benefits, individuals are more likely to comply if everyone else does. People neither feel good when they pay taxes or feel bad when they evade. Because they feel ‘everyone’ is doing it. All this means that there will be a huge cost making individuals comply with various taxes and associated regulations that are popping up like mushrooms. This will in turn increase government expenditure, negating most or some of the revenue from increased taxation. A complicated tax like IRIT will face significant difficulties and costs through its implementation. Identifying the ownership, imputed rent valuation, adjusting it for various mitigating factors, negotiations, endless legal challenges and distortions to the property market will render this tax unworkable in Sri Lanka. The IMF really should stay away from prescribing specific tax policies that are not suitable for Sri Lanka while the government should be much more erudite in holding their ground and fighting their corner.


Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Opinion

Boots on the ground,minds in the dark

Published

22 hours ago

on

2026/04/1

By

Confronting Sri Lanka’s Expanding Drug Threat

Senior security and intelligence professional with extensive experience in counter-terrorism, strategic risk assessment and law enforcement.

A Rising Tide Beneath the Surface

Sri Lanka’s recent success in intercepting large consignments of narcotics at sea is both reassuring and alarming. Reassuring, because it reflects the growing operational capability of the Sri Lanka Navy and the Police Narcotics Bureau. Alarming, because such volumes do not move without a market.

Are we merely intercepting supply, or are we ignoring a rapidly expanding demand within our own society?

· “If seizures are rising, it is not only a sign of enforcement success, it is also a signal of expanding demand.

“Boots on the Ground”: A New Meaning

In today’s Sri Lankan context, “boots on the ground” must be redefined. It is no longer limited to patrols at sea or coastal surveillance. It is about real presence intelligence-led, community-connected, and action-oriented.

Recent interdictions demonstrate a mature intelligence-to-action cycle. For this, the Sri Lanka Navy and Police deserve commendation.

Yet, behind every success lies a silent force

The Silent Shield: Intelligence Networks

Informants, analysts, and field operatives form the backbone of every successful operation.

*  They operate under risk

*  Their exposure can collapse entire networks

*  Their contribution must be recognised discreetly, not publicly

“An exposed informant today is a lost network tomorrow.”

A Market-Driven Menace

Drug trafficking is not accidental, it is profit-driven.

The scale of maritime smuggling suggests that Sri Lanka is no longer just a transit hub. It is increasingly becoming a destination market.

This transforms narcotics from a policing issue into a national social crisis.

Inside the Network: A Structured Ecosystem

The drug trade operates through layered chains:

*  International syndicates

* Maritime couriers

*  Local facilitators

* Urban distributors

* Street-level peddlers

Each layer is insulated. Each link is replaceable.

“Break one link, and the chain adapts. Break the system, and the threat collapses.”

Demand Is Engineered

A critical reality:

Drug networks do not wait for demand; they create it.

* Free or low-cost initial access

* Targeting youth and vulnerable groups

* Expansion through peer networks

* Stealth distribution networks

Addiction is often designed, not accidental.

Awareness: Prevention or Promotion?

Sri Lanka’s awareness programmes show mixed results.

While well-intentioned:

* Overexposure can trigger curiosity

* Fear-based messaging is ineffective

* Generic campaigns lack relevance

“Poorly designed awareness can introduce what it seeks to prevent.”

The Missing Link: Awareness + Recovery

Awareness alone is insufficient.

A modern approach must include:

*  Simple, relatable communication

* Focus on life consequences

* Clear access to rehabilitation

Shift the message:

From: “Say no to drugs”

To: “If trapped, there is a way out”

When Success Creates Strain: The Justice System Under Pressure

An often-overlooked consequence of increased drug detections is the pressure it places on the justice and prison systems.

A large number of drug-related offences are non-bailable, leading to a steady rise in remand populations. This has resulted in:

*  Severe prison overcrowding

* Heightened tension among inmates

* Increased confrontation between prisoners and prison authorities

Overcrowded prisons are not only a humanitarian concern they are an escalating security risk.

The Forensic Bottleneck: Delays in Government Analyst Reports

At the centre of this strain lies a critical dependency the Government Analyst Department.

Every detection requires scientific confirmation. However, the system is under significant pressure:

* High volume of samples

* Shortage of trained personnel

* Limited availability of chemicals and laboratory materials
·

*  Multiple deadlines imposed by courts

These constraints have led to delays in submitting reports, which in turn:

*  Extend remand periods

*  Increase court backlogs

*  Fuel frustration among inmates

“Justice delayed in narcotics cases becomes both a legal failure and a security threat.”

A Sensitive Concern: Accuracy of Detections

Another emerging concern is that a number of samples sent for analysis reportedly do not contain narcotics.

If substantiated, this raises serious issues:

*  Are arrests being made on insufficient preliminary evidence?

* Are field testing methods reliable?

* Is there undue pressure to increase detection statistics?

The implications are profound:

*  Wrongful detention

*  Loss of public trust

* Weakening of legitimate enforcement efforts

Each inaccurate detection undermines the credibility of the entire system.

A Dangerous Imbalance

Sri Lanka now faces a structural imbalance:

*  Strong enforcement

*  Increasing arrests·

*  Limited forensic capacity·

*  Overburdened courts·

*  Overcrowded prisons

This imbalance creates a chain reaction of institutional stress.

The Strategic Gap: Where Is the Research?

Despite strong enforcement, Sri Lanka lacks a research-driven response.

The Police Narcotics Bureau and National Dangerous Drugs Control Board must be strengthened with:

*  Dedicated research units

*  Data on usage trends·

*  Behavioural analysis·

*  Evaluation of awareness programmes

Supported by international collaboration.

“Without research, strategy becomes a reaction.”

From Sea to Society

“Boots on the ground” must extend beyond enforcement:

*  Religious leaders·

*  Teachers and schools·

*  Parents·

*  Community networks·

The real battle is not only at sea but within society.

A National Priority

The consequences are severe:

* Loss of youth potential·

* Rising crime·

* Family breakdown·

* Long-term public health burden

This is a national security issue with generational consequences.

STRATEGIC CONCLUSION

OFFENSIVE FRAMEWORK (SUPPLY DISRUPTION)

INTERNATIONAL PARTNERS

NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE

SRI LANKA NAVY / COAST GUARD

POLICE NARCOTICS BUREAU

STF / POLICE OPERATIONS

ARRESTS & SEIZURES

JUDICIAL SYSTEM

Focus: Intelligence-led interdiction, maritime dominance, legal enforcement

PREVENTIVE FRAMEWORK (DEMAND REDUCTION)

GOVERNMENT POLICY & RESEARCH

NDDCB / PNB COORDINATION

EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS

TEACHERS / COUNSELLORS

RELIGIOUS & COMMUNITY LEADERS

PARENTS

YOUTH

Focus: Awareness, early detection, social resilience, rehabilitation

INTEGRATED NATIONAL STRATEGY

(OFFENSIVE) (PREVENTIVE)

Sri Lanka has proven its ability to intercept drugs.

But interception alone is not victory.

“If enforcement is strong but society is weak, the problem will return.

If both are strong, the threat can be contained.”

Conclusion

Sri Lanka is no longer confronting a distant or isolated narcotics threat it is facing a deeply embedded, evolving ecosystem that stretches from international waters to the minds of its youth.

The recent surge in maritime interceptions is not merely a success story. It is also a warning.

Every shipment seized at sea is a reflection of a demand that exists on land.

We must therefore move beyond the comfort of operational victories and confront the harder truth: this battle cannot be won by enforcement alone.

“Boots on the ground” must now mean more than patrol vessels and tactical units. It must represent a nationwide presence of awareness, vigilance, intelligence, and responsibility from coastal radar stations to classrooms, from intelligence cells to family homes.

At the same time, we must protect what protects us from the intelligence networks that operate in silence. Their strength lies in their invisibility. Their recognition must remain measured, discreet, and strategic.

The drug economy is adaptive. It creates demand where none exists, exploits vulnerability where it finds it, and thrives where systems are disconnected. If left unchecked, it will not only fuel crime it will reshape society, erode institutions, and compromise future generations.

What Sri Lanka needs now is not a fragmented response, but a coordinated national doctrine:

*  Strong at sea

*  Smart in policy

*  Deep in research

*  Present in societyBecause the real battleground is no longer just geography it is generational.

What is required now is not just stronger enforcement but smarter systems, balanced capacity, and a unified national response. Because this is no longer just about drugs. It is about the future of the nation.

Mahil Dole is a retired senior police officer and former Head of the Counter-Terrorism Division of Sri Lanka’s State Intelligence Service. With over four decades in policing and intelligence, he has interviewed more than 100 suicide cadres linked to extremist movements. He is a graduate of the Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies in Hawaii and has received specialist training on terrorist financing in Australia and India.

By Mahil Dole

Continue Reading

Opinion

Sri Lanka has policy, but where is the data?

Published

2 days ago

on

2026/03/31

By

In recent months, President Anura Kumara Dissanayake has repeatedly expressed a concern that the government does not have the accurate data it needs to make good decisions.

At meetings with senior officials from ministries ranging from health and agriculture to education and infrastructure, the President has reportedly lamented that the government often lacks reliable information on what its projects are achieving, how funds are being spent, and whether public investments are producing results. The meeting on December 6th at the Matale District Secretariat was a case in point. The President emphasised the need for most accurate data to award compensation for damaged agricultural lands before the month’s end. He recalled that the Department of Agriculture’s data showed an excess of rice in the country, but the nation has faced a rice shortage.

For a country attempting economic recovery after the most severe crisis in its post-independence history, absence of accurate data is a dangerous position to be in.

Without data, decisions become guesswork. Without evidence, policy becomes speculation.

Ironically, Sri Lanka already possesses the policy architecture required to solve this problem. The National Evaluation Policy (2018) and the National Evaluation Policy Implementation Framework (2023) were created precisely to ensure that public spending is guided by evidence, results, and accountability. Yet today, despite these policies and the presence of a dedicated government agency tasked with monitoring development projects, the country still lacks the integrated digital monitoring and evaluation system needed to turn policy into practice. Until that gap is closed, Sri Lanka will continue to struggle with inefficient public investment, delayed projects, and policy decisions made without reliable evidence.

The scale of the problem

The Department of Project Management and Monitoring (DPMM), operating under the Ministry of Finance, is the central institution responsible for overseeing development projects implemented by government ministries. According to its 2024 Annual Performance Report, the department monitored 226 large-scale development projects across various ministries during the year. These projects collectively had an allocated budget of LKR 705 billion, but the actual expenditure amounted to only LKR 401.96 billion, representing about 56.9% utilization of the allocated funds.

In other words, nearly half of the planned development spending did not materialize.

While fiscal constraints and external factors contributed to this outcome, the data nevertheless highlights a deeper systemic issue: weak monitoring and decision-making structures that fail to identify and resolve implementation problems early.

The report also indicates that many projects face delays due to procurement issues, coordination failures, cost escalations, and operational bottlenecks. What makes the situation more troubling is that information about these problems is often fragmented and slow to reach decision-makers.

The government does monitor projects through reports and field visits, but the information flow remains largely manual and scattered across ministries. In the digital age, such a system is simply inadequate.

A policy that already foresaw the solution

Sri Lanka’s National Evaluation Policy (NEP), approved by the Cabinet in 2018, recognised this problem years ago. The policy aims to ensure that public investment decisions are guided by reliable evidence, efficiency, and measurable development results.

The NEP outlines several key goals:

· strengthening evidence-based decision making,

· improving efficiency in resource utilisation,

· ensuring transparency and accountability in public expenditure,

· promoting learning from successes and failures of past projects, and

· creating a national culture of evaluation.

To operationalise the policy, the government introduced the National Evaluation Policy Implementation Framework (NEPIF) in 2023. This framework explicitly calls for the creation of integrated information systems capable of gathering and analyzing data across the project cycle—from planning and budgeting to implementation and evaluation. In fact, NEPIF specifically proposes the establishment of a web-based integrated public investment management and evaluation information system to store project data and evaluation reports.

Such a system would allow decision-makers to access reliable information quickly, improving accountability and policy planning. Unfortunately, despite the clarity of this vision, the digital infrastructure necessary to implement it at a national scale is still largely absent.

A revealing moment at a Colombo seminar

The urgency of this gap became strikingly clear at a recent seminar in Colombo organized by a national NGO. The organization demonstrated its cloud-based monitoring and evaluation system which was comprehensive and updated by multiple layers of personnel, to a group of university students. On a large screen, a dashboard displayed real-time information on the organization’s twenty development projects across the country. Each project appeared as a branch of a digital tree, connected to activities, budgets, locations, and beneficiaries. With a few clicks, staff could generate reports showing the status of any project at national, district, or local levels, both of data and graphics. Updated data was available up to the previous day.

What would normally take weeks of manual compilation could be done in less than a minute.

Among the audience was a university academic who observed something obvious but powerful. ‘If a small NGO can run a system like this,’ he asked, ‘why can’t the Government?’ Another participant responded and told that the non-introduction of a digitalized Monitoring and Evaluation mechanism was due to some bureaucrats’ resistance. ‘I heard the Evaluation Reports of several projects of the government was not published because the respective Project Managers had opposed, fearing their failure would be exposed’, another academic commented. Those comments deserve serious reflection on the situation, I believe.

The digital revolution in monitoring and evaluation

Around the world, governments are increasingly adopting digital monitoring and evaluation platforms to track public investments in real time. These systems combine several elements:

· project databases

· geospatial mapping

· financial monitoring tools

· citizen feedback mechanisms

· performance dashboards for decision-makers.

Countries such as Estonia, South Korea, Rwanda, and Chile have integrated such systems into national governance structures. In these systems, ministers and senior officials can see instantly:

· which projects are progressing

· which projects are delayed

· how funds are being spent

· whether outputs and outcomes are being achieved.

More importantly, such platforms enable early intervention. Problems can be identified before they become crises. For Sri Lanka, which must now manage scarce fiscal resources with extreme care, such tools are no longer optional luxuries.

They are necessities.

The cost of not knowing

The absence of integrated data systems carries real economic consequences. Public investment decisions affect everything from roads and irrigation schemes to hospitals and schools. When these investments fail or underperform, the cost is not merely financial. It affects the daily lives of citizens.

A hospital without doctors. An irrigation scheme without water. A school building without teachers.

These are not simply implementation failures; they are information failures.

Without reliable monitoring systems, governments often learn about problems too late. By the time corrective action is taken, budgets have been spent and opportunities lost.

The NEPIF recognises precisely this challenge. It emphasises that evaluation should be an integral part of the entire development cycle—from project design to implementation and feedback for future planning.

But such evaluation cannot occur without reliable data systems.

Building an evaluation culture

Another important goal of the National Evaluation Policy is to create a culture of evaluation within the public sector. This requires a shift in mindset. Evaluation should not be seen as a fault-finding exercise. Instead, it should function as a learning mechanism that helps improve policy design and implementation.

The NEPIF stresses that evaluation findings should inform planning, budgeting, and future project selection. However, without systematic information systems, evaluation results often remain scattered across reports that few decision-makers read. Digital platforms can transform this situation by making information visible, accessible, and actionable. They turn data into knowledge. And knowledge into better decisions.

What a national digital system could look like

Sri Lanka does not need to start from scratch. The institutional building blocks already exist:

· the Department of Project Management and Monitoring (DPPM)

· the National Evaluation Policy

· the National Evaluation Policy Implementation Framework

· various sector-specific monitoring systems across ministries.

What is missing is integration.

A national digital monitoring and evaluation platform could include:

1. A centralised project database:

All government development projects recorded with budgets, timelines, outputs, and implementing agencies.

2. Real-time progress dashboards:

Accessible to the President, Cabinet, ministry secretaries, and provincial administrators.

3. Geographic mapping:

Showing where projects are located and how they benefit communities.

4. Automated reporting:

Reducing paperwork and enabling faster decision-making.

5. Citizen transparency portals:

Allowing the public to see how public funds are used.

Such a system would dramatically strengthen transparency, accountability, and efficiency.

The opportunity before Sri Lanka

Sri Lanka today has a rare opportunity. Economic crises often force governments to rethink outdated systems. The country cannot afford inefficient public investments any longer. Every rupee spent must produce measurable results. The National Evaluation Policy and its implementation framework already provide the intellectual foundation for this transformation. What remains is political commitment. A bold decision to build the digital infrastructure of evidence-based governance.

A call to action

The President’s concern about the lack of reliable data in government is both accurate and urgent. But the solution does not require new policies. The policies already exist. What Sri Lanka needs now is implementation. A national digital monitoring and evaluation system would give policymakers something they currently lack: a clear, real-time picture of the country’s development efforts. Such a system would empower leaders to identify problems early, allocate resources wisely, save billions of rupees from wasting and ensure that development projects truly benefit citizens.

In short, it would give Sri Lanka what every modern state needs: a digital nervous system connecting policy, data, and decision-making. The question is no longer whether the country needs such a system.

The question is simply this: how soon Sri Lanka is willing to build it.

by Tilak W. Karunaratne

Continue Reading

Opinion

Tribute to a distinguished BOI leader

Published

4 days ago

on

2026/03/29

By

Mr. Tuli Cooray, former Deputy Director General of the Board of Investment of Sri Lanka (BOI) and former Secretary General of the Joint Apparel Association Forum (JAAF), passed away three months ago, leaving a distinguished legacy of public service and dedication to national economic development.

An alumnus of the University of Colombo, Mr. Cooray graduated with a Special Degree in Economics. He began his career as a Planning Officer at the Ministry of Plan Implementation and later served as an Assistant Director in the Ministry of Finance (Planning Division).

He subsequently joined the Greater Colombo Economic Commission (GCEC), where he rose from Manager to Senior Manager and later Director. During this period, he also served at the Treasury as an Assistant Director. With the transformation of the GCEC into the BOI, he was appointed Executive Director of the Investment Department and later elevated to the position of Deputy Director General.

In recognition of his vast experience and expertise, he was appointed Director General of the Budget Implementation and Policy Coordination Division at the Ministry of Finance and Planning. Following his retirement from government service, he continued to contribute to the national economy through his work with JAAF.

Mr. Cooray was widely respected as a seasoned professional with exceptional expertise in attracting foreign direct investment (FDI) and facilitating investor relations. His commitment, leadership, and humane qualities earned him the admiration and affection of colleagues across institutions.

He was also one of the pioneers of the BOI Past Officers’ Association, and his passing is deeply felt by its members. His demise has created a void that is difficult to fill, particularly within the BOI, where his contributions remain invaluable.

Mr. Cooray will be remembered not only for his professional excellence but also for his integrity, humility, and the lasting impact he made on those who had the privilege of working with him.

The BOI Past Officers’ Association

jagathcds@gmail.com

Continue Reading

Trending