By Foday Moriba Conteh

A concession agreement between the Government of Sierra Leone and Aminata & Sons (SL) Limited has sparked public debate over transparency, fairness and the Government’s approach to supporting local businesses following the disclosure of a package of fiscal incentives granted to the company for the rehabilitation and operation of petroleum storage facilities at the Kissy Terminal in Freetown.

The agreement, signed in November 2025 by Minister of Trade and Industry, Alpha Ibrahim Sesay, on behalf of the Government of Sierra Leone, provides Aminata & Sons with a range of tax incentives aimed at facilitating investment in petroleum storage infrastructure.

Under the arrangement, Aminata & Sons has been granted the right to rehabilitate, operate and manage two petroleum storage tanks at the Kissy Terminal, with capacities of 4,500 and 5,000 metric tonnes respectively. The company will also have access to two additional storage tanks within the Sierra Leone Ports Authority vicinity.

Government officials justified the agreement as part of broader efforts to address persistent fuel supply challenges and strengthen the country’s petroleum storage capacity to improve national fuel security.

The concession is expected to run for an initial period of ten years, subject to review every five years and possible renewal. Aminata & Sons will be responsible for financing rehabilitation works, maintaining the facilities, employing staff, and ensuring compliance with international petroleum industry standards.

However, attention has largely focused on the fiscal incentives contained in the agreement. These include exemptions from import duties and Goods and Services Tax (GST) on machinery, equipment, and vehicles required for the project, deferred payment of petroleum import taxes for three years, payroll tax exemptions for certain expatriate staff, and various corporate tax incentives related to research, training, and corporate social responsibility activities.

Business leaders and some civil society commentators have questioned whether the concessions provide Aminata & Sons with advantages not available to other companies operating within Sierra Leone’s petroleum and logistics sectors.

The allegations surrounding the proposed concessions granted to Aminata & Sons have raised serious questions that many stakeholders believe deserve robust public scrutiny and parliamentary oversight. At a time when Government is pursuing aggressive domestic revenue mobilization to fund critical national priorities, they argue that any concession capable of significantly reducing revenue inflows should be carefully evaluated against its long-term economic and fiscal consequences.

Several industry stakeholders have argued that established local businesses have invested heavily in fuel infrastructure over many years without receiving similar incentives. They contend that granting significant tax exemptions to a single operator could create an uneven business environment and affect competition within the sector.

Critics further maintain that the potential impact on Government’s revenue generation efforts cannot be ignored. According to them, concessions of this nature could create substantial and recurring revenue losses, thereby reducing the State’s capacity to invest in infrastructure, education, healthcare and other essential public services. They also warn that the precedent created by such an arrangement could be deeply concerning. If one company is granted extraordinary concessions, they ask, what would prevent others from demanding similar treatment? Such a development, they argue, could open the floodgates to a series of exemptions and waivers that may result in significant and potentially permanent revenue deficits for Government.

Many observers also believe that preferential treatment of this magnitude risks creating an uneven playing field. They say it could serve as a major disincentive to indigenous Sierra Leonean businesses that have invested heavily in the downstream sector under existing rules and tax obligations. Some also caution that it could discourage reputable foreign direct investors who expect transparency, fairness and predictability in the investment environment, with potentially negative consequences for the industry’s growth, competitiveness and long-term sustainability.

Critics have also raised concerns about the process through which the company was selected for the project. According to the agreement, parliamentary ratification is required before the concession becomes fully effective. However, some observers have called for greater public disclosure regarding the selection process, investment criteria, and expected economic benefits.

Civil society representatives have urged Parliament to conduct a thorough review of the agreement, including assessments of its fiscal implications, economic benefits, and compliance with national procurement and investment regulations.

Economists note that while investment incentives can play an important role in attracting capital and supporting strategic infrastructure projects, such incentives also result in foregone government revenue and therefore require careful evaluation to ensure that the long-term benefits outweigh the costs.

“The issue is not necessarily whether incentives should be provided,” one economic analyst observed. “The key questions are whether the incentives are justified, whether the process was transparent, and whether similar opportunities are available to other investors under comparable circumstances.”

Some stakeholders have also posed what they describe as an important policy question: whether Sierra Leonean companies operating in foreign jurisdictions, particularly in the home country of Aminata & Sons, would ever receive concessions of such magnitude at the expense of those countries’ domestic revenue generation strategies. If the answer is no, they argue, then Sierra Leone should equally safeguard its own national economic interests.

Supporters of the project argue that expanding petroleum storage capacity is critical for ensuring a stable fuel supply and reducing the risk of shortages. They maintain that strategic investments in energy infrastructure may require targeted incentives to encourage private sector participation.

The debate comes against the backdrop of the Government’s broader commitment to promoting local content and indigenous business development. President Julius Maada Bio’s administration has consistently emphasized the importance of empowering Sierra Leonean businesses and increasing local participation in the economy.

Observers say Parliament’s consideration of the agreement will provide an opportunity for lawmakers to examine whether the proposed incentives align with national development objectives and represent value for money for the state. Some warn that, if approved without adequate safeguards, the concession could mark the beginning of a decline in the downstream petroleum sector by distorting competition and undermining investor confidence.

As discussions continue, stakeholders from the private sector, civil society, and government are calling for greater transparency and public engagement to ensure that any final agreement serves the country’s long-term economic interests while maintaining a fair and competitive business environment. They insist that Sierra Leone’s development agenda must remain anchored on policies that encourage fair competition, protect legitimate investments, strengthen domestic revenue mobilization and promote sustainable economic growth, adding that Parliament should subject the proposal to the highest level of scrutiny and, where necessary, reject any arrangement that is not demonstrably in the best interests of the nation and its people.

At the time of publication, responses from the Ministry of Trade and Industry regarding questions about the concession agreement and the selection process had not yet been received.