Skip to main content

Uganda Taxpayer Identification: How NIN, BRN and TIN Work After the 2025 Change

Jurisdiction: Uganda · Topic: Taxpayer identification · FGL review: September 2026

Uganda's taxpayer-identification framework changed in 2025. For tax-law purposes, an individual's National Identification Number (NIN) and a non-individual's Uganda Registration Services Bureau registration number are now used as tax identification numbers. At the same time, URA is still operating legacy TIN services while it integrates NIN, BRN and TIN records.

That distinction matters. The legal identifier has changed, but taxpayers should not assume that every existing URA process, account reference or historic TIN has disappeared overnight.

What the law changed

The Tax Procedures Code (Amendment) Act, 2025 substituted section 4 of the Tax Procedures Code Act. For tax purposes, it provides that:

  • an individual's NIN issued under Uganda's national identification system is used as the tax identification number;
  • a registration number issued by URSB is used for a non-individual; and
  • a foreign tax identification number may be used where it is issued by a foreign tax authority in a country covered by the relevant treaty or information-exchange arrangement.

The amended provision also requires the relevant identifier to be stated on returns, notices, communications and other documents used for tax-law purposes.

Why taxpayers can still see a TIN in URA systems

URA's 2026 public guidance describes the operational process as an integration of TINs, NINs and BRNs. Existing taxpayers are being required to update their registration details so that URA can associate the correct NIN or BRN with the taxpayer's existing record.

URA also continues to provide services for retrieving or using a TIN in some portal processes. The practical message is therefore not "delete your TIN". It is: make sure the identity information attached to your URA account is complete and consistent with the identifier now required by law.

What existing taxpayers should update

URA's May 2026 notice requires registered taxpayers to update their registration details with:

  • the correct NIN for an individual or BRN/registration number for a non-individual;
  • current telephone contacts;
  • physical address; and
  • the nature of the business or economic activity.

URA says taxpayers with incomplete or outdated registration details may be prompted to update them before proceeding with other portal transactions.

Why this matters to finance teams

Taxpayer identity now reaches far beyond the registration screen. Finance and procurement teams should review the identifiers used in supplier master data, customer master data, withholding-tax records, EFRIS transactions, tax invoices, payment support and statutory filings.

A useful control is to make the following fields part of vendor and customer onboarding where relevant: legal name, NIN/BRN, existing URA TIN where still operationally required, VAT-registration status, EFRIS status and current contact information.

NIN and BRN also matter in EFRIS

URA's August 2026 EFRIS notice says business e-invoices or e-receipts should carry the buyer's BRN, NIN or TIN. This makes taxpayer identity part of the transaction evidence used in day-to-day tax compliance, not merely a registration detail held in a separate file.

For the wider invoicing and VAT-control implications, see FGL's guide to EFRIS and VAT withholding from 1 July 2026.

What this change does not mean

  • A NIN does not create a new tax by itself. Tax liability still depends on the relevant charging law, income, transaction or activity.
  • A business registration number does not replace tax analysis. It is an identifier, not a conclusion about VAT, income tax or withholding tax.
  • Existing URA records should not be abandoned. The transition requires alignment of records, not the destruction of historical tax references.

A practical taxpayer checklist

  • Log into the URA portal and confirm that the taxpayer profile carries the correct NIN or BRN.
  • Check the registered telephone number, physical address and business activity.
  • Align internal supplier and customer records with the identifiers used by URA.
  • Review EFRIS and tax-document templates to ensure the correct taxpayer identifier is captured.
  • Keep evidence of material registration updates and resolve inconsistencies before a filing, licensing or transaction deadline.

More Uganda-specific compliance material is organised in the Uganda Tax knowledge desk.

Sources

FGL note: This article distinguishes the legal change in taxpayer identifiers from the operational transition occurring in URA systems. Portal processes can change, so taxpayers should verify the current workflow when completing a transaction.

Free tools

Use an FGL calculator

Open the calculator directly instead of navigating through a separate tools page.

Continue with FGL

Practical resources
Discussion

Questions, corrections or another perspective?

Join the conversation below. Keep comments constructive, relevant and free of confidential information.

Popular posts from this blog

Ernst & Young v URA: VAT on Imported Services and the UGX 3.48 Billion Assessment

Jurisdiction: Uganda · Decision: Commercial Court, Civil Appeal No. 26 of 2022 · Judgment date: 11 June 2026 · FGL review: September 2026 Uganda's Commercial Court has upheld a VAT assessment of UGX 3,482,492,210 against Ernst & Young Uganda in a dispute over services received from non-resident group entities and other foreign service providers. The decision is important because it gives businesses a current judicial example of how Uganda's imported-services VAT rules can apply to cross-border support, technology and professional-service arrangements. What the case was about In Ernst and Young v Uganda Revenue Authority , Civil Appeal No. 26 of 2022, the dispute concerned services obtained from entities outside Uganda, including members of the wider EY network and third-party foreign suppliers. URA treated the services as imported services and assessed VAT for the period January 2014 to June 2018. EY challenged the treatment, including arguments about where the s...

Stanbic-URA Transfer-Pricing Dispute: What Finance Teams Should Learn While the Case Is Pending

Jurisdiction: Uganda · Topic: Transfer pricing and tax dispute management · Status: Pending before the Tax Appeals Tribunal at the time of this FGL review · FGL review: 21 September 2026 Stanbic Bank Uganda Limited and Stanbic Uganda Holdings Limited are contesting a major transfer-pricing assessment by the Uganda Revenue Authority (URA). Public reporting places the working dispute figure at approximately UGX 117.8 billion , and the Tax Appeals Tribunal listed TAT Application No. 170 of 2025 for conferencing in June 2026. This article does not attempt to decide who is right. The dispute is still being litigated. Instead, it uses the publicly available record to explain what finance teams can learn about related-party charges, evidence, tax governance and the management of unresolved assessments. What the dispute is about The dispute arises from URA's review of related-party transactions involving Stanbic's Ugandan operations and entities within the wider...

Reconciling ERP Sales, EFRIS, VAT and Income Tax Returns: A Practical Guide

Scope: Uganda · Topic: Revenue reconciliation across ERP, EFRIS, VAT and income tax · FGL review: September 2026 Sales should be explainable across every system a business uses, but they will not always be numerically identical. An ERP may record invoices and journals, EFRIS records fiscal documents, VAT follows statutory supply rules, financial statements apply accounting standards, and the income-tax return applies tax rules to annual business income. The control objective is therefore not to force all four numbers to match. It is to build a documented bridge that explains why they differ, whether each difference is valid, and what evidence supports it. Why the numbers can legitimately differ A difference can arise from timing, classification, system configuration or tax treatment. Common examples include advance billings, deferred income, unbilled revenue, credit notes, exempt or zero-rated supplies, manual journals, foreign-currency treatment, customer-contra...