Skip to main content

About FGL

Finance & Governance Lab

A practitioner-led professional knowledge platform turning technical subjects into clear, practical resources for people who make, review and rely on financial and governance decisions.

01

Mission and audience

Clearer knowledge for better decisions

FGL exists to make finance, tax, governance and organisational practice easier to understand and apply. Its mission is to connect authoritative sources, professional judgement and real operational experience so that readers can make better-informed decisions, strengthen controls and build more accountable organisations.

FGL is written for finance teams, accountants, tax professionals, auditors, managers, business owners, organisational leaders, students and other readers seeking practical, professionally grounded explanations. Its primary context is Uganda, particularly for tax and regulatory analysis, while many resources have wider relevance.

02

Scope

What FGL covers

01

Uganda Tax

Practical guides, developments, case briefs and compliance analysis.

02

Accounting & IFRS

Clear explanations of standards, reporting questions and finance workflows.

03

Governance & Controls

Internal control, risk, assurance, accountability and organisational oversight.

04

Systems & Automation

ERP, data, digital finance and responsible automation.

05

Leadership & Culture

The people, behaviours and decisions that shape effective organisations.

06

Learning Resources

Selected materials supporting professional development without replacing FGL’s original analysis.

Uganda Tax is being developed as FGL’s first flagship knowledge hub, supported by structured guides, case analysis and practical tools. The wider scope reflects a simple reality: tax, reporting, controls, systems and organisational behaviour often meet in the same decision.

03

History

From publishing platform to professional knowledge centre

FGL began as a practitioner-led publishing platform for sharing useful ideas on finance, governance and professional development.

It has since evolved into a more structured knowledge centre, with defined editorial pillars, stronger source discipline, practical article standards and a growing programme of guides, case briefs and institutional resources.

That evolution continues, but the original purpose remains: explain important issues clearly and make the analysis useful in practice.

04

Values

How FGL approaches its work

Accuracy and source discipline

Important claims should be grounded in credible, preferably primary, authority.

Practical relevance

Analysis should help readers understand what an issue means for real decisions, processes and controls.

Clarity

Technical complexity should be explained without unnecessary jargon or oversimplification.

Integrity and transparency

Source material, FGL interpretation and unresolved questions should be clearly distinguished.

Professional judgement

Good practice requires evidence, context and thoughtful application, not mechanical answers.

Continuous improvement

Important resources should be reviewed, corrected and strengthened as law, standards and practice develop.

05

Boundaries

What FGL does—and does not do

What FGL does

  • Explains technical and professional subjects in accessible language.
  • Connects rules and standards to practical implications.
  • Produces original analysis, guides, case briefs and commentary.
  • Encourages stronger controls, documentation and accountable leadership.
  • Updates or corrects material when reliable new information changes the analysis.

What FGL does not do

  • FGL is not a regulator, professional body, law firm, accounting firm or tax authority.
  • Its educational content does not replace advice tailored to specific facts.
  • Its summaries are not official legislation, standards, guidance or judicial decisions.
  • It does not claim certainty where law, evidence or interpretation remains unsettled.
  • It does not publish generic material merely to increase volume.
Ivan Lwanga, finance and accounting professional and founder and editor of Finance and Governance Lab

Founder and editor

Ivan Lwanga

Ivan Lwanga is a finance and accounting professional and the founder and editor of Finance & Governance Lab. His professional work has included accounts payable, taxation, reconciliations, month-end accounting, audit support, financial reporting, internal controls and finance-systems implementation. FGL grew from his continuing interest in how technical finance requirements work in real processes, systems and organisations.

Education Bachelor of Business Computing Makerere University Business School
Professional study CPA Uganda — in progress Institute of Certified Public Accountants of Uganda (ICPAU)
Relevant practice exposure Finance, tax, controls & systems Including reconciliations, audit support, reporting, internal controls and finance-system implementation.

How FGL describes authorship: FGL does not use unsupported expert or specialist titles for Ivan. The profile states his actual education, professional study and areas of work experience. Where an article depends on legislation, accounting or auditing standards, court decisions, regulatory guidance or other specialist material, the aim is to identify authoritative sources, distinguish those sources from FGL interpretation, and state uncertainty or limitations where they matter.

Professional profile on LinkedIn → ICPAU → Makerere University Business School →

FGL’s aim is simple: to become a trusted, practical reference point for readers seeking clearer finance, tax and governance decisions.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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

By
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...
1 comment
Read more

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

By
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...
Post a Comment
Read more

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

By
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...
Post a Comment
Read more