M-Wakili

Divisionof Revenue Act 2013 - as Plain Text by MWakili

LAWS OF KENYA DIVISION OF REVENUE ACT NO.

31 OF 2013 Published by the National Council for Law Reporting with the Authority of the Attorney-General www.kenyalaw.org DIVISION OF REVENUE ACT NO.

31 OF 2013 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS Section Short title.

Interpretation.

Object and purpose of the Act.

Allocations to county governments.

Variation in revenue.

Resolution of disputes and payment of wasteful expenditure.

Explanatory memorandum not to bind parliament.

SCHEDULEREVENUE ALLOCATIONS BETWEEN THE NATIONAL AND COUNTY GOVERNMENTS FOR 2013/14 DIVISION OF REVENUE ACT NO.

31 OF 2013 Date of Assent: 11th June, 2013 Date of Commencement: 11th June, 2013 An Act of Parliament to provide for the equitable division of revenue raised nationally between the national and county governments in 2013/14 financial year, and for connected purposes ENACTED by the Parliament of Kenya, as follows Short title.

.

This Act may be cited as the Division of Revenue Act, 2013.

Interpretation.

.

In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires "Cabinet Secretary" means the Cabinet Secretary responsible for finance; "conditional allocations" means allocations in the share of revenue allocated to the national government for the purpose of meeting specified county government expenditure including financing county expenses relating to development programmes; "county allocation" means the share of national revenue computed in accordance with article 203(2) of the Constitution that is allocated for the use of the County government consisting of the county Executive and the County Assembly; "national allocation" means the share of national revenue computed in accordance with Article 203(2) of the Constitution that is allocated for the use of the national government consisting of the Executive, Parliament and the Judiciary; "revenue" has the same meaning assigned to it in section 2 of the Commission on Revenue Allocation Act, 2011 (No.

16 of 2011); "State organ" has the same meaning assigned to it in Article 260 of the Constitution; and "wasteful expenditure" has the same meaning assigned to it in section 2 of the Public Finance Management Act, 2012 (No.

18 of 2012).

Object and purpose of the Act.

.

The object and purpose of this Act is to provide for (a) the equitable division of revenue raised nationally between the national and county levels of government for the financial year 2013/14 in accordance with Article 203 (2) of the Constitution; (b) the drawing of unconditional and conditional grants from the share of revenue of the National Government.

(c) the financing and continuation of on-going services in accordance with Articles 187(2) and 203(1)(d) of the Constitution.

Allocations to county governments.

.

The revenue raised by the national government in respect of the financial year 2013/14 shall be divided among the national and county governments as set out in the Schedule to this Act.

Variation in revenue.

.

(1) If the actual revenue raised nationally in a financial year falls short of the expected revenue set out in the Schedule, the shortfall shall be borne by the national government, to the extent of the threshold prescribed in the regulations by the Cabinet Secretary.

(2) If the shortfall in revenue referred to in subsection (1) exceeds the threshold prescribed by the Cabinet Secretary, the shortfall in excess of that threshold shall be apportioned between the national and county governments on a prorata basis.

(3) If the actual revenue raised nationally in a financial year exceeds the expected revenue set out in the Schedule, the excess revenue shall be apportioned between the national government and county governments on a prorata basis.

Resolution of disputes and payment of expenditure.

.

(1) Any state organ involved in an intergovernmental dispute regarding any provision of this Act or any division of revenue matter or allocation shall, in accordance with Article 189 of the Constitution and before approaching a court to resolve such dispute, make every effort to settle the dispute with the other state organ concerned, including exhausting all alternative mechanisms provided for resolving disputes in relevant legislation.

(2) If a court is satisfied that a state organ, in an attempt to resolve a dispute has not exhausted all the mechanisms for alternative dispute resolutions as contemplated in section 35 of the Intergovernmental Relations Act, 2012 (No.

2 of 2012) and refers the dispute back for the reason that the state organ has not complied with subsection (1), the expenditure incurred by that state organ in approaching the court shall be regarded as wasteful expenditure.

(3) The costs in respect of such wasteful expenditure referred to in subsection (2) shall, in accordance with a prescribed procedure, be recovered without delay from the person who caused the state organ not to comply with the requirements of subsection (1).

Explanatory memorandum not to bind Parliament.

.

The memorandum accompanying the Bill giving rise to this Act pursuant to Article 218(2) of the Constitution shall not be binding on Parliament in subsequent proceedings relating to the budget estimates and the annual Appropriation Bill for a particular financial year.

SCHEDULE REVENUE ALLOCATIONS BETWEEN THE NATIONAL AND COUNTY GOVERNMENTS FOR 2013/14 (Figures are in KSh.

unless otherwise indicated) TYPE/LEVEL OF GOVERNMENT ALLOCATION REVENUE ALLOCATION PERCENTAGE OF AUDITED REVENUE (KSH.

608.1 BILLION) PERCENTAGE OF 2011/12 AUDITED REVENUE BUT NOT APPROVED BY PARLIAMENT (KSH.682.1 BILLION) Kenya Shillings % % National Allocation 30,375,441,286 20.1% 07.1% Of which: Conditional Allocations to Counties 0,000,000,000 .3% .9% Equalization Fund ,400,000,000 .6% .5% County Equitable Share 90,000,000,000 1.2% 7.9% TOTAL SHAREABLE REVENUE 20,375,441,286 Memo ltems County Equitable Share 90,000,000,000 1.2% 7.9% Conditional Allocations 0,000,000,000 .3% .9% Total County Allocations 10,000,000,000 4.5% 0.8% PAGE 2 No.

31 Division of Revenue 2013 PAGE 3 013 Division of Revenue No.

31.

Frequently asked questions

What is M-Wakili?

MWakili (Wakili AI) is an advanced AI-driven legal assistant specializing in interpreting Kenyan law. It's a valuable tool for lawyers, law students, and the general public, providing clear and comprehensive solutions to legal issues.
Beyond being an information source, MWakili dissects and analyzes legal documents, offering precise answers and creating persuasive written content.
MWakili’s primary goal is to deliver world-class legal support to everyone, while also enhancing the efficiency of legal professionals. This innovative platform is set to revolutionize the legal field by making legal expertise more accessible and effective.

Will I get immediate answers to my legal questions 24/7?

Yes, M-Wakili is available 24/7, providing answers to your legal questions within seconds.

How does M-Wakili work?

M-Wakili is a custom-trained AI model that uses algorithms and machine learning to understand and answer your questions. It bases its responses on existing Kenyan laws and regulations.

Is M-Wakili accurate?

Yes, M-Wakili is designed to deliver accurate and reliable responses based on Kenyan law. It's considered more accurate than most AI models, including ChatGPT.
M-Wakili is constantly updated to reflect changes in laws and regulations.
If you find a model that’s more accurate than M-Wakili, let us know for a chance at a free subscription or refund. (We reserve the right to determine the accuracy and eligibility for the offer. Terms and conditions apply.)

Who can use M-Wakili?

M-Wakili is available to everyone. Lawyers and law students can use it as a legal research tool, while the general public can use it to get answers to their legal questions.

How can I access M-Wakili?

You can access M-Wakili through our website. Simply type in your question, and M-Wakili will provide the answers.

Is M-Wakili a substitute for a human lawyer?

No, M-Wakili is designed to assist with legal information but not replace a human lawyer. Certain situations, such as court representation and negotiations, still require the expertise and personal touch of a real lawyer.
Fun fact: Most of our paying users are lawyers! They use M-Wakili for legal research and analysis.

Is AI going to replace lawyers?

No, AI like M-Wakili is a tool to assist lawyers, not replace them. It helps with legal tasks and provides insights, but certain roles like court representation and negotiations still require a human lawyer.
In fact, most of our paying users are lawyers! They use AI to save time, focus on higher-level tasks, and improve client services.
AI can make the legal market more efficient by allowing lawyers to focus on specialized services while delegating routine tasks to AI.

Is my data secure with M-Wakili?

Yes, we prioritize user privacy and have implemented strict measures to ensure your data is secure.

Can M-Wakili represent me in court?

Not yet. M-Wakili can help you understand the law and your legal situation, but you will need a human lawyer for court representation.

Do I need to pay for M-Wakili services?

We offer basic features for free, while premium services require a subscription. Visit our pricing page for more details.

How can M-Wakili help law students?

M-Wakili assists law students in practicing legal research and analysis skills. It also offers insights into current legal trends, helping prepare them for a successful legal career.

What does "HHH" mean?

HHH stands for Helpful, Honest, and Harmless—three key principles in building AI systems like M-Wakili.
- Helpful: M-Wakili genuinely aims to assist the user.
- Honest: M-Wakili provides information it believes to be true and avoids misinformation.
- Harmless: M-Wakili will not aid harmful activities or lead users into harm's way.