Why Pay Twice? Truedare Contract Duplicates ICUMS Modules

When Parliament approved a new “AI-driven digital customs tracking” agreement between the Ghana Revenue Authority (GRA) and a little-known Cyprus-registered firm, Truedare Investments Limited, the deal was presented as fresh technology to plug leakages at the ports and modernise revenue mobilisation. MPs were told this new platform would track the contents of imported containers in real time, strengthen valuation and classification, enhance pre- and post-arrival audit, and, crucially, “complement” the existing Integrated Customs Management System (ICUMS) at no additional cost to the state.
Strip away the talking points, and a different picture emerges. Technically, the government is wrong. The functions being advertised for Truedare are not a fundamentally new system Ghana currently lacks; they are precisely the kind of modules and analytics that already exist – or can be natively configured – within ICUMS. By choosing to bolt on an external platform instead of fully exploiting the one it has, the government is creating duplication, adding hidden costs, and undermining the single-window reform it spent years defending.
To understand why this matters, it helps to recall what ICUMS actually is. Rolled out nationally in 2020, ICUMS was not just another piece of port software; it was Ghana’s flagship single-window customs and trade-facilitation platform, designed to replace the GCNet and WestBlue regime and end the era of multiple, overlapping systems at the ports. Official documentation and trade-facilitation partners describe ICUMS as an end-to-end platform that captures all customs-related data, from manifest and bill of lading through declaration, valuation and classification, risk channeling, inspection outcomes and release. It maintains historical transaction records and audit trails of every change and approval. It has a configurable risk-management engine that assigns consignments to various lanes based on rules and profiles. It supports post-clearance audit and investigation workflows. It links other border agencies into the same environment.
In other words, ICUMS is exactly the sort of data-rich, transaction-heavy backbone on which “AI” and advanced analytics are supposed to run. An AI-driven customs audit solution is not, in technical terms, a parallel universe. It is a layer of models and algorithms that sits on top of a system like ICUMS, ingests the data it already stores and feeds alerts and risk scores back into the same workflows that customs officers use every day.
That is why the core justification for Truedare – that ICUMS “does not have a model” to do AI audit – is so problematic. It conflates a platform’s capability with a policy choice. The truth is that the architecture and core modules required for AI-driven audit, investigation, and digital tracking are already in ICUMS. The missing piece is not a new foreign system; it is the decision to configure, resource, and use the intelligence modules Ghana has paid for.
The profile of the new partner only sharpens the concern. Corporate filings from Cyprus show that Truedare Investments Limited is a private company incorporated on 28 December 2024, with a declared object of “general trade” and issued share capital of just EUR 1,545. Two individual shareholders based in the EU now own all its shares after the exit of an earlier Cypriot corporate shareholder, and there are no registered charges or mortgages on its assets. For a vehicle this new and thinly capitalised, being plugged directly into Ghana’s customs data spine is a significant elevation. That may be acceptable if there is a strong public record of relevant technical experience, but no such track record has been laid before the public. Investors and businesses are therefore left to take on trust that a small offshore company will deliver a national-scale AI audit at the ports better than a properly configured ICUMS module could.
Then there is the money. In Parliament, the Truedare arrangement was promoted as coming at “no additional cost to the state.” After Ghana’s recent experience with Strategic Mobilisation Limited (SML), that phrase should set off alarms, not applause. SML’s fuel and revenue-assurance contracts were initially framed as performance-based arrangements that would not weigh on the budget. The Office of the Special Prosecutor later documented payments exceeding GH¢1.4 billion to SML under multi-year deals that bypassed key safeguards and, in crucial respects, could not be justified by the value independently verified.
Economically, there is no mystery. If the Treasury is not paying upfront, someone else is. That “someone” is almost always the trading community and, by extension, households. A contract that is invisible in the fiscal tables can still drive up per-container or per-transaction fees, or channel a share of incremental collections to the vendor, increasing logistics and compliance costs that eventually filter into prices. For a business readership, the notion that a new digital customs contract is truly free to the economy should be treated with scepticism.
At the operational level, the Truedare move also risks reopening a system architecture that Ghana only recently stabilised. The point of ICUMS was to give customs officers, freight forwarders, shipping lines and agents one primary front-end to work with, reducing interface fatigue and confusion. Adding another major system for tracking and AI audit creates exactly the kind of split workflows and finger-pointing that the single-window reform was supposed to solve. Two dashboards, two sets of alerts, and two vendors in the same enforcement chain make it easier for problems to fall between the cracks and harder to assign responsibility when something goes wrong.
For investors, this is not just a technical story. The way Ghana handles contracts like Truedare is part of the broader policy-risk equation. A digital revenue architecture anchored on a single, well-governed platform like ICUMS sends one signal: that the state understands platform risk, will protect its own data spine, and will insist on integration rather than fragmentation. A competing architecture in which new offshore vendors are periodically bolted on around that spine, to perform functions that could be achieved by enhancing the core system, sends a very different signal: that long-term concessions are not as stable as they look, and that revenue-linked contracts can proliferate even when the technical case is weak.
The charitable reading of the government’s stance is that it feels under pressure to tackle leakages and sees AI as a quick route to smarter enforcement. There is no doubt that mis-declaration, under-valuation, and routing games remain a real problem, and that data science has a role to play in uncovering patterns that human auditors might miss. But the harder work lies inside Customs itself: building an internal risk-governance and analytics function that owns the rules and models inside ICUMS, constantly refines them based on intelligence, and ensures they are embedded into daily operations. That is institutional reform, not contract management.
This is why the decision to bring in Truedare in the way the government has done is a misstep. It misdiagnoses the problem as a lack of systems rather than a lack of resolve to use existing systems fully. It weakens the logic of the single window by positioning a second platform in a space that an ICUMS module should occupy. It obscures the true cost of digital revenue contracts behind the convenient phrase “no cost to the state.” And it complicates investor assessments of Ghana’s digital governance at a time when the country is urgently trying to rebuild fiscal credibility.
Ghana does not need a new external “AI customs system” beside ICUMS to fix enforcement at the ports. It needs to switch on, strengthen and properly oversee the AI-ready modules the country has already bought, and where truly necessary, procure specific analytics tools to plug directly into them. In bringing in Truedare to perform work that should sit as part of ICUMS, the government is not modernising its architecture; it is running around it.