By Abdulrasaq Hamzat
As the world evolves, so must our understanding of religious obligations, particularly when their spirit and purpose are already being fulfilled through modern systems.
One such obligation is zakat, the Islamic institution of almsgiving, which has long stood as a pillar of faith and a tool for economic justice.
But in the age of structured national taxation and centralized welfare programs, we must ask, is paying zakat still distinct from paying tax, or has tax become its modern equivalent?
This question is not merely academic, it is deeply practical, especially for millions of Muslims who find themselves burdened with paying both compulsory state taxes and an additional 2.5% of their wealth annually as zakat.
In a context where the tax system already finances public education, health, social welfare, roads, and safety nets, this dual obligation is not only redundant but contradicts the spirit of Islam, which discourages unnecessary hardship and promotes equity.
Zakat was never about ritual alone. It is rooted in the Qur’anic command.
“Take from their wealth a charity by which you purify them and cause them to grow…” (Qur’an 9:103)
The goal is moral and economic purification to circulate wealth, uplift the poor, and strengthen the community. Today, modern governments collect taxes and use them for precisely these ends. So, if the intent and impact of zakat are already achieved through taxation, does it make sense, Islamically or logically to treat tax and zakat as separate obligations?
Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) emphasized ease, not burden.
He said, “Make things easy and do not make them difficult.” (Sahih Bukhari and Muslim)
Mandating both tax and zakat is, in essence, double taxation, a concept unjust in any economic system. Even in Islamic jurisprudence, the principle of maslaha (public interest) allows for flexibility when strict adherence to form undermines justice or utility. Why should a Muslim pay two separate levies, one to the government, another to a religious fund, when both serve the same purpose?
This insistence on separating zakat from tax is akin to insisting that camels must remain the only acceptable form of transport in pilgrimage, despite the availability of aircraft and highways. It’s not modernization that violates Islam; it’s refusing to modernize the application of its values that renders it disconnected from reality.
Reformist thinkers from Muhammad Abduh and Rashid Rida to contemporary scholars like Fazlur Rahman have long advocated for reinterpreting Islamic law in light of new social realities. They understood that form without function becomes empty ritual, and that Islam must remain living and adaptive, not locked in historical constructs.
In this light, it is both theologically sound and morally just to recognize modern taxation as a fulfillment of zakat’s intent. This does not mean abolishing zakat in Muslim majority contexts with no functioning welfare systems, but rather, contextualizing its application where state tax already performs the same function.
Islamic law is not static; it is guided by maqasid al-shari’ah, the higher objectives of the law. These include justice, welfare, ease, and preservation of wealth. In light of these principles, paying zakat on top of an already heavy tax burden serves no divine purpose, it only alienates the faithful by demanding the impractical.
The time has come for Muslim scholars, economists, and policymakers to reconsider the role of zakat in modern state systems.
Just as Islam once revolutionized tribal societies with its principles of fairness and compassion, it must now engage with contemporary systems and institutions with the same visionary boldness.
If zakat is about justice, and tax already delivers that justice, then tax under the right conditions is zakat in spirit, and should be treated as such.
Abdulrazaq Hamzat is a multidimensional analyst, Energy Economics and Executive Director of Foundation for Peace Professionals (PeacePro). He can be reached at discus4now@gmail.com
