• Adedeji dismisses criticism as politically motivated
• NANS mobilises students for nationwide protest
• SPN condemns reforms, urges mass resistance
• CNG alleges deliberate alteration by presidency
• CPPE: Tax reform faces resistance amid reform fatigue, trust deficit

Concerns previously raised over discrepancies between Nigeria’s newly gazetted tax reform laws and the versions passed by the National Assembly have now been reinforced by the release of Certified True Copies (CTCs) by the National Assembly.

The CTCs set out, in clear terms, the provisions approved by lawmakers and provide authoritative documentary evidence of what was transmitted for presidential assent.

The House of Representatives had on Saturday released the CTCs of four tax reform Acts recently signed into law by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, following public concerns over alleged alterations and the circulation of unauthorised versions of the laws.

The four Acts released are the Nigeria Tax Act, 2025; Nigeria Tax Administration Act, 2025; National Revenue Service (Establishment) Act, 2025; and Joint Revenue Board (Establishment) Act, 2025.

House spokesman, Akin Rotimi, who disclosed this in a statement, said the release was ordered by the Speaker of the House and Senate President, Godswill Akpabio. He said the decision followed reports that multiple and conflicting versions of the tax laws were in circulation.

A member of the House of Representatives, Abdulsamad Dasuki, had during a plenary session alleged discrepancies between tax laws passed by the National Assembly and the versions subsequently gazetted and made available to the public.

He said his legislative rights had been breached because the content of the gazetted tax laws did not reflect what lawmakers debated and approved on the floor of the House.

The tax bills were passed by the House in February after months of debates, public hearings, and clause-by-clause consideration, and were later harmonised with the versions passed by the Senate. On June 26, President Bola Tinubu signed the four bills into law.

According to Rotimi, the issue came to light after a member of the House raised a point of privilege over discrepancies noticed in some versions of the Acts. He said the Speaker subsequently directed an internal verification and the immediate public release of the certified documents.

A review by The Guardian of the certified copies alongside the gazetted Acts shows that several controversial provisions currently in force were not contained in the bills passed by the House, lending weight to earlier claims of post-passage alterations. One of the major areas highlighted by the CTCs is Section 3 of the Nigeria Tax Administration Act.

The National Assembly-passed version explicitly assigns the Nigeria Revenue Service responsibility for administering key federal taxes, including taxation of income from petroleum operations and Value Added Tax (VAT). However, these two items do not appear in the gazetted version of the Act.

The omission raised questions about whether the scope of federal tax administration was deliberately narrowed or altered after legislative approval, particularly given the central role of VAT and petroleum taxation in Nigeria’s fiscal framework.

Further discrepancies are evident in Section 29, which governs financial disclosures by banks and other financial institutions. Under the version passed by the National Assembly, institutions were required to submit annual returns, with reporting triggered where cumulative monthly transactions reached N50 million for individuals and N250 million for corporate entities.

The National Assembly version also provided safeguards, including limits on the nature of information to be disclosed and a requirement that additional disclosures be backed by a formal notice.

In contrast, the gazetted Act replaces annual returns with quarterly reporting, lowers the thresholds to N25 million for individuals and N100 million for companies, and removes provisions that allowed taxpayers and institutions to rely on notice-based protections.

The changes significantly expand reporting obligations while narrowing procedural safeguards, a shift now confirmed by the absence of such provisions in the certified copies released by the House. Differences were also confirmed in Section 39, dealing with currency computation for tax purposes.

The National Assembly-passed version allows taxes, including those relating to petroleum operations, to be assessed and paid in the currency of the transaction.

The gazetted version, however, mandates that petroleum-related tax computations be made in United States dollars, a change with implications for compliance costs, foreign exchange exposure, and financial planning for operators in the sector.

Perhaps the most striking validation provided by the CTCs relates to Sections 41(8) and 41(9), which do not appear at all in the House-passed version of the Nigeria Tax Administration Act.

These provisions, introduced in the gazetted law, require taxpayers seeking to appeal decisions of the Tax Appeal Tribunal to deposit 20 per cent of the disputed tax amount as a condition for approaching the High Court, while also formalising a tiered appeal process up to the Supreme Court.

The CTCs also clarify the limits of enforcement authority approved by the House. In Section 60, the version passed by lawmakers allows tax authorities to appoint agents of a taxable person but does not include language permitting such action without an order of the High Court.

Similarly, Section 64 of the Act passed by the lawmakers confines the powers of tax authorities to investigation or the initiation of investigations into possible violations of tax laws.

The gazetted version goes further by introducing arrest powers, authorising tax authorities to effect arrests through law enforcement agencies. These powers are not contained in the certified legislative text.

Discrepancies were also confirmed in the Nigeria Revenue Service (Establishment) Act, particularly in sections dealing with accountability and legislative oversight.

The National Assembly version mandates the submission of quarterly and annual reports to the National Assembly and expressly empowers lawmakers to summon the Executive Chairman or board members on matters of administration, governance, and finance.

These provisions are absent from the gazetted Act, which retains only basic audit requirements. The certified copies also show that broader accountability duties assigned to the Executive Chairman in the NASS version, including the submission of strategic plans and routine reports, were removed before gazettement.

In the Joint Revenue Board of Nigeria (Establishment) Act, the CTCs confirm that lawmakers required officers exercising the board’s powers to be specifically authorised by the board.

The gazetted Act adopts broader language that does not clearly define the source of such authorisation. While the House-passed version lists defined funding sources, the gazetted Act introduces additional contributions from members and removes explicit references to the Consolidated Revenue Fund as a funding source for the Tax Appeal Tribunal and the Office of the Tax Ombudsman.

Adedeji dismisses criticism of tax reforms as politically motivated
However, the Executive Chairman of the Nigeria Revenue Service (NRS), formerly the Federal Inland Revenue Service, Zacch Adedeji, has defended the newly implemented tax reforms, attributing much of the public criticism to political agendas rather than flaws in the law.

Adedeji made the remarks during an interview on Arise TV yesterday, where he sought to clarify key elements of the reforms, including the distinction between income taxes, transactional taxes such as Value Added Tax (VAT), and withholding taxes, which he described as prepaid taxes.

“Many Nigerians pay as you earn. In addition, the banks will collect VAT. They have to fill forms and provide documentation,” he said.

“Transactional taxes, like VAT, apply to everyone irrespective of income. Income taxes focus on earnings. But paying income tax does not exempt you from transactional taxes,” Adedeji added.

He explained that withholding tax was not an additional levy but an advance payment based on transactions. “It is just tax that you’ve paid in advance based on the income you’ve generated. So even if you are on PAYE, you still pay transactional taxes,” he said, stressing that the structure was designed to streamline revenue collection rather than burden citizens.

Addressing concerns about the timing and implementation of the reforms, Adedeji noted that the laws were passed by the National Assembly in June 2025 and were phased in gradually to allow individuals and businesses time to adjust.

“The law has been in effect since June, when the President assented to it. What started on January 1 was simply the implementation of rates after a six-month adjustment period. This is standard practice in Nigerian tax policy,” he said. He also dismissed claims that the reforms could be used to target political opponents ahead of the 2027 general elections.

“The Nigeria Revenue Service is Nigeria, not a Political Revenue Service. There is no way we would do that. We are patriotic civil servants working for the progress and prosperity of Nigeria,” he said. On protests and calls for the suspension of the law, Adedeji warned against what he described as political exploitation of the reforms.

“When people say they want to suspend the law, what will happen to Nigeria? Nobody can suspend the law. You need to see the motive behind these statements,” he said, linking some demonstrations to attempts to frustrate the benefits of the reform.

The NRS chairman said the reforms included measures aimed at easing the tax burden on low-income earners.

“One focus of this bill is to give relief to the poor. More than 95 per cent of the poor are totally exempted. We removed VAT on all food items and transportation,” he said.

“When you look at the net benefit, the poor are the most positively affected by this reform,” he added.

NANS mobilises students for nationwide protest against tax reforms
The National Association of Nigerian Students (NANS) has begun nationwide mobilisation of students to protest the implementation of the new tax laws, declaring January 14, 2026 as a National Day of Action.

The development came amid growing opposition to the tax reforms, with stakeholders including the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) and the minority caucus of the House of Representatives calling for a suspension of their implementation.

Reacting to the Federal Government’s decision to commence implementation of the new tax regime, the President of NANS, Olushola Oladoja, faulted the move to enforce the law from January 1, 2026, despite what he described as unresolved issues in the gazetted version.

In a statement, Oladoja said the decision to proceed was “not only unfortunate but a dangerous precedent for a government that claims commitment to participatory reforms and democratic values”.

The students’ body said it was prepared to resist policies it believed were worsening the economic hardship faced by Nigerian students and their families, adding that students could no longer remain silent while measures that deepened suffering were imposed on the masses.

SPN condemns Tinubu’s tax reforms, urges mass resistance
Also, the Socialist Party of Nigeria (SPN) condemned President Bola Tinubu’s tax reform laws, describing them as a calculated attempt to raise state revenue for looting and the continued servicing of what it called the opulent lifestyle of the political elite, while worsening hardship for workers and the poor.

In a joint statement signed by its Acting National Chairperson, Comrade Bamigboye Abiodun, and National Secretary, Chinedu Bosah, the party rejected the justifications advanced by the Tinubu administration for the reforms, which it said took effect on January 1, 2026.

The SPN argued that taxing workers and the poor under Nigeria’s current economic conditions amounted to double jeopardy and would deepen mass poverty, inequality and suffering across the country.

It dismissed claims by the Federal Government that the new tax laws were intended to generate revenue for investment in education, healthcare and infrastructure, or to reduce poverty and inequality.

The party said similar assurances were given during the removal of fuel subsidy, a policy it said had instead left millions of Nigerians poorer due to rising inflation and a sharply increased cost of living, without meaningful improvements in public services.

Citing what it described as a World Bank–linked assessment, the SPN said more than 60 per cent of Nigerians, over 130 million people, now live in poverty, representing a sharp increase compared with pre-2023 figures.

It added that multidimensional poverty indicators showed severe deprivation in access to healthcare, education, decent housing, clean water and electricity, particularly in rural areas where poverty levels often exceeded 70 per cent.

CNG alleges deliberate alteration of tax laws by presidency
Reacting to the release of the Certified True Copies, the Coordinator of the Coalition of Northern Groups (CNG), Jamilu Charanchi, told The Guardian that the controversy surrounding the tax reform laws was not the result of confusion but a deliberate policy choice by the presidency.

He argued that the reforms were being pushed through without regard for public opinion, insisting that the version being implemented differed from what Nigerians, through their elected representatives, had agreed to.

Charanchi maintained that no bill passed by the National Assembly could become law without presidential assent, stressing that the gazetted version signed by President Bola Tinubu appeared fundamentally different from what lawmakers approved.

According to him, this raised serious questions about whose interests the reforms were designed to serve, adding that the divergence reinforced public suspicion that the process had departed from democratic norms.

He said, “The issue of this tax reform bill is solely something that Tinubu wants to implement, whether Nigeria likes it or not. He’s not doing it for the sake of Nigeria, neither is he doing it for the sake of Nigerians.

“He’s doing it for the sake of himself. We already know that there is no way that a law passed by the National Assembly can become law without being fully signed by the president. And we have seen the one that the president has signed.

“That means President Tinubu is implementing something that is entirely different from what Nigeria agreed on. That is simply to tell you that President Tinubu is not there for Nigerians.

“At the initial stage of this tax reform bill, we raised so many serious questions and allegations that this tax reform bill is not based on the interest of Nigeria.”

CPPE: Tax reform faces resistance amid reform fatigue, trust deficit
Relatedly, the Chief Executive Officer of the Centre for the Promotion of Private Enterprise (CPPE), Dr Muda Yusuf, said the public resistance to the tax reform was not merely the result of poor communication but was rooted in lived experience.

For many Nigerians, he said, past reforms had translated into higher living costs and declining welfare, with little evidence that the sacrifices made resulted in improved public services.

In a statement, Yusuf noted that a weak social contract continued to undermine confidence that additional tax revenues would be transparently and efficiently deployed. With businesses and households still recovering from recent macroeconomic shocks, he said, tolerance for new compliance demands was understandably low.

On paper, he said, the reforms had a sound and progressive framework, aimed at strengthening revenue mobilisation, improving equity, simplifying the tax system and aligning fiscal policy with economic diversification and growth objectives.

However, he warned that good policy design did not automatically guarantee good outcomes. “History offers a sobering lesson: good policy design does not guarantee good outcomes. The ultimate success or failure of Nigeria’s tax reform will depend far less on its legislative provisions and far more on how it is implemented. Without careful sequencing, political sensitivity and economic realism, even well-intentioned reforms can trigger resistance, disrupt livelihoods and further erode public trust,” he said.

Pointing out that the economy was still absorbing the aftershocks of elevated inflation, weakened purchasing power and the adjustment costs of fuel subsidy removal and foreign exchange reforms, Yusuf said most households and businesses were experiencing reform fatigue. This, he added, was compounded by the approach of a politically sensitive pre-election period.