Connect with us

News

Alteration row: Tinubu insists on Jan 1 for new tax regime

Published

on

President Bola Tinubu has insisted that the new tax laws will take effect on January 1, 2026, as planned. This was disclosed in a statement that he personally signed on Tuesday and issued by the State House.

This came as former Vice President Atiku Abubakar and the Peoples Democratic Party slammed the President, describing the move as hasty and insensitive amid ongoing controversies surrounding the alleged alterations to the legislation.

The PUNCH reports that Tinubu, on June 26, 2025, signed the four Tax Reform Bills into law. These laws include the Nigeria Tax Act, the Nigeria Tax Administration Act, the Nigeria Revenue Service Act, and the Joint Revenue Board Act.

The Acts comprehensively overhaul the Nigerian tax landscape to drive economic growth, increase revenue generation, improve the business environment, and enhance effective tax administration across the different levels of government. While some of the laws have gone into effect, others are set to go into effect on January 1.

Tinubu said, “The new tax laws, including those that took effect on June 26, 2025, and the remaining Acts scheduled to commence on January 1, 2026, will continue as planned. These reforms are a once-in-a-generation opportunity to build a fair, competitive, and robust fiscal foundation for our country.

“The tax laws are not designed to raise taxes, but rather to support a structural reset, drive harmonisation, and protect dignity while strengthening the social contract. I urge all stakeholders to support the implementation phase, which is now firmly in the delivery stage.

“Our administration is aware of the public discourse surrounding alleged changes to some provisions of the recently enacted tax laws. No substantial issue has been established that warrants a disruption of the reform process. Absolute trust is built over time through making the right decisions, not through premature, reactive measures.”

The President went on to emphasise his administration’s unwavering commitment to due process and the integrity of enacted laws.

“The Presidency pledges to work with the National Assembly to ensure the swift resolution of any issue identified. I assure all Nigerians that the Federal Government will continue to act in the overriding public interest to ensure a tax system that supports prosperity and shared responsibility,” he asserted.

The PUNCH reported that in recent weeks, there had been allegations of alteration to the gazetted tax reforms. A member of the House of Representatives from Sokoto State, Abdulsamad Dasuki, alleged that the versions of the tax laws gazetted and made public contained provisions never debated or approved by lawmakers. This had sparked calls for the suspension of the implementation of the laws.

Atiku, PDP slam Tinubu

Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar and the Peoples Democratic Party have knocked President Tinubu over his decision to proceed with the enforcement of the amended tax laws from January 1, describing the move as hasty and insensitive amid ongoing controversies surrounding alleged alterations to the legislation.

Atiku, in an exclusive interview with The PUNCH through his media adviser, Paul Ibe, described Tinubu’s insistence on proceeding with the plan despite the alleged alterations as irresponsible.

Similarly, the Tanimu Turaki–led PDP, in a statement issued on Tuesday by its National Publicity Secretary, Ini Ememobong, said the President’s stance demonstrated that he prioritised revenue generation over the welfare of Nigerians.

The President’s stance comes barely four days after the National Assembly directed the re-gazetting of the four tax reform laws following allegations that provisions in the published Official Gazette differ from what lawmakers actually passed.

Atiku said it would be irresponsible for President Tinubu to go ahead with the plan in spite of the public outcry over the alleged alterations.

See also  Big diplomatic overhaul: Tinubu’s 65 envoy picks brace for Senate storm

He stated, “How do we know that nothing substantial was altered? Was there an investigation by the Federal Government or the Presidency? We are only aware that there was an ad hoc committee that had not completed its work. So why would the President go ahead? The President should remember that his mandate is derived from Nigerians. Nigerians have spoken, and they have spoken clearly about how they feel concerning these tax laws.

“As you know, tax laws have a huge impact on people’s lives, and it is only proper that all the processes that have been initiated are exhausted to be sure that this law was duly passed by the National Assembly and assented to by the President without discrepancies. Otherwise, it amounts to forgery. And that, by the way, is the character of this administration. It appears that forgery has become a state policy, to the extent that even a tax law— a so-called reform meant to improve tax administration in Nigeria—already has serious issues even before implementation.

“Sadly, it appears that the Senate President and the President are working in concert to ensure that Nigerians do not even have the benefit of this particular document. What was signed and gazetted? There are supposed to be three copies: one with the Presidency, one with the Supreme Court, and one with the National Assembly. Why is it difficult to produce any of these documents so that Nigerians can independently determine what happened and whether the allegations are true? It is not the responsibility of the Presidency to dismiss these concerns. Doing so represents the height of irresponsibility, to say the least.

“If the President goes ahead with its implementation, I want to say clearly that this is an act of irresponsibility. It reflects elements of dictatorship and follows the same pattern of state capture. I do not know what this administration is trying to achieve, but I do not think it is the right thing to do. He must understand that there are consequences for actions and inactions.”

On its part, the PDP reiterated that Nigerians are calling for a comprehensive probe into the irregularity, insisting on clarity about who carried out the alleged illegal insertion and the process through which it occurred.

It also decried what he described as the Tinubu administration’s tendency, since assuming office in 2023, to place revenue considerations above the welfare and well-being of Nigerians.

PDP stated, “Rather than address these issues comprehensively, the Presidency has consciously minimised them and instead vehemently insisted that the commencement date must stand, despite the discrepancies. This disposition clearly shows where the priority of the government lies, between Nigerians and money.

“This Tinubu Presidency has always prioritised finance over the welfare and well-being of Nigerians from its inception in 2023, as evidenced by the reckless way it announced and implemented the removal of subsidy, which immediately impacted the economy of the country and caused ordinary Nigerians to suffer irreparable economic damage.

“In this instance, the President should remember that he is an employee of the people and, therefore, should listen to his employers. He should also remember that he won with less than 40 per cent of the votes in the elections that gave him the job, and should therefore recognise that listening to Nigerians must be a primary duty of his administration, rather than serving the narrow interests of people around him.

See also  Lagos bond subscription hits N310bn

“Mr President is reminded that a responsible PDP administration in 2012 listened to the cries of Nigerians and civil society organisations (where he played a prominent role during the protests) against the removal of fuel subsidy, in deference to the voices of Nigerians.”

PDP emphasised that the interests of Nigerians should be the top priority for the President and the Federal Government. It continued, “Consequently, we reiterate our earlier call for the suspension of the commencement date of the Tax Act, pending the conclusion of a thorough investigation. Obedience to laws in a democracy is directly linked to the belief that elected legislators have deliberated upon and approved them.

“A mere suspicion, let alone a confirmed fact, that unapproved sections have been smuggled into a law with the capacity to affect all Nigerians, is sufficient reason to suspend its commencement. The President must act in favour of the people of this country; to do otherwise is a clear confirmation that money, not the people, is the priority.”

The controversy erupted on December 17, 2025, when a House of Representatives member, Abdussamad Dasuki, raised a matter of privilege in the House, alleging that gazetted tax laws available to the public “differed materially” from versions debated, harmonized, and approved by the National Assembly.

Dasuki warned that the alleged alterations posed “serious legal and constitutional risks,” noting they were “not backed by any constitutional framework and could threaten Nigeria’s democratic order.”

Specific concerns included alien provisions such as coercive and fiscal powers, including arrest powers, power to garnish without court order, compulsory USD computation, and appeal security deposits, that allegedly appeared in gazetted copies without legislative approval.

On December 26, the National Assembly leadership jointly directed the Clerk to the National Assembly to re-gazette the Acts and issue Certified True Copies of versions “duly passed by both chambers.”

House spokesman Akin Rotimi described the directive as “an administrative step intended solely to authenticate and accurately reflect the legislative decisions of the National Assembly.”

“This review is strictly confined to institutional processes and procedures. It does not constitute, imply, or concede any defect in the exercise of legislative authority by the House of Representatives or the Senate,” Rotimi stated.

An Ad Hoc Committee chaired by Muktar Betara (APC, Borno) was established to investigate the allegations and reconstruct “the sequence of events” around passage, presidential assent, and gazetting.

Several opposition figures and bodies have called for the suspension of the January 1 implementation pending the resolution of the controversy.

Atiku had described any alteration as “an act of treason against the Nigerian people,” while former Senate Leader Ali Ndume urged President Tinubu on December 25 to suspend implementation “amid claims and counterclaims.”

The Nigeria Labour Congress, Nigerian Bar Association, and 2023 Labour Party presidential candidate Peter Obi have all demanded a halt to the commencement date until the matter is resolved.

Presidential Fiscal Policy and Tax Reforms Committee Chairman Taiwo Oyedele had briefed the President in Lagos, assuring him that implementation would proceed as planned.

“The plan to commence the new law, the two remaining new laws on the first of January 2026, will go ahead as planned, on schedule, because these reforms are designed to provide relief to the Nigerian people,” Oyedele told journalists on Friday.

He emphasised that “the bottom 98 per cent of workers will see either no pay tax or lower taxes to be paid. Small businesses, 97 per cent of them, will be exempted from corporate income tax, VAT, withholding tax, and large businesses will see a drop in the taxes that they paid.”

See also  Israel accuses Hamas of breaching truce

NBA, ACF react

The President of the Nigerian Bar Association, Afam Osigwe (SAN), and the Arewa Consultative Forum also raised concerns over Tinubu’s insistence on implementing the new tax laws from January 1, 2026, citing unresolved controversies surrounding the authenticity of the legislation.

Reacting, Osigwe said there were critical distinctions that must be made regarding the implementation of the tax laws. According to him, if the President’s decision is to implement “the authentic law as passed by the National Assembly, which has no controversy of having been doctored or tampered with,” then the President would be right.

He explained that the NBA’s call was not for the suspension of the tax laws in general, but specifically for any version alleged to have been altered after passage by the National Assembly. “It is a suspension of the tax law that is alleged to be tainted with additions, modifications, and deletions of some provisions, which in our opinion would be a subversion of the will of the people as expressed by the legislature,” he said.

Osigwe added that if the President intended to implement the actual tax laws passed by the National Assembly, which its leadership had directed the Clerk to certify in line with the provisions of the Tax Authentication Act, then the basis for the NBA’s call for suspension would no longer exist. “If that is the law to be implemented effective January 1st, then we would not ask that the implementation be suspended,” he said.

However, he warned that implementing a version different from what was passed by the National Assembly would justify calls for suspension. “So it depends on what version of the law is being sought to be implemented,” Osigwe stated.

Similarly, the ACF faulted the January 2026 implementation timeline. Speaking in Kaduna on Tuesday, the ACF National Publicity Secretary, Prof Tukur Muhammad-Baba, described the President’s stance as unfortunate, noting that the controversies surrounding the Tax Reform Bills had yet to be resolved.

“The development is unfortunate, as the President ought to respond to the various controversies that the Tax Reform Bills have thrown up. The complaints being raised are critical and legitimate,” Muhammad-Baba said.

He noted that Nigerians were particularly worried about discrepancies between what the National Assembly passed and the version of the laws that was eventually gazetted. “What the citizens want to know is exactly what the National Assembly passed and why there is a difference with the gazetted version. It is a fundamental credibility and integrity issue that must be addressed and resolved,” he added.

Muhammad-Baba said there were indications that the National Assembly had begun looking into the matter and stressed that due process should be allowed to run its course. “The process must be allowed to go through in the interest of the nation as a whole, as it affects all citizens who are critical stakeholders in the Nigerian project,” he said.

He further disclosed that the ACF leadership was reviewing the situation and would announce its official position in the coming days. Recalling earlier debates on the tax laws, he said the ACF had made critical recommendations that were incorporated into the versions passed by the National Assembly.

“It is disappointing to see those efforts being wasted, as it now appears. This is not the way to run a democracy,” he concluded.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

News

Reps order IG to produce fake, PFIPC agency DG Adeyemi within 48 hours

Published

on

The House of Representatives Committee investigating the operations of the controversial Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council has directed the Inspector-General of Police, Olatunji Disu, to produce the self-acclaimed Director-General of the organisation, Adeyemi Adeniyi, before it on Wednesday.

The directive was issued on Monday during the resumed investigative hearing at the National Assembly Complex, Abuja.

Representing the IG, Assistant Commissioner of Police, Bashir Abdullahi, appeared before the committee and was instructed to ensure Adeyemi’s appearance by noon on Wednesday to assist lawmakers in their ongoing investigation into the activities of the organisation.

The committee is probing the circumstances under which the PFIPC, despite not being legally established, allegedly secured office accommodation in Phase III of the Federal Secretariat Complex in Abuja and received a budgetary allocation of ₦1.32bn in the 2026 Appropriation Act.

The directive followed the Nigeria Police Force’s confirmation of key aspects of its criminal investigation, including petitions from the Office of the Chief of Staff to the President alleging that Adeyemi fraudulently presented himself as the Director-General of both the Presidential Economic Advisory Council and the Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council.

The Committee Chairman, Yusuf Gagdi, said Adeyemi’s appearance had become imperative given the seriousness of the allegations and the institutions implicated in the matter.

“This committee clearly needs the suspected DG to appear before this committee. People’s names are involved. People’s integrity are involved. Institutional names are involved. Institutional integrity is involved.

“It is not an option now. We will need him here to confirm some documents to us in such a way that will not undermine our investigation to enable us to submit our report on time,” Gagdi said.

See also  Tinubu reinstates Fubara after Emergency Rule

The committee subsequently directed its clerk to formally communicate its resolution to the Inspector-General of Police.

“The committee hereby resolves that the Inspector-General of Police of the Federal Republic of Nigeria do kindly present Mr Adeyemi on Wednesday by 12 noon. That is the ruling of the committee,” Gagdi declared.

Earlier, ACP Abdullahi informed lawmakers that although investigations were ongoing, the police had already filed an eight-count charge against Adeyemi before the Federal High Court.

“The Nigerian Police Force investigated part of this case late last year and filed eight-count charges before a Federal High Court. The case is ongoing,” he said.

He disclosed that the suspect had been arrested and arraigned, but cautioned against making public disclosures that could prejudice the ongoing investigation or judicial proceedings.

“We don’t want to say things that are under investigation. It is definitely going to prejudice the ongoing investigation and make people have opinions that may prejudge the outcome of an investigation or judicial decision,” Abdullahi stated.

Despite the police’s reservations, the committee sought confirmation of documentary evidence already in its possession.

The police confirmed that on October 17, 2025, the Office of the Chief of Staff to the President petitioned security agencies over allegations against Adeyemi, prompting investigations that culminated in criminal charges bordering on conspiracy and fraud.

Investigators also confirmed receiving another petition alleging that Adeyemi falsely presented himself as the Director-General of both the Presidential Economic Advisory Council and the Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council.

According to the police, the petition alleged that Adeyemi used the purported office to obtain accommodation within the Federal Secretariat, sought approval to recruit about 300 personnel, attempted to secure a $1.3 billion allocation in the 2026 Appropriation Act for the non-existent agency, and planned to organise a World Investment Summit under the platform of the purported council.

See also  US begins partial visa ban on Nigerians January 1

One of the highlights of the hearing came when the committee compared signatures on documents allegedly issued from the Office of the Chief of Staff to the President with signatures on authentic official correspondence obtained by the police.

When asked whether the signatures matched, the police witness responded unequivocally,”They are not the same.”

The committee said the discrepancy reinforced concerns that official State House documents may have been forged.

Gagdi further asked, “So, it is not only a letter that was suspected to be forged? We are dealing with documents that include what is said to be a forged Act of the National Assembly in an attempt to establish a fake agency,” he added.

Gagdi disclosed that investigators had identified about 29 allegedly forged documents, including purported approvals from the State House, the Office of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation, the Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, the Ministry of Finance and several other government institutions.

According to him, representatives of many of the affected agencies had already appeared before the committee and disowned the documents attributed to their offices.

Gagdi, however, stressed that the committee had deliberately avoided compelling the police to disclose information that could compromise ongoing criminal investigations.

“We are avoiding a situation whereby they will be pushed to make statements that will undermine their ongoing investigation,” he added.

He assured that the House investigation would continue independently and that its final report could recommend further action by relevant security agencies.

punch.ng

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

See also  Hundreds still missing after Boko Haram attack in Borno

Continue Reading

News

Forged state house letter used to create fake PFIPC agency, Acct-General reveals

Published

on

The House of Representatives’ investigation into the operations of the controversial Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council took a dramatic turn on Monday after the Accountant-General of the Federation, Shamseldeen Ogunjimi, revealed that a forged State House letter was used to obtain official government recognition for the ‘fake’ agency.

Appearing before the House Ad Hoc Committee probing the circumstances surrounding the establishment and operations of the council, Ogunjimi disclosed that the Office of the Accountant-General acted on what appeared to be an authentic correspondence from the presidency requesting the creation of an administrative code for the PIFPC, only for investigations to later establish that the letter did not originate from the State House.

The revelation is the latest in a series of disclosures before the committee, which is investigating how a non-existent presidential agency allegedly secured office accommodation in the Federal Secretariat, sought budgetary allocations, recruited personnel and obtained official government recognition through what investigators believe were forged documents.

Presenting his report, Ogunjimi said the Office of the Accountant-General first interacted with the purported council in November 2024.

According to him, “a letter dated November 7, 2024, bearing a State House reference number, requested the creation of an administrative code for the Presidential Economic Advisory Council to facilitate budgeting, accounting and financial reporting.”

He explained that, in line with established procedures, “the Office of the Accountant-General processed the request, created the administrative code and communicated its approval to the State House,” with a copy sent to the Office of the Auditor-General for the Federation.

See also  ASUU protest rocks campuses ahead of FG talks

Following that approval, the office received additional requests from the purported council, including applications for self-accounting status, deployment of personnel, opening of Treasury Single Account and domiciliary accounts, as well as funding approvals.

Ogunjimi, however, stressed that although some administrative processes were carried out, no public funds were ever released to the council.

“It is important to note that no funds were released under salaries, overhead, capital, or any form of intervention or special allocation to the council,” Ogunjimi told the committee.

He further disclosed that while the council requested an establishment grant of ₦27.4bn, the application was rejected because there was no budgetary provision for such expenditure.

The Accountant-General also explained that although the Central Bank of Nigeria opened two domiciliary accounts for the organisation to receive inflows, the accounts never became operational because the council failed to satisfy the regulatory conditions required for their activation.

Lawmakers expressed concern over how the purported agency was able to navigate several layers of government bureaucracy without raising suspicion.

Responding, Ogunjimi made what committee members described as one of the most significant revelations of the hearing.

“The letter that was received by the Treasury was respectfully addressed as coming from the State House. That letter was never issued by the State House”, he said

The disclosure prompted members of the committee to conclude that a “hijacked” State House letter had allegedly been used to mislead government institutions into processing official requests for an agency that had no legal existence.

The committee also questioned how civil servants originally posted to the Office of the Chief Economic Adviser to the President eventually became attached to the purported council without the knowledge of the Office of the Accountant-General.

See also  ICPC disowns viral ₦50bn bribe video, warns of legal action

Ogunjimi explained that two officers deployed to the Office of the Chief Economic Adviser in 2010 and 2013 remained in the office after it was allegedly taken over by the new council, but no formal communication was sent to the treasury notifying it of any change.

“It was never assumed or written to us that those two officers were being taken over. The staff also never reported to the office to say that another council had taken over the office and the name had changed. As far as I was concerned, we were dealing with a new agency, not the Office of the Chief Economic Adviser,” he said.

He further disclosed that when the purported council later requested the deployment of five additional officers, the treasury approved only three after determining that the organisation’s size did not justify the number requested.

“It was when all this matter came to light that I got to know that two of our staff were actually working or being absorbed by the agency. We never knew. We believed, based on the records available to us, that those officers were still with the Office of the Chief Economic Adviser,” he added.

The ongoing House investigation centres on allegations that forged presidential approvals, counterfeit State House correspondence, fake Acts of the National Assembly and other falsified government documents were used to create and operate the purported Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council and the Presidential Economic Advisory Council.

The committee has already heard evidence from the Nigeria Police Force, which confirmed that criminal charges bordering on conspiracy and fraud have been filed against the prime suspect, Adeyemi Adeniyi, at the Federal High Court.

See also  Hundreds still missing after Boko Haram attack in Borno

At its sitting on Monday, the committee also directed the Inspector-General of Police to produce Adeyemi before lawmakers by noon on Wednesday to answer questions relating to the alleged forgery of official government documents and the operations of the purported presidential agency.

The committee is expected to conclude its investigation with recommendations on possible administrative, legislative and criminal actions against those found culpable.

punch.ng

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

Continue Reading

News

See full list of African countries that do not need proof of funds for UK’s student visa

Published

on

The United Kingdom on Monday updated its financial requirements for applicants seeking Student and Child Student visas, retaining stricter evidence rules while exempting nationals of only three African countries from submitting proof of funds at the point of application.

The updated guidance, published by the UK government on its website, listed Botswana, Mauritius and Tunisia as the only African countries whose nationals will not be required to provide financial evidence upfront unless requested during the visa decision-making process.

Other countries on the exemption list include Australia, Canada, China, Japan, New Zealand, Singapore, the United States, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar, among others.

Despite the exemption, the UK clarified that applicants from the listed countries must still meet all financial requirements and could be asked to provide evidence during the application process.

The guidance stated, “You must meet the financial requirements for this route when you apply; however, you may not need to submit evidence upfront as part of your application. In these circumstances, the decision maker may still request the evidence from you during the application process to prove you meet the financial requirements.”

The development means applicants from major African source countries for UK education, including Nigeria, Ghana, Kenya, South Africa, Egypt and others not listed, will continue to submit financial documents as part of their visa applications.

Under the revised rules, applicants for a Student visa must demonstrate they have sufficient funds to cover tuition fees as stated on their Confirmation of Acceptance for Studies and living expenses.

See also  Is Trump correct on Nigeria?

Students studying outside London are required to show they have £1,171 for each month of their course, up to a maximum of nine months, while those studying in London must show £1,529 per month for the same period.

Applicants travelling with dependants must also show additional funds. Those studying outside London must have £680 per month for each dependant, while applicants studying in London must show £845 monthly for each dependant, both for up to nine months.

For Child Student visa applicants, the required maintenance funds vary depending on their living arrangements, including boarding school accommodation, foster care, residence with parents or legal guardians, or independent living for eligible 16 and 17-year-olds.

The UK government also outlined acceptable sources of funds, including government-backed student loans, official financial sponsorship, personal savings and money belonging to parents or eligible partners.

However, it said applicants cannot rely on overdrafts, cryptocurrency holdings, stocks and shares, pensions or funds kept in unregulated financial institutions.

The guidance further requires applicants using personal or family funds to show that the required amount has been held for at least 28 consecutive days before the application, with financial evidence dated no more than 31 days before submission.

The UK also maintained exemptions from providing financial evidence for certain categories of applicants, including those applying to extend their stay after spending at least 12 months in the country on a valid visa, Student Union Sabbatical Officers, doctors and dentists in training, and applicants whose nationality qualifies for the reduced documentary requirement.

The latest update comes as the UK continues to tighten oversight of its international student visa system while maintaining financial eligibility requirements for prospective students seeking to study in the country.

See also  Israel accuses Hamas of breaching truce

punch.ng

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

Continue Reading

Trending