The minority caucus of the 10th House of Representatives says it has uncovered what it described as illegal alterations in the gazetted copies of Nigeria’s tax reform laws.
In a statement, Afam Ogene, who chairs the seven-member committee set up by the caucus to investigate the issue, said a review of the Acts showed that multiple versions of the laws are currently in circulation.
The controversy began after AbdulSamad Dasuki, a lawmaker, alleged that there were differences between the tax laws passed by the national assembly and the versions later gazetted and made available to the public.
The allegation triggered public concern, with some Nigerians calling for the suspension of the implementation of the tax laws until the discrepancies are resolved.
Following the outcry, the leadership of the Senate and the House of Representatives directed the Clerk of the 10th National Assembly to work with relevant executive agencies to re-gazette the laws to ensure accuracy and consistency.
The laws in question are: the Nigeria Tax Act, 2025; the Nigeria Tax Administration Act, 2025; the Joint Revenue Board of Nigeria (Establishment) Act, 2025; and the Nigeria Revenue Service (Establishment) Act, 2025.
Subsequently, the House of Representatives released certified copies of the laws for public examination.
Ogene said the decision by the leadership of both chambers to order a re-gazetting exercise was a clear sign that there were procedural irregularities in the earlier versions that went beyond the authority of the National Assembly.
He explained that the Minority Leader of the House, Kingsley Chinda, constituted the investigative committee to thoroughly examine what he described as a serious legislative scandal. According to Ogene, the committee is made up of lawmakers drawn from the six geopolitical zones, including Aliyu Garu, Stanley Adedeji, Ibe Osonwa, Marie Ebikake, Shehu Fagge, and Gaza Jonathan.
He said early findings from a comparison of the certified true copies issued by the house and the gazetted versions showed clear alterations, particularly in the Nigeria Tax Administration Act.
Ogene stated that three different versions of the law were found to be in circulation, with noticeable discrepancies between the version passed by parliament and the one published in the official gazette.
He pointed out that under section 29(1), the version approved by the national assembly set the tax compliance reporting threshold at ₦50 million for individuals and N100 million for companies, while the gazetted version reduced the threshold for individuals to ₦25 million and altered that of companies. According to him, this change amounted to an unlawful expansion of the tax net, and an attempt by the Executive to undermine the Legislative authority of the 10th National Assembly.
Ogene also said the gazetted version introduced new provisions under section 41 that require taxpayers to deposit 20 percent of disputed tax amounts before appealing decisions of the tax appeal tribunal to the high court. He noted that these provisions were not part of the law passed by the 10th NASS.
In addition, he said section 64 of the gazetted law expanded the powers of tax authorities to include arresting suspected offenders through law enforcement agencies and selling seized assets without a court order.
Ogene further alleged that section 3(1)(b) was altered to remove Petroleum Income Tax and Value-Added Tax (VAT) from the list of taxes administered by the federal government, contrary to what was approved by lawmakers.
He described the change as a direct challenge to the exclusive lawmaking powers of the National Assembly. The lawmaker also said section 39(3) was modified to require tax computations for petroleum operations to be done in United States dollars, instead of the currency of the transaction as originally approved by parliament. According to him, the removal of requirements for quarterly and annual reports to the 10th NASS weakened accountability and violated the principle of checks and balances.
Ogene said the committee believes the evidence uncovered so far is sufficient to justify a deeper investigation into the matter, adding that the committee has requested additional time to conduct a more detailed review in order to ensure accountability and protect the integrity of the legislative process.
