The ongoing controversy surrounding Nigeria's new tax laws has intensified following the release of Certified True Copies (CTCs) by the National Assembly. These documents provide definitive proof of significant discrepancies between the versions of the tax bills passed by lawmakers and the laws later gazetted and signed by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu.
Discrepancies Confirmed by Legislative Documents
The House of Representatives, on Saturday, released the CTCs of four key tax reform Acts: the Nigeria Tax Act, 2025; Nigeria Tax Administration Act, 2025; National Revenue Service (Establishment) Act, 2025; and Joint Revenue Board (Establishment) Act, 2025. This action, ordered by the Speaker of the House and Senate President, Godswill Akpabio, came in response to public alarm over conflicting versions in circulation and allegations of post-legislative alterations.
The issue was first raised in a plenary session by House member Abdulsamad Dasuki, who claimed the gazetted laws did not reflect what was debated and approved. A review of the CTCs alongside the gazetted Acts by The Guardian validates these concerns, revealing that several contentious provisions currently in force were not part of the bills passed by the National Assembly.
Key Areas of Alteration
A major divergence is found in Section 3 of the Nigeria Tax Administration Act. The National Assembly version explicitly tasked the Nigeria Revenue Service with administering taxes on petroleum operations and Value Added Tax (VAT). These critical items are absent from the gazetted version, raising questions about a deliberate narrowing of federal tax authority.
Further changes are evident in Section 29 on financial disclosures. The lawmakers' version mandated annual returns with thresholds of N50 million for individuals and N250 million for companies. The gazetted Act imposes quarterly reporting with lower thresholds of N25 million and N100 million, respectively, while stripping away key procedural safeguards for taxpayers.
Perhaps the most striking addition confirmed by the CTCs is in Sections 41(8) and 41(9). These provisions, which require taxpayers to deposit 20 per cent of a disputed tax amount before appealing to the High Court, do not appear at all in the House-passed version of the Act.
The CTCs also show that powers of arrest for tax authorities, found in the gazetted version, were not approved by lawmakers. Similarly, provisions for strong legislative oversight and accountability of the Nigeria Revenue Service in the National Assembly version were significantly watered down or removed before gazettement.
Stakeholder Reactions and Mounting Resistance
The release of the CTCs has amplified criticism from various quarters. The Coalition of Northern Groups (CNG), through its Coordinator Jamilu Charanchi, alleged the discrepancies were a deliberate policy choice by the presidency. He argued that President Tinubu was implementing a law fundamentally different from what the National Assembly approved, serving interests other than those of Nigerians.
In defence, the Executive Chairman of the Nigeria Revenue Service (NRS), Zacch Adedeji, dismissed the criticism as politically motivated. In an interview on Arise TV, he defended the reforms, stating they were designed to streamline revenue and exempt the poor. He insisted the NRS would not be used as a tool for political targeting ahead of the 2027 elections.
However, public resistance is crystallizing. The National Association of Nigerian Students (NANS) has declared January 14, 2026, a National Day of Action and is mobilising students for nationwide protests against the laws, which they say will deepen economic hardship.
The Socialist Party of Nigeria (SPN) also condemned the reforms, describing them as a means to raise revenue for elite looting while increasing suffering. They urged mass resistance, drawing parallels with the aftermath of the fuel subsidy removal.
Analysis Points to Deeper Issues of Trust
Dr Muda Yusuf of the Centre for the Promotion of Private Enterprise (CPPE) provided context, noting that resistance stems from reform fatigue and a profound trust deficit. He explained that past reforms have often led to higher costs without visible improvements in public services. While the policy design may be sound, he warned that success hinges entirely on sensitive and realistic implementation, especially with the economy still reeling from recent shocks and a pre-election period approaching.
The controversy now centres on a fundamental democratic question: whether the law being implemented reflects the will of the people as expressed through their elected representatives, or if it has been altered to serve other agendas after legislative approval.
