By SUNTV Global Channel | December 24, 2025
A serious constitutional controversy is brewing around President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s administration following allegations that key provisions of Nigeria’s recently passed tax reform laws were altered after approval by the National Assembly.
The claims, first raised on the floor of the House of Representatives by Hon. Abdussamad Dasuki and now backed by several lawmakers, suggest that the version of the Nigeria Tax Bill assented to and gazetted by the Executive differs substantially from the harmonised version passed by lawmakers. A legislative investigation is now being initiated to determine the extent and legality of the alleged alterations.
How the controversy began
The Nigeria Tax Bill was originally transmitted to the National Assembly by President Tinubu in October 2024. The sweeping reform package included the Nigeria Tax Administration Act, alongside newly proposed statutes such as the Nigeria Revenue Service Act and the Joint Revenue Board Act. With the ruling APC enjoying overwhelming dominance in both chambers, the bill passed with relative ease.
However, lawmakers now allege that after legislative approval, the Executive branch altered, inserted, and deleted several provisions without returning the bill to the National Assembly for reconsideration — a move critics say violates the Constitution.
Legal experts point to Sections 4 and 58 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), which vest law-making powers exclusively in the National Assembly and clearly outline the procedure for passing bills. There is no constitutional authority for the Executive to amend a bill after passage.
28 alterations found in first 100 sections
According to critics of the reform, including policy analysts and lawmakers, a detailed comparison of the gazetted version of the Nigeria Tax Administration Act with the version passed by the National Assembly has already revealed at least 28 alterations within the first 100 sections alone.
Some of the most contentious changes include:
- Section 3(1)(b): Removal of federal administrative powers over petroleum income tax and VAT, despite VAT still appearing elsewhere in the same section — a contradiction that could spark federal-state tax disputes.
- Section 29: Expansion of compliance obligations for financial institutions by shifting from annual to quarterly returns and removing certain notice safeguards.
- Section 39(3): A fundamental change mandating the use of US dollars for petroleum tax transactions, replacing the Assembly-approved provision that allowed taxes to be paid in the transaction currency.
- Section 41(8)–(9): Introduction of a 20 percent security requirement before appealing to the High Court — a provision lawmakers say they never approved.
- Sections 60–65: New enforcement powers, including asset appointments, accelerated sales, arrests through law enforcement agencies, and compound interest on unpaid tax debts, raising concerns about property rights and excessive coercive powers.
Analysts argue that these are not clerical corrections but substantive policy changes with far-reaching economic and constitutional implications.
Revenue Service Act also affected
The Nigeria Revenue Service Act is also alleged to have undergone post-legislative alterations. Among them:
- Section 7: Expansion of presidential appointment powers to include six board members from the six geopolitical zones.
- Section 17: Change in the number of Executive Directors from “exactly six” to “not less than six,” removing rotational requirements approved by lawmakers.
- Sections 25 and 30: Removal of mandatory quarterly and annual reports to the National Assembly, significantly weakening legislative oversight and accountability.
Lawmakers insist that the removal of these reporting and oversight provisions undermines the constitutional checks-and-balances framework.
Oyedele’s response under scrutiny
The Chairman of the Presidential Tax Reform Committee, Mr. Taiwo Oyedele, has faced criticism for his response to the controversy. His call for partial implementation of the law — even if parts are found to be altered — has been described by critics as legally untenable.
Constitutional lawyers argue that once an Act is found to have been altered outside the procedure set out in Section 58, it becomes invalid in its entirety. An unconstitutional law, they stress, cannot be selectively enforced by the Executive.
Political and legal implications
If the alleged alterations were made without President Tinubu’s knowledge, responsibility could fall on the Attorney-General of the Federation, legislative clerks, or officials involved in the gazetting process. However, if it is established that the President knowingly assented to, or authorised, a doctored version of the bill, constitutional experts say the matter could escalate beyond administrative misconduct.
In that scenario, impeachment proceedings would become legally permissible, transforming the controversy into a full-blown constitutional crisis.
As the implementation date of the tax reforms approaches, Nigerians, lawmakers, and civil society groups are now scrutinising the gazetted laws line by line. As one lawmaker noted, “Even a single discrepancy between the harmonised bill and the gazetted Act is enough to invalidate the process.”
SUNTV Global Channel will continue to monitor developments as the National Assembly’s inquiry unfolds.
