Why I oppose proposed tax bills – Borno Rep member
A member of the House of Representatives from Borno State, Ahmed Jaha, has said that his decision to raise some issues over the tax bills passed for a second reading on Wednesday was because he felt there was a need for clarity.
Jaha, who represents Chibok/Damboa/Gwoza Federal Constituency, stated this while speaking to journalists shortly after the consolidated bill scaled second reading in the Green Chamber.
According to him, the manner of transmission of the bills to the National Assembly breached procedural antecedents.
He said, “First of all, the bills were transmitted despite rejection by the members of the National Economic Council. Despite rejection by the elders across the country, despite rejection by the Governors’ Forum, particularly the Northern Governors’ Forum. The second reason is that after studying it, members were able to understand that some provisions needed to be revisited for the purpose of fairness and good governance.
“That was the reason why it generated a lot of controversies at the very beginning when the bill was presented. In other words, members of the parliament, particularly in the House of Representatives, were not on the same page. We used to be on the same page when and wherever the need arose. But on this bill, we were to some extent divided, or I can say sharply divided at the very beginning.”
He however added that he agreed with some of the provisions of the proposed tax reforms.
“My position as a person is to maintain the status quo. The highest I can concede as far as my opinion and the opinion of my constituents is to cede 20 per cent based on derivation or based on generation derivation. In other words, wherever these companies have their headquarters, 20 per cent can be given to them.
“That’s what we have currently in Section 40 of the current Act that is governing the VAT distribution. But if it’s based on consumption derivation and there is enough and adequate technology and infrastructure to track consumption, analyse consumption and distribute or share them accordingly, then to me, it’s a very good deal because there is fairness.
“Instead of you remitting 30 per cent or 20 per cent simply because these companies that generated this money or VAT have been headquartered in certain locations; we give them that money to be fair to Nigerians. It’s for you to pay this 30 per cent to where the consumption took place.”
“The second area where I am satisfied is that there is a consensus among all the honourable members that the National Information Technology Development Agency is not going to be terminated. The National Agency for Science and Engineering Infrastructure is not going to be terminated and the Tertiary Education Trust Fund is not going to be terminated, bearing in mind their importance to the national development.
“NITDA has a role to play in providing technology for effective and efficient implementation of the tax laws whenever it’s passed. So, there is no way you can terminate the life of an instrument that can facilitate the success of a reform,” he argued.
He added, “Thirdly, on the issue of the Chief Executive Officer of the Nigerian Revenue Service when passed, or the current FIRS, to be the Chairman of the Board is completely not fair and is completely not right because as said by writers, power corrupts absolute and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
“He also faulted the provision in the bill which makes the Chief Executive Officer of the Federal Inland Revenue Service to act simultaneously as Chairman of the Board, saying “You cannot be a judge in your own case when and wherever the need arises.”
He also added that “Section 141 (1) that speaks about the supremacy of the Act has given the Act a position of the constitution. You know there is no law that can be as powerful as the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria”.
He further objected to the proposed inheritance tax which he said was against the provisions of Islam, Christianity and other faiths.
According to him, Islam is explicit and does not allow tampering with a deceased estate.
He said, “So, either in Christianity or in Islam or even in traditional religion, people protect with high sense of responsibility and obligation the estate of a deceased person when and wherever the need arises.
“Particularly in Islam, you are not even allowed to take even a packet of pure water out of inheritance and give it to somebody that is not the heir or entitled to that particular inheritance.
“The issue of collecting tax out of what somebody left behind for us is against Islam and I believe it’s against a lot of practices in other religions.”
