Tag: Tax Law

  • Ondo okays new Tax Law

    Ondo okays new Tax Law

    Ahead of January 1, 2026 implementation of the new Tax Law,  Ondo State Government has approved a new Tax Bill for transmission to the House of Assembly for consideration and passage into law.

    The approval was granted at the State Executive Council (SEC) meeting held on Tuesday and presided over by Governor Lucky Aiyedatiwa.

    Briefing reporters after the meeting, Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice, Dr. Olukayode Ajulo, SAN, said the proposed tax law aligned with the state’s commitment to harmonising its fiscal policies with the federal tax reforms scheduled to take effect from today.

    He said the bill was designed to ensure Ondo State’s tax framework operated in line with national standard under the Nigeria Tax Act 2025 and related reforms.

    He said the legislation would promote efficiency, transparency and sustainable revenue generation, while providing relief for low-income earners and small businesses.

    Read Also: Tinubu: New Tax Laws will bring prosperity

    “By adopting these measures, the state aims to foster economic growth, improve public services and create a more equitable tax environment that supports businesses and individuals alike,” Ajulo said.

    He added that the approval marked a proactive step towards integrating Ondo State into Nigeria’s evolving national tax landscape. “The bill will now proceed to the House of Assembly for legislative review and debate. The government encourages public participation and remains open to constructive feedback from stakeholders,” he said.

    The state government has appointed Owei Kekemeke as the pioneer Amananawei of Agadagda-Obon in Ese Odo Local Government.

    Commissioner for Local Government and Chieftaincy Affairs, Alhaji Amidu Takuro, who also spoke after the SEC meeting, said the government was ready to fill vacant traditional stools once affected communities began the selection process.

    He confirmed that warrant chiefs had been approved for the appointment of Alade Okun of Alade in Idanre Local Government, clearing the way for the installation of a new monarch.

    On infrastructure development, Commissioner for Infrastructure, Lands and Housing, Abiola Olawoye, hailed Governor Aiyedatiwa for his commitment to advancing key projects across the state.

  • Fed Govt: no going back on Tax Law from Jan. 1

    Fed Govt: no going back on Tax Law from Jan. 1

    • Gains of Tinubu’s Administration, by Information Minister Idris

    The Federal Government yesterday affirmed that it would proceed with the implementation of the new tax laws with effect from January 1 as planned.

    Minister of Information and National Orientation, Mohammed Idris, said the government had followed due process of extensive consultations, legislative deliberations, approvals and final enactment by the President.

    According to him, the government has only one version of the new tax laws, which was duly processed by the National Assembly and signed by the President.

    “Government is going ahead with commencement of implementation, noting as changed,” Idris said last night.

    Against the background of reports of alterations in the gazetted copy of the new Tax Administration Act, Idris, who spoke at a news conference in Abuja, said the executive arm would expect a report of a probe by the National Assembly, where the issue of alleged alteration was raised.

    He said: “I think it is important for us to wait for the National Assembly to look at this again to tell us whether there were discrepancies or not.

    “This is, at this point, an affair of the National Assembly to which I have no jurisdiction, and I have no authority to speak about.

    “As far as the government of Nigeria is concerned, there’s only one version of that tax document.”

    Idris spoke during a review of the activities of the Tinubu Administration in 2025, where he listed the gains and challenges.

    Idris’ position was reechoed by Chairman of the Presidential Fiscal Policy and Tax Reforms Committee, Mr. Taiwo Oyedele, and immediate past Executive Chairman of the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS), Mr. Muhammad Nami.

    Oyedele cautioned against drawing conclusions based on documents circulating in the public space, insisting that some of the materials being referenced were not authentic.

    According to him, there was confusion over what constituted the final, legally binding version of the bill passed by the National Assembly.

    He explained that the only authoritative version of the bill would be the harmonised copy certified by the Clerk of the National Assembly and transmitted to the President.

    He said: “The official harmonised bills certified by the clerk, which the National Assembly sent to the President, we don’t have a copy to compare. Only the lawmakers can say authoritatively what was sent…

    “Even I cannot say that I have it. I only have what was presented to Mr President to sign.”

    Oyedele also shed light on a controversial provision that had circulated widely, particularly Section 41(8), which suggested that a 20 per cent deposit would be required.

    Read Also: Group demands suspension of tax law

    He said he contacted the House of Representatives Committee on the issue, only to be told that the committee had not met to take any decision.

    “I know that particular provision is not in the final gazette, but it was in the draft gazette,” he said, adding that the situation appeared to have been complicated by premature actions taken by unnamed individuals.

    “Some people decided that they should write the report of the committee before the committee had met, and it had circulated everywhere,” Oyedele said.

    He stressed that the document circulating in the media did not originate from the committee set up by the House of Representatives and urged the public to allow lawmakers to carry out their investigation.

    “What is out there in the media did not come from the committee set up by the House of Representatives. I think we should allow them to do their investigation,” Oyedele said on Channel Television’s Morning Brief.

    Nami, in a statement, said the issue at hand does not call for protest or jettisoning of the new tax framework, but a careful investigation, restoration and punishment of anyone found to have compromised the process.

    He expressed concern over attempts to discard what he described as carefully developed tax laws that resulted from years of research, investment and legislative work by the National Assembly, a process he said began in 2022.

    According to him, abandoning those efforts would amount to wasting scarce national resources and weakening institutional credibility.

    He maintained that the most sensible path forward was for Nigerians to stand with the National Assembly, which is working to ensure peace and prevent the waste of resources already invested in the tax reform project.

    Nami expressed confidence that, with firm and coordinated action, the country could still implement the new tax provisions by January 2026.

    According to him, the reforms were designed to block leakages in the tax system, boost revenue to fund economic growth and development programmes, support debt servicing and budget deficits at all levels of government, roll out social welfare initiatives, strengthen security and deliver world-class infrastructure capable of attracting foreign direct investment.

    He said: “Indeed, numerous provisions encourage governments at all levels to prioritise taxing prosperity over poverty and fruits over seeds so that SMEs can grow and provide employment opportunities to our youth, ultimately becoming taxpayers in the future.”

    Nami, however, alleged that the alterations to the Tax Administration Act were carried out at the point of gazetting by yet-to-be-identified individuals, without the knowledge or approval of either the Presidency or the National Assembly.

    House of Representatives Speaker  Abbas Tajudeen constituted an investigating committee following an allegation of alterations by a member of the House from Sokoto State, Abdulsamad Dasuki.

    Rising under a matter of privilege, Dasuki, a member of the opposition Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), alleged that the tax laws passed by both the House and the Senate were different from the tax laws gazetted and currently in circulation.

    Speaker Abbas then told members that the leadership has decided to investigate the matter with a view to ascertaining the truth behind the allegations.

    The members of the committee to investigate the allegations are Aliyu Mukthar Betara (Chairman), Ahmed Idris Wase, James Abiodun Faleke, Fred Agbedi, Igarewey Iduma Enwo and Babajimi Benson.

    The committee was mandated to investigate the alleged doctoring of the tax reform laws.

    Abbas, who announced the composition of the committee, however, did not give them a specific time frame to conclude their work, but asked them to investigate the allegations and report back to the House.

    President Tinubu signed four major tax reform bills into law, an action the Federal Government described as the most far-reaching overhaul of Nigeria’s tax system in decades.

    The laws are scheduled to take effect from January 1, 2026, following their passage amid intense debates and stiff opposition from some lawmakers from the northern part of the country.

    The laws comprise the Nigeria Tax Act, the Nigeria Tax Administration Act, the Nigeria Revenue Service (Establishment) Act and the Joint Revenue Board (Establishment) Act, all to operate under a unified authority known as the Nigeria Revenue Service.

    According to the government, the reforms are aimed at simplifying tax compliance, expanding the tax base, removing multiple and overlapping taxes, and modernising revenue collection across federal, state and local governments.

    The idea of tax reform was kicked against by many interests, including some governors.

    At a point, the National Economic Council (NEC) requested the Bills’ withdrawal from the National Assembly, but the President declined, asking those with misgivings to express them during the public hearing.

    After more consultations, the Bills were passed to the President’s delight.

  • New Tax Law: Banks to file reports on accounts with N25m quarterly turnover

    New Tax Law: Banks to file reports on accounts with N25m quarterly turnover

    • Govt rules out tax-related debit on bank customers’ accounts
    • Banks to demand TIN from taxable Nigerians

    Commercial banks are now required to file reports on bank accounts with N25 million quarterly turnover and above to the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS) or other related agencies for effective tax monitoring.

    This is in alignment with the federal government’s new tax administration framework which comes into effect on  January 1, 2026, Chairman of the Presidential Fiscal Policy and Tax Reforms Committee, Mr. Taiwo Oyedele, said yesterday in Lagos.

    Oyedele ,speaking    during a media workshop on the new consolidated tax law, explained that  the new dispensation has raised the threshold for mandatory reporting from N10 million to N25 million, which he said translates to “almost N100 million a year before any report is triggered.”

    Addressing the misconception that banks will begin reporting all transactions, Oyedele said the 2020 Finance Act already requires   accounts used for business to have a Tax Identification Number (TIN).

     Oyedele said only accounts that meet the turnover threshold would be identified and monitored for proper tax payment.

    Besides,he said  that banks request Tax Identification Number (TIN) from all taxable Nigerians in line with the new tax regime.

     According to him, Section 4 of the Nigerian Tax Administration Act, makes the possession of a tax ID mandatory for all taxable individuals.

    But  the requirement does not apply to students or dependents who, according to him,  will be exempted from tendering  TIN  to maintain a bank account.

    He also said there was no need for anxiety over possibility of banks directly debiting customers’ accounts over tax matters.

     “Nobody will debit your bank accounts in banks. Banks will not debit customers’ accounts for tax default,” he said.

    He dismissed fears that government plans to deduct money directly from bank accounts of taxpayers, insisting that such claims are “false, dangerous and capable of destabilising the economy.”

     He said the speculations on social media were based on ignorance and deliberate misinformation.

    “Let me say this clearly: nobody — not FIRS, not Central Bank of Nigeria, not any government agency — has the power to debit your bank account,” he declared.

      “Whether you have N50,000 or N50 million, nobody is taking any money from your account. It is simply not true.”

     Oyedele explained that the allegation arose from the consolidation of major tax statutes into a single code, which led many to assume that the government has introduced new enforcement powers.

    He said that the only existing mechanism that allows recovery of unpaid taxes is a court-ordered garnishee, which he described as “a long legal process that is almost never used.”

     “Even in extreme cases where someone owes hundreds of millions and refuses to pay, the government cannot just wake up and remove money,” he said.

      “They must assess you, notify you, allow objections, conclude the process, go to court, and get a judge’s order. Without that, nobody can touch your account.”

     According to him, in nearly three decades of tax administration work, he has “never seen a single instance where money was removed from an account without due judicial process.”

     He recalled the attempt under the former FIRS Chairman,  Babatunde Fowler  to impose post-no-debit orders on accounts suspected of tax evasion — a move that failed without recovering a single naira.

    His words:“that process didn’t succeed, and it created unnecessary panic.Nobody is repeating that mistake.”

     The tax reform chair warned that rumours could cause harmful panic withdrawals.

    Read Also: Tinubu unveils new security, economic blueprint to harness Nigeria’s marine wealth

     “One thing that can damage the economy very quickly is people rushing to withdraw their money out of fear,” he cautioned.

     “Nothing in the law authorises the government to debit accounts. Please help us educate others so we don’t create a problem where none exists.”

     Oyedele maintained that the goal of the reform is to simplify compliance, expand the tax net, and reduce the burden on households and small businesses.

     The Tax Reform Bills were signed into law on June 26,2025 by  President Bola Tinubu.

     They are the Nigeria Tax Act (NTA), The Nigeria Tax Administration Act (NTAA), The Nigeria Revenue Service Act (NRSA) and the Joint Revenue Board Act (JRBA), collectively referred to as “the Acts” hereafter).

     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.

     Highlights of the law include exemption of individuals earning NGN800,000 or less per annum from tax on their income and gains, while higher income earners will be taxed at a higher rate up to 25%.

    It also  increases the tax exemption threshold for compensation for loss of employment or injury from NGN10million to NGN50million.

    There is also provision for the establishment of Tax Ombuds office to liaise with the tax authorities on behalf of taxpayers, and serve as an independent arbiter to review and resolve complaints relating to taxes, levies, duties or similar regulatory charges.

  • Court gives nod to Lagos consumption tax law

    A Federal High Court in Lagos yesterday lifted its interim injunction restraining the Lagos State Government from enforcing the provisions of Hotel Occupancy and Restaurant Consumption Tax Law, 2015.

    Justice Rilwan Aikawa, in a ruling on a motion filed by the Registered Trustees of Hotel Owners and Managers Association of Lagos, had restrained the State Government from further enforcing the law pending the determination of the matter.

    Joined as defendants are the Attorney-General of Lagos State and the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS).

    The plaintiff is urging the court to strike out the Hotel Occupancy and Restaurant Consumption Law, Cap H8, Laws of Lagos State 2015.

    The plaintiff also asked the court to restrain the State Government from enforcing the provisions of its new Hotel Occupancy and Restaurant Consumption (Fiscalisation) Regulations 2017.

    At the last adjournment on April 17, counsel to the first defendant, Mr Lawal Pedro (SAN), had informed the court of his motion, seeking a variation of the court’s interim orders made on March 21.

    Pedro, in the motion, argued that the interim order was made following misrepresentations and concealment of material facts by the plaintiff.

    He had specifically argued that the interim injunction was irregular for not being within the scope of the relief sought by the plaintiff (hotel operators) in the suit.

    “Not discharging the interim injunction will cause greater hardship, damages and injustice to the Lagos State Government which cannot be compensated by the plaintiff,” Pedro had argued.

    When the case came up yesterday, Olasupo Shasore (SAN), announced appearance for the plaintiff and informed the court that he had reached an agreement with the defence counsel for a variation of the existing orders, pending determination of the suit.

    He added that it was also agreed that no new measures would be introduced by the defendants until determination of the substantive suit.

    In response, Pedro confirmed the position, and added that the restraining orders be lifted on the Hotel Occupancy and Restaurant Consumption Law, Cap H8, Laws of Lagos State 2015 which has been in force in the State.

    According to him, the restraining orders on the Regulation 2017 can be allowed to subsist pending determination of the suit.

    He, then, moved his motion, seeking variation of the interim orders.

    The court consequently ruled: “An Order is hereby made, varying the orders made on March 21, 2018.

    “The variation shall be to the extent that the restraining orders against the first defendant from implementing the Hotel Occupancy and Restaurant Consumption Laws of Lagos State, be expunged from the said order, while retaining the restraining orders on Hotel Occupancy and Restaurant Consumption (Fiscalisation) Regulations 2017.”

    While ordering the plaintiff to comply with the laws of the State, the Court added that no new measures should be introduced by the first defendant pending the determination of the suit.

    Meanwhile, the court has granted an accelerated hearing of the matter and adjourned till June 4.

  • Plateau agencies strategise on tax law reforms

    Ministries, departments and agencies in Plateau State have met to discuss how best to implement the state’s tax laws.

    Governor Simon Lalong, speaking during an engagement with members of the state Executive Council, chief executives of boards, agencies and parastatals on tax matters, said there was the need to boost the state’s Internally Generated Revenue (IGR).

    The event was organised by the Plateau State Internal Revenue Service

    Lalong said: “Inter-agency engagement is aimed at increasing stakeholder’s awareness on the legal frame work and policy reforms in the area of tax administration in Plateau State, in line with the provision of the Plateau State Revenue (Consolidation) Law, which I signed into Law in 2016.

    “This engagement would not have come at a better time than this, given the coming on board of new members of the State Executive Council and the recently constituted membership of the Boards, Parastatals and Agencies of Government.

    “The Theme of this engagement: Collaboration, synergy and legal compliance parameters; optimising Internally Generated Revenue (IGR) collection in Plateau State for effective service delivery and development is not only timely, but necessary in our quest as a government to improve the IGR of the state for the purpose of accelerating the much needed development of the state.

    “The government’s commitment to service delivery, in the face of the economic misfortune occasioned by the drop of the revenue accruing to the nation on monthly bases, necessitated our thinking out of the box under this new reality.

    “No government, society and community, can survive without resources. Our successful execution of developmental projects will not come by just mere wishes but through the practical effort of the people to collectively engage in the mobilisation of revenue for an effective service delivery to take place.”

  • Ipaye: Fight corruption through effective tax administration

    Ipaye: Fight corruption through effective tax administration

    An effective tax administration system will help in the detection of economic crimes, Deputy Chief of Staff to the President, Mr Ade Ipaye, has said.

    According to him, in modern systems, tax administration is increasingly being used to detect corruption and other economic crimes in addition to enforcing tax laws.

    Ipaye taught tax law at the University of Lagos (UNILAG) before he joined the Lagos State Government as Special Adviser on Taxation and later served as Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice.

    He spoke in Lagos during a dinner/lecture in honour of former Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Lagos Branch chairman Mr Chijioke Okoli, who was conferred with the rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN).

    The event was organised by “Friends of Chijioke Okoli” in collaboration with NBA Lagos Branch and an association of Igbo lawyers, the Otu Oka-Iwu (Law Society).

    Decrying tax evasion, Ipaye referred to a Joint Tax Board report which states that only about 10 million people are registered for Personal Income Tax in all the states, including the Federal Capital Territory (FCT).

    “Out of this, 4.6 million (or 46 per cent) are in Lagos State. If you juxtapose that against the 77 million workforce which the Nigerian Bureau of Statistics has declared to be in existence in Nigeria, you can clearly see how far down we are and how a sharp decline in the price and volume of our exported crude oil can be so devastating to the economy,” Ipaye said.

    Ipaye backed the view that a multi-agency approach to fighting tax and financial crimes, including corruption, is the best recourse for a government seeking to make corruption more difficult to hide.

    He said: “The rationale is quite simple. Tax examiners are often highly trained forensic accountants or auditors or financial investigators with an ability to follow money trails, whether legal or illegal.

    “They are, therefore, well-placed to detect and report unexplained increases in wealth or suspicious transactions that could constitute a bribe.

    “Furthermore, the proceeds of corruption are also, quite invariably, subject of tax evasion, and this correlation can help in law enforcement. In most cases, wealth acquired illegally would not have been subjected to tax, even though it is not tax exempt.

    “Thus, even where illegality is difficult to prove, tax evasion and money laundering are usually easy (The famous Chicago drug baron, Al Capone (Alphonse Gabriel) was convicted of tax evasion and sentenced to 11 years imprisonment even when it was difficult to prove his drug dealing and other criminal activities). This demonstrates the potentials of taxation as a means of checking corruption.”

    According to him, with greater cooperation between tax collection and anti-corruption agencies, tax examiners and inspectors can be placed in a better position to report suspicious activities to the relevant agency to take further action.

    Ipaye believes corruption in the tax system acts as a major hindrance to sustainable economic growth as it deters well-meaning and capable long-term investors, thereby killing industries before they become viable.

    “In this sense, corruption leads to the erosion of the future tax revenue base of a country, thereby impacting future tax revenue collection,” he said.

  • Withholding Tax (WHT) administration

    Withholding Tax (WHT) administration

    Withholding Tax (WHT) is an advance payment of income tax. In principle, it is a payment for the ultimate income tax liability of the taxpayer or company. It is not a separate tax and does not confer an exemption from the filing of yearly tax returns by the company which suffered WHT. The tax is deducted at source when a payment is to be made to the beneficiary.

     

    Applicable Tax Law

    Withholding Tax (WHT) is not a distinct tax type and therefore has no legislation of its own. It is only a mechanism for the collection of other taxes. Consequently, its application is provided for in the enabling law of other tax types i.e. Section 81 of Company Income Tax Act, Section 54 of Petroleum Profit Tax Act, Section 73 of Personal Income Tax Act and Section 13 of Value Added Tax (VAT) Act.

     

    Tax coverage and income subject to WHT

    It seeks to collect taxes that may have been lost through evasion and/or avoidance. It is to ensure that taxpayers are correctly taxed but it must be understood that transactions that are ordinarily not liable to tax in Nigeria are also not liable to WHT; thus, contracts and supplies of goods and services performed entirely outside Nigeria by non-resident taxpayers will not be liable to WHT. The residence of the taxpayer is not relevant for determining liability to tax or the application of WHT, but it is important to consider whether the provider/supplier of the goods or services is liable to tax.

    The rate of tax applicable to the various goods and services is provided in later parts of this paper. The introduction of the WHT regime came about to address the problem of tax evasion although, there is the overriding objective of full disclosure, transparency, predictability and fairness. In the light of these objectives and bearing in mind that the tax is intended as an advance payment of tax, its operation should always be optimised to ensure that taxpayers are not overtaxed and Government does not lose revenue.

    Rents: This includes rental income on both real and personal property. As a general rule, income on a property (rent, hire or lease payments or rights (royalties) situated in Nigeria is liable to tax in Nigeria, the place of payment notwithstanding. Where a person rents or hires property/services from another, WHT at the rate of 10  per cent will apply. But where a person provides services to another for e.g. air/land transport service, using its own equipment/facilities, the transaction becomes a contract of services rather than rental or hire.

    Interest: This is income from investments of every kind. WHT is applicable to income from government securities and income from bonds or Treasury bills. Interest on loans paid by a Nigerian company is often not subject to WHT.

    Dividends:Refer to income from shares. The income is subject to tax whether it is received by a Nigeria company or a non-resident company. The tax imposed is regarded as final tax, but corporate bodies are allowed to recoup WHT deduction where the dividend is to be redistributed as Franked Investment Income (FII). The Petroleum Profit Tax Act (PPTA) however exempts dividends payable by oil producing companies on petroleum operations from WHT imposition.

    Royalty:Refers to unearned income which accrues to the owner from past endeavors. Permission must be obtained before it can be used. It is payment of any kind as a consideration for the use of or the right to use any patent, trade mark or right/

    Consultancy/professional/management/technical services-These are specialised services rendered by persons with the required knowledge and skills. The mere fact that services are provided by a company which has consultancy as part of its name does not by itself render such service as consultancy. The real content of the services being provided must be examined and if it amounts to a consultancy service, then the appropriate rate would apply; the same treatment applies to professional/management services. For instance, if an engineering company is carrying out a construction activity, the proper classification for the services would be ‘‘construction’’ as opposed to professional/technical services; similarly, the use of industrial machinery/equipment to provide a service does not render it to be ‘technical’’ because the industry position requires that only arrangements thatinvolve a transfer of technology should be classified as technical.

    All types of contracts and arrangements, other than sale and purchase of goods and property. This classification is wide enough to capture every transaction, other than outright purchase/sale of goods and property. The revenue holds the view that majority of the activities carried on in the oil industry are done by way of contractions, and should properly fall under this category. The issue of contracts and transactions, not being conducted in the ordinary course of business has over the years been subjected to series of reviews and amendments, aimed at improving the WHT system to achieve efficiency as well as minimise the cost of doing business.

    The aim of WHT is not to compound the problems of producers, manufacturers and those engaged in any activity, other than services. The definition of manufacturing activate as contained in the FIRS information circular No. 2002 appears to have further generated more controversy than expected. The following classification will assist in the understanding of circumstances where WHT will apply in relation to any production activity.

     

    Where there is a dual relationship between parties in a

    business transaction

     

    An example of this contract is where a manufacturer/producer require raw materials from a supplier for its production. This is dual relationship between both parties and the transaction will not be liable to WHT. E.g., a farmer supplies groundnut to a manufacturer of groundnut oil; a manufacturer of glass supplies bottles to a bottling company or soft drink manufacturer or an oil marking company supplies diesel direct to a user.

     

    Where there is a tripartite relationship between parties in a transaction

    In a tripartite contract relationship involving a manufacturer, supplier and agent, there could be either two options, depending on the level of financial arrangement. For example, where manufacturer A, engages agent C to procure or source for raw materials from supplier, B, for his production line, there is a tripartite arrangement here. There is nothing preventing manufacturer, A from dealing directly with supplier B to achieve a dual contract relationship.

    (a) If agent C is mobilised by manufacturer B with fund to source for materials for its operation, there will be need to segregate the service cost from the entire contraction, and only the service component will be liable to WHT.

    (b) If the agent, C, finances the sourcing of the raw materials for Manufacturer A, the entire contract value will be liable to WHT at the time of payment.

     

    Where a maufacturer delivers its normal products to its

    distributors and dealers for sale

    In this situation, the income accruing to the manufacturer will not be liable to WHT as it is regarded as transaction in the ordinary course of business, but the commission earned by the distributors/dealers will be subjected to WHT.

     

    Agency transactions and arrangements

    Agency arrangement implies a contract between a principal and agent. The reward for services by the agent is commission, which is subject to WHT of 10 per cent.

    However, if the principal is a non-resident, any sales proceeds from the arrangement will attract fie per cent WHT, where any of the conditions in Section 26(1) (b) of CITA holds.

    The organisations making the payments are required to withhold tax from such payments and pay over the withheld amounts to their respective relevant tax authorities within 30 days of receipt of payment or credit by the person or entity suffering the tax.

    The relevant tax authorities to receive the WHT tax transactions made by companies is FIRS and for individuals and unincorporated bodies subject to rules of residence is SIRS or FIRS.

     

    Person liable to deduct WHT

    The payer of WHT for any activity under this tax shall include company (corporate or non-corporate), government Ministries and Department, Parastatals, statutory bodies, institutions and other established organisation approved for the operations of Pay As you Earn System (PAYE).

     

    Who is taxable?

    • All persons, companies etc. who’s incomes are liable to income tax, are subject to Withholding Tax.

    • However, exempt entities, such as educational institutions, Government Ministries, Parastatals and other Agencies of government, are agents for the collection of WHT. They are required to deduct WHT on any payment made to a taxable body and remit same to the relevant tax authority.

    WHT implication on foreign transactions

     

    Non-resident companies/enterprises

    The revenue practice is that non-resident companies are not empowered to deduct any type of WHT. These categories of enterprises are practically outside the regulatory monitoring and control of the FIRS. It will be impracticable for revenue office to inspect the accounting books of these companies to confirm due deduction and remittance of WHT.

     

    Double Taxation Agreement (DTA)

    Transactions that are ordinarily not liable to tax in Nigeria are not liable to WHT in Nigeria. Thus contracts and supplies of goods and services performed entirely outside Nigeria by non-resident individuals are not liable to WHT. Nigeria has treaty agreements with about eight countries and these countries are granted a reduced rate of WHT deduction, usually at 75 per cent of the generally applicable WHT rate. 7.5 per cent. These countries include UK, Northern Ireland, Canada, France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Pakistan and Romania.

     

    Permanent Establishment (PE) principle under Nigeria’s taxation

    The rules construe a PE where:

    • The company has a ‘fixed base’ in Nigeria.

    • The company operates in Nigeria through a dependent agent authorised to conclude contracts or deliver goods on its behalf,

    • The company is executing a turnkey project in Nigeria, or

    • The operation between the company and its Nigeria affiliate does not appear to be at arm’s length.

    • ‘Fixed base’ implies some degree of permanence and will include:

    • Facilities, such as a factory, office, branch, mine, oil or gas well

    • Activities, such as building, construction, assembly or installation

    • Provision of services in connection with the activities listed above.

    Principles of PE

    • The rules construe a Permanent Establishment where:

    • The company has a ‘fixed base’ in Nigeria.

    • The company operate in Nigeria through a dependent agent authorised to conclude contracts or deliver goods on its behalf,

    • The company is executing a turnkey project in Nigeria, or

    • The operation between the company and its Nigeria affiliate does not appear to be at arm’s length.

    ‘Fixed base’ implies some degree of permanence and will include: Facilities, such as a factory, office, branch, mine, oil or gas well Activities, such as building, construction, assembly or installation,  provision of services based on the above-listed activities.

     

    Other types of income not liable to WHT

    • Companies operating within the Free Trade Zones/Export Processing Zones.

    • Insurance premium.

    • Turnover/income from dealership or distributive trade

    • Telephone bills are not subject to WHT.

     

    Application of WHT

    Sections of CITA and PITA that provide for the deduction of withholding tax at the applicable rates below.

     

    Types of payment                            Applicable rates 

                                                                          Companies       Individual

    Dividends, Interest, Rent                                10%                         10%

    Directors Fees                                   10%                         10%

    Royalties                                                            15%                   15%

    Commission, Consultation,           10%                         5%

    Technical, Service Fees

    Management fees                                             10%                         5%

    Construction/Building

    Contracts                                                        5%                               5%

    Contracts, other than outright sales

    and purchase of goods in the

    ordinary course of business           5%                           5%

     

    Returns & Remittance

    Tax Returns are filed monthly with evidence of remittance and a detailed schedule of taxable transactions.

    Submitted schedule should show the following details:

     

    Name of supplier    Address Nature of   Invoice     payment   Amount   Rate @ Y% Tax

            Service      Date           Date

    • Returns for corporate suppliers should be filed within 21 days from end of month of transactions.

    • Returns for non –corporate suppliers should be filed within 30 days from end of month of transaction.

    • In practice, tax returns are filed in the same month they occur.

    • Tax deducted should be remitted to the revenue in exchange for a receipt of payment.

    • Tax is payable in the currency of the qualifying transaction.

    Following payment and filing of returns, the revenue processes credit notes for the suppliers on whose income tax was deducted.

    • Credit notes can be used in applying for tax credit against current and future tax liabilities (i.e. where it is not final tax)

    • Remittances are due to either federal or state tax authorities.

    Remittances due to Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS):

    • Corporate entities,

    • Nonresident individuals,

    • Members of the armed forces and police,

    • Resident of Abuja,

    • Foreign officers.

    Remittances due to state internal revenue service (SIRS):

    • All other individuals / partnerships resident in the state.

     

    Payment of currency

    Section 64B of CITA empowers the tax authority that withheld tax must be remitted to the tax authority in the currency in which the deduction was made. This means that transactions made in foreign currency are to be remitted in the same currency and that the tax so withheld is to be remitted in the same currency. Simultaneously penalty for default would also be calculated in the same currency.

    How to claim WHT credit (Credit notes)

    A taxpayer from whom tax has been withheld is expected to gain withholding tax credit notes from the relevant tax authority via the deducting organisation. All withheld taxes are forwarded to the tax authority, which in turn records the credit against the tax payer’s account, with a schedule containing details of the contract or service, on which basis the tax authority issues a credit note. Assessed tax and related charges are usually entered as debits in the taxpayer’s tax account, while he is expected to pay only the difference between his assessed tax and withholding tax credit at the time of filing their own returns.

    • It is this credit note that a taxpayer uses as a set off against tax assessed within that year or if unutilised within that year can be applied based on the taxpayer request to transfer the credit balance in that year to offset or reduce debit balance of another year.

    • In cases where there is an excess charge of WHT on a taxpayer, the 2007 amendments to CITA (Section 63 (7)) have even further empowered FIRS to refund proven excess withholding tax to any taxpayer within 90 days of filing a claim.

    Offences and penalties

    Offences

    • Failure to withhold tax or

    • Failure to remit or  late remittance of the tax withheld

    • Non remittance of the tax withheld within the time limit stipulated by the Revenue.

    Penalties

    a. For companies

    A fine of 200 per cent of the tax not withheld or withheld but not remitted, plus interest at the prevailing commercial rate.

    b. For Individuals & other organisations

    A fine of the higher of N5,000 or 10 per cent of the amount of tax due, plus the amount of tax deductible, or  withheld but not remitted, plus interest at the prevailing commercial rate.

    • Interest on savings account of less than N50, 000 paid by a Bank, is not subject to WHT.

    The WHT system has come to stay since it is a veritable source of revenue to government. It enhances the collection efforts of tax authorities and it ensures that revenue is generated in advance. It is therefore imperative that the system should continue to be improved upon in the light of modern tax administration procedure. Usually, an advance payment of tax provides information that an income source has been identified through a third party. Such information being provided by the payer should be readily available for use in accessing a potential taxpayer. Field officers should always be ready to follow up on such information.