Pressure is mounting on the Federal Government over Nigeria’s new tax laws as more members of the House of Representatives publicly reject the gazetted versions and call for their cancellation or suspension over alleged post‑passage alterations.
Their objections build on a formal complaint already raised on the House floor by Hon. Abdulsammad Dasuki (PDP, Sokoto), who cited a breach of his legislative privilege after discovering that the gazetted tax laws did not match what lawmakers debated and approved.
Speaking on BBC Hausa’s Ra’ayi Riga programme, Hon. Muhammad Bello Fagge (Fagge Federal Constituency, Kano) and Hon. Yusuf Shitu Galambi (Gwaram Federal Constituency, Jigawa) warned that any tampering with the texts after National Assembly approval would be unconstitutional and dangerous for democracy, according to Daily Trust.
Hon. Fagge recalled that the opposition had initially resisted the tax bills, forcing a nationwide consultation process before they were passed.
“We in the opposition initially objected to the tax bills because of fears that certain provisions could be introduced without proper scrutiny.
“This led the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Tajudeen Abbas, to constitute a committee that went round the country, met with traditional rulers and governors, and asked them to submit their grievances and suggestions to the National Assembly. After that process, the bills were harmonised and approved,” he said.
He said lawmakers became alarmed when they discovered that the versions eventually published by government were not identical to what the two chambers passed.
“However, when the laws were later gazetted, what appeared was different from what we approved in Parliament.
“There were discrepancies, meaning that what was signed is not what we at the National Assembly passed,” he said.
Fagge pointed to specific clauses in the Nigeria Revenue Service Act, including Section 25 on accounts and audit, as well as Sections 26 and 30. He added that the Joint Revenue Board Act also appeared to contain changes in Sections 9, 14, 30, 40 and 44.
“Even if it is just one part that is different from what we agreed, there is a problem,” he added.
He accused the gazetted versions of quietly shifting powers away from the legislature and judiciary to the Executive and the Nigeria Revenue Service.
READ ALSO: SERAP to Tinubu: Publish Original, Signed Tax Laws or Face Court
“There is no way the legislature will make a law without giving itself oversight functions. That is the essence of checks and balances. The issue goes beyond party politics. This is not about opposition politics. This is about saving Nigeria.”
Hon. Galambi, in his contribution on the programme, linked public resistance to taxation to a longstanding lack of trust in government.
“We all know that people do not like tax because of the mistrust they have about how government utilises their money. But if people are certain and have trust, nobody will object,” he said.
He described the alleged alterations as “disturbing,” saying they must be thoroughly investigated before the new regime comes into force.
Galambi urged the government to suspend implementation of the tax laws, currently scheduled to begin in January 2026, until the House concludes its probe.
“If alterations are found, the law should be brought back and corrected in line with what the legislators passed. If nothing is found, then implementation can go ahead,” Galambi said.
He also raised alarm over reports that enforcement powers may have been expanded to allow the Nigeria Revenue Service act without first obtaining a court order.
“We said enforcement should only be with a court order. If the court order requirement has been removed, it can create tension in the country and people will not agree with it,” he said.
The lawmakers revealed that the ad‑hoc committee set up by Speaker Tajudeen Abbas has four weeks to examine all versions of the bills, compare them with the gazetted texts and make recommendations.
They insisted that if any discrepancy is confirmed, the affected provisions must be cancelled or re‑enacted strictly in line with what Parliament originally passed, to protect constitutional order and public confidence.