A Professor of Law, Auwalu H. Yadudu, has expressed serious concern over alleged discrepancies between tax laws passed by the National Assembly and the versions later gazetted by the Federal Government, warning that the situation amounts to a possible usurpation of legislative powers.
In a detailed commentary released on Thursday, Yadudu said his review of documents highlighting differences between Acts passed by lawmakers and their gazetted counterparts led him to the conclusion that elements within the Executive arm may have unilaterally altered the laws to advance a tax reform agenda outside constitutional processes.
His remarks followed a motion raised on the floor of the House of Representatives on Wednesday by Abdussamad Dasuki, representing Kebbe/Tambuwal Federal Constituency in Sokoto State, who alleged a breach of legislative privilege. Dasuki told lawmakers that provisions of four tax bills debated, harmonised, and passed by both chambers were materially different from what appeared in the official Gazette.
Yadudu said if the allegations are verified, they strike at the foundation of constitutional governance and legislative autonomy. He questioned how laws that underwent public debate, committee scrutiny, and public hearings could later emerge with new provisions inserted or duly passed clauses removed.
Citing specific examples from the Nigeria Tax Administration Act, the law professor pointed to changes affecting petroleum income tax and value-added tax provisions, which he said undermined legislative consensus and introduced internal contradictions. He also highlighted a provision in the gazetted version mandating the use of the United States dollar as the sole currency for computing tax obligations, contrary to the version passed by lawmakers, which permits computation in any currency relevant to the transaction.
According to Yadudu, the gazetted law further introduced a requirement compelling taxpayers to pay 20 per cent of a disputed tax assessment before filing an appeal, a provision he said was absent from the law approved by the National Assembly and potentially unconstitutional.
He also criticised provisions granting tax authorities garnishee powers without court orders, warning that such measures weaken procedural fairness and judicial oversight. Yadudu noted that while the law passed by lawmakers requires court authorisation for garnishee actions, the gazetted version exempts certain tax authorities from this requirement.
“These discrepancies are not minor drafting errors,” Yadudu said, adding that they raise fundamental questions about legality, accountability, and respect for the separation of powers. He warned that the credibility of the entire tax reform exercise had been severely undermined, further eroding public trust.
The professor called on both chambers of the National Assembly to conduct a transparent and comprehensive investigation to determine how the changes were introduced and who authorised them. He also questioned the proposed January 1, 2026, commencement date for the tax reforms, warning that enforcing laws under a cloud of alleged illegality could expose the government to extensive litigation and uncertainty.
Proceeding without resolving the controversy, he cautioned, would risk legitimising impunity and further weakening legislative authority.
Earlier, Rep. Dasuki had informed the House that his comparison of the gazetted laws with the Votes and Proceedings and harmonised versions adopted by both chambers revealed inconsistencies he described as a clear breach of legislative privilege.
