The Federal Government has reaffirmed that the newly enacted tax laws will take effect from January 1, insisting that there has been no alteration to the version signed into law.
The Minister of Information and National Orientation, Mohammed Idris, made this known on Tuesday in Abuja amidst public controversy over claims that the gazetted copy of the Tax Administration Act differs from what lawmakers approved.
Idris noted that the law went through the full legislative process, including consultations, debates and presidential assent, stressing that the federal government recognises only one authentic version of the tax legislation.
“Government is going ahead with commencement of implementation, nothing has changed,” he said.
He explained that concerns about possible discrepancies in the gazette were raised at the National Assembly and that the executive would rely on the outcome of the legislature’s probe.
“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.” he said.
The minister spoke while reviewing the performance of the Tinubu administration in 2025, outlining achievements as well as challenges faced during the year.
His stance was supported by the Chairman of the Presidential Fiscal Policy and Tax Reforms Committee, Taiwo Oyedele, and the immediate past Executive Chairman of the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS), Muhammad Nami, who both urged Nigerians to ignore unofficial documents in circulation.
Oyedele cautioned against making assumptions based on unverified versions of the law, pointing out that there was uncertainty over which document reflected the version ultimately approved by lawmakers. He stressed that only the harmonised copy, duly certified by the Clerk of the National Assembly and forwarded to the President, should be considered legally binding.
Addressing widespread claims about a controversial clause, particularly Section 41(8), which suggested a requirement for a 20 per cent deposit, Oyedele said the provision had been misunderstood.
“I know that particular provision is not in the final gazette, but it was in the draft gazette,” he said.
He revealed that upon contacting the House of Representatives committee overseeing the issue, he was told that no official decision had been reached, adding that the confusion stemmed from premature actions by unidentified persons.
“Some people decided that they should write the report of the committee before the committee had met, and it had circulated everywhere,” Oyedele said.
Calling for patience, he insisted that the document in circulation did not emanate from the committee established by the House and urged the public to allow lawmakers to complete 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,” he added.
