Democracy Under Tax Siege

Weekend Trust Page 3 Comment, January 3, 2026

On the eve of 2026, a Federal Capital Territory High Court ordered the federal government to proceed with the implementation of Nigeria’s controversial new tax regime, brushing aside an application seeking to halt its commencement amid serious allegations of post-legislative alterations.

While the ruling may have settled a procedural question, it has deepened a far more dangerous problem, including public confusion, distrust and rising anger.

Millions of Nigerians as well as corporate bodies, small businesses, civil servants and struggling households have been thrown into uncertainty. They are being asked to obey laws whose authenticity remains bitterly contested. This is no small matter. It goes to the heart of democratic governance and the sanctity of the legislative process.

Justice Bello Kawu struck out the application filed by the Incorporated Trustees of African Initiative for Abuse of Public Trustees, which sought to restrain the federal government, the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS) and the National Assembly from implementing four major tax laws pending the determination of the substantive suit. Significantly, the group asked the court to restrain the government and its agencies from implementing or enforcing provisions of the Nigeria Tax Act, 2025; the Nigeria Tax Administration Act, 2025; the Nigeria Revenue Service (Establishment) Act, 2025 and the Joint Revenue Board of Nigeria (Establishment) Act, 2025 pending the determination of the substantive suit. The judge ruled that the application lacked merit and failed to show irreparable harm or constitutional violations, stressing that fiscal policy lies within the lawful authority of the government.

Legally sound as the ruling may be, it fails to confront the political and moral crisis triggered by the tax laws. Across the country, lawmakers, civil society organisations and policy experts have raised grave concerns about alleged discrepancies between what the National Assembly passed and what was eventually gazetted.

Among the most troubling allegations are claims that enforcement powers were expanded beyond legislative approval, including provisions permitting arrests, asset seizures and enforcement actions without prior court orders. There are also reports of a newly introduced requirement compelling taxpayers to deposit up to 20 per cent of disputed assessments before filing appeals—a move that effectively shuts the door of justice against the poor and small businesses.

Further allegations include the imposition of compound interest on unpaid tax liabilities, stricter reporting thresholds with more frequent filing obligations, and dollar-denominated tax computations for certain sectors, notably petroleum. Even more disturbing are claims that accountability and oversight provisions inserted by lawmakers were either diluted or quietly removed, while funding and revenue management clauses were rewritten in vague language that weakens transparency.

The federal government insists that no alterations were made and that the gazetted laws faithfully reflect what was passed by the National Assembly. But bare denials cannot erase legitimate doubts. In a democracy, trust is earned through openness, not arrogance.

Millions of Nigerians as well as corporate bodies, small businesses, civil servants and struggling households have been thrown into uncertainty. They are being asked to obey laws whose authenticity remains bitterly contested. This is no small matter. It goes to the heart of democratic governance and the sanctity of the legislative process.

While the court has spoken on procedure, respected legal minds insist that the substance remains unresolved. On the same day of the ruling, human rights lawyer, Femi Falana, argued that the tax laws could not validly take effect until the controversies surrounding their legitimacy were addressed. He questioned which “authentic” laws Nigerians are expected to obey when clean, accessible copies are unavailable.

Falana’s indictment of institutional opacity is damning. In this digital age, it is unacceptable that bills passed by the National Assembly and signed into law by the president are not readily accessible on official platforms. That failure alone fuels suspicion and invites unrest.

President Bola Tinubu has described the tax reforms as a “once-in-a-generation opportunity” to reset Nigeria’s fiscal foundation, insisting that they are not designed to raise taxes but to harmonise the system and strengthen the social contract. That ambition may be laudable, but a social contract built on confusion, secrecy and coercion is doomed to collapse.

At Daily Trust, we hold that laws command obedience only when citizens believe they were made transparently and in good faith. Anything less erodes confidence, not just in the law but in those who make and enforce it. When that happens, resentment festers and legitimacy bleeds away.

The warning signs are already here. Students are mobilising. Labour unions, professional bodies, opposition lawmakers and civil society groups are demanding a pause and introspection. These are not anarchists; they are stakeholders in a fragile democracy pleading to be heard.

Taxation is a legitimate function of government everywhere in the world, but it carries a sacred obligation, especially fairness, clarity and accountability in the use of public funds. Nigerians are not refusing to pay taxes; they are demanding honesty and respect.

It is not too late for President Tinubu and the National Assembly to do the right thing and thereafter publish clean copies of the laws, address contentious provisions openly and rebuild trust before enforcement hardens opposition.

Governing by force of law alone while ignoring public conscience is a dangerous gamble Nigeria can ill afford.