₦airaland Forum

Friend Inviter
Photos

Topic Creator
David
David
3 friends . 4 photos
Tags

Buhari
Politics
Election

Tags

Luiz
MrIbrahim
DinoMalaye
CITN
factory
MAnchestercity
EPL
Scholes
One
League

Buhari defeats Atiku in Kano with 1.07m margin
The Collation Officer for the Presidential election in Kano, Prof. Magaji Garba, announced this on Tuesday following the collation of the result from the 44 local government areas of the state.

He said that the APC Presidential candidate scored 1,464,768 to defeat the PDP candidate who scored 391,593 votes.

He added that, “the total registered voters in the state are 5,391,581, while total accredited voters are 2,006,410.

“The total votes cast during the election on Saturday is 1,964,751 and the total valid vote is 1,891,134, while the total rejected vote is 73,617.”

Below is the breakdown of the result as announced by the electoral officers from all the 44 Local Government Areas of the state.

Ajingi

APC: 21,458

PDP: 5,267

Albasu

APC: 26,412

PDP: 10,285

Rano

APC: 23,855

PDP: 7,055

Kibiya

APC: 18,085

PDP: 11,023

Gezawa

APC: 29,954

PDP: 8,246

Gwale

APC: 50,834

PDP: 12,283

Bebeji

APC: 26,023

PDP: 8,190

Minjibir

APC: 27,725

PDP: 5870

Garko

APC: 22,356

PDP: 2,840

Kabo

APC: 29,482

PDP: 8,955

Kiru

APC: 29,739

PDP: 12,205

Doguwa

APC: 25,454

PDP: 7,013

Shanono

APC: 24,173

PDP: 8,469

Danbatta

APC: 31850

PDP: 6947

Wudil

APC: 28755

PDP: 5108

Bichi

APC: 42714

PDP: 11050

Dawakin Kudu

APC 39,261

PDP 10,751

Kura

APC 34,996

PDP 9,047

Kumbotso

APC 53,923

PDP 11,366

Takai

APC 38,477

PDP 5,877

Nasarawa

APC 84,289

PDP 16,140

Makoda

APC 24,749

PDP 3,234

Fagge

APC 31,010

PDP 15,492

Kano Municipal

APC 65,579

PDP 15, 523

Tarauni

APC 52,585

PDP 7,323

Dala

APC 65,047

PDP 16,711

Rogo

APC 32,991

PDP 12,465

Tofa

APC; 19,984,

PDP; 7732

Garun Malam:

APC, 23810,

PDP 4861.

Gaya

APC: 25,864

PDP: 6,577

Kunci

APC: 20372,

PDP: 4,983

Bagwai

APC: 23,375,

PDP: 10584

Bunkure

APC: 27,232

PDP: 9528

Karaye

APC: 23023

PDP: 8265

Rimin Gado

APC: 20,589

PDP: 10,305

Madobi

APC: 26110

PDP: 13113

Dawakin-Tofa

APC: 37417

PDP: 6507

Tudun Wada

APC 38,865

PDP 10,707

Gabasawa

APC: 24420

PDP: 6130

Sumaila

APC 34,609

PDP 4904

Tsanyawa

APC 25,823

PDP 5399

Gwarzo

APC 33,581

PDP 10,682

Ungogo LGA

APC: 51,842

PDP: 10,475

Minjibir LGA

APC: 27,725

PDP: 2840

Grand Total

APC 1,464,768

PDP 391,593

Source: Pulse

Dino Melaye, the Peoples Democratic Party senatorial candidate in Kogi West appears to be coasting to victory in results declared so far by the Independent National Electoral Commission. Sen. Dino Melaye He won the highest votes in Mopamuro Local Government Area. Melaye is seeking reelection for the second term into the red chamber of the National Assembly, with his toughest rival, Mr Smart Adeyemi of the APC. APC Faction Expels Hope Uzodinma From Party Mr Ibrahim Ismaila, the INEC Collation Officer of Mopamuro LGA, announced the interim results at the collation centre in INEC LG office in Mopa at about 3: 20 a.m on Sunday. According to Ismaila, the PDP senatorial candidate, Melaye won 5112 votes, while his closest rival Smart Adeyemi of APC got 3658 votes, ADC 784 and SDP 26 votes out of the 9717 valid votes cast. There were 336 rejected votes, making total votes cast to be 10055. In the House of Representatives, the PDP also beat APC with 3703 votes. The APC got 3157 votes and ADC 2 609 votes. A total of 10042 votes were cast while 9704 votes were valid while 338 votes were rejected. In the presidential election, the PDP scored 5336 votes to the APC’s 3646. He added that out of 10055 votes cast in the election, 336 were rejected while 9507 were accepted as valid. Reports have it that the collation of final results would be done at Yagba Federal Constituency Headquarters in Isanlu in Yagba East LGA. However, the result in the ward for Yagba Federal House of Representatives showed the APC candidate beating the PDP rival, by polling 465 votes. PDP got 326 votes while ADC came second with 455 votes. Of the 1418 votes cast in the election, 138 were rejected, while 1280 were accepted as valid. Reports have it that the collation of results at local government level is still ongoing at INEC office in Mopamuro LGA

Source: Vanguard

All eyes are on the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) for the announcement of last Saturday’s presidential election between President Muhammadu Buhari, flagbearer of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC ) and Atiku Abubakar, presidential candidate of the major opposition, Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).

Since the conclusion of the exercise which was generally peaceful in most parts of the country except for few troubles in states like Rivers, Lagos and Osun, several results have been released by anxious Nigerians and supporters of the two gladiators. However, the commission has urged Nigerians not to rely on results announced on social media and other unverifiable platforms but wait for the official announcement by the electoral umpire.

According to INEC chairman, Prof. Mahmood Yakubu “Only INEC is empowered by law to declare election results. I urge everyone to refrain from issuing any result. The commission will work assiduously to ensure that the collation and declaration of results are done at the various levels expeditiously”.

Also, in a message on its verified Twitter handle, @ inecnigeria, the Commission yesterday said it was the only body constitutionally empowered to declare the results of the elections.

“It has also come to our notice that some election ‘results’ are circulating on the various social media platforms. Kindly disregard such ‘results,’ as only INEC is constitutionally empowered to declare the outcome of the elections,’’ it said

While speaking on the suspense generated by the 2015 presidential eection, which though held on a Saturday, the winner was not declared until the following Wednesday, Yakubu said the commission was working to ensure that it does not keep Nigerians waiting for days without declaring the results.

“Even though this time around we have more presidential candidates than in 2015, we have more registered voters than we had in 2015, the size of the result sheet is bigger than we had in 2015, but we are committed to concluding the process for the Presidential elections roughly about the same time that we concluded the 2015 general elections.

“We will do whatever we can to ensure that we speedily conclude the process but we won’t sacrifice accuracy for speed.”

PDP Planning Announcement Of Fake Results – APC

The APC Presidential Campaign Council (PCC) has slammed the PDP for allegedly planning announcement of fake results.

The PCC Director, Strategic Communications (Official Spokesperson), Festus Keyamo, in a statement on Sunday, called for the immediate arrest of Alhaji Buba Galadima.

The APC campaign said the PDP and Atiku’s campaign were perfecting plans to release fake presidential election results ahead of INEC and planning to mobilise hoodlums for choreographed protests.

It called on INEC, Nigeria Broadcasting Commission and all law-enforcement agencies to warn the PDP and all their surrogates against flouting the law on announcement of official results as the violators would be made to face the law, stressing that opposition does not confer immunity on anyone to flout the law.

The PCC, which urged all well-meaning Nigerians, the international community and reasonable members of the opposition not to be bought by the cheap antics of the PDP, said Nigeria will continue to exist after the election.

“Let’s restrain our wards from being used by these unscrupulous elements,” the statement added.

The APC campaign said the latest devilish plot against the country was a clear indication that their apology to the Nigerian people was just a hoax, adding that “They have learnt nothing and they have forgotten nothing as they just cannot win any election fair and square.”

The statement read, “Devastated by authentic results filtering out of polling units nationwide, our usual sources within the camp of the PDP have informed us that an emergency meeting of the main opposition party has been summoned for today somewhere in Abuja.

“Top on the agenda of the PDP is to activate the last strand of their Dubai strategies that have since collapsed like a pack of cards: they plan to release fake results of the Presidential Election later today or early Monday morning that they claim to have compiled themselves.

“Our information is that they aim to create crises and confusion that will lead to Alhaji Atiku Abubakar claiming victory in a day or two from today ahead of the official announcement of the results by INEC. Then, what would follow will be some carefully choreographed protests by pockets of hoodlums in some parts of the country. The ultimate aim is to curry the sympathy of our foreign friends and push us to the Venezuela situation.

“In preparation for this reckless move, some PDP social media agents are already flying some kites on-line as to the number of States allegedly ‘won’ by PDP. In fact, Alhaji Buba Galadima, an official spokesperson for Alhaji Atiku Abubakar has made a short video announcing PDP as the ‘winner’ of the Presidential Election.

“As an official spokesperson, he is clearly acting on behalf of Alhaji Atiku Abubakar and on his instruction. We, therefore call for the immediate arrest, interrogation and prosecution of Alhaji Buba Galadima in this regard. The world is watching and waiting on Alhaji Atiku Abubakar to say something on the video by Alhaji Buba Galadima.

“Over the years, the PDP had been declared ‘winner’ of Presidential elections under controversial circumstances. “On those occasions, President Muhammadu Buhari never took laws into his hands and declared himself President. He also never declared parallel results. He availed himself of constitutional means to address his grievance by approaching the law courts.”

PDP Wants Atiku Declared Winner

On its part, the PDP urged the INEC to declare its candidate, Atiku Abubakar, the winner of the presidential election. The party expressed the view that its candidate has won the election, and that INEC was only delaying the announcement to enable it falsify figures in favour of Presiden Buhari.

In a statement signed by Kola Ologbondiyan, its Publicity Secretary, the party said “The PDP charges INEC to immediately announce results as delivered from the polling units and declare the people’s candidate, Atiku, the winner of the February 23 presidential election.”

Copying the United Nations, the European Union Commission, the US Embassy in Abuja, the UK High Commission in Nigeria and French President Emmanuel Macron, among others, PDP wrote further, “Our position is predicated on clear and verifiable results across the nation, showing that Atiku is in clear lead both in spread and total number of votes cast.”

Citing intelligence report, PDP said, “Intelligence available to us is that INEC is delaying the announcement of results following directives by the Muhammadu Buhari Presidency and the APC which are bent on altering the figures from the polling centres and allocate fictitious figures for President Buhari.”

“Curiously, INEC server is now shut down, results are no more being transmitted and the reason is to enable the APC to inflate figures from six designated states. We call on international observers and election monitors to insist on a transparent process of transmission of results and the monitoring thereof.”

Indicting APC governors across the states, PDP wrote: “We already have reports of how APC governors have been making desperate efforts to tamper with the results of the elections in their respective states with the view to award conjured votes to President Buhari.

“In Kogi State, Governor Yahaya Bello has been making frantic moves to change results to suit APC’s intent and purposes as against the wishes of the people, expressly delivered at the polls.”

PDP indicted certain government officials, saying, “Nigerians already know how the Minister of Transport and the DG of the Buhari Campaign, Rotimi Amaechi, used the military to hold an INEC official in River State, Mrs. Mary Efeturi, hostage and insisted that she alters the results in favour of President Buhari.”

Warning the INEC chairman not to change the results of the presidential elections, PDP said, “The PDP calls on INEC Chairman, Prof. (Mahmood) Yakubu to note that in this age of Information Communication Technology, Nigerians already have the results as delivered at the polling centers and any attempt to alter any figure will be faced with vehement resistance.”

Will Orubebe Drama Repeat Itself?

The 2015 Presidential election between President Muhammadu Buhari and Goodluck Jonathan witnessed high level dramas especially during the announcement of results. The national agent of the PDP at the presidential election collation centre of INEC in Abuja, Elder Godsday Orubebe disrupted the announcements of the results. When it was obvious that the candidate of the PDP, former President Goodluck Jonathan, was losing, Orubebe dramatically seized the microphone for minutes insisting that the INEC Chairman, Prof. Attahiru Jega was bias against the PDP, hence, should suspend announcement of result.

Shouting on top of his voice and calling the INEC Chairman, Jega some unprintable names, Orubebe, a former Minister of Niger Delta Affairs, accused Jega of taking sides in the election by showing support for the APC. “You sent a committee to Rivers to probe what happened there. We submitted petitions to you about Kano, Jigawa, Katsina but you have not done anything about our complaints. You cannot continue with these results; we will not take it,” Orubebe said.

When the INEC Chairman attempted to continue with the announcement of the results, the former Minister shouted him down and said, “Mr. Jega, You cannot continue, go to your office.” Orubebe initially stopped the announcement of results from Collation Officer of Ebonyi State, Prof. Michael Amalekwu, which was later continued.

Reacting to his allegations, a calm Jega rebuked Orubebe for his public conduct as a former Minister and denied giving the election results to the APC.

In conclusion, he said “Mr Orubebe, you are a former Minister of the Federal Republic .You are a statesman in your own right. You should be careful about what you say or what allegations or accusations you make. Certainly you should be careful about your public conduct”.

Orubebe, who received backlash from Nigerians for his conduct has since tendered an unreserved apology. Speaking after the elections, he said “ Election is a passionate thing and I really regretted what took place this morning. I was unnecessarily pushed by Jega to get to that level and I did make that statement. I want to apologise particularly to young Nigerians that look up to take politics as a career to say that what happened was not intended to cause them any embarrassment.

“To Nigerians generally, I regret my actions as even an elder in the Church, and a leader, the young men expected to see a lot from me and I believe that if there was any disappointment they got from me I apologize to Nigerians and to the youths of this country”.

Speaking in a recent interview on what transpired during the period, Jega said he remained calm while Orubebe disrupted election because he as well as his colleagues were determined to conduct credible elections.

In an interview with Zero Tolerance, a quarterly magazine of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) , Jega said during the collation of results, it was evident to him that some people were bent on derailing the process by provoking him and his colleagues.

“The fact of the matter is that all of us in INEC were determined to conduct free, fair, credible and peaceful elections and by the time we came to collation it became evident that we had done our best professionally. So, we were determined to ensure that no matter the provocation we would ensure that the results were tabulated and announced. There were all sorts of allegations and accusations, but they didn’t faze us because we knew we have not done anything to warrant such allegations and accusations” he said.

Source: Independent

The Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS) says defaulting wealthy Nigerian taxpayers who have no Taxpayer Identification Numbers (TIN) have only a 30 days lien to do so. The agency also said other Nigerians and firms with a turnover of N100 million in their accounts, but not paying taxes have only a 30 days lien to do so. The Executive Chairman of FIRS, Tunde Fowler, announced the period of grace in Lagos during a meeting with Manufacturers Association of Nigeria (MAN) on Friday. Mr Fowler said about 59,000 companies charging for the Value Added Tax (VAT), and sometimes Withholding Tax (WHT), for their services, do not have TINs for the remittances to the FIRS of the VAT or WHT taxes they charge. He said the banks will return the lien on tax defaulters’ bank accounts after the 30 days grace period. The lien was lifted last Friday, February 15, 2019. To ensure tax justice, protect all taxpayers and also ensure that monies deducted from taxpayers in form of VAT or WHT by business owners are properly accounted for and paid into the right treasury, Mr Fowler said FIRS resolved to restrict the bank accounts of defaulters’.
Okowa Campaign AD
He said last year, the FIRS, after reviewing the records from banks in the country, identified some operators who make a turn-over of between N100 million and N1 billion, but do not have TINs. However, in the course of their businesses, he said these operators charge VAT and perhaps WHT without remitting same to the FIRS. “If these companies do not have TIN, it means that they have not been paying their taxes. At the same time, they have not been remitting the VAT and WHT they charge on taxpayers to appropriate authorities, in this case, FIRS.” Criticizing the practice where companies would deduct monies meant for the government and fail to remit them to the appropriate agencies, Mr Fowler said if these people do not come forward to get TIN and pay appropriate taxes, FIRS will get their bank accounts frozen. “Tax payment is not only for civil servants or salary income earners alone. Millionaires and billionaires, who make incomes from this economy need to pay taxes. It is not fair for any business or any person who makes an income from this economy not to pay taxes. “Each of us must contribute to the national till. If any taxpayer has the opportunity to make their wealth in this economy, the least they can do is to pay their tax.” The Executive Chairman also explained that following turn-up of taxpayers to clear their arrears, the FIRS wrote to the banks to lift the lien on bank accounts temporarily for a period of 30 days. “In the last two weeks, the FIRS office was always besieged by taxpayers who want to clear their arrears,” he said. The Chairman said the situation came to a point where the FIRS had to send letters to banks to lift the lien for 30 days to enable taxpayers to regularise their accounts. To remove delays in receiving notifications after transactions on taxpayers’ accounts, the FIRS chairman said online solutions have been put in place to help taxpayers. He urged taxpayers to register their companies with their e-mails and telephone numbers, adding that once payments are made, notifications would be received instantly. He identified some of the initiatives the FIRS is adopting to improve VAT compliance to include Auto VAT collect, e-Services, VAT certificates, Central VAT filing, VAT coordination, Tax Audit and Investigation, Joint Tax Force, Taxpayer Education and SAG Platform (State Accountant General Platform). FIRS would honour proof of WHT deduction by any government agency. The President of MAN, Masur Ahmed, thanked the FIRS for conceding to their demands for a review of VAT charges on animal feeds. He said it was important for Nigeria to take a cue from other countries who have zero per cent VAT rate on animal feeds. The federal government, he said, should sign an Executive Order and Gazette that animal feeds should be VAT exempt in Nigeria. “This will go a long way to stabilizing the economy because VAT charges on animal feeds have adverse multiplier effects on the cost of production,” Mr Ahmed said.

Source: Dubawa

The President and Chairman of Council, Chartered Institute of Taxation of Nigeria, Chief Cyril Ede, has said that part of the functions of the institute is to educate people on taxation. Ede said this during a tax forum for corporate and professional women with the theme, ‘Building a new Nigerian tax culture through women’ organised by the Society for Women in Taxation, an arm of the CITN in Lagos recently. He stated, “Taxation is a price we pay for a civilised society and we cannot go away from it, that is why CITN is devoting time to make sure that we encourage everybody to make the knowledge known so that it does not become a crime. We have been doing that to our children in schools as tax clubs. We are trying to catch them young.” The CITN president said the government should allow tax education to be part of knowledge in schools so that they could grow with the understanding of taxation. The first female President of CITN, Mrs Adebimpe Balogun, explained that what professional women were doing today could be compared with the case of Aba women riot. She stated, “In those days, our women were not enlightened enough to understand the role of taxation and they were so unfairly treated, because in those days, a woman could not do a number of things but to take care of her home, that was why the women fought against taxation those days.”

Source: Punch

Financial experts have urged the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS) to evolve effective communication and engagement mechanism with taxpayers to sustain economic growth. Speaking in Lagos recently, director-general of the Lagos Chamber of Commerce and Industry (LCCI), Mr Muda Yusuf said that imposing a tax lien should be a last resort of FIRS to force businesses to pay taxes, adding that tax administration should be consistent with the principles of equity, fairness, legality, accountability and due process. Yusuf was reacting to FIRS’s directive to banks to lift lien on tax defaulters’ bank accounts for 30 days. A tax lien is a legal claim by a government entity against a tax defaulter’s assets. Some corporate bodies complained of freezing and debiting of their bank accounts by FIRS through appointed banks on grounds of tax default. The FIRS, on Feb.15, wrote to banks’ managing directors to unfreeze bank accounts of the affected tax defaulters. It said the directive was issued because of the large number of taxpayers that besieged its offices in their bids to regularise their tax positions, and the inconveniences they were going through. He said: “Taxpayers should be given ample opportunity to defend their positions on tax matters before a lien is placed on their bank accounts. Some companies’ accounts are frozen in error because there is no proper engagement, documentation or communication with the taxpayers,” he said. Also, Mr Taiwo Oyedele, Tax Leader, PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC), West Africa, said the substitution power granted FIRS under the relevant laws did not support freezing of bank accounts in the manner done by the service. “For most of the companies affected, FIRS did not send an assessment to them; they only got to know about it when they got to the banks and discovered that their accounts had been frozen. “The power granted to tax authority under the various laws is to be exercised strictly under specific conditions; it does not confer the right on FIRS or any tax authority to forcefully collect taxes that are under dispute or arbitrary tax assessments. “An assessment is undisputed where it results from a self-assessment by the taxpayer or where the taxpayer has specifically agreed to the assessment,” he said. Oyedele said that the power conferred on FIRS must be exercised with caution and in accordance with the law to avoid negative impact on the business environment and ease of paying taxes.

Source: Leadership

The Federal Government has flagged-off its roads for tax-refund initiative with Dangote Construction handling a 16-kilometre Ofeme Community road network in Ohuhu in Umuahia North local Government, Abia State. The community road project which is expected to be delivered under the FG’s Road Infrastructure Development and Refurbishment Investment Tax Credit Scheme enables private sector like Dangote, Unilever, NLBG and others to invest in road construction, making it possible to upgrade access roads to industrial and manufacturing clusters and reduce cost of transportation which results into reduction in the cost of food and other services, thereby curbing inflation. Speaking during the flag-off ceremony in Ofeme Abia state, the Minister of Industry, Trade and Investment, Dr. Okechukwu Enelemah, called on the people to give the contractor the needed cooperation to enable it complete the road project in record time of one year stated in the contractual agreement. Also speaking, the Federal Controller of Works, Abia State, Engr. Nwankwo Chuwudike, who represented the Minister of Power, Works and Housing, Raji Fashola, said “the road would not only enhance the standard of living of the Ofeme community, it would also lead to reduction in the cost of transportation and ultimately help in poverty reduction.” He called on the people of Ofeme to own the project while also “appealing to all road users, and the youths of this community to be supportive, patient and mindful of road diversions during construction, while we hold the contractors to their bond of timely and quality delivery of this service.” Federal Government recently resolved to continue with massive infrastructural development across the country under Executive Order #007 signed by President Muhammadu Buhari in January. Six private sector players will execute 19 road projects under the Executive Order 7. They are Dangote Industries Limited; Lafarge Africa Plc; Unilever Nigeria Plc; Flour Mills of Nigeria Plc; Nigeria LNG Limited; and China Road and Bridge Corporation Nigeria Limited. These Investors will be investing in 19 Eligible Road Pilot scheme projects, totalling 794.4km which have been prioritised in 11 States across each of the 6 Geo-Political Zones. The Minister of Finance Mrs Zainab Ahmed who chairs the Scheme’s management committee said that “Executive Order #007 of 2019 on the Road Infrastructure Development and Refurbishment Investment Tax Credit Scheme will incentivise private sector investment in Nigerian roads across key economic corridors and industrial clusters, relieving the Government of the burden of funding the initial outlays for these investments.

Source: Todayng

Kevin De Bruyne admits Manchester City's system has been figured out by their opponents this season, but remains confident they can eclipse their achievements of the previous campaign.
City have lost four games in the Premier League this season, double the amount they did last time out, but remain at the top of the table - level on points with Liverpool, who have a game in hand.
Get Sky Sports Get a Sky Sports pass
Alongside another successful league campaign, City are still in the FA Cup, Champions League and meet Chelsea in Carabao Cup final on Sunday, live on Sky Sports.
De Bruyne is optimistic City can eclipse their success of last year and win a treble of trophies by the end of the campaign, despite manager Pep Guardiola's refusal to adapt his system.
The Belgian playmaker said: "In the league we lost a few more games than we did last year but we are still fighting on all fronts.
Pep Guardiola says Man City are dreaming of success in the Champions League
"I think other teams figure out what we do, maybe, a little bit better. They maybe also have better squads. We just added one player, the rest is the same team.
"The way we play is always going to be the same with Pep, we're not going to change. Everybody knows that.
"But in the end I don't think there is a lot of difference. We've a lot of points in the league and I think the standard we are setting is still very high.
"Maybe it's not the same as last year but maybe we'll win more titles this year. The most important thing is titles. If we win three titles we will have done better than last year."
City are in Germany ahead of Wednesday's Champions League last-16 first leg against Schalke.
Guardiola said his team were dreaming of success in Europe's elite competition this season after being knocked out at the quarter-final stages in the previous campaign.
De Bruyne, however, refused to get ahead of himself, saying: "I think the goal is not to win the four competitions. The goal is to win every game and then the further you progress.
"We are happy with where we are but we want to progress in every round we play in. That's now the Champions League.
"We want to do well and go to the quarter-finals, so we are one step closer to winning it. To set standards to win all four - that's nearly impossible."

Source: Skysports

Saudi Arabia’s crown prince is not seeking to buy English Premier League club, Manchester United, the kingdom’s media minister said on Monday.
While denying reports to that effect, the minister, Turki al-Shabanah, added that there had only been a meeting with the Saudi wealth fund regarding sponsorship.
Reports that Mohammed Bin Salman intends to buy the club are “completely false”, Shabanah, wrote on social network Twitter.
He was reacting to reports that the crown prince had sought to tempt the Glazer family to cede control of the club.
“Manchester United held a meeting with PIF Saudi to discuss (a) sponsorship opportunity,” Shabanah said, adding that no deal materialised. On Sunday, the British newspaper, the Sun, said the crown prince was in a £3.8-billion ($4.9-billion) take-over bid for one of football’s most popular clubs. The paper said a bid was first submitted in October.
It added that the fallout from the murder of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi at the kingdom’s embassy in Istanbul, however, put the “skids” on a potential offer.

Source: Punch

The Court of Appeal (CoA), in December 2018, upheld the ruling of Federal High Court (FHC) on the liability of educational institutions to pay companies income tax (CIT). The judgement arose from an appeal by Best Children International Schools Limited (BCIS/the Appellant) against Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS) in respect of the FHC decision that BCIS’ profits do not qualify for exemption under Section 23(1)(c) of Companies Income Tax Act (CITA).
Background
In 2014, FIRS assessed BCIS to CIT and tertiary education tax (TET). BCIS challenged this by instituting an action at the FHC. The FHC decided in favour of FIRS on the premise that BCIS is a company limited by shares (CLS) and thus not an educational institution with public character. BCIS appealed the decision, urging the CoA to determine the appropriateness of FHC’s reliance on Section 26 of Companies and Allied Matters Act (CAMA) in determining its exemption status under CITA and to provide an injunction restraining FIRS from enforcement of the assessment on the Appellant. The CoA upheld the FHC decision declaring that BCIS is liable to tax as it was not registered as a company limited by guarantee (CLG). According to the CoA, a CLS is for profit making and must pay income taxes. The fact that BCIS is a school or an educational institution is not enough to exempt it from payment of taxes.
Analysis and implications of the decision
Section 23(1)(c) of CITA exempts “profits of any company engaged in ecclesiastical, charitable or education activities that are of public character and the profits are not derived from a trade or business carried on by such company.”
In view of the above, I have examined the conditions and considerations for exemption below:
Nature of activity: the activities must be educational in nature. Although not defined in CITA, educational activities are easy to determine and BCIS was able to demonstrate it carries out educational activity.
Activities must be of public character: CITA does not define “public character”, thus its interpretation often generates issues. The CoA ruled that BCIS did not prove that its educational activities are of a “public character”, thus the exemption is inapplicable. Moreover, the Appellant’s proprietor introduced herself as a member of the National Association of Proprietors of Private Schools. In a similar case between American International School (AIS) and FIRS, brought before the Tax Appeal Tribunal (TAT) in 2015, FIRS sought to levy CIT on AIS on the grounds that it was not an educational institution of “public character”, even though AIS was registered as a CLG. This is because the services rendered by AIS were for a fee and could not be said to be available to every Nigerian. AIS argued that its activities are of a “public character” using an analogy of “institution of a public character” as defined in Paragraph 9 of the Requirements for Funds, Bodies or Institutions Regulations, 2011, pursuant to FIRS’ Establishment Act, which defines such body as “a body or institution whose activities are meant to benefit Nigerians in general and particularly the public and its profits are not available for distribution to its promoters”.
TAT ruled in favour of AIS, on the following bases:
No segment of the Nigerian public was excluded from the services rendered by AIS – FIRS did not provide any evidence of exclusion of any segment
AIS’ profit/income was not distributed to AIS’ directors or guarantors
AIS derives profit only from educational services.
The above presupposes that an entity would be able to claim “public character” if no segment of the Nigerian public is excluded from benefiting from its educational activities.
This then raises the question of the extent of exclusion that will negate “public character” – would gender, special needs, foreigners only etc., constitute exclusion of any segment of the Nigerian public from having access to educational services? Additionally, does the fee charged by the schools ensure availability to all segments of the Nigerian public, or does it ensure that only the segment of the public that pays enjoys the benefit?
Non-derivation of profit from a trade or business:
One of the bases of CoA’s decision was that BCIS failed to prove that its profit was not from a trade or business.
Simply put, trade is a business carried on for profit purpose. Thus, applying CITA strictly, offering educational services at a fee with a view to making profit would constitute a trade/ business which negates the exemption. Notwithstanding, applying this strict interpretation would be counter-productive, as Section 23(1)(c) of CITA is an exemption provision. It envisages that educational institutions would make profits, it only exempts those profits from tax. This view was given credence in AIS v FIRS where TAT held that charging fees for educational services is not strange to the income generation activities of a school. Considering that educational entities are mere artificial persons holding interest of promoters, ability to distribute profits from the trade to ultimate beneficiaries becomes important. This, in my view, forms the basis of taking cognizance of modality of set up.
Thus, CoA’s focus on the form of registration (which ultimately affects distribution to promoters) in BCIS v FIRS appears to be in order. One of the grounds of dismissing the appeal is that BCIS did not prove that it was registered as a CLG (proscribed from distributing profits to promoters). Rather, it was presented by FIRS as a CLS (permitted to share profits to shareholders). One perspective on this is consideration of what happens if a CLS does not distribute profits and has no intention of distributing profits and documents thisfact in its Memorandum and Articles of Association (MEMART). Would such educational institution then be considered to be of public character? In my view, this should not absolve such companies as the MEMART may be amended while the restriction under a CLG or incorporated trust is pursuant to a law which is not under the control of the promoters.
Conclusion
Educational institutions (with the ability to distribute profits to promoters or shareholders) in Nigeria may no longer be able to enjoy income tax exemption on the basis of carrying out educational activities alone. Ability to share profits (driven by mode of registration) appears to be a prerequisite for determining “public character” and ultimately, tax exemption.

Furthermore, the treatment of ancillary income from other activities (transportation and sale of books and uniforms) carried out by schools may come under more scrutiny. The jury is still out on whether these activities qualify as “other trade or business” or an extension of “educational services”.

Source: Proshare

Only recently, business owners were awakened to cruel bank transaction notifications running into millions of naira undertaken without their consent. On further enquiries from their respective banks, they were shocked to learn that the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS) had issued fiat to financial institutions to put lid on accounts of suspected tax defaulters. “We just woke up, saw notifications from our banks that the FIRS told them to put a lien of an outrageous amount in taxes we are owing; that was about a N100 million,” one of the affected business owners told THISDAY on conditions of anonymity. The Executive Chairman, Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS), Mr. Tunde Fowler, recently disclosed that the sum of N23 billion had been recovered from 45,000 tax defaulters, who had over N100 million as turnover in their respective bank accounts. He further hinted that a new batch of 40,000 millionaires would be targeted in this year. However, the latest mode of clampdown on businesses, which had failed to comply with their tax obligations have been severely criticised in some quarters, including FIRS staff and renowned tax and audit authorities. A source further told THISDAY that some staff of the revenue agency had even urged affected individuals to seek legal redress as the move by Fowler was unprecedented, with grave implications for the growth of small enterprises which are critical for economic development. Famous audit firm KPMG, had promptly questioned the FIRS move, describing it as “draconian”. It stated: “We note and salute the FIRS’ objectives to bring delinquent taxpayers into the tax net and consequently increase the federal government’s tax revenue. “However, the current practice whereby the FIRS issues fiat to freeze taxpayers’ bank accounts generally and to demand that SBs pay alleged outstanding tax liabilities from customers’ bank balances without recourse to affected persons, is draconian. “This will cast doubt on the federal government’s drive to improve the ease of doing business in Nigeria, diminish the credibility of the Nigerian tax system, and erode investors’ confidence in the Nigerian economy.” The company also called on taxpayers to “ensure that they fulfill their civic obligations by paying the right amount of taxes and filing relevant tax returns with the tax authorities, as and when due”. Apparently, under pressure from critics over its unpopular actions to compel compliance through seizure of accounts, Fowler had within the week halted the freezing of bank accounts of tax defaulters for 30 days. According to him, the directive became necessary in view of the large number of taxpayers, who had besieged its offices in their bid to regularise their tax positions, coupled with the inconveniences they encountered during the process.But in spite of the criticisms bedevilling the FIRS measures, particularly the seeming lack of due process in freezing bank accounts, the service appears unperturbed and has maintained that it possessed powers under its Establishment Act to take the steps. Justifying its actions, FIRS spokesman, Mr. Wahab Gbadamosi, responding to THISDAY enquiries maintained that “tax is anchored on law, the basis of tax is law in the first place” stressing that the FIRS Establishment Act (FIRSEA), Company Income Tax Act (CITA) among others already provided the basis for its actions. Quoting relevant sections of the Act, Gbadamosi said, “The Service may require any person to give information as to any money, fund or other assets, which may be held by him for, or of any money due from him to, any person.
“Also note that Section 49 of CITA further empowers FIRS to take all the steps we have taken with respect to recovery of tax debts from billionaire and millionaire tax defaulters.” What Gbadamosi does not seem to understand is that a country tax regime is one of the factors potential investors consider in choosing where to invest their funds. Nevertheless, KPMG, in its position paper released in February, argued that the revenue collection agency had overstepped its bound in a bid to expand its tax revenue base. The firm added that contrary to FIRS’ claim, “nothing in the CITA or FIRSEA authorises the FIRS to impose a freeze order on a taxpayer’s bank account beyond the amount of tax proven to be due and payable by that taxpayer.” As the argument over the legality or otherwise of the FIRS actions persist, particular attention should be paid to the negative impact it would have on the investment atmosphere, especially at a period when the federal government is working hard to improve the ease of doing business in the country, which had been a point of concern to wooing foreign investment into the country. The freezing of companies’ bank accounts at will further calls to question the non-disclosure obligations the banks themselves owe to customers, especially as this is not yet a criminal case until proven by a court of law, and could dampen the confidence of small and medium enterprises, which are struggling to grow under an already harsh business environment. According to a source who had his accounts frozen and later released, what they (FIRS) are doing is illegal and abnormal without following the law. There was nothing like consulting the taxpayers, telling them of their discrepancy and issues in their taxes-absolutely nothing like that. “Somebody sits down, calls the bank, looks at your turnover and slams you a tax, without confirming whether you have paid or not, whether you are in compliance or not, whether you are in breach or not and without even going through your TIN because they are the custodian of who is an active tax payer or not.” The resultant development had seen those who had no issues in their tax filing suffer unnecessarily during the siege on their accounts by the FIRS, which requested affected clients to show up at its headquarters in Abuja to reconcile their tax records. Although, FIRS deserves commendation for embarking on innovations that had seen tax receipts grow in recent times, its new approach to enforcing compliance poses a grave concern, which if not addressed on time could result in tyranny and oppression in tax administration with all its attendant consequences for the economy.

Source: This Day

As a result of complaints by Nigerians and industry experts, the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS) has written to banks, directing them to lift the lien on tax defaulters’ bank accounts for 30 days. The directive, which takes immediate effect, was contained in a letter from the Chairman, FIRS, to bank Managing Directors. FIRS, however, made the announcement in a statement posted on its official Twitter account Friday night. The agency explained that it issued the directive because of the large number of taxpayers, who have besieged its offices in their bid to regularize their tax positions and the inconveniences they are going through.
It should be remembered that the FIRS recently issued Letters of Substitution, pursuant to Section 49 of the Companies Income Tax Act (CITA) 2004 and Section 31 of the Federal Inland Revenue Service Establishment Act (FIRSEA) 2007, to banks in Nigeria, appointing them as tax collecting agents for certain listed customers maintaining bank accounts with such banks. The FIRS, in the said Letters of Substitution, alleged that the affected companies have breached their tax obligations by failing to pay tax to the FIRS, as and when due, and provided the SBs with an indication of a specific amount owed by each said company. The SBs were directed to set aside the indicated sums and pay such over to the FIRS in full or partial payment of the alleged tax debt. KPMG advisory services had on Thursday stated that FIRS have gone draconian by giving fiats to banks to freeze accounts of suspected tax defaulters. “The current practice whereby the FIRS issues fiats to freeze taxpayers’ bank accounts generally and to demand that SBs pay alleged outstanding tax liabilities from customers’ bank balances without recourse to affected persons, is draconian. This will cast doubt on the Federal Government’s drive to improve the ease of doing business in Nigeria, diminish the credibility of the Nigerian tax system, and erode investors’ confidence in the Nigerian economy,” the for wrote in an explanatory note. It, however, stated that taxpayers must also ensure that they fulfil their civic obligations by paying the right amount of taxes and filing relevant tax returns with the tax authorities, as and when due.

Source: Tribune

The Acting Registrar General of the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC), Lady Azuka Azinge, has said that the Federal Government reviewed the fee for business registration downward by 50 per cent to encourage Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) to formalise their businesses.
She said this when the management of Daily Trust Newspaper visited her in the CAC headquarters in Abuja yesterday.
Represented by the Commission’s Director of Registry, Mr Abdul Hakeem Mohammed, Lady Azinge said the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) estimated that about 34 million SMEs operate in the informal sector of the economy and the fee reduction was targeted at enrolling them into the formal sector of the economy.
She said the reduction, which was a part of the Commission’s Business Incentive Strategy (BIS), brought down the fee for business registration from N10, 000 to N5,000 to encourage more SMEs to give their businesses formal identities.
The CAC boss said the incentive was meant to last for the last quarter of 2018 but popular demand led to an extension to March 31, 2019.
She urged SMEs that are yet to take advantage of the incentive window to register their business names before the deadline.
The Head of Public Affairs Department of CAC, Mr. Godfrey Ike, commended Daily Trust for being professional and setting the pace for journalism practice in Nigeria.


Source: Daily Trust

The Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS) recently issued Letters of Substitution, pursuant to Section 49 of the Companies Income Tax Act (CITA) 2004 and Section 31 of the Federal Inland Revenue Service Establishment Act (FIRSEA) 2007, to banks in Nigeria (“the Substitution Banks” or “SBs”), appointing them as tax collecting agents for certain listed customers (“affected companies”) maintaining bank accounts with such banks. The FIRS, in the said Letters of Substitution, alleges that the affected companies have breached their tax obligations by failing to pay tax to the FIRS, as and when due, and provided the SBs with an indication of a specific amount owed by each said company. The SBs were directed to set aside the indicated sums and pay such over to the FIRS in full or partial payment of the alleged tax debt.
Furthermore, the FIRS demanded that the banks should not execute any mandates on those accounts without its prior approval. A number of taxpayers concerning whom similar Letters of Substitution were issued by the FIRS in 2018, suffered the consequence of being unable to access their bank accounts for paying salaries or making routine transactions until the “freeze” order imposed by the FIRS was lifted. Indeed, the first time that many affected companies knew of the existence of these Letters of Substitution was typically when bank mandates were rejected by their bankers. The FIRS also demanded the SBs to provide the companies’ (and their subsidiaries’) detailed bank statements and financial records, and records of all principal officers of the companies. The FIRS based its actions on the provisions of Sections 28 and 29 of the FIRSEA.
Background
Sections 31 of the FIRSEA and Section 49 of CITA allow the FIRS to appoint any person, by notice in writing, to be an agent of a taxpayer, where such person is in custody of any money belonging (or due) to the taxpayer. The appointed agent may be required by such notice to pay any tax “payable” by the taxpayer to the FIRS out of the taxpayer’s money in his custody. The FIRSEA and CITA provide that any appointment made by the FIRS under these sections of the law would be “subject to the provisions of the tax legislation with respect to objections and appeals”. Section 69 of CITA allows a taxpayer to object to a disputed assessment within thirty (30) days from the date of service of the notice of assessment. Section 77(3) of CITA further provides that the collection of tax, in any case where notice of an objection or appeal has been given by a taxpayer, shall remain in abeyance until such objection or appeal is determined.
Nothing in the CITA or FIRSEA authorises the FIRS to impose a freeze order on a taxpayer’s bank account beyond the amount of tax proven to be due and payable by that taxpayer. The requirement directed to banks not to honour mandates from taxpayers over and above the tax amount supposedly proven by FIRS to be due and payable is without foundation and goes too far.
Matters Arising
It is not clear from the provisions of the FIRSEA or CITA relied upon by the FIRS that its power of substitution is expected to be exercised without notice to the affected taxpayers. Indeed, it seems reasonable that no tax would be due from a taxpayer ex parte or at the sole discretion of the tax authority. At least, a tax assessment would first have been issued either on a self-assessment basis by the taxpayer, or by the FIRS in exercise of its powers to issue a deemed income tax assessment in default of a self-assessment (or a tax audit-related assessment following an audit exercise). The tax assessment must have become final and conclusive before a tax payment can be said to be due and payable by a taxpayer. The burden should, expectedly, be on the FIRS to prove to the SBs that a tax assessment issued against each taxpayer has, indeed, become final and conclusive prior to issuance of the Letter of Substitution. The FIRS makes no effort in its Letter to “prove” or provide any reasonable basis for the banks to conclude that tax payments are, indeed, due from the taxpayers listed therein.
The SBs are constituted by Section 49 of CITA and Section 31 of the FIRSEA to be agents of the affected taxpayers and required to act on their behalf. Clearly, the intention of the law is to preserve the tax due and prevent a taxpayer from dissipating its resources without settling its tax liabilities. This must be a measure of last resort or justified by extreme circumstances of a difficult taxpayer with acknowledged liabilities. The SBs, being agents to the taxpayer, owe a duty of care to their principal and not to the FIRS. The SBs, therefore, are exposed to risks, if they were to pay over the sums demanded by the FIRS and it should be established that no such liability (or less liability than the sum actually paid) was due from the taxpayer on whose behalf such payment was made. The Letter of Substitution does not include an indemnity to the SBs for this eventuality.
Sections 31(5) and 49(3) of the FIRSEA and CITA, respectively, provide that any notice issued by the FIRS to appoint a bank as an agent of tax collection would be subject to objections and appeals as though such notice were an assessment. Further, Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria guarantees a person’s right to fair hearing in civil matters, which include taxation. Hence, the FIRS should allow for mechanisms whereby affected persons can object to and appeal against notices issued under the above-referenced provisions. Where a taxpayer disagrees with a notice issued by the FIRS, it is unclear if SBs (in their capacity as agents of the taxpayers) would be required to object to the FIRS on behalf of the customer, or if the taxpayer would be required to object to the notice directly. In our view, the latter option is more expedient.
The letters to the SBs leave them with 7 days within which to comply with the directives of the FIRS. This is contrary to the provisions of Sections 69 and 77(3) of CITA which permit a taxpayer a 30-day period of review and objection. Since the Letter of Substitution is to be treated as a tax assessment, it is important for due process to be observed, in which case SBs should be afforded sufficient time to notify their customers of their appointment. We hope that the FIRS will consider this and, in future, afford SBs the minimum statutory time within which to respond to their demand. SBs may need to develop an administrative framework for monitoring the status of responses by taxpayers as a basis for further engagement with the FIRS on their appointment. This is to avoid the risk of their customers’ tax liabilities vesting permanently on them by virtue of Section 31(3) of the FIRSEA and Section 49(1) of CITA which makes the tax payment recoverable from the SBs in the event of their default to act. SBs may be caught between the devil and the deep blue sea in the circumstance of a taxpayer that disputes payment, and an FIRS that insists on payment. Tracking these matters and making regular reports to the FIRS within the time afforded by law may be the only way for the SBs to avoid incurring direct liability in these circumstances.
Nothing in the CITA or FIRSEA authorises the FIRS to impose a freeze order on a taxpayer’s bank account beyond the amount of tax proven to be due and payable by that taxpayer. The requirement directed to banks not to honour mandates from taxpayers over and above the tax amount supposedly proven by FIRS to be due and payable is without foundation and goes too far.
Generally, a bank has a fiduciary obligation to maintain the confidentiality of its customers and their transactions, and to prevent third-party access to the customers’ account information. The exceptions to this duty are in cases where the bank is required by law or a court of competent authority to make disclosure, and where the customer consents to the disclosure. We note that the FIRSEA and CITA allow the FIRS to request certain banking information (without breaching the bank’s duty of confidentiality), such as names and addresses of new customers and specific individuals, and details of transactions above N5 million and N10 million for individuals and companies, respectively. However, these provisions, including relevant provisos, should not be interpreted to have given the FIRS the absolute power to demand all forms of customer information, including details of account balances, bank statements and other financial records of a company, its subsidiaries or principal officers; or power to direct when a bank may honour its customers’ transaction requests. We think that the FIRS might be better served approaching a court of law for an enabling order providing it with authority to obtain such information as described in the Letter of Substitution.
To conclude, we note and salute the FIRS’ objectives to bring delinquent taxpayers into the tax net and consequently increase the Federal Government’s tax revenue. However, the current practice whereby the FIRS issues fiats to freeze taxpayers’ bank accounts generally and to demand that SBs pay alleged outstanding tax liabilities from customers’ bank balances without recourse to affected persons, is draconian. This will cast doubt on the Federal Government’s drive to improve the ease of doing business in Nigeria, diminish the credibility of the Nigerian tax system, and erode investors’ confidence in the Nigerian economy. Taxpayers must also ensure that they fulfil their civic obligations by paying the right amount of taxes and filing relevant tax returns with the tax authorities, as and when due. This will place them in the right position to challenge any austere directive issued by tax authorities. In this regard, aggrieved parties should not shy away from seeking legal redress whenever they perceive that their statutory rights have been breached. This will, hopefully, ensure probity in tax administration in Nigeria and further contribute to our tax jurisprudence.

Source: Proshare

KPMG, one of the Big Four auditors in the world, says Nigeria’s Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS) has gone draconian by giving fiats to banks to freeze accounts of suspected tax defaulters.
In September 2018, Tunde Fowler, FIRS chairman, said the service was going after 6,772 tax defaulters, stating that they would have their account frozen till they pay due taxes.
“So, all these ones of TIN and no pay and no TIN and no pay, to the total of 6772 will have their accounts frozen or put under substitution pending when they come forward,” Fowler had said.
“First, they refused to come forward in 2016, they refused to come forward under VAT and are still operating here. So, we are putting them under notice that it is their civic responsibility to pay tax and to file returns on these accounts.”
In reality, FIRS has not only frozen the accounts in question, but have also stopped some companies from paying staff salaries or carrying out routine transactions.
In addition to this, FIRS has also ordered the banks to deduct the alleged tax debt from these bank accounts “in full or partial payment”.
In its KPMG in Nigeria issue 2.5 released in February 2019, the professional service firm, said FIRS has gone too far in its bid to get more people into the tax net.
KPMG argued that Section 69 of Companies Income Tax Act (CITA) 2004 “allows a taxpayer to object to a disputed assessment within thirty (30) days from the date of service of the notice of assessment”.
The firm adds that “Section 77(3) of CITA further provides that the collection of tax, in any case where notice of an objection or appeal has been given by a taxpayer, shall remain in abeyance until such objection or appeal is determined”.
KPMG CONTRAVENING COMPANIES INCOME TAX ACT
KPMG said “nothing in the CITA or FIRSEA authorises the FIRS to impose a freeze order on a taxpayer’s bank account beyond the amount of tax proven to be due and payable by that taxpayer”.
“The requirement directed to banks not to honour mandates from taxpayers over and above the tax amount supposedly proven by FIRS to be due and payable is without foundation and goes too far.”
It added that “the letters to the SBs leave them with 7 days within which to comply with the directives of the FIRS. This is contrary to the provisions of Sections 69 and 77(3) of CITA which permit a taxpayer a 30-day period of review and objection”.
FIRS BREACHING BANK-CLIENT CONFIDENTIALITY
KPMG stated that the letters of substitution issued to the banks breach the confidentiality agreement between banks and their clients.
“Generally, a bank has a fiduciary obligation to maintain the confidentiality of its customers and their transactions, and to prevent third-party access to the customers’ account information,” KPMG said.
“The exceptions to this duty are in cases where the bank is required by law or a court of competent authority to make disclosure, and where the customer consents to the disclosure.
“We note that the FIRSEA and CITA allow the FIRS to request certain banking information (without breaching the bank’s duty of confidentiality), such as names and addresses of new customers and specific individuals, and details of transactions above N5 million and N10 million for individuals and companies, respectively.
“However, these provisions, including relevant provisos, should not be interpreted to have given the FIRS the absolute power to demand all forms of customer information, including details of account balances, bank statements and other financial records of a company, its subsidiaries or principal officers; or power to direct when a bank may honour its customers’ transaction requests.”
KPMG SALUTES FIRS TAX DRIVE — WITH CAUTION
Concluding its intervention to FIRS, KPMG said: “We note and salute the FIRS’ objectives to bring delinquent taxpayers into the tax net and consequently increase the Federal Government’s tax revenue”.
“However, the current practice whereby the FIRS issues fiats to freeze taxpayers’ bank accounts generally and to demand that SBs pay alleged outstanding tax liabilities from customers’ bank balances without recourse to affected persons, is draconian.
“This will cast doubt on the Federal Government’s drive to improve the ease of doing business in Nigeria, diminish the credibility of the Nigerian tax system, and erode investors’ confidence in the Nigerian economy.”
The company also called on taxpayers to “ensure that they fulfil their civic obligations by paying the right amount of taxes and filing relevant tax returns with the tax authorities, as and when due”.


Source: The Cable

Few days after being accused of refusing to remit over N2tn said to have been seized from corrupt public officeholders, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission has been linked to another scandal following the revelation that the commission recovered over N1.7bn from 15 companies for the Federal Inland Revenue Service but failed to remit same to the agency.
Several calls, e-mails and SMS to the spokesperson for the EFCC, Mr. Wilson Uwujaren, for response on Saturday, were not replied.
The Chief Executive Officer, Panic Alert Security System, Mr. George Uboh, while appearing before the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges and Public Petition on August 26, had disclosed how the Chairman of the EFCC, Ibrahim Lamorde, allegedly short-changed Nigeria of over N2tn.
But Uboh, in an interview with journalists in Abuja on Saturday, said the over N1.7bn recovered from 15 companies was “over-due taxes on behalf of FIRS.”
He alleged that the money was not remitted to the agency, saying, “FIRS in its submission denied receiving any payments/transfers from EFCC in respect of the said companies.”
Documents Uboh made available to journalists showed that the funds were recovered between 2010 and 2011.
The security expert said members of the public interested in getting details of his earlier N2tn seized by EFCC but unremitted to government should download the documents from his website: www.pasecng.com.
The petitioner also expressed his readiness to expose the country’s former presidents, vice presidents, current and ex-governors as well as the current administration over numerous shady practices.
“EFCC has been the house of refuge where looters hide. I want to demystify EFCC”, Uboh stated.
The breakdown of the N1,767,594,842.65 said to have been recovered by the EFCC and list of the 15 companies include Zakhem Construction Limited — N401m; Daewoo Nigeria Limited — N208m; WAPCO — N311m; Mikano International Limited —N16m; Protea Hotel, Apo Apartments — N10m; Reiz Continental Hotels — N32m; Coscharis Motors Limited — N130m; and Elizade Nigeria Limited — N555m.
Others are ITCC Technical Limited, Kaduna — N47m; Grand Ibro Hotel, Abuja — N14m; Efab Properties, Abuja — N19m; Le Meridien Hotel, Port Harcourt – N10m; Northern Nigeria Flour Mills Plc – N2.7m; Ni’ Ima Guest Palace – N2.8m; and Okomu Oil Palm Plc – N5m.

Source: Business Daily

The Independent National Electoral Commission has said that measures were put in place to ensure that Observer Groups accredited for the 2019 general elections were apolitical.
The Independent National Electoral Commission has said that measures were put in place to ensure that Observer Groups accredited for the 2019 general elections were apolitical.
INEC National Commissioner, Prof. Antonia Okoosi-Simbine, who is the Chairperson, Election and Party Monitoring Committee, disclosed this in an interview with the News Agency of Nigeria on Wednesday in Abuja.
Okoosi-Simbine said that considering the importance of elections, the commission carried out in house due diligence to ensure that accredited observers were genuine and not those infiltrated by political parties or politicians.
She said one of the measures employed by the commission in accrediting observers was to relate with groups that had experience or well known for having worked with INEC.
She said: “Another criteria is that such group must be registered with the Corporate Affairs Commission. A lot of the groups that are working for politicians or political parties are not usually registered with the CAC.”
Okoosi-Simbine said though some partisan groups always try to apply for accreditation but with due diligence by the commission, such groups were denied accreditation.
She said that even after accreditation, INEC could withdraw the accreditation of any group considered inimical to the electoral process.
Okoosi-Simbine said that observers had helped the commission to improve the electoral process through their reports.
She cited the adoption of simultaneous accreditation and voting system as one of the recommendations by observer groups after the 2015 general elections.
She said: “We considered that as a very important suggestion because we noted that approximately two million people accredited during the 2015 general elections did not return to vote.”
Asked if INEC was paying observer groups, Okoosi-Simbine said that the commission was not funding any group to observe Nigeria elections, saying they were expected to source their funds.
She said: “The commission absolutely pays nothing. It does not keep accommodation; it does not give transport to observer groups.
“However, the process of observation cost the commission money. In the sense that the commission has to pay for venue, tea and coffee break, it has to provide the kits that are provided for observers.
“The commission has to produce it so that everybody is dressed in a uniform manner and the polling officers can easily identify them as they come to the polling units.
“So the commission actually spends money on these processes.’’
She advised accredited observer groups to stick to approved guidelines by the commission in carrying out their duties.
Okoosi-Simbine reminded them that they were not to monitor but observe elections and advised them to report any anomaly to the commission.



Source: The Eagle

Prince Adetokunbo Kayode, President of Abuja Chamber of Commerce and Industry (ACCI), has called for urgent tax reforms to save Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) from stifling demands for tax even before they make profit.
Kayode who stated this while speaking with newsmen in Abuja, explained that the practice of mandatory requirement for tax clearance from companies newly registered was a disincentive for the growth and thriving of SMEs in the country and also one of the stumbling blocks in the Ease of Doing Business.
While noting the ongoing progress in national tax reforms, the ACCI boss advised tax authorities to immediately review the tax clearance system to reduce the burden placed on new and young companies sprouting up across the country.
“The growth of Small, Medium and Micro Enterprises depends very much on the enabling environment the government is able to create for them to grow.
“Their growth will in turn create jobs and collective wealth for the nation. All that is necessary must be done to nurture such new businesses.
“New companies should not be mandated to produce tax clearance until after a year or so of operations”, he noted.
Wondering why tax must be imposed before operations, Kayode said members of the Chamber of Commerce had variously lamented the negative effect of that policy in their efforts to run their legitimate businesses.
“If this country must grow and have a vibrant economy, the plight of the SMEs must be adequately taken into account. SMEs are of fundamental importance to us due the meaningful contribution they add to economic development.
“They are constantly expanding output, generating employment, redistributing income, promoting indigenous entrepreneurship as well as greatly producing primary goods that strengthen industrial linkages. The sector is accountable for about 85 per cent of the total industrial employment in the country and between 10-15 per cent of the total manufacturing output”, the President of ACCI insisted.

Source: Punch

The Society of Women in Taxation, Lagos State Chapter, says it is committed to promoting tax knowledge to women in society.
In a statement on Monday, SWIT said it would be educating women during its upcoming tax forum for corporate and professional women in Lagos with the theme, ‘Building a new Nigerian tax culture through women.’
The Chairperson , SWIT , Lagos State Chapter, Mrs Dena-Rose Ajayi, said women were nation builders.
“Thus, there is a need to properly enlighten them on tax policy issues,” she said
The chairperson said participants at the forum would include women “who are captains of industries and successful women leaders in both private and public establishments.”
She said the event would also feature award session during which deserving individuals and organisations would be recognised for their contributions to development of taxation in Nigeria.
According to the statement, the chapter recently held its regular tax programme for the youth by organising an inaugural tax debate for the secondary school pupils both in public and private schools in the state.


Source: Punch

The Lagos Chamber of Commerce and Industry, LCCI, yesterday, countered the move by the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS) to restrain bank accounts of some individuals and businesses over tax defaults.
Muda Yusuf, LCCI boss…debt stock profile not sustainable
In a communiqué by the Council of the LCCI, the Director General, LCCI, Mr. Muda Yusuf, said the move would be counter-productive to other measures of the government aimed at promoting investments and financial inclusion.
LCCI said, “Revenue generation is not an end in itself, it is a means to an end. The ultimate objective is to ensure equity, improve welfare of citizens, create jobs and promote the advancement of the economy. The activities of agencies of government should be in tandem with the Ease of Doing Business Agenda of government and the promotion of the ideals of the Economic Recovery and Growth Plan (ERGP).”
Yusuf noted that tax administration should be consistent with the principles of equity, fairness, legality, accountability and due process.
“Taxpayers should be given ample opportunity to defend their positions on tax matters before a lien is placed on their bank accounts. There are instances where company accounts were frozen in error because there was no proper engagement, documentation or communication with the tax payers.

Source: Punch

The Federal Inland Revenue Service is to dispose of the properties of 52 companies over tax debts valued at about N3.4bn.
Investigations by our correspondent in Abuja showed that already, the Legal Department of the Service had begun the process to sell the properties in a bid to effectively implement the initiative.
It was learnt that apart from the 52 companies, ten other companies are still under investigation for tax evasion while enforcement action is expected to be carried out on another 10 companies in Lagos with a total tax value of N727.42m.
Our correspondent gathered that based on an investigation conducted by the FIRS, some private organisations that own properties in Nigeria had not been paying any form of taxes.
Following this discovery, it was learnt that the agency took a review of all properties that were under corporate ownership.
By law, where a company has not filed or paid any taxes, the tax authority used an estimated assessment based on the company’s turnover.
In order to ascertain the level of turnover, the FIRS wrote to commercial banks asking for details of the turnover of some of the affected companies.
The first letter to commercial banks from the FIRS, findings showed, was written in May last year.
The letter requested a list of companies, partnerships and enterprises with a banking turnover of N10bn and above.
The move was aimed at ascertaining those companies that are compliant with the tax laws and those that are not compliant.
The second letter according to findings was written to all commercial banks in October 2018, and the responses from the banks are currently being reviewed by the FIRS.
It was learnt that the move was part of the special programme to drive compliance.
The special programme is targeted at recovering tax liabilities from non-compliant companies that are currently being assessed for tax under the Company Income Tax Act.
Speaking on the steps to ensure compliance, the FIRS Chairman, Mr Tunde Fowler, had on Thursday during a meeting with the acting Inspector-General of Police, Mohammed Adamu, explained that the agency would collaborate with security agencies this year to go after wealthy tax defaulters.
He had requested the Nigeria Police to assist the FIRS to bring the tax defaulters to pay their taxes.
He said, “We looked at businesses, partnerships of any activity that has banking turnover between N100m and N999m. We have done a review of this group of businesses.
“We have about seven more banks that we are still waiting for the return from and to review their information.
“So far, we have 45,361 that have TINs and are making payments. We have 40,611 that have TINs, that made tax payment and, we have 44,504 that have no TIN and no payment.
“So, when you look at it from a glance, we have close to 75,000 in this group that are still not taxpayers and we have said the payment of tax is not only for the civil servants. it’s for all Nigerians.
“So, the millionaires and the billionaires will pay tax on behalf of what is due to the national coffers.”
Fowler commended the Nigerian Police Force for its support and collaboration over the years, which he said, had helped the FIRS to achieve its target and requested for more support to enable it to recover taxes due to rich tax evaders in 2019.

Source: Punch

The Federal Inland Revenue Service has appointed Sterling Bank Plc as a collecting agent to recover taxes from 2,933 defaulting companies.
This was disclosed in a letter signed by the Chairman, FIRS, Mr Tunde Fowler, and addressed to the Managing Director/Chief Executive Officer, Sterling Bank, Abubakar Suleiman.
The letter, which was obtained by our correspondent, was titled, ‘Letter of substitution appointing your bank as collecting agent and notice for release of bank statement and other financial records of the following attached companies.’
In the letter, the tax agency informed the bank of the failure of 2,933 listed companies to comply with provisions of the tax laws by not paying taxes due to the FIRS.
The letter read in part, “Pursuant to my powers under Section 49 of the Companies Income Tax Cap C12 LFN 2004 as amended and Section 31 of the FIRS (Establishment) Act No. 13 of 2007, I hereby appoint your bank as a collecting agent for the full recovery of the amount displayed on the attached schedule payable to the FIRS.
“In this regard, you are required to set aside the aforesaid sum and pay same to the credit of these attached companies in full or partial amortisation of its aforesaid tax debt. This should be done prior to the execution of all or any related transactions involving these companies or any of its subsidiaries.
“I further request that the FIRS be informed of any transactions prior to execution on the accounts, especially the transfer of funds to or from offshore or local accounts of these companies or any of its subsidiaries. Only on my authority should such transactions be exited.”
The FIRS also requested the bank to forward to it, within 72 hours, the receipt of the appointment letter, detailed bank statements and financial records for the attached companies and/ or any of its subsidiaries, holding accounts with the bank.
“You are also to provide records of all principal officers related to any of these companies. The statement should cover the period from the date the accounts were opened to the date of receipt of this notice,” it stated.
The FIRS also informed the bank that failure to comply fully with the notice was an offence punishable under the various tax laws and the criminal code.

Oil and gas companies operating in Nigeria got a total of 12,383 service permits in 2018 for the services rendered in the sector.
The Department of Petroleum Resources said the service permits were issued in three categories.
In a document detailing some of its achievements in 2018, which was obtained by our correspondent from the agency in Abuja on Friday, the DPR outlined the categories as general, major and special.
The agency said, “DPR granted a total of 12,383 oil and gas industry service permits in 2018. The permits include 2,730 in the general category; 5,963 in the major category; and 3,690 in the special category.”
The DPR has the statutory responsibility of ensuring compliance with petroleum laws, regulations and guidelines in the oil and gas industry.
The discharge of these responsibilities involved monitoring of operations at drilling sites, production wells, production platforms and flow stations, crude oil export terminals, refineries, storage depots, pump stations and retail outlets.
It also discharges these responsibilities by monitoring any other location where petroleum is either stored or sold and all pipelines carrying crude oil, natural gas and petroleum products while carrying out the additional functions that include the processing of industry applications for leases, licences and permits.
On the basis of the legal framework for the service permits, the agency stated that any service company that operated in the oil and gas sector without a service permit would be in contravention of the provision of the DPR regulation.
In its guidelines for oil and gas industry service companies permit, the DPR said a company might apply for and obtain permits in more than one category provided it was registered by Corporate Affairs Commission and had the appropriate legal status as well as the competencies, capabilities or equipment to carry out the jobs.
It said the guidelines were issued pursuant to Section 8, subsection 1(a) and 9, subsection 1(a) & (h) of the Petroleum (Drilling and Production) Amendment Regulations 1988, which empowered the director of petroleum resources to formulate regulations/guidelines from time to time for the smooth and safe operations in the oil and gas industry.

Source: Punch

The Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS) says it will go after estimated 40, 000 millionaire tax defaulters in 2019.
Mr Wahab Gbadamosi, the Head Communications and Servicom Department of FIRS, disclosed this in a statement in Abuja on Thursday.
Gbadamosi quoted the Executive Chairman of the service, Mr Tunde Fowler, as making this disclosure when he received the Acting Inspector General of Police, (I-G) Mohammed Adamu who paid him a courtesy visit.
Fowler said that FIRS identified 45, 000 millionaire tax evaders in 2018 and recovered N23 billion through substitution of their bank accounts.
He explained that N23 billion was realised from over 45, 000 tax defaulters that had over N100 million as turnover in their accounts.
He called for collaboration with stakeholders like the Police to continue to go after wealthy tax defaulters in 2019.
Fowler requested the Nigeria Police to help the Service bring the tax evaders to pay their taxes.
He thanked the Nigerian Police Force for its support and collaboration over the years in assisting FIRS to achieve its target.
He sought for more support and collaboration to enable it recovers due taxes from more 40,000 rich tax defaulters in 2019.
“Let me put on record that the Nigeria Police Force has been extremely helpful to FIRS. Without the Police, I doubt if the Service would have been able to achieve what we have achieved.
“2018 was a successful year. The FIRS collected a total of N5.320 trillion of tax revenue. This is the highest revenue collection in the history of the service.
“This is significant, because this collection was when oil prices oscillated between $50 and $70 per barrel.
“Oil price was at an average of $100 to $120 per barrel between 2012 when FIRS collected N5.07 trillion.
“Oil component of the N5.320 trillion is N2.467 trillion, which represents 46.38 per cent, while non-oil element of the collection is N2.852 trillion, which is equal to 53.62 per cent,” he explained.
The acting I-G assured FIRS that the Police would continue to support the service because the job of revenue generation was critical to the survival of the nation.
Adamu said that the service rendered by FIRS was important for the survival of the country.
He emphasised the need for the service to be supported by all stakeholders so that it could achieve its goals.


Source: PM News

A Federal High Court in Lagos on Thursday, fixed March 26 to hear a preliminary objection to a suit by MTN Nigeria Communication Ltd, against the Attorney General of the Federation, over alleged N242 billion and 1.3 billion dollars import duties and withholding tax assessments.
The News Agency of Nigeria reports that MTN instituted the suit by a writ, dated September 10, 2018, challenging the legality of the AGF’s assessment of its import duties, withholding tax and value-added tax in the sums of N242 billion and 1.3 billion dollars.
The plaintiff is seeking among other reliefs, a declaration that the AGF’s demand of the sums of N242 billion and 1.3 billion dollars from MTN, is premised on a process which is malicious, unreasonable and made on an incorrect legal basis.
When the case was called on Thursday, Mr Damian Dodo (SAN), appeared for MTN, leading Messrs Tunde Fagbonhulu (SAN), Prof. Fabian Ajogwu (SAN) and Olabode Olanipekun (SAN).
Mr Terhemba Agbe, a Senior State Counsel from the Federal Ministry of Justice, announced appearances for the AGF.
Plaintiff’s counsel then informed the court that the matter was adjourned for mention, adding that plaintiff had filed all necessary papers and pleadings and is prepared to open its case.
In response, Agbe informed the court of a preliminary objection to the suit dated November 5, 2018, and filed on November 7, 2018, which he said had been served on the plaintiff.
He told the court that he was informed that the plaintiff had filed a reply to the objection, but that he was yet to receive same.
Justice Aneke consequently fixed March 26, for hearing of the defendant’s preliminary objection.
In its writ of summons, MTN is seeking declaratory reliefs on the following grounds:
That the purported “Revenue assets investigation” allegedly carried out by the Federal Government on MTN, for the period of 2007 – 2017, and its decision conveyed through the office of the AGF by a letter dated Aug. 20, violates the provisions of section 36 of the constitution.
A declaration that the AGF acted in excess of its powers, by purporting to direct through its letter of May 10, a “self-assessment exercise” which usurps the powers of the Nigerian Customs Service to demand payment of import duties on importation of physical goods.
A declaration that the AGF acted illegally, by usurping the powers of the Federal Inland Revenue Service, to audit and demand remittance of withholding tax and value-added tax.
A declaration that the purported “self-assessment” exercise instituted by the AGF via its letter of May 10, is unknown to law, null and void and of no effect whatsoever.
In addition, the plaintiff wants a court order, vacating the AGF’s demand letter dated Aug. 20, for the sums of N242 billion and 1.3 billion dollars from MTN Nigeria Communications Ltd.
Besides, MTN is claiming a total sum of N3 billion in damages, against the defendant, which covers General damages, exemplary damages, and Legal costs.
Meanwhile, in its preliminary objection, the AGF argues that the plaintiff in seeking redress to the subject matter, has just three months from the date of the cause of action arose, to institute the action.

It argues that the plaintiff commenced the suit in clear disregard to section 2 of the Public Officers Protection Act, which provides that any action commenced against a public officer, must be made within three months from commencement of cause of action.

AGF argues further that plaintiff’s failure to commence the suit within three months as stipulated by law, robs the court of jurisdiction to entertain same.

Source: Punch

The Nigeria Labour Congress has called for an amendment to the present Income Tax Law so that the new National Minimum Wage of N30,000 will not be taxed.
NLC’s General Secretary, Dr. Peter Ozo-Eson, made the call in Abuja in an interview with the News Agency of Nigeria on Wednesday.
Ozo-Eson was reacting to a motion submitted by the National Union of Textile Garment and Tailoring Workers of Nigeria at the plenary session of the 12th National Delegates Conference of the NLC.
NAN reports that the union had noted that there was a twin assault on the real income of Nigerian workers caused by unrestrained devaluation of naira and high rate of inflation.
The union had also expressed concern that the process for the new minimum wage was taking too long, calling on the NLC to discuss strategies and plans for effective implementation of the new minimum wage, particularly at the state level.
According to Ozo-Eson, the call has become necessary as the income tax law needs to be amended to protect workers’ purchasing power.
Ozo-Eson, while appealing for protection of the new minimum wage, said that the N30,000 as agreed was a compromised minimum wage that was ‘so low.’
‘‘Ideally, it should not be taxed; but I believe that the correct way to do it is to amend the Income Tax Law in order to raise the exemption bar if the N30,000 will fall within.
‘‘The law should be amended to ensure that the minimum wage level is below the taxable income. Under the present law, if you earn N18,000 a month, your tax is zero.
‘‘There is a tax table, but with N30,000, under the existing exemption guideline, there will be some little tax because it will be slightly above the exemption tax.
‘‘What needs to be done is to have an adjustment to the schedule so that the exemption is placed above the minimum wage,’’ he said.
General Secretary, National Union of Textile, Garment and Tailor Workers of Nigeria, Mr. Issa Aremu, stressed the need to put pressure on the Federal Inland Revenue Service to raise the tax bar.
Aremu said this should be done in such a way that the N30,000 minimum wage would fall below taxable income.
He advocated tax holidays for some categories of Nigerian workers.
According to him, ‘‘Now that we have raised the minimum wage to N30,000, we must impress it on the FIRS to raise tax bar so that the new minimum wage will be protected.
‘‘If you tax minimum wage of N30,000, we may as well go back to N25,000 or N27,000 by default.
‘‘The Deputy Speaker of the House of Representatives, Yusuf Lasun, raised the point and I think Labour must push the agenda to protect the new minimum wage.
“The N30,000 is actually a compromised amount from N56,000 earlier proposed; so, it must be protected.
‘‘If the Federal Government can give 10 years’ tax holiday to companies, why not give the same to workers?
‘‘Given the collapse of income today, Nigerian workers deserve tax holidays. We are not asking for this because we consider our job as charitable, what workers have in their pockets is what will turn the economy around.
‘‘That is what we will use to purchase goods in the market and pay rent.
‘‘For economic recovery, it is good for workers to have a sustainable purchasing power or disposable income that is off the tax hook,’’ he added.

Source: Punch

LAGOS – To ensure the industry overcome its current challenges, the Association of Bureaux de Change Operators of Nigeria (ABCON),yesterday emphasized the need for the Central Bank of Nigeria(CBN) to exempt bureau de change operators from payment of Value Added Tax (VAT).
The association’s president, Alhaji Aminu Gwadabe, stated this in his speech at the launch of the ABCON live run automation project in Lagos.
He said the association should also be exempted from Commission on Turnover (COT), reduce BDCs annual license renewal fee and also expand their scope of transactions,lamented that the BDC sector has been confronted with many challenges that have continued to defy solutions.

contact Inner Konsult for Professional services on Tax, accountancy and CAC services . O8038460036 , www.innerkonsult.com

Summary
On 11 December 2018, the Court of Appeal (COA or the Court), in the case between Best Children International Schools Limited (BCIS Limited or the Company) vs Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS), held that the Company is liable to Companies Income Tax (CIT), regardless of its claim to be an educational institution. The Court reached this decision on the grounds that BCIS Limited failed to prove that it qualified as an educational institution entitled to the tax exemption granted under Section 23(1)(c) of the CIT Act.

Read more: https://sunmoladavid.com/court-appeal-rules-taxability-educational-institution/

contact Inner Konsult for Professional services on Tax, accountancy and CAC services . O8038460036 , www.innerkonsult.com

Apple said on Tuesday it had reached an agreement with French authorities to settle 10 years of back taxes, becoming the latest US company to reach a deal with France which has led a European push for higher taxes on tech giants.
French news weekly reported that Apple had paid nearly 500 million euros ($570 million) to resolve the case in a confidential settlement reached in December.
Apple declined to disclose the amount paid, but a source familiar with the case confirmed the figure to AFP.
“The French tax administration recently concluded a multi-year audit on the company’s French accounts and an adjustment will be published in our public accounts,” Apple said in a statement.
“We know the important role taxes play in society and we pay our taxes in all the countries where we operate, in complete conformity with laws and practices in force at the local level,” added the company.
French authorities declined to comment further, citing the confidentiality of tax matters.

– French tech tax looms –
Apple is one of several American technology giants in the line of fire in Europe over their tax strategies, which see them route their income through low-tax nations such as Ireland or Luxembourg.
In 2016, it was ordered by the European Commission to pay 13 billion euros in back taxes to Ireland.
The European Commission said Apple paid an effective corporate tax rate of just 0.005 per cent on its European profits in 2014 — equivalent to just 50 euros for every million.
The deal in France comes as the government prepares to push ahead with its own unilateral “GAFA tax” — named after Google, Apple, Facebook and Amazon — faced with the failure of EU members to agree on how to get technology companies to pay more tax on their European operations.
The tax, to be put to parliament in a bill later this month, would affect companies with global sales of more than 750 million euros and 25 million euros in France, according to the government.
It would be retroactive to January 1 and is expected to raise 500 million euros this year.
French Economy Minister Bruno Le Maire has called the question of how and where global companies pay their taxes “a major issue in the 21st century”.
But an agreement among EU members has proved elusive.
Ireland, Denmark and Sweden have all blocked plans for a levy for fear of dissuading investment and Germany has proved lukewarm on the issue, fearing US retaliation against its car industry.
The issue has been referred to the OECD, which aims to come up with an international tax by 2020.

– Scramble to settle –
Apple is the second major technology company to reach a tax deal with French authorities within the past year, reflecting the growing pressure from voters on governments to bring foreign companies to book.
In February 2018, Amazon said it had settled a French claim for nearly 200 million euros and would start declaring all its earnings in the country, ending a dispute that had dragged on for years.
In 2017, however, France’s tax collection drive suffered a setback with a local court ruling that Google was not liable to pay 1.1 billion euros in taxes claimed on revenues transferred from France to Ireland.
According to L’Express, the deal between France and Apple was clinched after several months of talks, and concerned the small amount of revenue the firm booked in France while the sales it reported in Europe ballooned.
The report said Apple’s European revenues exploded seven-fold, from 6.6 billion euros in 2008 to 47.7 billion in 2017, most of which was booked in Ireland where it has its European headquarters.

The court ordered that the forfeited sum be deposited in the Treasury Single Account of the Federal Government.
A Kano division of the Federal High Court has ordered an interim forfeiture of the sum of N1,000,494,000, suspected to belong to former First Lady, Patience Jonathan, to the Federal Government.
According to an investigation conducted by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), the sum in question was lodged in three deposits with Fidelity Bank Plc on May 20 and May 25, 2015.
The bank account allegedly belongs to Magel Resort Limited, a company linked to Mrs Jonathan, according to a statement signed by the EFCC's spokesperson, Tony Orilade, on Friday, February 1, 2019.
The commission had received information that the money was not being utilised and had commenced an investigation that allegedly revealed that Mrs Jonathan and some relatives of former president, Goodluck Jonathan, were directors of the company.
Others listed as directors of the company are Oba Oba Tamunotonye, Goodluck Jonathan Aruera, Goodluck Jonathan Ariwabai and Esther Fynface.
Investigations revealed that the sum of N500,000 was deposited on May 20, 2015 by one Fynface, who is alleged to be in charge of the company, while N1 billion was transferred in two tranches on May 25, 2015 from PAGMAT OIL AND GAS NIGERIA LIMITED, a company that was not incorporated with the Corporate Affairs Commission.
Acting on an ex parte motion filed by the EFCC to forfeit the money to the government, Justice A. Lewis-Allagoa ordered that the forfeited sum be deposited in the Treasury Single Account of the Federal Government.

The Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC), yesterday, described the passage of the Companies and Allied Matters Bill by National Assembly as a feat, monumental and demonstrative of the harmonious relationship existing between the two chambers of the Eighth Assembly.
Reacting to the passage of the bill by the House of Representatives after Third Reading on Tuesday, January 22, 2019, the Acting Registrar-General of the commission, Lady Azuka Azinge noted that the bill, which seeks to repeal the extant statute (the Companies and Allied Matters Act, Cap C20, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004) and enact another statute in its place, represented one of the biggest pieces of legislative review in the history of the National Assembly.
She noted further that, since the extant statute was enacted almost 30 years ago, it had not witnessed any significant review.
Lady Azinge stated that the main thrust of the bill was to ensure the ease of starting and growing business in Nigeria; ensure more appropriate regulation for MSMEs; enhance transparency and shareholder engagement; align regulatory framework with international best practice for competitiveness and, in the context of a global economy, make Nigeria an investment destination of choice.
Describing the bill as testimonial of a partnership that worked, she acknowledged the collaboration between the commission, government and private sector stakeholders.
She said in particular the support of the Presidential Enabling Business Environment Council (PEBEC), through its secretariat, the Enabling Business Environment Secretariat (EBES); the National Assembly Business Environment Roundtable (NASSBER); the Technical Advisory Committee of the Senate; the Federal Ministry of Industry, Trade and Investment (FMITI); the Federal Ministry of Justice (FMJ); the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC); the Nigerian Bar Association through its Section on Business Law (SBL-NBA); the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Nigeria (ICAN); the National Association of Chambers of Commerce, Industries, Mines and Agriculture (NACCIMA); and the Manufacturers Association of Nigeria (MAN).
Others were the Nigerian Investment Promotion Commission (NIPC); the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS); the Institute of Chartered Secretaries and Administrators of Nigeria (ICSAN); the Association of National Accountants of Nigeria (ANAN); the Nigerian Stock Exchange (NSE); the Business Recovery and Insolvency Practitioners Association of Nigeria (BRIPAN); the Nigerian Association of Small and Medium Enterprises (NASME); Lagos Chamber of Commerce and Industry (LCCI) and several professional firms.
Azinge expressed optimism that the b would receive the assent of the President very soon, stressing the commitment of the commission to double its efforts of registering more businesses from now on compared to the three million figure recorded since inception.
It would be recalled that the bill originated from and was passed by the Senate on Tuesday, May 15, 2018.

The Federal High Court (FHC) sitting in Abuja recently gave a judgement in favour of Theodak Nigeria Limited (TNL or “the Company” or “the plaintiff”) in its lawsuit against the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS or “the defendant”).
The issue for determination was whether the FIRS had statutory power to deem the value of the Company’s property to be its turnover for any year of assessment (and impose income tax thereon) based on the provision of Section 30 of the Companies Income Tax (CIT) Act, Cap. C21, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria (LFN), 2004.

Background
The Federal High Court (FHC) sitting in Abuja recently gave a judgement in favour of Theodak Nigeria Limited (TNL or “the Company” or “the plaintiff”) in its lawsuit against the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS or “the defendant”).
The issue for determination was whether the FIRS had statutory power to deem the value of the Company’s property to be its turnover for any year of assessment (and impose income tax thereon) based on the provision of Section 30 of the Companies Income Tax (CIT) Act, Cap. C21, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria (LFN), 2004.
Background Generally, CIT is payable on the profits of a company “accruing in, derived from, brought into or received in Nigeria1” in respect of any trade or business that may have been carried on.
The CIT Act requires every company to file its tax returns for every year on a self-assessment basis, containing the amounts of profits from every source, with the FIRS. Section 30 of CIT Act empowers the FIRS to assess a company on a fair and reasonable percentage of the turnover from its trade or business where either the business produces no assessable profits; where the assessable profits are less than might be expected to be, or where the true assessable profits cannot be ascertained.

Facts of the case and issues for determination
The FIRS alleged that the Company did not file its income tax returns for 2015 and thereby failed to pay its income tax liability for that year.
Hence, the FIRS invoked the provisions of Section 30(1)(a) of the CIT Act by deeming 20% of the ascertained value of a property admitted to be owned by the Company to be the CIT payable, and issued its assessment notice for the amount.

Dissatisfied with the FIRS’ action, TNL filed an appeal at the FHC arguing that:
Section 30(1)(a) of the CIT Act does not empower the FIRS to assess the value of its property to CIT
the foregoing CIT Act provision provides for assessments to be based on a fair percentage of the turnover of a trade or business and the value of a company’s property is not listed as taxable income in Section 9 of the CIT Act.
Thus, the Company urged the FHC to declare that the value of its building was not the same as its turnover, and that the FIRS’ action was ultra vires its statutory powers under the CIT Act.
Thus, the Company urged the FHC to declare that the value of its building was not the same as its turnover, and that the FIRS’ action was ultra vires its statutory powers under the CIT Act. The plaintiff also prayed the FHC to set aside the FIRS’ assessment and restrain the defendant from enforcing the recovery of the alleged tax liability. The FIRS, on its part, argued that Section 30(1)(a) of the CIT Act gave it a wide range of power to assess delinquent taxpayers to tax, and therefore had the statutory power to impose its best of judgment assessment on TNL based on the value of the Company’s property. This was on the ground that TNL had failed to file its tax returns despite several notices issued by the FIRS. The defendant also argued that the assessment was final and conclusive because the plaintiff failed to object within 30 days as provided by the CIT Act.
The plaintiff also prayed the FHC to set aside the FIRS’ assessment and restrain the defendant from enforcing the recovery of the alleged tax liability. The FIRS, on its part, argued that Section 30(1)(a) of the CIT Act gave it a wide range of power to assess delinquent taxpayers to tax, and therefore had the statutory power to impose its best of judgment assessment on TNL based on the value of the Company’s property.
This was on the ground that TNL had failed to file its tax returns despite several notices issued by the FIRS. The defendant also argued that the assessment was final and conclusive because the plaintiff failed to object within 30 days as provided by the CIT Act.

Decision
After considering the arguments of both parties, the FHC held that:
The FIRS did not act within the boundaries of Section 30(1) of the CITA in assessing the Company to tax on the basis of the value of its property. Section 30 only empowers the FIRS to assess a company to tax on a fair and reasonable percentage of its turnover, and that turnover refers to the aggregate income that a business receives from its normal business activities for a given period, usually from the sale of goods and services. Hence, the value of the Company’s property is not the same as its turnover or income.
It would be unfair to deem the value of the Company’s property as its turnover for the year of assessment, and the FIRS’ act of unilaterally assessing the value of the Company’s property was oppressive and ultra vires.
The Company was not under any obligation to object to the FIRS before it could challenge the assessment in court. The use of the word “may” in Section 69(1) of the CIT Act makes it discretionary for the plaintiff to object to the FIRS’ assessment, and failing which the Company could not be denied the right of access to court as conferred by the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
Based on the foregoing, the FHC issued a perpetual injunction restraining the FIRS and or its agents from enforcing any actions against the Company on the basis of the property assessment.

Comments
The FHC’s judgement on the power of the FIRS to assess a company to CIT based on value of its properties has, hopefully, put paid to the controversy attendant on the initiative taken by the FIRS to use properties owned by taxpayers as basis for their assessment to tax.
The CIT Act is clear on the categories of income chargeable to income tax, which should be respected by the tax authorities.
Also, as one of the canons of taxation is equity, taxpayers should be assessed to the right amount of tax in proportion to their income, only. The FHC judgement that a taxpayer has the discretion to seek redress in the court in the first instance, without first going through the administrative process of objecting to a tax assessment by the FIRS, is quite instructive.
The decision essentially invites tax payers to weigh their options and forum shop at two levels. Firstly, in deciding whether to bother objecting to an FIRS tax assessment as provided for in the tax legislation for an initial administrative dispute resolution protocol and, secondly, in deciding whether to refer a tax dispute to the Tax Appeal Tribunal (TAT) at all.
Consequently, this decision may inadvertently lead to a shortening of the tax resolution procedures provided in tax legislation and therefore an early widening of the gates to litigation at the FHC level for cases that may actually not be ripe for adversarial resolution.
As full litigation can be costly and time-consuming, and as judges are also not necessarily as hands on with respect to tax technical issues as the FIRS itself, or the TAT, we are in favour of encouraging taxpayers to explore the less adversarial protocols available under the tax legislation before referring disputes to the FHC for resolution.
While a taxpayer cannot be denied the constitutional right of access to the courts, the pursuit of administrative resolution of a tax dispute through objection to a tax assessment by the FIRS should not be totally rejected.