The house of representatives minority caucus ad-hoc committee probing alleged altercations in Nigeria’s tax laws has confirmed that illegal alterations were made to some tax reform Acts.
The committee identified the Nigeria Tax Administration Act, 2025, as the legislation most affected by the alleged unlawful changes.
The confirmation was contained in an interim report released on Friday, examining discrepancies between versions passed by lawmakers and those later published in the official gazette.
The probe followed public controversy sparked when Abdulsamad Dasuki, a member of the House, alerted lawmakers to the circulation of altered tax laws that differed from what the chamber approved.
In response at the time, the minority caucus, in a statement dated December 28, 2025, pledged to “unconditionally protect the independence of the legislature and our democracy,” warning that the circulation of fake laws amounted to an assault on constitutional order.
Pursuant to that resolution, the caucus, led by Kingsley Chinda, on January 2, 2026, inaugurated a seven-member investigative panel chaired by Victor Ogene.
Other members of the committee are Aliyu Garu, Stanley Adedeji, Ibe Osonwa, Marie Ebikake, Shehu Fagge, and Gaza Gbefwi Jonathan.
On January 3, 2026, Akin Rotimi, spokesperson of the House, announced that Tajudeen Abbas, speaker of the House, had ordered the release of the four tax reform Acts signed into law for public scrutiny.
The Acts released were the Nigeria Tax Act, 2025, Nigeria Tax Administration Act, 2025, National Revenue Service (Establishment) Act, 2025, and Joint Revenue Board (Establishment) Act, 2025.
In its preliminary findings signed by Ogene, the committee said a comparison of certified true copies from the House and the gazetted versions already in circulation validated Dasuki’s claims.
The report stated, “There were some alterations as alleged, especially in the Nigeria Tax Administration Act, 2025. There were three different versions of the documents in circulation, particularly the Nigeria Tax Administration Act, 2025.”
The committee said a directive to “align” the Acts with the Federal Government Printing Press was “a clear indication that there were procedural anomalies in the previously gazetted version that illegally encroached on the core mandate of the national assembly.”
On Section 29(1) of the Nigeria Tax Administration Act, the committee noted that while the certified version set reporting thresholds at ₦50m for individuals and ₦100m for companies, the gazetted version reduced the individual threshold to ₦25m instead of ₦250m.
It described the change as “a clear case of the executive undermining legislative powers by illegally altering an already passed law to drag more taxpayers into the net”.
The committee also criticised the insertion of subsections 41(8) and 41(9) in the gazetted Act, which imposed a mandatory 20 per cent deposit of disputed tax sums before appeals could proceed to the high court.
It noted that “these sections were not in the authentic version passed by the National Assembly.”
The panel further observed that Section 64 of the gazetted Act unlawfully widened enforcement powers to include arrests and the sale of seized assets without court approval.
On Section 3(1)(b), the committee said the gazetted version removed petroleum income tax and VAT from the definition of federal taxes, calling it “an affront to the exclusive powers of the National Assembly to make laws.”
It also found that Section 39(3) of the altered Act mandated tax computation for petroleum operations in United States dollars, contrary to the original version which required computation “in the currency of the transaction.”
The committee raised similar concerns about the Nigerian Revenue Service (Establishment) Act, citing the deletion of Sections 30(1)(d) and 30(3) relating to national assembly oversight.
It said the authentic Act provided for parliamentary oversight through summons and reporting obligations, but the gazetted version removed quarterly and annual reporting requirements “in total disregard and disrespect of the institution of the National Assembly and the doctrine of checks and balances.”
Citing what it described as “anomalies, illegalities, and impunity” that threaten constitutional authority and democratic governance, the committee said the matter required deeper investigation.
The panel therefore sought additional time to conclude its assignment, while thanking the minority caucus leadership “for finding us worthy of the assignment.”