New Tax Reform Act: Legal Implications of Ndume’s  Assertions 

Senator Ali Ndume has publicly claimed that the versions of Nigeria’s 2025 Tax Reform Acts signed by President Bola Tinubu differ from those passed by the National Assembly, alleging post-passage alterations that undermine legislative integrity. 

These statements, made in late 2025 and as recently as January 28, 2026, have fueled calls for suspension and investigation.

Ndume asserts that multiple versions of the laws exist, with the gazetted and signed copies containing unauthorized changes beyond minor drafting errors, such as altered statutory references, removal of petroleum taxes from federal powers, and expanded coercive powers for tax authorities without court oversight. 

He criticizes the executive for secrecy, noting even the Presidential Tax Reform Committee chair admitted discrepancies, and insists no unilateral alterations are permissible post-passage. 

These claims echo concerns from the House Minority Caucus, Rep. Abdussamad Dasuki, NBA, and civil society.

The claims implicate breaches of Sections 4 (legislative powers) and 58 (assent process) of the 1999 Constitution, as post-passage changes bypass National Assembly approval and threaten separation of powers. 

Critics such as Atiku Abubakar label such alterations “treasonous” assaults on legislative supremacy, potentially rendering the laws illegitimate if proven. 

Legal experts warn this sets a dangerous precedent, eroding democratic institutions and exposing taxpayers to enforcement under disputed statutes.

As a senator, Ndume enjoys parliamentary privilege under Section 51 of the Constitution, shielding his statements from civil or criminal liability if made in legislative proceedings; his public media claims likely fall under qualified privilege, barring malice.

 No reports indicate defamation suits or sanctions against him; instead, his position amplifies calls for probes without personal legal jeopardy. If inaccuracies are proven, political backlash is possible, but constitutional protections prioritize free speech on public matters.

The House of Representatives has however launched an ad hoc probe into the discrepancies, with Ndume urging suspension until resolved to avoid implementation challenges. 

No court challenges have been filed yet, but civil society and opposition may pursue judicial review, potentially voiding the laws if alterations are substantiated. 

The Acts took effect January 1, 2026, heightening urgency amid threats to public trust and 2027 elections.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *