By Amos Aar
THE BENUE State House of Assembly on January 5, 2026 convened a crucial public hearing on the proposed Benue State Revenue Service (Consolidation and Harmonised) Bill 2025, indicating the state’s determined march to align its fiscal framework with Nigeria’s contentious new national tax regime that came into force on January 1, 2026.
The harmonised law seeks to repeal the 2022 internal revenue administration law and usher in a unified, modern tax code designed to improve revenue mobilisation and transparency in state fiscal affairs.
In his opening remarks, Speaker, Hon. Alfred Berger, stressed the importance of stakeholder input for laws that should benefit ordinary citizens through better-funded hospitals, schools, agriculture, and public infrastructure.
Finance Committee Chairman, Hon. Dr Mathew Damkor, highlighted the proposed law’s potential to eliminate multiple taxation, clarify tax obligations, and reduce compliance costs for businesses, particularly small and medium enterprises, thereby improving the ease of doing business in Benue.
Stakeholders from across ministries, the private sector, traditional institutions, and civil society took part in the hearing, contributing to what lawmakers framed as an inclusive and consultative process.
Across Nigeria, the implementation of the federal tax reforms has caused debate, divergent state reactions, and intense public discourse over its potential effects on economic activity, citizens’ welfare, and sub-national fiscal autonomy.
In supportive camps, states like Ekiti, Jigawa, Plateau, Nasarawa, Kogi, and Kwara have moved swiftly to domesticate the new tax framework, with governors and assemblies aligning local revenue laws with the national regime. Ekiti State, for example, became the first in the country to sign into law its Revenue Administration Act 2025, a move the governor framed as a step toward transparency, electronic billing, and modernisation of tax administration.
Officials there have publicly assured residents there will be no arbitrary deductions from bank accounts and asserted the laws will help reduce the cost of essentials and boost economic growth.
Proponents argue these reforms will eliminate duplicative taxes, curb arbitrary collections, and create a more predictable business environment. They see the harmonised tax system as essential to bolstering internally generated revenue, reducing dependence on federal allocations, and enabling states to deliver services more effectively. Government officials and technical experts have also worked to debunk misinformation circulating about personal bank monitoring and tax liabilities, emphasising that many fears stem from misunderstanding rather than law text.
But the row against the reform is equally loud. In the North, leaders such as Bauchi State Governor, Bala Mohammed, and counterparts in northern Nigeria have been outspoken in their opposition, warning the tax bills could precipitate social unrest and disadvantage their regions. In late 2024, Governor Mohammed threatened anarchy if the proposed tax bills were passed without addressing concerns that the reform did not adequately protect northern interests, particularly the perceived redistribution of revenue that could favour economically stronger southern states.
Northern voices, including some governors and civil society allies, have argued the reforms are discriminatory or unbalanced, especially regarding how Value Added Tax (VAT) revenue and other tax streams are shared, contending that the changes could negatively affect states with lower internally generated revenue.
Former lawmakers from the region have also described the reforms as skewed and lacking inclusiveness, alleging that they could worsen fiscal disparities instead of bridging them.
Apart regional interest groups, national opposition movements and critics have warned that rolling out the new tax laws amid economic hardship may compound the difficulties faced by workers, small business owners, and low-income earners.
Some opposition figures have called for a suspension of implementation pending wider consultation and clarification of contested provisions.
Supporters of the reform, including the Presidency and fiscal policy experts, counter that the changes are long overdue and will largely reduce costs for the majority of taxpayers, expand relief for small enterprises, and eliminate multiple tax points that currently burden the economy. They argue that misinformation is fuelling fear, and that only a modest portion of high earners will shoulder increased rates under the new regime.
In the national debate, the side championing domestication and gradual adoption of the new tax framework appears to have a louder institutional voice, reflected in the number of states advancing amendments, federal government advocacy, and technical clarifications aimed at reducing public anxieties. Yet, the public interest pivot hinges on addressing the core concerns raised by opposing states and citizens: fairness in revenue distribution, protection for vulnerable populations, and transparency in implementation.
For many Nigerians grappling with rising living costs, any reform perceived to deepen financial burdens without commensurate benefits draws obvious anger.
Conversely, advocates insist that harmonization and modernization are prerequisites for long-term economic stability and sustained service delivery.
As Benue’s legislature continues its hearing and invites further contributions from citizens and experts, the national discourse indicates the urgent need for balanced reform that marries fiscal efficiency with equity, ensuring the tax system not only raises revenue but also safeguards public welfare and fosters inclusive growth.
