New Tax Law: NANS mobilises in opposition to implementation, faults FIRS’ place

**Article Title: New Tax Law: NANS Mobilises in Opposition to Implementation, Faults FIRS’ Place**

**Introduction: The Gathering Storm of Student Resistance**

In a development that signals a deepening crisis in the relationship between the Nigerian state and its youth demographic, the National Association of Nigerian Students (NANS) has declared a national day of action against the implementation of the controversial Tax Reform Law. This move, set to take place on January 14, 2026, is not merely a protest against fiscal policy; it is a profound political statement regarding the legitimacy of government actions, the transparency of the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS), and the democratic rights of citizens to participate in law-making processes that directly affect their livelihoods.

The decision by NANS to mobilize scholars across the nation stems from a cascading series of grievances. At the forefront is the stubborn insistence of the FIRS to implement the new tax regime starting January 1, 2026, despite glaring discrepancies in the gazetted version of the law and the failure of the government to engage in meaningful dialogue with critical stakeholders. The student body, representing a significant and volatile segment of the Nigerian population, has accused the presidency of being surrounded by “fiscal and economic advisers” who are pushing the nation toward an avoidable confrontation.

This article provides an in-depth analysis of the unfolding events, dissecting the constitutional, economic, and social implications of the Tax Reform Law. It explores the specific faults NANS has identified with the FIRS, the validity of the proposed protests, and the broader context of democratic governance in Nigeria. By examining the statements of NANS leadership and the responses from the government, we aim to present a comprehensive picture of a nation grappling with the balance between necessary reforms and the preservation of civil liberties.

**The Core Grievance: Discrepancies and Lack of Transparency**

The immediate trigger for the mobilization is the government’s plan to enforce the Tax Reform Law from January 1, 2026. However, the roots of this conflict run deeper than a mere disagreement over dates. NANS has pointed out that the version of the law currently being implemented contains significant discrepancies when compared to the one passed by the National Assembly. In a constitutional democracy, the National Assembly is the sole body empowered to legislate. When the executive arm, through the FIRS, attempts to implement a version of the law that differs from what the legislature approved, it raises fundamental questions about the rule of law.

The Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS) has been singled out as the primary antagonist in this narrative. NANS alleges that the agency has failed to engage the necessary stakeholders and the general public on the “nitty-gritty” of the regulation. The student body argues that the rush to implement the law on January 1, 2026, is not driven by economic necessity but by a desire to force a policy through without adequate scrutiny.

This lack of transparency is a recurring theme in the opposition’s rhetoric. The statement released by the Presidency, which reaffirmed the implementation timeline, was described by NANS as a “grave insult to Nigerians.” This sentiment captures the feeling of disenfranchisement prevalent among the youth. When the government claims that a policy is “non-negotiable” despite widespread opposition, it creates a perception of high-handedness and hegemony.

**NANS and the Responsibility of Representation**

As the umbrella body for Nigerian students, NANS carries a heavy burden of representation. The student population is historically the vanguard of social change in Nigeria. From the anti-colonial struggles to the protests against military dictatorships, students have consistently been at the forefront of demanding accountability from the government. The current mobilization is a continuation of this legacy.

The leadership of NANS, led by Comrade Olushola Oladoja, has framed this protest not just as a defense of student interests, but as a defense of the Nigerian democracy itself. The statement issued by the association emphasizes that “Nigeria is a constitutional democracy, not a dictatorship.” This framing is crucial because it elevates the dispute from a policy disagreement to a constitutional crisis.

NANS argues that the government is being advised to proceed with a “misstep” that ignores the painful economic consequences for ordinary Nigerians. The association highlights that civil society organizations, youth groups, and even the National Assembly have raised fundamental questions. By ignoring these voices, the government is accused of disregarding the very people who voted for it. This narrative of betrayal is potent because it resonates with the daily experiences of many Nigerians who feel that government policies are imposed rather than negotiated.

**The Role of the FIRS: A Contested Mandate**

The Federal Inland Revenue Service finds itself in the eye of this storm. The agency’s mandate is to assess, collect, and account for federal taxes. However, the implementation of a new tax law requires more than just administrative efficiency; it requires political legitimacy. The FIRS is accused of overstepping its bounds by enforcing a law that is still shrouded in controversy.

One of the specific faults NANS has identified is the failure of the FIRS to conduct comprehensive public education and sensitization. Tax laws are complex, and their impact on the average citizen is often not immediately apparent. Without a robust campaign to explain the benefits and mechanics of the new law, the public is left to fear the worst. The FIRS’s silence on the discrepancies in the gazetted law further erodes public trust.

Moreover, the insistence on the January 1, 2026, deadline, despite the existence of unresolved issues, suggests a lack of flexibility on the part of the government. In a democratic setting, policy implementation is often a fluid process that requires adjustments based on feedback. The FIRS’s rigid stance is seen as a reflection of an authoritarian mindset that prioritizes control over consensus.

**The Constitutional Dimension: The Sovereignty of the People**

A central theme in the NANS statement is the sovereignty of the people. The declaration that “there can be no government without the governed” is a direct challenge to the executive’s authority. In a democracy, the power of the government is derived from the consent of the governed. When that consent is withheld, the legitimacy of the government’s actions is called into question.

The NANS leadership noted that the process for engaging citizens over the Tax Reform Law is not democratic. This critique points to a broader problem in Nigerian governance: the tendency to treat public consultation as a formality rather than a substantive requirement. The National Assembly, as the constitutionally recognized representatives of the people, has raised questions. By proceeding with implementation, the executive is effectively bypassing the legislature and, by extension, the electorate.

The planned protest on January 14, 2026, is therefore not just a march; it is an assertion of sovereignty. The convergence point at Unity Fountain, Abuja, and the march to the Presidential Villa Gate, is symbolic. It represents the physical proximity of the people to the seat of power, a reminder that the distance between the ruler and the ruled is bridged by accountability.

**Economic Implications: Fear and Uncertainty**

While the political and constitutional arguments are prominent, the economic implications of the Tax Reform Law cannot be ignored. Nigeria is currently facing severe economic hardship, characterized by high inflation, currency devaluation, and widespread poverty. In such an environment, the introduction of a new tax law, particularly one viewed as controversial, creates uncertainty.

NANS argues that the law would portend “painful economic consequences” for many Nigerians. While the specific details of these consequences are debated, the fear is that the new tax regime could place an additional burden on an already struggling populace. The government’s claim that the law is “well-intentioned” is met with skepticism because the communication strategy has been poor.

The economic fallout of mass protests is also a consideration. Disruptions to economic activities, particularly in the Federal Capital Territory, could have ripple effects. However, NANS is betting that the potential long-term benefits of stopping a “misguided” policy outweigh the short-term costs of protest.

**The Mechanics of Mobilization: Peaceful but Firm**

NANS has emphasized that the protest will be peaceful. This is a crucial distinction. In the past, student protests in Nigeria have sometimes been marred by violence and destruction. By explicitly committing to “peaceful mass protest,” NANS seeks to deny the government any pretext for a violent crackdown.

The mobilization structure of NANS is extensive. The call to action goes out to “campus chapters, state joints, zonal coordinators, and the national secretariat.” This hierarchical structure allows for rapid mobilization across the country. The “state joints” refer to the coordination between different schools in a state, while “zonal coordinators” manage regions.

The operational details are yet to be fully communicated, but the intent is clear: to create a visible, undeniable presence in Abuja. The choice of the Presidential Villa as the destination is deliberate. It is the ultimate symbol of executive power, and protesting there sends the strongest message to the highest level of government.

**The Government’s Stance: Intransigence or Resolve?**

The Presidency’s response to the looming protest has been characterized by resolve. By reaffirming the implementation date, the government has drawn a line in the sand. This stance is likely aimed at projecting strength and ensuring that the tax reform, a key part of the administration’s economic agenda, is not derailed.

However, this resolve may be miscalculated. In a democracy, ignoring a significant portion of the population, especially the youth, can have long-term political consequences. The government’s narrative that it is being pushed toward confrontation ignores the fact that confrontation is a choice. The government could choose to suspend implementation and engage in dialogue, but it has opted not to.

The government’s advisers, as criticized by NANS, appear to be operating under the assumption that policy implementation can be divorced from public sentiment. This is a dangerous assumption in a country where social unrest can quickly escalate. The government risks winning the battle of implementation but losing the war for public trust.

**Broader Implications: A Test of Democratic Credentials**

The clash between NANS and the government over the Tax Reform Law is a litmus test for Nigeria’s democratic credentials. It raises several critical questions: Can a government force a policy on a populace that rejects it? Does the rule of law apply only to citizens, or also to the government? How much power should an unelected agency like the FIRS wield?

The outcome of this confrontation will set a precedent for future policy implementations. If the government successfully implements the law despite the protests, it may embolden officials to disregard public opinion in other areas. Conversely, if the protests force a suspension, it will reinforce the power of civil society and the importance of participatory governance.

NANS has made it clear that their demands are “non-negotiable.” They are asking for the immediate suspension of the implementation until all grey areas are resolved. This is a reasonable request in any functioning democracy. The government’s refusal to accede to this request suggests that there are deeper issues at play, perhaps related to internal politics or the desire to assert dominance.

**The Role of the National Assembly**

The National Assembly plays a pivotal, yet complicated, role in this saga. As the legislative arm, they are the ones who passed the law. However, the executive is implementing a version that differs from what was passed. The National Assembly has raised “fundamental questions regarding discrepancies in the gazetted version.” Yet, their voice has been overshadowed by the executive’s determination.

NANS has criticized the government for ignoring the National Assembly. This is significant because it highlights the erosion of the separation of powers. When the executive ignores the legislature, and both ignore the people, the system breaks down. The student protest is, in part, an attempt to restore this balance by amplifying the voice of the legislature through the power of the people.

**The Risk of Escalation**

While NANS has promised a peaceful protest, the risk of escalation cannot be ruled out. History has shown that when peaceful protests are ignored, they can turn violent. The government’s intransigence could provoke a more radical response from the youth. The security agencies, who are often quick to resort to force, must exercise restraint.

A heavy-handed response to a student protest could backfire spectacularly. It could galvanize support for NANS, drawing in other segments of society who are unhappy with the government but were previously uninterested. The government must weigh the cost of enforcing the tax law against the cost of potential social unrest.

**Conclusion: The Path Forward**

The mobilization of NANS against the Tax Reform Law is a defining moment in Nigerian politics. It represents a clash of titans: a determined student body and a resolute government. The stakes are high, involving not just tax policy, but the very nature of democratic governance.

The Federal Inland Revenue Service, acting on the instructions of the presidency, has chosen to proceed with implementation despite valid objections. NANS, representing millions of students, has chosen to resist. The confrontation scheduled for January 14, 2026, at Unity Fountain, Abuja, will be a test of wills.

For the government, the path forward should involve a return to the negotiating table. Acknowledging the discrepancies in the law and committing to a transparent review process would go a long way in de-escalating tensions. It would also demonstrate that the administration values democratic participation over bureaucratic expediency.

For NANS, the challenge is to maintain discipline and ensure that the protest remains peaceful and focused. The eyes of the nation, and indeed the world, will be on Abuja. The outcome will determine not only the fate of the Tax Reform Law but also the trajectory of civil society engagement in Nigeria.

Ultimately, the message from NANS is clear: the days of imposing policies without consent are over. In a democracy, the people are the ultimate sovereigns. The government would do well to remember this before January 1, 2026, passes. The implementation of a tax law may seem like a routine administrative task, but if it is done without legitimacy, it will yield nothing but resentment and resistance. The “fresh news” of today is merely the prelude to a larger drama that will test the resilience of the Nigerian democratic experiment.