VAT and its Garment of Controversy (B)

On Monday 9, August 2021, the Federal High Court (FHC) sitting in Port Harcourt not exactly in the same words, said to the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS) in its Judgement “Give unto Rivers what belongs to Rivers”.

This statement was borne out of the question before the court as to who deserves to collect the Value Added Tax (VAT) generated in Rivers state.

It is important to state that this decision is not the first of its kind, as in Ukala’s Case,2 the FHC expressly held that the National Assembly had no power to enact the VAT Act. Here, the plaintiff had by an Originating Summons, amongst others, asked the FHC to determine the extent of powers of the Federal Government to make laws for the purpose of taxation other than taxation of incomes, profits, and capital gains.


What do you think?