The House of Representatives has sought the legal opinion of the Attorney-General of the Federation over a dispute between the Nigeria Revenue Service and the Tertiary Education Trust Fund concerning N123.48bn deducted as collection costs from Education Tax revenues between 2012 and 2024.
The House Public Accounts Committee, chaired by Bamidele Salam (Accord, Osun), resolved to seek the AGF’s advice to determine whether the four per cent deduction applied by the NRS to Education Tax collected from oil companies was lawful.
The dispute followed an audit query by the Auditor-General for the Federation, which identified differences between the Education Tax collected by the revenue agency and the amount remitted to TETFund.
At the committee’s hearing on Wednesday, representatives of both agencies presented different interpretations of the law governing the deductions.
While TETFund accused the NRS of making excessive deductions, the revenue agency maintained that its actions were consistent with the law.
TETFund’s Director of Finance and Accounts, Dr Gloria Olotu, told the lawmakers that the four per cent collection charge applied only to non-oil revenue and should not cover Education Tax collected from companies in both the oil and non-oil sectors.
She said the Fund’s review of the deductions, following the Auditor-General’s query, showed that the NRS had “applied the charge to the total Education Tax collection without excluding the oil revenue component.”
Olotu explained that calculations based on figures provided by the NRS showed that the excess deductions between 2012 and 2024 amounted to N123,486,953,796.24.
She said TETFund had written several letters to the revenue agency seeking a refund and resolution of the dispute but had yet to receive a favourable response.
However, an Executive Director representing the NRS, Shettima Tamadi, rejected the refund demand, insisting that the deductions were supported by the law, particularly Sections 15A and 69 of the NRS Act.
Tamadi argued that Section 69 defines non-oil revenue as all revenue except proceeds from Petroleum Profits Tax.
He said Education Tax paid by oil companies therefore remained subject to the four per cent collection charge because it was not Petroleum Profits Tax.
According to him, oil companies pay Petroleum Profits Tax separately, and the NRS does not deduct collection costs from those payments.
The committee said the disagreement required an authoritative legal interpretation, particularly as the NRS’s position appeared straightforward based on an ordinary reading of the relevant provision.
Members consequently resolved to obtain the AGF’s opinion to “establish the correct interpretation and determine whether the deductions were properly made.”
TETFund also told the lawmakers that it had previously sought legal advice from the Attorney-General on the matter and promised to submit the response to the committee.
The lawmakers, however, decided to independently request the AGF’s opinion before reaching a final decision.
The committee subsequently adjourned the hearing pending the submission of written explanations requested from TETFund and the relevant legal advice.
The outcome of the review could determine whether the NRS will refund N123.48bn to TETFund or whether the disputed deductions were lawfully made under the existing legal framework.