March 4, 2019

Court reportedly asks Monalisa Chinda to be arrested for tax evasion

A High Court in Lagos, has reportedly ordered that actress Monalisa Chinda, should be arrested for failing to pay income tax over a 6-year period. In a report by The Nation News on Sunday, March 3, 2019, it was alleged that the actress had failed to obey a request asking her to show up in court. As a result, Justice Adedayo Akintoye, insisted that she must be apprehended in an order reportedly given on Monday, January 21, 2019. “The defendant has been served with hearing notice. The proof of service is in the court’s file,” a statement from prosecutor Y.A Pitan reads. The counsel mentioned this while asking for a bench warrant to arrest the actress who has reportedly been evasive. Monalisa Chinda is alleged to be found wanting for refusing to fulfill an obligation to pay tax to the Lagos State government for her business located in Lekki on the Lagos Island. The accusation has resulted in a 2-count charge, one of which alleged “failure to furnish and file annual tax returns for the purpose of personal income taxation with the Lagos State Internal Revenue Service (LIRS) contrary to Section 94(1) of the Personal Income Tax Act 2004 (as amended).” According to The Nation, the bench warrant to arrest the actress shall extend up until April, having failed to appear in court two months earlier.   Source: Pulse

Court reportedly asks Monalisa Chinda to be arrested for tax evasion Read More »

FIRS and 85,000 millionaire tax defaulters

A disclosure the other day by the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS) boss about possible pursuit of 85,000 millionaire tax defaulters is curious and unfortunate. There is no reason for serious alarm before such a critical service can be delivered and the reasons are not too far to seek. Tax payment to governments by qualified individuals and corporate organisations, has been a feature of both the ancient and modern world. It is generally recognised as a civic duty or responsibility through which governments gather revenue/financial resources with which the machinery of state and the common needs of the people are satisfied. Essentially, payment of tax is important for governments and their institutions to survive and serve the needs of the people. Every qualified taxpayer ought to know and comply with this basic need of paying due tax. And so, the other day, a report that the Federal Inland Revenue Services (FIRS) was seeking help from and collaboration with other stakeholders like the Nigeria Police Force (NPF), to catch-up with “wealthy tax defaulters” to cause them to fulfil their tax obligations, sounded unthinkable that the wealthy in our midst could be fingered as part of tax defaulters in the country. Despite having been rewarded with wealth through their various undertakings and endeavours, the little they are ordinarily expected to do is to support the machinery of the government and the welfare of the people. No one expected them to fail to pay their taxes. To have chosen to default in their tax obligations is to say the least the highest level of ingratitude and no doubt, irresponsibility. According to the report, out of the N5.32 trillion tax revenue FIRS achieved in 2018, about N2.3 billion was recovered from 45,000 “wealthy tax defaulters.” Against this development, FIRS plans to go “after another set of over 40,000 millionaire tax defaulters in 2019.”  It is necessary to observe that FIRS claimed to have been scrutinising accounts of banks’ customers for the purpose of its tax revenue generation. Indeed, there have been reports that the apex tax agency has engaged in placing liens on bank accounts of suspected tax defaulters. Placement of such liens means that the affected bank customers will be unable to have access, in part or whole, to their account balances until they resolve whatever the issues may be with FIRS. In other words, affected bank customers will not be able to make withdrawals until they settle tax liabilities dictated by FIRS. It is, therefore, obvious that FIRS, in its tax revenue drive, is using coercive method to compel individuals and organisations to pay tax. This is curious in the polity. While tax revenue, like other revenue sources open to governments, is essential for the government to be able to carry out its duties and responsibilities in the interest of the citizenry, there is hardly any doubt that FIRS must ensure that whatever method it has adopted or plans to adopt in pursuit of suspected tax evaders is in line with subsisting legal and regulatory provisions. This is even more exigent if the tax agency has to pass through the banks in its recovery of tax debts.  It should be noted that banks, as custodians of public and private funds, have obligations to their customers, especially with regard to confidentiality of transactions. So, any attempt or indeed breach of this near-sacred and long-established understanding between banks and their customers, (outside what is permitted by law) has implications not just for the banks but also the larger economy. As is well known, the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) always laments that the amount of money outside the banking system is very high. In spite of CBN’s efforts to bring much of the money outside into the banking system, successes recorded are yet to change the situation significantly. Consequently, effectiveness of monetary policies has remained impaired. And this is not in the best interest of the economy. On the other hand, banking institutions are having their own challenges – rising bad debts, poor liquidity, fraud, money laundering, etc). It is foreseeable that FIRS’ debt recovery approach will send signals -right or wrong- to customers of banks. One such signal may be that it is no longer safe for persons to keep their money in banks, without intrusion by third parties. When such happens, customers, who ordinarily have multiplicity of choices, will begin to consider alternatives to safekeeping and safe-guarding as well as utilisation of their funds. Consequently, more funds will find their way outside banks.  If this country returns to a situation where banks’ customers avoid or minimise using the banking system, the first casualties will be the banks. Their deposit portfolio will significantly decrease and with very high debt levels in banks already, an invitation to banks’ distress will, knowingly or otherwise, have been made. If the situation reaches a critical state where many banks may become distressed, Nigerians and their government will most certainly begin to place side by side tax debt recovery vis-a-vis banks’ distress to decide which, among the two, should be placed on hold. Therefore, for FIRS to continue or commence its intended incursion into the banking industry for the purposes of recovering tax revenues outstanding against the wealthy, it is imperative that both the regulators of the banking system and operators, at the highest level of decision-making, must properly and effectively engage themselves, prior to embarking on this explosive venture. There is the need to thoroughly consider and abide by legal and regulatory provisions. Proper planning and setting up of implementation procedures as well as consistent public awareness and/or orientation are important. In all respects, arbitrariness, high handedness and breach of relevant subsisting laws and regulations must be eschewed.  So, in the main, tax payment is a worldwide legitimate and civic responsibility of persons who are not exempted (for varying reasons) from such payments. Therefore, every tax liable person has a responsibility to meet such liability without waiting for the tax man’s knock on the door. Whether

FIRS and 85,000 millionaire tax defaulters Read More »

N170m FIRS Contract Fraud: Court stops Zinox Computers’ from gagging

A court in Abuja on Thursday blocked an attempt by Zinox Technologies Limited to suppress press freedom and stop PREMIUM TIMES from continuing its reporting on the allegation of N170 million contract fraud against the computer firm. In its ruling on the motion by Zinox Technologies seeking an injunction to restrain PREMIUM TIMES from further reporting the scandal, the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Apo, Abuja, dismissed the application for lack of merit. In his judgment, Justice SC Oriji said a close examination of the totality of evidence and address by Zinox Technologies did not show any cogent reason why the court should grant the injunction in its favour. According to the judge, a media organisation cannot be restrained from publishing a report yet to be proven legally as libellous. The judge said when a media organisation considers its publication factual, and its publishers have sworn to defend the facts of the publication, the court will infringe on the public’s right to know if it stops the press from exercising the responsibility guaranteed under Section 39 of the Constitution. Consequently, the Court dismissed the application by Zinox Technologies and upheld PREMIUM TIMES’ argument that the former had no good reason to warrant the Court granting the injunction. The matter was adjourned to March 11 for the hearing of their motion for extension of time within which they can file their reply to our statement of defence. ROOTS OF THE CASE On May 15, 2017, Zinox Technologies, an affiliate of Zinox Group, filed a suit seeking to restrain PREMIUM TIMES and some of its officials from continuing its reporting on the N170.3 million contract fraud scandal involving five of the company’s officials, including its top management. Zinox had accused the newspaper’s editors of libelling it and its chairman, Stanley Ekeh, through the series of publications on the scam. Apart from its demand for N2 billion in damages, Zinox asked for an order of perpetual injunction restraining PREMIUM TIMES from further publication, an apology as well as court directive for the removal from the newspaper’s website series of publications on the scandal. But, PREMIUM TIMES pushed back with a counter application demanding N10 billion as damages against Zinox Technologies and its top officials, for attempting to suppress press freedom by asking the court to stop the discharge of its role inform the public factually on issues in the society. Pending the commencement of hearing on the substantive suit, Zinox, on December 3, 2018, filed an application seeking the court’s injunction to restrain PREMIUM TIMES from publishing any further report on fraud scandal against its top officials. Hearing on the matter was adjourned to January 8. At the resumed sitting, after arguments were heard from both parties, the court adjourned till February 28 for the ruling, and commencement of hearing on the substantive suit. On Thursday, the court ruled against Zinox in favour of PREMIUM TIMES. But, the commencement of hearing on the main suit, which was earlier scheduled to commence immediately, was adjourned to March 18, 2018. Counsel to PREMIUM TIMES, Jude Muoka, hailed the judge for delivering a sound and erudite judgment by upholding the right of the press to publish factual and credible information and defending the right of the public to know. “We have always known the application was never on a firm foundation. Zinox Technologies and its officials were only using the application to attempt to shield themselves from the searchlight of the public over the scandal,” Mr Muoka said. Meanwhile, during the court sitting, Mr Muoka said he drew the court’s attention to the continued publication of defamatory materials against PREMIUM TIMES. Some of the publications surfaced in various online platforms a fortnight ago about the purported clearance by the police and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) to the accused Zinox top officials over the fraud scandal. The reports featured in publications including Sabi News, Brand Spur, Grassroots.NG,   Communications Week, Independent, ThisisLagos, and Latest Nigerian News. But, the police and EFCC have since denied knowledge about the substance of the reports. EFCC spokesperson, Tony Orilade, told PREMIUM TIMES the question of clearance to Zinox does not even arise because it is not part of the mandate of the anti-graft agency. “As a rule, EFCC does not give clearance to any person or group in cases under prosecution. It is only the courts that are authorised to do so after the matter has been diligently prosecuted and the accused person or group discharged and acquitted,” he said. Also, police spokesperson, Frank Mba, said he had no knowledge about Police clearance of the Zinox officials. “I am not aware of any such report (of clearance of Zinox officials), I can assure you. I don’t know anything about it, and I don’t have anything to do about it for now,” Mr Mba said on the telephone.   Source: Dabawa

N170m FIRS Contract Fraud: Court stops Zinox Computers’ from gagging Read More »

Loading...