The House of Representatives has resolved to seek the legal opinion of the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) over a disputed N123.48bn deducted by the Nigeria Revenue Service (NRS) from Education Tax revenues due to the Tertiary Education Trust Fund (TETFund) between 2012 and 2024.
The decision followed a disagreement between the two agencies over the legality of the four per cent cost-of-collection charge applied by the NRS to Education Tax collected from oil companies.
The House Public Accounts Committee, chaired by Bamidele Salam, representing Accord in Osun State, said it would obtain an authoritative legal interpretation before determining whether the deductions were properly made.
The dispute arose from an audit query by the Auditor-General for the Federation, which identified discrepancies between the Education Tax collected by the revenue agency and the amount remitted to TETFund.
At a committee hearing on Wednesday, representatives of both agencies presented opposing interpretations of the provisions governing the deductions.
TETFund’s Director of Finance and Accounts, Dr Gloria Olotu, told lawmakers that the four per cent cost-of-collection charge applied only to non-oil revenue and should not have been extended to Education Tax collected from oil companies.
She said the Fund’s review, following the Auditor-General’s query, showed that the NRS had applied the charge to the entire Education Tax collection without excluding the oil revenue component.
According to Olotu, calculations based on figures supplied by the NRS established that excess deductions between 2012 and 2024 amounted to N123,486,953,796.24.
She added that TETFund had written several letters to the revenue agency seeking a refund and resolution of the disagreement but had yet to receive a favourable response.
However, an Executive Director representing the NRS, Shettima Tamadi, rejected the demand for a refund, insisting that the deductions were supported by Sections 15A and 69 of the NRS Act.
Tamadi argued that Section 69 defines non-oil revenue as all revenue other than proceeds derived from Petroleum Profits Tax.
He maintained that Education Tax paid by oil companies remained subject to the four per cent collection charge because it was not Petroleum Profits Tax.
He explained that oil companies paid Petroleum Profits Tax separately and that the NRS did 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 from an ordinary reading of the relevant provision.
Members consequently resolved to approach the AGF to establish the correct interpretation and determine whether the deductions were lawful.
TETFund informed the lawmakers that it had previously sought the Attorney-General’s advice on the matter and promised to forward the response to the committee.
The committee also resolved to independently request the AGF’s opinion before taking a final position.
The hearing was subsequently adjourned pending the submission of written explanations requested from TETFund and the relevant legal advice.
The outcome is expected to determine whether the NRS should refund the disputed N123.48bn to TETFund or whether the deductions were consistent with the existing legal framework.