On Tuesday, March 19, 2019, the then Minister for Budget and National Planning, Senator Udoma Udo Udoma, and the Executive Chairman of the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS), Babatunde Fowler, hinted the National Assembly that the Value Added Tax (VAT) rate is likely to go up.
Their statement was later corroborated in July, as the Chairman, Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMFAC), Engr. Elias Mbam, added his voice to the demand for an increment in VAT from 5 per cent to about 7.5 per cent to shore up Nigeria’s revenue base which he said is heavily reliant on oil earnings.
The message became clearer on September 11, when the the current Minister of Finance, Budget and National Planning, Zainab Ahmed, spoke on the proposed plan to increse VAT at the end of the Federal Executive Council meeting. She said: “We also reported to council and council has agreed that we start the process towards the increase of the VAT rate. We are proposing and council has agreed to increase the VAT rate from five percent to 7.2 percent”.
For the trio; Udoma, Fowler and Zainab, an increase in VAT is not just needed to shore up Nigeria’s revenue base as posited by Engr Mbam, it is necessary to enable government fund the new minimum wage of N30,000 per month approved by the National Assembly.
While the Senate Committee on Finance awaits the details on reasons for the proposed increase by the finance minister and chairman, FIRS, the move had generated mixed reactions among the public on its possible effects on living standards and the economy.
Ordinarily, increasing VAT by the government of the day shouldn’t warant the magnitude of reaction as witnessed in this case. After all, such could still serve as a veritable means of meeting the expansive fiscal expenditure needs of the federal government. Besides, the World Bank recently noted that fiscal deficits in Nigeria will likely widen further due to increased pre-election spending and sustained revenue shortfalls.
But while the need for government to bridge its revenue gap remains incontestable, and while it also reserves the right to adopt any legitimate measure in its revenue generation drive, VAT increment inclusive, the writer is rather worried about the time the VAT increase measure is deemed apt for such purpose.
If Udoma, Fowler, and Zainab’s reason for the planned increment is anything to go by, then there is need for more innovative approaches to scaling up the government’s revenue capacities so as to meet its growing funding commitments, especially, against the background of increasingly financing its fiscal deficit from borrowings.
Let us not forget that there are expectations that the increase in minimum wage could possibly be eroded by price increases of key household items, offsetting the expected improvement in purchasing power. And for the Nigerian industrial climate, you can guess what hope this portends for foreign investments and the faith of the Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs).
I hope the government’s enamoured pursuit of increasing revenue should not be to the detriment of the wellbeing of its own citizens as the choice of VAT increase upon the prevailing economic realities could be interpreted to be.
CSL Stockbrokers confirmed the above fears when it declared that “financing the increment in the wage burden through tax increment would force companies to raise prices significantly, ultimately placing the incidence of the tax increment on the consumers. It is, therefore, considered a bad timing and inconsistent with current economic reality”.
VAT, as we know, is basically imposed on consumption. Apart from the already diminished scale of consumption in the Nigerian economy which invariably may affect the collection performance of VAT, a simple economic analysis would attest that any increase in VAT at this time, would disproportionately affect poor people. But even beyond that argument, the biggest challenge is that any increase in indirect taxes affects the prices of goods and services.
This, analysts argued, could in turn affect the country’s inflation rate. With an inflation rate of over 11 per cent, the outcome of the proposed VAT increase is very critical given that the Central Bank of Nigeria is keen to contain inflationary pressures in the economy and bring inflation back to a single digit within a target range of 6-9 percent. It is thus expected that the rise in VAT would likely lead to a rise in inflation.
Moreso, in a clime like ours where the poverty level of the general populace has eroded their economic power, VAT increase may further worsen the living conditions of consumers whose real income has been stifled over the years. According to a recent report, “one striking feature in the performance of consumer goods companies over the past 18 months, is the consistent decline in reported revenue, suggesting that consumer demand remains weak.”
Well-meaning Nigerians have said “the consequence of this hike on the lives of Nigerians that are already suffering horrendous deprivations is dire and so, capable of exacerbating the poverty that has ravaged the people” .
The writer is of the view that at a time like this, when Nigerian workers expect an upward review in their monthly remuneration, in order to be economically repositioned, a planned corresponding increase in the prices of consumer goods by the government does not portray the government as one with the intention of making positive impacts on the lives of its citizens.
By this proposal, I am afraid the government risks being interpreted as one that does not realise the depth of misery that pervades our nation and may have probably completely detached itself from the people it ought to succour; a reason, I guess, the organised labour described this planned increase as anti-people and anti-development.
The reality is that any increase in VAT will be counter-intuitive to the goals of reducing poverty and inequality given the existing high economic disparity in the country.
In fairness to all, the proposed increase in VAT, by the federal government will not only weaken the citizens’ purchasing power, but would also worsen the poverty level in the country.
I, therefore, see this obvious call on the manufacturers and stake holders in the chain of distribution to hike the cost of their merchandise to the detriment of the suffering masses, as a concept billed for still birth.

Sylvia ThankGod-Amadi