Taxes & Tariffs | |
Taxes & Tariffs | |
814 VIEWS | |
![]() |
Tuesday, December 17, 2019 / 7:59 PM / By Kim, Abimbola, Azeezah, Kemi, Oluwatoba & Emmanuel of Banwo &
Ighodalo / Header Image Credit: B&I
Introduction
The
Federal High Court, Lagos Division ("FHC" or the "Court"), recently decided in
The Registered Trustees of Hotel Owners
and Managers Association of Lagos (suing for itself and on behalf of all its
members) v Attorney-General of Lagos State & Federal Inland Revenue Service[1] ("Hotel
Owners") that (i) the consumption tax (by whatever name called) imposed and
chargeable by the Lagos State Government on goods and services supplied in
hotels, restaurants, and event centers in the State, is valid and enforceable
under Nigerian law, and (ii) the provision of the Value Added Tax ("VAT") Act[2]
(the "VAT Act"), which imposes VAT
on the supply of all non-exempt goods and services in Nigeria, is inapplicable
to goods and services supplied by and in hotels, restaurants and event centers
in Lagos State. The FHC further handed
down an order of perpetual injunction restraining the Federal
Inland Revenue Service ("FIRS") from
implementing the provisions of the VAT Act in relation to the supply of goods
and services consumed in hotels, restaurants and event centres in Lagos State.
Synopsis of the Hotel Owners Case
The Plaintiffs in the suit contended in the main that having paid VAT to the Federal Government of Nigeria ("FGN") in respect of goods and services supplied in hotels, restaurants and event centers in Lagos State, they are not liable to pay any further consumption tax imposed by the Lagos State Government ("LASG"), and sought from the FHC the declaratory reliefs set out below, to wit;
(i) That the VAT Act has covered the field in respect
of consumption tax on all goods and services supplied in Nigeria;
(ii) That the Hotel Occupancy and Restaurant
Consumption (Fiscalization) Regulations 2017, made pursuant to the Hotel
Occupancy and Restaurant Consumption Law of Lagos State[1] (the "Lagos Consumption Law") is inapplicable to the Plaintiffs;
(iii) That the FIRS is the only lawful and competent agency vested with constitutional powers to assess and collect consumption tax in respect of goods and services supplied in Nigeria.
Lagos State
Government, acting through its Attorney General, joined issues with the
Plaintiffs and sought an order of the Court invalidating the applicability of
sections 1, 2, 4, 5 and 12 of the VAT Act (which impose tax on the supply of
all taxable goods and services in Nigeria) to hotels, restaurants and event
centres, which are domiciled and/or operate within the State.
Lagos State
Government further argued that the aforementioned sections of the VAT Act are
inconsistent and irreconcilable with the legislative powers conferred on the
different tiers of Government reserved in sections 4(2), (4) and (7) of the
Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) (the "Constitution"), and as such, are invalid,
unconstitutional and unenforceable.
After hearing
arguments, the FHC upheld and sustained, the contention of Lagos State
Government, and consequently declared that the power to impose, charge and
collect tax pertaining to the supply of goods and services consumed in hotels,
restaurants and event centres is on the residual list in the Schedule to the
Constitution, and as such, is within the legislative competence of the Lagos
State House of Assembly.
Further, the
Court pronounced that Lagos State Government is the only lawful and competent
authority empowered to impose, charge and collect any tax pertaining to the
supply of goods and services consumed in hotels, restaurants and event centres
in the State; by virtue of the provisions of section 4(7) of the Constitution,
the Taxes and Levies (Approved List for Collection) Act[4] ("Approved Taxes Act"), the Taxes and Levies (Approved List for
Collection) Act (Amendment) Order 2015 ("Approved
Taxes Order"), and the Lagos Consumption Law. Consequent upon the
foregoing, the Court made an order of perpetual injunction, restraining FIRS,
its agents and privies from further assessing and collecting VAT in relation to
goods and services supplied by the affected businesses.
Commentary
The decision in
Hotel Owners reinforces the
constitutional delineation of legislative powers among the three tiers of
Government in Nigeria (Federal, State and Local Governments), and seeks to
abolish the burden of double taxation borne by taxpayers in relation to the
supply of goods and services consumed in hotels, restaurants and event centres
in Lagos State[5].
The decision, however, does not appear to have conclusively settled the
controversy around the competence of State Houses of Assembly to legislate on
issues and laws pertaining to imposition and collection of consumption taxes.
In our view, the decision in
the Hotel Owners Case is restrictive in scope and may not qualify as a sweeping
authority on the point, as it does not seem to cover consumption tax imposed on
goods and services supplied outside hotels, restaurants and event centres. There
is also the well-founded contention that Hotel Owners Case appears to have been decided in sharp contrast to
the Supreme Court's pronouncements in Attorney-General
of Lagos State v Eko Hotels Ltd. & anor.[6] ("Eko Hotels").
In Eko Hotels, the Supreme Court
reasoned and held that the VAT Act covers the field in relation to imposition
and collection of consumption tax in Nigeria, and that the imposition of VAT
and consumption tax on a taxpayer in relation to the supply of the same set of goods
and services would constitute double taxation.
The Supreme Court further held that since the rates of VAT and
consumption tax are similar, the co-existence of the same creates an unhealthy
competition between the federal and state tax laws to the detriment of
taxpayers. Thus, the Supreme Court concluded that consumption laws passed by
State Houses of Assembly would remain inoperable until such a time that the VAT
Act is either repealed or invalidated by an order of a court of competent
jurisdiction. By contrast, the FHC decision in Hotel Owners suggests
that the VAT Act does not cover the field in respect of consumption tax in
Nigeria.
Further, we hold the view that reference to, and reliance upon the Approved Taxes Act and the Approved Taxes Order as constituting in part, the basis for the decision in Hotel Owners appears misconceived, unfounded and unjustifiable; as the substance of both legislation does not expressly empower State Governments to impose consumption tax.
The Approved Taxes Act does not impose taxes
but only prescribes taxies and levies approved as being chargeable and
collectible by the three tiers of government. The listed taxes and levies
become collectible after specific laws, which empower their imposition,
chargeability and collection have been properly enacted into law by the
competent authority so authorized to give effect to them. Thus, in determining
the applicability of the Approved Taxes Act in respect of any of the taxes and
levies listed thereunder, regard would be had to the character or treatment of
the particular tax or levy under the Constitution.
From the provisions of section 4 of the
Constitution, it is clear that taxation of goods and services supplied and
consumed in hotels, restaurants and event centres neither reside on the
Exclusive Legislative List nor the Concurrent Legislative List, and as such;
cannot be validly legislated on by the National Assembly. This presupposes that
only a State (or Local Government deriving power under a State) can validly legislate
on such, being a matter on the residual list. Based on the foregoing, we are of
the considered opinion that the FHC ought to have restricted itself, and
anchored its reasoning in Hotel Owners on the provisions of the
Constitution, without more, and to the exclusion of any other authority
including the Approved Taxes Act and Approved Taxes Order.
We are aware that the FIRS has approached the Court of Appeal to challenge the FHC decision. Whilst an appeal will not necessarily operate to stay the effect of the judgement until it is effectively entered, and or an order is handed down in relation thereto, we believe that the FIRS may take steps incidental to truncating the efficacy of the judgement until the final determination of its appeal. It is also not inconceivable that the FIRS may continue to act in furtherance of imposing tax and collecting same in relation to the supply of goods and services, as it pertains to the Plaintiffs in Hotel Owners, in exercise of its powers under the VAT Act. Pertinent to state, that the FHC decision is a good judgement and shall apply as the authority on the subject until set aside by an appellate court.
Recent
Articles By Banwo & Ighodalo
1. Finance Bill 2019: Tax Implications for Nigerian
Entities - November 21, 2019
2. Patents:
The Fitness and Wellness Industry - October 23, 2019
3. Ownership of
Trademarks in Nigeria -
October 06, 2019
4. Companies
Operating In Nigeria To Pay 0.005% Net Profit Levy Under The NPTF
(Establishment) Act 2018 - September
17, 2019
5. NAFDAC-Regulated
Products Imported Into Nigeria Now To Be Processed On The Nigeria Trade Portal -
September 06, 2019
6. National Identity Management In Nigeria: NIMC
and Matters Arising - Jul 29, 2019
7. Drilling Rigs Are Not Vessels: Court Of Appeal
Pronounces - Jul 25, 2019
8. Nigeria: What You Need To Know About The New
Minimum Capital Requirement For Insurance -
Jun 03, 2019
9. National Housing Fund Act 2018: Analysis And
Recommendations For Legislative Review -
May 03, 2019
Contact
Persons
KEN ETIM ABIMBOLA AKEREDOLU SAN, FCIArb
kinetim@banwo-ighodalo.com aaekeredolu@banwo-ighodalo.com
AZEEZAH
MUSE-SADIQ KEMI
AJAYI
asadiq@banwo-ighodalo.com kajayi@banwo-ighodalo.com
OLUWATOBA
OGUNTUASE EMMANUEL
ONYEABOR
ogoguntuase@banwo-ighodalo.com EOnyeabor@banwo-ighodalo.com
The
Grey Matter Concept is an initiative of the law firm, Banwo & Ighodalo.
DISCLAIMER: This article is
only intended to provide general information on the subject matter and does not
by itself create a client/attorney relationship between readers and our Law
Firm or serve as legal advice. We are available to provide specialist legal
advice on the readers' specific circumstances when they arise.
Related News
1.
Kwara State Recovers N4.8bn Tax Refunds from
Previous Administration
2.
Double Tax Treaty (DTT) In Nigeria - FIRS
Clarifies the Rules for Claiming Treaty Benefit
3.
TAT Clarifies The Basis For Computing Interest
On Tax Liabilities
4.
Why Nigeria Needs To Improve Its Ease of Tax
Payments
5.
Finance Bill 2019: Tax Implications for Nigerian Entities
6.
Taxation Of On-Line Transactions - Implications On Domestic Revenue
Mobilisation
7.
Appointment of Employers as Agents and Taxing Severance Benefits -
Initial Thoughts
8.
2019 Finance Bill: 20 Sweeping Changes To Nigeria's Tax Laws That May
Affect You
9.
TAT Judgement On Taxation Of Dividend Paid From Tax-Exempt Income
10.
FHC Judgement on Appointment of Banks as Agents for Tax Collection
11.
TAT - It Is Illegal To Impose Tax Based On Taxes And Levies Act Without A
Primary Taxing Law
12.
Tax Appeal Tribunal Delivers Landmark Ruling against Abia State Board
13.
Tax 101 -
How The Proposed VAT On Online Transactions Will Affect You
14. TAT's judgement on Employer's Obligation to Remit Tax on Voluntary Pension contribution Withdrawals