I got this post from three people already and let me try to address some of the issues raised by @AmakaAnku - some of which are, I believe, innocent errors probably due to inadequate information.
In the Nigerian tax system, Company Income Tax (CIT) is chargeable on the profits of all companies apart from those engaged in oil exploration and production.
This is the basis of corporate taxation for companies in Nigeria.
Expenses are deductible if they are 'wholly, exclusively, necessarily and reasonably' incurred in the process of making the taxable profits.
For agricultural companies, costs such as labour costs, debt servicing costs, cost of seedlings, transportation and storage are deductible
So, in Nigeria, all agricultural companies are able to deduct the costs of labour, debt servicing costs, fertilizer, seedlings, transport, storage, etc before arriving at their taxable profit, along with several other reliefs that are available for the agricultural sector.
Therefore, Amaka missed this position of the Nigerian tax law (it’s not even a new law as it has been there before I started my accounting degree in 1996) in her argument, especially when she was comparing with the oil and gas sector.
For the Petroleum Profit Tax (PPT), which is charged at 85% vs the 30% for regular companies, the oil and gas companies pay their taxes in advance (based on estimates) unlike the agricultural and other companies that pay in arrears (on a preceding year basis).
So, the good news is that the Nigerian tax laws are already ahead of Amaka’s thoughts and suggestions.
The tax regime for an oil and gas company may not necessarily be at the 85% I mentioned above. There are instances where a lower rate may be applicable depending on the type of contract entered into by the company.
The lower rates may be applicable in the instances where the company is within the first five years of operation and those involved in a production-sharing contract (PSC) or agreement (PSA).
However, any activity that is not regarded as petroleum operation is subject to tax at a rate of 30% irrespective of the fact that the business activity is performed by an “oil and gas” company.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
On education, the FGN needs to grant full autonomy to the schools, issue clear KPIs (admission, teaching, research, infrastructure quality, graduates’ placement rates), and then regulate.
Let me attempt to answer @ItsChristy__ ‘s question 😁
Apparently, she went back to negotiate the termination clause.
The company had a policy that termination or resignation required 4-weeks notice with no payment-in-lieu.
She didn't like it. It limits her flexibility to switch to a new job if such an opportunity comes.
They agreed to give her a waiver because they desperately needed her.
The company now agreed to amend the clause to say that both parties could terminate the employment contract with one week notice or payment in lieu. The updated employment letter was signed.
Thanks Prof @yomitheprof for this article. While your conclusions are not aligned with my views on this topic, I believe that most of the arguments are logical and fair.
I believe that some of the issues raised should drive the discussion for the first amendment to #CAMA2020 😁
Yomi’s article is actually the best non pro-CAMA article that I have seen - it came with strong logic that is devoid of unnecessary emotions and sentiments.
Let me just share my thoughts on some of the issues raised.