Started working in June 2008, few weeks after NYSC and have worked in three companies since then. Here are my top 5 career lessons
Thread
1. Visibility is important
No matter how good you are, you need to be visible. Visible people in the workplace tend to rise faster. Sources of visibility include speaking in meetings, volunteering for corporate activities (from year end party committee to technical groups)
Doesn't mean you should turn into eye service merchant, else you create enmity for yourself. Be moderate but be deliberate.
2. Versatility helps
Demonstrate that you can do beyond your work. Position yourself as a fixer. Read well about your industry. Understand your company
3. Good bosses are life savers
I think the best think anyone should wish for is a good boss. This is extremely critical. I'm currently writing my memoir, hoping to launch when I clock 40 next year, and I have a chapter dedicated to my boss. You go extra mile for good bosses
4. It won't be rosy all the time
There are times you hav a good run, there are times you will be frustrated. It's normal. On 2 occasions in my 13 yrs career, I spontaneously contemplated resigning out of frustration. In one, I actually resigned, altho withdrew it after few hrs
5. Liberal work culture gets the best
I started in a Nigerian company but, credit to them, they are a largely liberal company with many friendly people. Moved to foreign at some point. I think McGregor's Y theory of human motivation trumps Theory X. Almost all my career has been
in Y environment - liberal, no micromanaging, full responsibility. I doubt I can fit into a X environment again (especially banks and many Nigerian companies). I'm also liberal in management philosophy - just get the job done - because my career was built in such environment.
I work very long hours, without anyone telling me to, because I know I need to deliver. Full responsibility.
Jarus
2021
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
NOC means National Oil Company and is the state owned oil company of a country. While most countries have just one (eg Nigeria=NNPC), some have multiple NOCs eg China (SINOPEC, CNOOC, PetroChina) & Russia (Rosneft, Gazprom)
You don't need to officially be an oil producing nation before you have an NOC. Ghana established GNPC in 1983 but officially became oil producing in 2010.
Most countries have NOCs but some countries have fully or partially privatized their own. Also, some of the NOCs were
not originally established by govt but were nationalised at some point. For example, BP was originally a private company (one of the offshoots of Rockefeller's Standard Oil) but it was nationalised by British govt at some point to become British NOC.
From the Brown Roofs of Ogbomoso to the Skyscrapers of Dubai, then to ....
I saw a younger friend of mine Facebook-check into Dubai this evening and I went into our private channel of communication to ask him whether he had taken the job he sought my advice on few months ago.
The answer was in the affirmative. He resumed early this month in a Private Equity (PE) firm in Dubai, one of the top financial centers of the world. For the uninitiated, PE is one of the most lucrative jobs in the world of finance, nay in any field
He had sought my advice in October last year (2019) on whether to choose that Dubai-based PE firm he was talking to or stay where he was (another top finance firm in Nigeria with international capital backing) and move to Canada later this year to resume at a top Canadian
I have seen this being brandished as proof that NNPC cooked books. Insufficient.
There is nothing wrong with impairment reversal. In accounting, a company is required to test its assets for recoverability at a certain interval or when certain economic activities relevant to
it (eg oil price in the case of an oil company) significantly change.
When the carrying value of the asset is higher than the recoverable value, the difference is booked as an impairment expense (not cash pls) to reduce the value of the asset in the balance sheet.
The corresponding entry is booked into P&L (that statement you're seeing up here) to reduce income.
In other words, when a company books an impairment, it reduces its asset value and reduces its profits (or increases it loss). Expense reduces profit (or increases loss),remember
Law (constitutionality) ✅
Politics (federalism) ✅
Public finance ✅
Economics (ease of doing business) ❎
My recommendation as a pro-business analyst
- Don't decentralize VAT collection
- Amend the constitution to correct the legal oversight
- FG & states should renegotiate VAT revenue sharing eg states that don't allow alcohol consumption should not share in VAT from alcohol
Alternatively, VAT should be canceled and replaced with sales tax and collected at state level. US that operates a federal system like us does not have VAT, rather it has sales tax at state level. UK that has VAT is not a federal state. This problem doesn't arise in the UK.
That is why it is value added tax. The supermarket has added "value" to it, that is why they are not selling at the price they bought it from Nestle. Ultimately, you as final consumer will be the bearer of the tax. This is how it works.
cocoa from Cote D'Ivoire and pays import VAT. Let's say the unit cost of purchase is N50, Nestle pays VAT of N3.75 on the raw material purchase. As the consumer (ie user) of the cocoa, it suffered N4 VAT (payable to FGN being import VAT). It processes (adds value to the cocoa)
to become Milo and sells at N70. The buyer of the Milo (say distributor) pays N70 and VAT of N5.25 to Nestle. Nestle recovers the N3.75 VAT it paid on its input from the N5.25 it collects on its output (value added = output value - input value) and pays the N1.75 diff
I've been inundated with requests to comment on this VAT debacle
Not sure I hav much to add as I have seen enough comments here that exhaustively dealt with it.
The issue has 3 aspects
- Law (constitution vs VAT Act)
- Public finance (fate of states)
- Politics (federalism)
I can't comment on the Law part as I'm not a lawyer but all indications seem to point to invalidity of VAT Act impose VAT. And this is why Rivers keep winning in courts. I don't know what magic FIRS lawyers want to pull to win in higher courts but we wait.
On public finance and politics, many analyses have been flying around which appear to make sense to me. But there is no need to rehash this.
But as a tax professional, I will personally prefer that FIRS continue to handle VAT. I have dealt with states and federal tax