By Adesina Wahab

Four bills, namely: The Nigeria Tax Bill 2024, NTB, the Nigeria Tax Administration Bill 2024, NTAB, the Nigeria Revenue Service  Establishment Bill 2024 and the Joint Revenue Board Establishment Bill 2024 are being considered by the National Assembly. The main aim of all the bills is to consolidate various legal frameworks regarding taxation.

Part X of the NTB 2024 covers Development Levy which is imposed on the assessable profits of all companies chargeable to tax under Chapters 2 and 3 of the bill. Education Tax, from which the Tertiary Education Trust Fund, TETFund benefits, falls under Development Levy in the proposed bill.

Also, the Nigerian Education Loan Fund, NELFund Act 2023, NITDA Act 2007 and NASENI Act Cap NLFN 2004 as amended, made them to benefit from taxes, levies and duties collected by the Federal Inland Revenue Service from some public quoted companies. 

However, the bone of contention is regarding the provisions of Section 59 (3) of the NTB 2024 which states how Development Levy is to be shared among TETFund, NELFUND (Student Loan Scheme), NASENI and NITDA beginning from 2025 to 2030 and beyond.

The proposed bill states that in 2025 and 2026, TETFund would get 50 percent of all the Development Levy collected, NITDA 20%, NASENI 5% and NELFUND 25%.

In 2027, 2028 and 2029, TETFund 66.7%, and NELFUND 33.3% , while NASENI and NITDA will get nothing. In 2030 and beyond it is NELFUND that will get 100 percent of the levy, while the others get nothing.

But with TETFund, seeing as the saving grace of public higher institutions in the country, the proposal to phase it out by 2030 has drawn a lot of condemnation from some quarters, especially, lecturers and parents. 

For parents, the National President of the National Parent Teacher Association of Nigeria, NAPTAN, Alhaji Haruna Danjuma, noted that phasing out TETFund would not augur well for public higher institutions.

“It would simply lead to higher fee regime in those institutions. Look at what we have been seeing in those institutions following the advent of the Student Loan Scheme, most of them increased their fees. If there is no TETFund, most of these institutions would find it difficult to execute capital projects and if they want to do that, they would have to do that from revenue they raise and they raise revenue from taxing students and their parents,” he said.

For academic staff, under the aegis of the Academic Staff Union of Universities, ASUU, the Fund is not something that should be allowed to die.

According to the union, such a proposal would not only make futile all the efforts put into setting up the Fund, but would also take tertiary education out of the reach of the poor.

The National President, Prof. Emmanuel Osodeke, while reacting to the provisions of some sections in the Nigeria Tax Reform Bill 2024, said, “With all the Development Levy going to Student Loan Scheme or NELFUND, public tertiary institutions will be forced to increase tuition fees. That will surely be exorbitant. Also, phasing out TETFund is going to be a threat to tertiary education in Nigeria and all the gains of the struggle put up to set up Education Tax Fund which later became TETFund would just be a waste.

“ If you go to our public tertiary institutions, you would know that if not for the Fund, many would have collapsed as a result of lack of basic facilities. In fact, on some campuses, anything you see that looks decent and new has been provided by TETFund, so we appeal to the federal government not to kill tertiary institutions in the country and reconsider this plan.”

Also, the Lagos Zonal Coordinator of ASUU, Prof. Adelaja Odukoya, said lecturers would do everything possible to ensure that TETFund is not sacrificed on the altar of making NELFund survive.

“The substitution of TETFund for NELFund encourages a culture of student debt, similar to troublesome models observed in nations such as the United States. This could deepen socioeconomic gaps by discouraging low income families from going to higher institutions of learning out of concern about accruing debt. It may be difficult for students from underserved or rural areas to get or repay loans, which would exacerbate already existing socioeconomic injustices.

“By raising educational quality and opportunities, the TETFund on the other hand, helps institutions and indirectly improves communities. One public asset that helps society is education. The common societal benefits of education, including lower crime rates, improved public health and greater civic involvement, are undermined when the public supported model, TETFund, is replaced with individualised one, NELFund,” he said 

Adelaja noted that inadequate facilities and learning materials, as well as lack of motivation for lecturers would have detrimental effects on education.

Adelaja opined that when TETFund is denied its percentage of Development Levy, which is the Education Tax being collected now, the government is saying it should cease to exist.

“With all the Development Levy going to Student Loan Scheme or NELFUND, public tertiary institutions will be forced to increase tuition fees. That will surely be exorbitant. Also, phasing out TETFund is going to be a threat to tertiary education in Nigeria and all the gains of the struggle put up to set up Education Tax Fund which later became TETFund would just be a waste.

“ If you go to our public tertiary institutions, you would know that if not for the Fund, many would have collapsed as a result of lack of basic facilities. In fact, on some campuses, anything you see that looks decent and new has been provided by TETFund, so we appeal to the federal government not to kill tertiary institutions in the country and reconsider this plan,” he said.