By Ọtọnba Morakinyọ Akínfọlárìn
The recent debates surrounding the Nigeria Revenue Service
(Establishment) Bill, 2024 – SB.584 and related tax reform bills have
reignited long-standing concerns about regional disparities, leadership styles, and economic self-reliance in Nigeria. While the bill aims to streamline revenue generation and reduce dependence on federal allocations, resistance from northern political leaders underscores deeper issues that threaten Nigeria’s socioeconomic stability.
This essay explores the implications of these reforms, highlights the historical
antecedents of regional economic strategies, and critically examines the reluctance of northern leadership to embrace progressive reforms. Understanding the Nigeria Revenue Service (Establishment) Bill, 2024 – SB.584. The bill seeks to establish an autonomous revenue service to improve tax collection efficiency, encourage fiscal federalism, and foster economic self-reliance across Nigeria’s regions. By decentralizing revenue generation, it is designed to reduce overreliance on oil revenues and federal allocations, thereby empowering states to harness their unique economic potentials.
However, critics argue that the bill disproportionately benefits Lagos State, given its robust economy and established tax infrastructure. This concern, particularly voiced by northern leaders like Governor Babagana Zulum, reflects fears of exacerbating regional economic inequalities. Yet, such
fears reveal a broader resistance to self-reliance and reform. Regional Economic Disparities: Leadership Styles and Historical Context.
The economic disparities between Nigeria’s regions are rooted in
leadership styles and policy priorities. Under the visionary leadership of Chief Obafemi Awolowo, the Southwest prioritized industrialization, education, and infrastructure development. Policies such as the the establishment of free education and industrial estates laid the foundation for sustained economic growth. In contrast, Sir Ahmadu Bello’s leadership in the North, while focusing on cultural preservation, failed to adopt policies that could drive industrialization and economic diversification. This divergence is evident in how regions utilized their agricultural resources. During the era of groundnut pyramids in the North and cocoa production in the Southwest, both regions had control over their resources. However, the Southwest’s strategic planning ensured value addition and industrial growth, while the North focused on raw material
exports without reinvesting in local industries. The North’s Reluctance to Embrace Reform Resistance to the tax reform bills mirrors the North’s historical hesitance toward progressive policies. Similar patterns were observed during
Nigeria’s struggle for independence in the 1950s, when northern leaders, led by Sir Ahmadu Bello, delayed the process with calls for prolonged consultations. Likewise, during debates on restructuring, northern political leaders dismissed the concept, questioning its necessity. This reluctance to embrace change is not rooted in altruism or national unity, as often claimed, but in a fear of losing the economic advantages
derived from the current centralized system. Critics argue that such
resistance perpetuates a parasitic relationship, where economically
vibrant regions subsidize others. This approach undermines national development and fuel resentment among regions.
The Path to Economic Self-Reliance for Nigeria to thrive as a nation, all regions must embrace self-reliance and equity-driven reforms. The North’s resistance to tax reforms and other progressive policies highlights systemic barriers and an overreliance on federal allocations. However, the solution lies within the region itself. By prioritizing education, industrialization, and infrastructure development, northern leaders can replicate the successes of the Southwest. Governor Zulum’s argument that the tax reforms disproportionately benefit Lagos is short-sighted. While Lagos may initially gain due to its
economic structure, other regions stand to benefit in the long term by
building their tax base and fostering local economic activities.
The informal economy, prevalent across Nigeria, presents untapped opportunities for revenue generation in both the North and South. Implications of Resistance for National Stability.The North’s aversion to reforms raises questions about its stance on Nigeria’s unity. The persistent opposition to policies aimed at fostering self-reliance and equity feeds into growing calls for fragmentation. If Nigeria were to disintegrate, regions with stronger economies and industrial bases, like the Southwest, would undoubtedly fare better.
This reality should compel northern political leaders to align with reforms that stabilize the nation and promote equitable development. Reimagining Leadership for a Unified Nigeria
To address these challenges, Nigeria requires visionary leadership that prioritizes national over regional interests. Political leaders must learn from history and adopt strategies that promote economic diversification
and self-reliance. The narrative of a monolithic “Hausa-Fulani” identity,
often used for political convenience, should give way to a more inclusive approach that addresses the unique needs of all ethnic groups within the
North.
Conclusion the Nigeria Revenue Service (Establishment) Bill, 2024 – SB.584 is more than a tax reform; it is a call to action for all regions to embrace selfreliance and equitable development. Northern resistance to these reforms, rooted in historical precedents and systemic barriers, hinders Nigeria’s progress. However, by adopting progressive policies and
reimagining leadership, the North can transform its economic trajectory and contribute to a more stable and prosperous Nigeria. The time for consultation has passed; the time for action is now.
