THE NIGERIAN 2024 WHT REGULATIONS AND THEIR EFFECT ON TAX GROSS-UP PROVISIONS IN CONTRACTS

Introduction

The Nigerian Government through the Ministry of Finance and the Coordinating Minister of the Economy issued the Deduction of Tax at Source (Withholding) Regulation 2024 (“Regulation 2024”) which took effect on the 1st of July 2024 and supersedes any other regulation governing deductions at source of Withholding Tax (WHT). The Regulation 2024 maintains the interpretation of the previous provisions of the Companies Income Tax (Rate, etc., of Tax Deducted at Source) Withholding Tax Regulation of 1997 (“Regulation 1997”) on with respect to WHT not being an additional cost to contracts.

This article examines the nature of gross-up clauses and their interplay with the WHT regime in Nigeria, legality and implications.

Nature of Gross-Up Clauses

The gross-up provision ensures that the recipient of a payment receives the full amount owed, regardless of the taxes the payer must withhold. This typically leads to the payer bearing the tax burden thus, increasing the overall cost of the transaction. A typical gross-up provision usually read thus:

In the event that Party A is required by law to make a payment subject to withholding of Tax, Party A shall ensure that Party B receives the fees it would have received had no such withholding been made or required to be made.”

Principle of Withholding Tax

The WHT regime is an advance payment of income tax which can be used to offset the income tax liability of a taxpayer. While it is not a separate form of tax, it is a collection mechanism adopted by the Tax Authorities to reduce the incidence of tax evasion/fraud by a taxable person, and it helps to bring obscure transactions to the notice of tax authorities. It enhances voluntary compliance, and it is a compulsory payment on any relevant income in which WHT is applicable and must be paid by the person making a payment to a third person as such person becomes an unpaid agent of the Relevant Tax Authority. Such payments are evinced on the Taxpromax portal of the relevant tax payer.

Implications of the “Deduction not a Separate Tax or an Extra Cost” Provision as stated in Regulation 2024 on Contracts

Under Nigerian law, a provision in a contract will be deemed valid where there is no express provision in a statute prohibiting that contractual provision. Therefore, in the absence of specific provisions prohibiting gross-up provisions for WHT, gross-up provisions for WHT in contracts cannot be considered illegal[1].

The shifting of tax obligations in contracts depends primarily on the bargaining positions of the parties. Hence, gross-up provision in contract cannot be regarded as illegal but will be unfair to the payer as it would be an extra cost on the payer as a portion of the payee’s tax burden has been shifted.

Conclusion

It is our considered view that Withholding Tax Regimes should tackle the issue on tax burden shifting. In our view, gross-up provisions in contracts do not aid or promote equity as a party would have to pay the WHT and the grossed-up monies. We believe that the tax regimes should also be concerned about who bears the burden of tax paid, that way, WHT will not be an additional cost to the payer. For businesses and individuals engaged in commercial contracts, understanding and adapting to this change will be crucial in optimizing their tax planning and maintaining the integrity of their financial dealings in Nigeria’s evolving tax environment.

 



[1] Total Nigeria Plc V. Moshood Adeleye Akinpelu & Anor (2004) 17 NWLR (Pt.903) 509

 

Please do not treat the foregoing as legal advice as it only represents the public commentary views of the authors. All enquiries on this Brief should please be directed at: 

David Akpeji
Associate
david.akpeji@ao2law.com

Olajide Akibu

Associate
olajide.akibu@ao2law.com

Oluwasunmisinuola Ajayi
Associate
oluwasunmisinuola.ajayi@ao2law-intern.com

More Articles

THE ROLE OF THE TAX OMBUDSMAN UNDER THE PROPOSED FISCAL REFORMS LAWS IN NIGERIA

THE ROLE OF THE TAX OMBUDSMAN UNDER THE PROPOSED FISCAL REFORMS LAWS IN NIGERIA

Could the creation of the Tax Ombud under the Joint Revenue Board Bill, 2024, be a game-changer for tax dispute resolution in Nigeria? While the Ombud promises fairness and accountability, limitations on its authority raise concerns. Is this a meaningful step forward or just a symbolic gesture? Explore the potential impact on taxpayers and tax authorities.

NIGERIA TAX BILL AND THE POTENTIAL REPEAL OF THE STAMP DUTIES ACT – WHAT LIES AHEAD?

To address the challenges posed by the multiplicity of taxes, and promote a more harmonized taxation framework, the Nigerian government has introduced a suite of legislative proposals aimed at reforming the country’s tax system. Amongst these, is the Nigeria Tax Bill (the “Bill”), which seeks to consolidate various legal frameworks governing taxation. Whilst we have discussed the Bill’s implications for free zone enterprises in our previous briefing note, this briefing note focuses on the Bill’s impact on the extant Stamp Duties Act (as amended), Cap. S8, LFN, 2004 (“SDA”), by highlighting the salient provisions of the Bill as it relates to the administration of stamp duties in Nigeria.

REVIEW OF ARBITRAL AWARDS UNDER NIGERIA’s NEW ARBITRATION LAW

On May 26, 2023, former president, Muhammadu Buhari signed into law the Arbitration and Mediation Act, 2023 (the Act, or AMA 2023), repealing Nigeria’s 35-year-old Arbitration and Conciliation Act Chapter A.18, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004 (the ACA 2004). The primary objective of the Act is to establish a unified legal framework for the fair and efficient resolution of commercial disputes through arbitration and mediation while ensuring the application of the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (New York Convention) to awards rendered in Nigeria or any Contracting State arising out of international commercial arbitration.