EFFECT OF TAX AVOIDANCE AND TAX EVASION ON ECONOMIC GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT IN NIGERIA (2006-2016)
Nnadi, Chukwudi Francis, Ph.D
Department of Business Administration and Management Institute of Management and Technology, Enugu
Ugwu, Kevin Okoh, Ph.D
Department of Accountancy, Enugu State University of Science and Technology (ESUT), Enugu State, Nigeria
ABSTRACT
This work evaluates the effect of tax avoidance and tax evasion on economic growth and development in Nigeria (2006-2016). It aimed to give a detailed examination of the effect of tax avoidance on the economic growth and development in Nigeria. The data gathered regressions model was employed to establish the relationship between dependent and independent variables. The study made use of economy approach in estimating the relationship between tax avoidance with economic growth and development in Nigeria. The study revealed that there is no significant relationship between economic growth and tax evasion and tax avoidance in Nigeria, the work also revealed that tax avoidance has no significant positive effect on economic growth. The study concluded that the application of modern equipped database of tax avoidance whose human resource practices would properly align to the used of international best practices would improve their revenue generation in Nigeria. The study among other things recommended that the federal government should have well equipped data base on all taxpayers in federal, state and local government in Nigeria, and that the federal government should set up a federal revenue court to look into cases of tax avoidance and evasion. Also the government should ensure that jurisdictions of those courts are extended to states and local governments, offender should also receive prompt prosecution of tax evaders.
KEYWORDS: Tax,Tax avoidance, Tax evasion, Economic growth and development, Nigeria INTRODUCTION
Tax is one of the sources of Government Revenue. It is a strong social and economic tool of the government in regulating the economy and maintaining health social life of the citizens. Tax can be defined as a compulsory payment by individual and companies to the state to enable her attain the National goals/objectives. Tax is a non-punitive but compulsory levy by the Government on properties and income of individuals and corporations within the territory. The money raised there of constitutes part of sources of finance for general government expenditure in the economy. According to Aguei (1983) tax is the transfer of resources from the private to the public sector in order to accomplish some of the Nation’s Economic and Social Goals. It is levy imposed by the government on the income profit or wealth of an individual, partnership and corporate organization. Tax is therefore the system whereby individual are assessed and the final collection of the money for and on behalf of the government. It is machinery through which Income Earner is obliged to pay a fraction of his income to the government. Economic growth can be said to be an increase in a country’s productive capacity, as measured by comparing gross national product (GNP) in a year with the GNP in the previous year. Increase in the capital stock, advances in technology, and improvement in the quality and level of literacy are considered to be the principal causes of economic growth. In recent years, the idea of sustainable development has brought in additional factors such as environmentally sound processes that must be taken into account in growing an economy.
The hall mark of technological advancement, economic growth, social satisfaction, the people’s needs and value to the society center exclusively within the ambit of taxation. Also the increasing impact government is making in economic development is such that it requires substantial financial assistance from every individual in the society. This phenomenon therefore presupposes a qualitative and practical approach to a good system of base administration and collection. Admittedly, negative, attitudes of the populace, especially in the payment of tax have resulted in tax evasion and tax avoidance. Tax evasion is capable of pulling down a well-organized government. While, tax avoidance may simply be defined as the reduction or minimization of a person’s tax liability by carefully arranging one’s affairs in such a way as to take advantage of loopholes in the tax taw provisions, it is the intentional act of a tax payer to pay less than what he ought to pay to the tax authority. It is legal. In the course of examining the attitude of the courts and the legislature towards tax avoidance, Wheat-craft (year) observed that “tax avoidance is an art of winning games without actually cheating; thereby beating the internal revenue and the Government to their own game”. Similarly in Ire v. Duke of Westminster, Lord Tomlin observed in respect of tax avoidance that: “Everyman is entitled, if he can to order his affairs so that the tax attaching under the appropriate act is less than it otherwise would be. If he succeeds in ordering them so as to secure this result, of Inland Revenue or his fellow tax payers may be of his ingenuity, he cannot be compelled to pay an increased tax”.
The political, economic, and social development of any country depends on the amount of revenue generated for the provision of infrastructure in that given country. However, one means of generating the amount of revenue for providing the needed infrastructure is through a well-structured tax system. Azubike (2009) revealed that tax is a major player in every society of the world. The taxation is an opportunity for government to collect additional revenue needed in discharging its pressing obligations. Taxation offers itself as one of the most effective means of mobilizing a nation’s internal resources and it lends itself to creating an environment conducive to the promotion of economic growth. Nzotta (2007) opines that taxes constitute key sources of revenue to the federation account shared by the federal, state and local governments. This is why Odusola (2006) stated that in Nigeria, the government’s fiscal power is divided into three-tiered tax structure between the federal, state, and local governments, each of which has different tax jurisdictions. The system is lopsided and dominated by oil revenue. He further argues that over the past two decades oil revenue has accounted for at least 70% of the revenue, thus indicating that traditional tax revenue has never assumed a strong role in the country’s management of fiscal policy. Instead of transforming the existing revenue base, fiscal management has merely transited from one primary product-based revenue to another, making the economy susceptible to fluctuations of the international market.
However, one of the major functions of any government especially developing countries such as Nigeria is the provision of infrastructural services such as electricity, pipe-borne water, hospitals, schools, good roads and as well as ensure a rise in per capita income, poverty alleviation to mention a few. For these services to be adequately provided, government should have enough revenue to finance them. The task of financing these enormous responsibilities is one of the major problems facing the government. Based on the limited resources of government, there is need to carry the citizens (governed) along hence the imposition of tax on all taxable individuals and companies to augment government financial position. To this end, government have always enacted various tax laws and reformed existing ones to stand the taste of time. They include: Income Tax Management Act (ITMA), Companies Income Tax Decree (CIID), Joint Tax Board (JIB) etc.
The problem of tax avoidance is not a surprising, unknown phenomenon. However, the growing extent of offshore wealth, which despite the financial crisis has grown at a rate of 28% in the last five years, is alarming. Although tax avoidance is a problem that faces every tax system, the Nigerian situation seems unique when viewed against the scale of corrupt practices prevalent in Nigeria. Under direct personal income taxation as practiced in Nigeria, the major problem lies in the collection of the taxes especially from the self-employed such as the businessmen, contractors, professional practitioners as observe by Ayua (1998), where persons bluntly refused to pay by reporting losses every year. According to him, many of this Professionals like lawyers, doctors, accountants, architects and traders in shops among others. Many of these professionals live a lifestyle inconsistent with reported income, which is usually unrealistically low for the nature of their businesses.
OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY
The main objective of this research work is to examine the effect of tax avoidance on the economic growth and development in Nigeria. The other specific objectives are:
Research Hypotheses
In an effort to discover the effect of tax avoidance and evasion on economic growth and development in Nigeria; the following hypotheses are postulated to enable toe researcher have good focus on the study: i. H0: There is no significant relationship between tax avoidance and economic growth and
development in Nigeria
ii. Ho: Tax avoidance has no significant effect on economic growth and development in Nigeria
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
THEORY OF TAXATION
Several theories have been advanced from time to time for achieving the principles of justice in taxation. Eftekhari, (2009) noted that taxation has always been an issue for the government and tax payers alike from the early years of civilization. The issue of taxation has generated a lot of controversy and severe political conflicts over time. According to its importance, several economic theories have been generally classified under three different theories as given; Ability to pay principle, benefit approach and equal distribution. Some of the theories are given as follows:
Ability-to-pay- Principle: As the name suggests it says that the taxation should be levied according to an individual’s ability to pay. It says that public expenditure should come from “him that hath” instead of “him that hath not”. The principle originated from the sixteenth century, the ability-to-pay principle was scientifically extended by the Swiss philosopher Jean Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778), the French political economist Jean-Baptiste say (1767-1873). This is indeed the basis of “progressive tax” as the tax rate increase by the increase of the taxable amount. This principle is indeed the most equitable tax system, and has been widely used in industrialized economics.
The usual and most supported justification of ability to pay is on grounds of sacrifice. The payment of taxes is viewed as a deprivation to the taxpayer because he surrendered money to the government which he would have used for his own personal benefit. However, there is no solid approach for the measurement of the equity of sacrifice in this theory as it can be measured in absolute, proportional or marginal terms.
BENEFIT RECEIVED THEORY
TAXATION
The concept of taxation has been a concern of global significance as it affects every economy irrespective of national differences (Oboh, 2012). Tax is a compulsory charge imposed by a public authority on the income of individuals and companies as stipulated by the government decrees, acts or cases laws irrespective of the exact amount of services rendered to the payer in return (Omotoso, 2001). Tax is a compulsory levy imposed by an organization or Government on its member citizens, for the sole purpose of providing common goods and services for the benefit of all members” (Ekenze, 2013). Tax is designed to raise revenue required for the expenditure authorized in a government budget expectation. It is also a veritable instrument of promoting social and economic justice and equality amongst citizens of a state or members of an organization. Tax is not a voluntary payment; it is a compulsory pecuniary burden placed upon the subjects of a given country to support the people.
TAX AVOIDANCE
Tax avoidance may simply be defined as the reduction or minimization of a person’s tax liability by carefully arranging one’s affairs in such a way as to take advantage of loopholes in the tax law provisions, it is the intentional act of a tax payer to pay less than what he ought to pay to the tax authority. It is legal. In the course of examining the attitude of the courts and the legislature towards tax avoidance professor wheat craft observed that “tax avoidance is an art of winning games without actually cheating; thereby beating the internal revenue and the Government to their own game”. Similarly in Ire v. Duke of Westminster, Lord Tomlin observed in respect of tax avoidance that: “Everyman is entitled, if he can, to order his affairs so that the tax attaching under the appropriate act is less than it otherwise would be. If he succeeds in ordering them so as to secure this result, of Inland Revenue or his fellow tax payers may be of his ingenuity, he cannot be compelled to pay an increased tax”.
Aim and Martinez (2001) noted that, tax avoidance is a legal reduction in tax liabilities by practices that take full advantage of the tax code, such as income splitting, postponement of taxes and tax arbitrage across incomes that face different treatments (Aim and Martinez, 2001, Eboziegbe, 2007). Tax avoidance includes not only the use of strategies that allow for the search of strategies to exploit deficiencies or ambiguities in the law (Known as aggressive tax planning strategies).
Tax avoidance means legally reducing one’s tax liability and it’s another term for tax planning. Tax planning describes the techniques which tax payer minimizes or escape tax liability. The tax payer seeks to take full advantage of all exemptions, deduction, concessions, rebates, allowances and other tax relies or benefits permitted by law. Tax avoidance is an attempt to escape the liability by circumventing the law, not by breaking it (Anyafa, 1938). Tax avoidance is a legal ways by which a tax payer reduces his tax liabilities. Tax liability by the tax payer or his agent by efficient tax planning. It is possible by fully complying with the tax laws and meeting tax liabilities. Thus tax avoidance takes the advantages of the loopholes in the existence fiscal laws. The avoider is just smart tax payer who exploits loopholes in the tax laws (and related laws) to reduce tax liability (Ezeanyeji, 2015). Thus, it is clear that tax avoidance is legal or at least not illegal since is mostly probably using the tax laws to limit his tax liability under the same laws. Examples of tax avoidance include;
i. Seeking professional advice;
ii. Reducing one’s income by submitting claims
iii. Increasing the number of one’s children (in Nigeria the maximum allowance is four);
iv. Taking addition life assurance policies. Tax avoidance is thus considered to be a matter of being sensible.
Therefore; irrespective of the generally held opinion that tax avoidance is unpatriotic and anti-social, it is clear that it is not a moral or legal issue unless the legislature expressly prohibits it. No doubt, tax evasion and avoidance had robbed the Nigerian government or substantial tax revenue. According to the Nigeria Stock Exchange, 85 percent of corporate tax revenue in the country accrues from the 196 companies listed on the exchange compared on the 30, 000 companies registered with corporate Affairs Commission. This is a serious indictment of the administrative machinery and capacity of the tax authorities in Nigeria.
Tax avoidance is an act of doing everything possible within the confines of the tax law to reduce the tax paid. It implies an arrangement of tax payer’s affairs using the tax shelters in the tax law, and avoiding tax traps in the tax laws to enable him pay less than he ought to pay. The tax payer takes advantages of loopholes in tax laws and reduces the normal tax he supposes to pay. Tax avoidance can take any he supposed to pay. Tax avoidance can take any of the following forms:
Incorporating the tax payers’ sole proprietor or partnership into a limited liability company.
The ability to claim allowances and reliefs that are available in tax laws in other to reduce the amount of income or profit to be subjected to tax.
Minimizing the incidence of high taxation by acquiring a business which has sustained heavy loss and set off the loss against future profit.
Investing in capital assets (through new form corporate financing by equipment leading). Also through capital allowances as it minimizes tax liability.
Sheltering part of the company’s taxable income from income tax by capitalizing profit through the issue of bonus shares to the existing members at the (deductible) expenses to the company.
Creation of a trust settlement for the benefit of children or other relation in order to manipulate the martinet tax rate such that a high income bracket tax payer reduces his tax liability.
CAUSES OF TAX EVASION AND AVOIDANCE IN NIGERIA
There are many causes for tax avoidance. In order to develop methods and instruments for fighting tax avoidance it is very much important to establish a broad understanding of the different causes underlying these problems. They are;
High Rates of Taxation: The prevailing high rates of taxation are one of the main causes of evasion and avoidance. The high tax rates in the top income brackets are said to be tolerated only because, considerable evasion take place there. But the tax rates by themselves are not to be blamed for the large extent of the evasion in any country for even if the rates are reduced, evasion will still continue, because it exists at all levels of income.
Complexity in Tax Laws: The complicated provisions of the Direct Taxes Acts, not all of which are easily intelligible were also stated to be responsible to some extent, for tax avoidance as well as evasion. The average tax-payer has inevitably to seek the assistance of tax experts and their advice is not always dis-interested but to help the tax-payer for evasion and avoidance.
Shortage of Experienced Personnel: Another reason for avoidance is said to be the dearth of experienced personnel in the department. It is, therefore, necessary to have in the department sufficient numbers of trained and experienced personnel to cope with the current as well as arrear load of assessment and investigation work. Simultaneously, the organization and procedures of the department should be imposed so as to bring it with highest pitch of efficiency.
Moral and Psychological Factors: Certain moral and psychological factors have also been pointed out as responsible for tax avoidance in various countries. Unfortunately, all citizens do not realize their duties to the state and the necessity of paying the correct among of taxes and paying them in time. Only a reformed moral outlook and the development of better civic conscience can improve matters in this respect.
Attitude of Income-Tax Department: It should also be agreed that income-tax department is no less responsible for the present state of affairs. It has been said and not unjustifiably, that even when the assesses returns are correct in respect of income, wealth etc. and produce evidence in support, the assessing officers do not always accept them. Because of this attitude of the department, it is said that assesses, sometimes under state their income and wealth, etc., in returns. This mutual distrust between the assessing officers and the tax- payers also encourage, to some extent, tax evasion, which should be broken. For this purpose, the administration has to take initiative and trust the assesses and conduct itself with a high sense of justice and fair play.
Officers of the Department should be men of Integrity: It has also been said that lack of integrity in some of the officers of the department is partly responsible for tax avoidance. It should be stressed that “Not only should the department officials be honest but they must also be above suspicion and should so conduct themselves in their private as well as official life that no wrong motives could be attributed to any of their actions.”
Political Vendetta: People avoid tax if they are being oppressed by the party in power. Sometimes, the political party in power may witch-hunt their opponents by imposing heavy taxation on their business interests or personal income tax. This leaves the opponent with no other option than to evade the tax. Sometimes also, the opponent may refuse to pay income tax if the party in power is not favorable to him or he does not support that government (Appah, 2004).
EFFECTS OF TAX AVOIDANCE ON ECONOMIC GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT
purposes. Avoidance takes the form of investment in arts collection, emigration of persons and capital. And as observed by Toby (2003) the tax payer indulges in evasion by resorting to various practices. These practices erode moral values and build up inflationary pressures. This point can be buttressed with the fact that because of the evasion of tax, individuals and companies have a lot of money at their disposal. Companies declare higher dividends and individuals have a high take home profit. This increase the quantity of money in circulation but without a corresponding increase in the goods and services. This then build up what is known as inflationary trends where large money chases few goods.
1. Tax evasion and tax avoidance hamper the social welfare. It obliges the government to borrow loan that effects the economic development.
2. Economic growth is co-related with budget and large budget helps to accelerate economic development of a country. But due to tax evasion and avoidance, a huge amount of revenue is not collected. As a result the government has to short-out the budget.
3. In capitalist mixed economy, private sector is supposed to play vital role in investment and development. But sometimes direct investment by governments is necessary. Due to tax evasion and tax avoidance the government cannot supply the expected fund for investment.
4. The government has to take various plans for economic development. But due to lack of fund, the plan cannot be implemented. If the people would not evade tax, the government could implement the plans as they would have enough resources with them for their purpose.
5. The government needs fund to create employment opportunities to its citizen. But due to tax evasion and tax avoidance, the government cannot ensure the employment opportunity due to paucity of funds.
6. It also hampers structural development such as roads bridges, transportation, industrial development etc.
7. Development expenses fall due to tax evasion and tax avoidance. It affects the distribution function of wealth of the government and adversely affects the economic development of a country.
From the above discussion it is clear to us that tax evasion and tax avoidance affect the economic development of a country severely, because a large part of the government income is collected by tax revenue (Appah, 2010).
METHOD OF CHECKING AVOIDANCE AND EVASION
The methods that could be adopted for combating avoidance are different from those required for eliminating evasion. Avoidance could be checked only by plugging the loopholes in the law and by careful drafting of all new legislations.
1. Reduction in Tax Rates: It has been pointed out that prevalence of high tax rates is the first and foremost reason for tax evasion in any country. This makes the tax evasion profitable and attractive in spite of the attendant risks. The high rates of taxation create a psychological barrier to greater effort, and undermine the capacity and will to save and invest. Hence, it is suggested that there should be reduction in the present tax rates.
3. It is also suggested that there should be regulation of donations to political parties. However, it is suggested that reasonable grants-in-aid should be given to political parties and the accounts of political parties should be audited and published annually.
4. The practice of being too meticulous in small cases, where no worthwhile revenue is involved, has done much to damage the image of the department in the public eye. It is therefore suggested that confidence be created among small tax payers. It means that the small tax payers should not be harassed unnecessarily.
5. Changes in penal provisions: Penalty serves its purpose only so long as it is within reasonable limit. A penalty based on income instead of tax highs the smaller tax-payer harshly. Hence, it is suggested that there should be changes in the penal provisions in different countries. It is also recommended that the minimum penalty impossible for concealment of income should be the amount of tax sought to be evaded and the maximum penalty impossible should be fixed at twice the said amount.
6. Public opinion: It is suggested that public conscience is to be aroused against tax evasion and the evaders should be ostracized by the society. But it is possible only when the public is convinced that tax evasion is anti-social.
7. Vigorous Prosecution: It is also suggested that the department should completely re-orient itself to a more vigorous prosecution itself to a more vigorous prosecution policy in order to instill a wholesome respect for the tax laws in the minds of the tax-payer. Further, where there is a reasonable chance for securing a conviction, the tax dodger should in variably be prosecuted.
8. Arousing Public Conscience: A special drive should be undertaken to arouse public conscience by enlisting the co-operations of leaders in the various walks of life by (Ezeanyeji, 2015).
METHODOLOGY
The researcher adopts survey research design while carrying out the study. This study used secondary sources of data collection. For an in depth analysis of the issue involved in the effects of tax avoidance and evasion on economic growth and development in Nigeria. The researcher carried out a survey which is aimed at revenue generation. In this study mixed methods of research design (both quantitative and qualitative methods) will be used by mixing both quantitative and qualitative data in a single study (Germils and Airasn, 2006, 489). The quantitative method makes it possible to effectively utilize a large sample size that would produce statistical data with an improved ability to generatlize such across the country.
POPULATION OF THE STUDY
The focus of this research work is on the eligible individual taxpayers and organizations in the society. This includes workers in both the formal and informal sector. Those in the formal sectors are all civil servants and or officers with their different salary level and proportionate tax rates e.g. the police, teachers, doctors, soldiers, all the ministries workers whether at the federal, state or local government level. The informal sector forms a larger percentage of the working or taxable population of Nigeria. Put simply they dominate the economy of Nigeria. They include all the self-employed and their employees and or agents.
SAMPLE SIZE
The study adopts the judgmental sampling whereby selection is based on individual taxpayers and corporate organization. It is most appropriate or preferred by the researcher. They are preferred by the researcher because data on them are readily available and they are the most popular sources of revenue to the Government. This study covered both self-employed and salary earners for the period of 2006-2016.
DESCRIPTION OF MODEL VARIABLES
HYPOTHESIS I
Ho: There is no significant relationship between tax avoidance and economic growth in Nigeria Hi: There is significant relationship between tax avoidance and economic growth in Nigeria These are expressed in the following mode:
GDP = βo + βTEA - - - - - model for object 1
Where GDP represents economic growth. It is the dependent variable while TEA represents Tax avoidance. It is the independent variable.
βo is constant while BTEA represents rate of change in βTEA HYPOTHESIS 2
Ho: Tax avoidance has no significant positive effect on economic growth in Nigeria H3: Tax avoidance has a significant positive effect on economic growth in Nigeria GSP = βo +βoTE - - - model objective 2
Where GDP represent economic growth. It is the dependent variable while βTE represent tax evasion. It is the independent variable.
βo is a constant
βTE represent rate of change TECHNIQUES OF DATA ANALYSES
In analyzing the data gathered regressions model was employed to establish the relationship between dependent and independent variables. The study made use of economy approach in estimating the relationship between tax avoidance with economic growth and development in Nigeria. The ordinary least square (OLS) techniques were employed in obtaining the numerical estimates of the co-efficient in different equation. The ordinary least square method was chosen because it possesses some optimal properties. Its computational procedure is fairly simple and it possesses the BLUE property.
DATA ANALYSIS, RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
HYPOTHESIS ONE
Objective: To ascertain the relationship between Tax avoidance on economic growth and development in Nigeria
From the correlation table, we see that our correlation coefficient of 0.902 which is greater than 0.3 shows there is a significant relationship between tax avoidance and economic growth measured in GDP. To visualize this, we use a scatter plot
The scatter plot graph also shows that tax avoidance has a significant relationship with economic growth as indicated by the scattered dots.
TEST OF HYPOTHESIS
To test the hypothesis, our p value of 0.000 is less than 0.01 therefore; we reject the null hypothesis and accept the alternative hypothesis.
Objective: To determine the effect of Tax evasion and avoidance on economic growth Ho: Tax avoidance has no significant positive effect on economic growth
Correlations
GDP
Avoided Tax Revenue
GDP Pearson Correlation 1 .902**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 11 11
Avoided Tax Revenue Pearson Correlation .902** 1 Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 11 11
Model Summary
Model R R Square
Adjusted R Square
Std. Error of the Estimate
1 .302a .091 -.010 3.11613
a. Predictors: (Constant), Evaded and Avoided Tax Revenue ANOVAa
Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
1 Regression 8.773 1 8.773 .903 .367b
Residual 87.393 9 9.710
Total 96.166 10
a. Dependent Variable: Growth Rate
b. Predictors: (Constant), Avoided Tax Revenue
Coefficientsa
Model
Unstandardized Coefficients
Standardized Coefficients
t Sig.
B Std. Error Beta
1 (Constant) 8.545 4.489 1.904 .089
Avoided Tax Revenue -1.630E-6 .000 -.302 -.951 .367
a. Dependent Variable: Growth Rate
Result from our regression analysis shows that the Co-efficient of Correlation (R) value of 0.302 means that the strength of the effect of tax avoidance has on economic growth is 30.2% percent.
Column number three is named 'R Square' also called Co-efficient of Determination or (R2). The value given under it measures the extent or degree to which changes in Avoided Tax Revenue can be relied on to explain the changes in Economic growth. The value of 'R Square, (R2) value of .091 means that changes or flow of tax avoidance can only explain 9.1 percent of the changes in economic growth. TEST OF HYPOTHESIS
Since our p value (0.367) is greater than 0.01 we can conclude that tax avoidance has no significant positive effect on economic growth. We therefore accept the null hypothesis while rejecting the alternative hypothesis.
CONCLUSION
The study investigated the effect of tax evasion and avoidance on economic growth and development in Nigeria. Based on the result of the study, it was found that tax avoidance is still midcentury with low tax system in Nigeria.
RECOMMENDATIONS
i. The federal government should have well equipped data base on all taxpayers in federal, state and local government in Nigeria.
ii. The federal government should set up a federal revenue court to look into cases of tax avoidance and evasion. Also the government should ensure that jurisdictions of those courts are extended to states and local governments, offender should also receive prompt prosecution of tax evaders.
iii. The federal government should ensure that tax officials are constantly trained on the job, and should embark on aggressive public enlightenment campaign on tax.
iv. The federal government should embark on continuous tax education as well as in religious gatherings in federal, state and local governments in Nigeria
v. The federal government should sensitize the general public on the issues of tax evasion and avoidance in our system in order to improve revenue generation for economic growth and development in Nigeria.
REFERENCE
Aguei C. O., (1983). An empirical study of tax evasion and tax avoidance. Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development. 9(10)45-60.
Azubike N., (2009). Personal income tax in Nigeria. Enugu State: Immaculate education publications. Nzotta, S. M. (2007). Tax evasion problem in Nigeria: A critique Nigerian account. 40(2), 40-43. Odusola A., (2006). Role of taxation in generating adequate revenue for Nigeria: To promote
economic growth. A working paper. Calabar.
Ayua, L. A. (1998). The Nigerian tax law. Ibadana spectrum law publishing.
Eftekhari K., (2009). International and state building in developing countries: in Brautiggam D. O. H. Fjedstad, and M. Moore Eds).
(Oboh, 2012).
Omotoso, A.L., (2001). Tax planning a paper delivered at the workshop on Nigerian corporate and personal income tax management, Lagos
Ekenze, O.C., (2013). Impact of tax Administration on governance revenue in a developing economic. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(3) 25-35.
Martinez I.D. (2001). An empirical study of tax evasion and tax avoidance. Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development. 9(10)45-60.
Eboziegbe, M. O. (2007). Tax evasion hinders local governments; The Saturday tribune. October, 13. Kiabel, B. O. (2001). Personal income tax in Nigeria. Owerri, Springfield Publisher.
Adebisi, J. F. and Gbegi, Do. O. (2013). Effect of tax avoidance and tax evasion on personal income tax administration in Nigeria. American Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 30(5)12-15. Ani C., (1978). Justifying Resistance to Tax Payment in Nigeria: Economic Reflections, 13(3).
Anyafa, K.L., (1938). Tax Morale, tax evasion and the choice of policy instruments in different political systems. Public Finance, 49,62-69.
Ezeanyeji C. I. S. (2015). Taxation and fiscal policy. Rhyce Kerex publishers. Enugu.
Appah, E., (2004). Improving the Nigeria tax system from Canadian experience. Wordsmith printing and packaging Ltd., 101-104
Toby K., (2003). Justifying Resistance to Tax Payment in Nigeria: Economic Reflections, 13(3). Appah, E.., (2010). Tax revenue generation and Nigerian economic development.
Ola, C. C. (2001). Income tax law and practice in Nigeria. 5th edition, Ibadan, Dalag prints and part. Germils O.D., and Airasn, L.O. (2006). Justifying Resistance to Tax Payment in Nigeria: Economic
