Nigeria’s fiscal landscape has officially shifted with the commencement of the Nigeria Tax Act, 2025 on January 1, 2026. However, a quiet storm is brewing in the boardrooms of tax consultants and corporate legal departments. Two versions of the same Act are currently in circulation: one released previously by the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS) as the gazette tax laws, bearing a reference number “FGP 29/72025/5OO” and the “Final Approved Copy”; the version bearing the weight of the law, signed by both the Clerk of the National Assembly and President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, which was recently made public by the National Assembly. Incidentally, both copies claim to be published by the official gazette of the Federal government Press. While the former “FGP 29/72025/5OO” lists the page range as A385-A597, the copy released by the National Assembly bearing the stamp “Final Approved Copy” lists the page range as A387-A596.

While the differences may seem subtle at a glance, a deep dive reveals material discrepancies that could redefine tax liabilities for millions of businesses, particularly Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs).

Perhaps the most jarring difference lies in the very definition of a “Small Company.” Under the FIRS version of the Act, a small company which enjoys a 0% Companies Income Tax (CIT) rate, is defined as a business with an annual gross turnover of N50,000,000 or less. In a significant departure, the Presidentially-signed Final Approved Copy raises this ceiling to N100,000,000. This N50 million gap is not merely semantic; it represents a vast segment of the Nigerian business community that would be exempt from income tax under the official law but potentially pursued for payment under the FIRS version.

Read more: Why Nigeria Cannot and Will Not Tax Your Bank Account – Eben Joels

Another subtle but material difference lies in the taxation of “Digital” vs. “Virtual Assets”. As Nigeria seeks to formalize its burgeoning digital economy, the terminology used to describe what is to be taxed is not so straightforward. In the FIRS version, Section 4(1)(j) explicitly brings “profits or gains from transactions in digital or virtual assets” into the tax net. The Final Approved Copy, however, opts for the more concise “digital assets”. While “digital” is often used as a catch-all, the inclusion of “virtual” in the FIRS version appears to cast a wider, more aggressive net over the crypto and blockchain space.

The list of repealed laws is the bedrock of any new tax regime. Here, the FIRS version includes a critical addition: it lists the “Taxes and Levies (Approved List for Collection) Act” as being repealed. The version released by the National Assembly and signed by the President does not include this Act in its list of repeals. This creates a legal grey area regarding which agency; Federal, State, or Local has the authority to collect specific levies. If the Taxes and Levies Act remain in force (as the President’s signature suggests), many of the collection mandates assumed by the new Act could face constitutional challenges in court.

The energy sector is not exempt from the confusion. In Section 86, which governs decommissioning and abandonment funds for petroleum operations, the FIRS version demands that licensees deposit a minimum of 30% of the fund with a Nigerian bank. The national assembly version sets the threshold at 15%.

Furthermore, the FIRS document contains an expanded Section 13 that provides detailed definitions for “financial technology” (fintech), “shared services”, and “labelled startups”. These technical definitions, intended to clarify the tax status of tech-driven services, are notably absent from the same section in the version signed into law by the President.
In the eyes of the Nigerian judiciary, the rule of thumb is clear: the version signed by the Clerk of the National Assembly and given Presidential Assent is the law of the land. The “Final Approved Copy,” which lists the Official Gazette range as A387-A596, remains the only legitimate reference for taxpayers.

Read more: The Limits of Regulatory Authority and the Imperative of Legislative Clarity

The instances mentioned above do not reflect all the material instances we have cited. For example, the scope of “employment income” appears broader in the unsigned version distributed earlier, before the recent version released by the National Assembly. There are also differences in what constitutes “Gas Production Credits”. Hidden somewhere in the previous version is a mandate for the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission to account for all royalties due within the ten years immediately preceding the Act’s commencement. This material mandate is missing from the version released by the National Assembly.

As the FIRS begins implementation, discrepancies such as referring to the “Nigeria Revenue Service” instead of the “Nigerian Revenue Service” cited in the signed copy and several other subtle differences may lead to avoidable litigation. For now, Nigerian businesses are advised to comply with the signed Gazette issued by the National Assembly.

Nigeria’s ongoing tax reform process, including the enactment of omnibus tax statutes intended to replace and consolidate several existing tax laws, represents one of the most far-reaching fiscal restructurings in recent history. Given the breadth and systemic impact of these reforms, strict adherence to constitutional procedure, legislative authority and settled principles of administrative law is indispensable. These are just not matters of form; they go to the legitimacy of the law itself.

Recent public statements attributed to the Chairman of the Presidential Fiscal Policy and Tax Reforms Committee, suggesting that perceived defects or inconsistencies in the clear provisions of a gazetted Act may be addressed through regulations, had already raised concern within the legal and tax community. Those concerns have now assumed greater significance in light of both Mr. Oyedele’s further explanation and the emergence of an ongoing investigation by the National Assembly into post-passage alterations of the tax legislation.

Mr. Oyedele’s Clarification and the Problem It Reveals

In his most recent public explanation, Mr. Taiwo stated that he does not have access to the harmonised version of the tax legislation as passed by the National Assembly. He further indicated that this lack of access makes it difficult to ascertain whether the version currently gazetted accurately reflects what was approved by the legislature.

This clarification is legally consequential. If a key factor in the reform process is unable to independently verify the harmonized legislative text, then questions about discrepancies cannot be resolved by assumption, explanation or administrative interpretation. At that point, the issue ceases to be one of implementation detail and becomes a question of legislative authenticity.

Read more: Why Nigeria Cannot and Will Not Tax Your Bank Account – Eben Joels

Legislative Authority and the Role of the National Assembly

Under sections 4(1) and (2) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended), legislative power for the Federation is vested exclusively in the National Assembly. That authority is neither shared with committees nor exercisable by administrative bodies through proxy. The Supreme Court has consistently affirmed that substantive law-making power is exclusive and non-delegable.

Once a bill has been passed by the National Assembly, assented to by the President and published in the Official Gazette, the legislative process is complete. The text so gazetted constitutes the law and is the only version recognized by the Constitution. However, this constitutional finality necessarily presupposes that the gazetted text is an authentic reproduction of the harmonised bill passed by Parliament.

Gazetting, Authenticity and the Current Uncertainty

Publication in the Official Gazette is the act that confers legal force and public notice on legislation. Nigerian courts have consistently treated the Gazette as conclusive evidence of statutory law. However, the authority of the Gazette depends on authenticity. Where credible questions arise as to whether the gazetted text corresponds with the harmonised version approved by the National Assembly, that uncertainty strikes at the root of legality.

This concern is no longer speculative. The House of Representatives has formally constituted a Select Committee to investigate allegations of post-passage alterations to the tax legislation. The Committee’s interim findings suggest that certain provisions may have been inserted, modified or removed after legislative passage, raising serious constitutional questions as to validity.

In such circumstances, neither drafts, explanatory notes nor post-enactment assurances can cure the uncertainty. Only the legislature itself can conclusively determine what it passed.

Read more: How the Nigeria Tax Act 2025 Empowers Individual Taxpayers

Why Regulations Cannot Resolve Legislative Defects

It is in this context that suggestions about using regulations to “correct” perceived defects become particularly problematic. Regulations are a form of delegated or subsidiary legislation. Their validity depends entirely on the enabling Act, and Nigerian case law is settled that they cannot amend, override or contradict the clear provisions of an Act of the National Assembly.

More fundamentally, regulations cannot be used to resolve doubts about whether the primary legislation itself accurately reflects legislative intent. Delegated legislation presupposes a valid and settled principal statute. It cannot be deployed to stabilise, legitimise or repair uncertainty at the level of primary legislation.

Institutional Risk of Proceeding Amid Legislative Uncertainty

Proceeding with implementation while the National Assembly is actively investigating the legality and provenance of the gazetted Acts carries significant institutional risk. It risks creating multiple competing “versions” of the law: one allegedly passed, another gazetted, and a third administratively interpreted. In tax law, where certainty is foundational, such fragmentation is untenable.

It also exposes taxpayers, administrators and the government itself to avoidable litigation, compliance disputes and enforcement challenges. Once implementation begins, unwinding actions taken under a statute later found to be defective becomes legally and practically complex.

The Case for Deferring Implementation

In light of Mr. Oyedele’s clarification and the ongoing legislative investigation, constitutional prudence points in one direction. Implementation of the new tax legislation should be deferred until the National Assembly concludes its inquiry and either confirms the authenticity of the gazetted text or takes corrective legislative action.

Deferring implementation is not an indictment of reform. Rather, it is a safeguard for the reform. It protects taxpayers from uncertainty, preserves institutional credibility and ensures that when implementation begins, it rests on an unimpeachable legal foundation.

Conclusion

Nigeria’s tax reform agenda can only succeed if it is anchored firmly in constitutional legality. Where uncertainty exists as to whether a gazetted Act faithfully reflects what the legislature passed, that uncertainty must be resolved by the legislature, not managed by regulation or administrative explanation.

No committee, however well intentioned, can substitute regulatory assurance for legislative certainty. The supremacy of the Constitution, the primacy of the National Assembly and the authority of an authentic Official Gazette are not obstacles to reform. They are the conditions that make reform lawful, credible and enduring.

There is a pervasive fear among Nigerians often fueled by aggressive headlines that the government is on the verge of peering into your bank account and arbitrarily debiting “unpaid taxes” based on your daily transaction alerts.

The fear is understandable. The government is desperate for revenue. The recent passage of the Income Tax Act (ITA) 2025, a product of the current administration’s tax reform committee, was meant to modernize our archaic tax laws. Despite the fanfare, the new Act has failed to address the fundamental structural flaws in the old Personal Income Tax Act (PITA).

Here is the cold, hard reality: The Nigerian government cannot and will not tax your bank account directly anytime soon. Here is why.

The Wrong Taxman has the Data (Federal vs. State)

The primary safeguard preventing Nigeria from taxing your personal bank account is Nigeria’s federal structure.

Under the Nigerian constitution and retained by the ITA 2025, the Federal Government (via the FIRS or the newly proposed Nigeria Revenue Service) collects taxes from companies. The State Governments (via their State Internal Revenue Services) collect taxes from individuals.

This creates a massive disconnect. The Federal Government has the data. Through the NIBSS and BVN frameworks, the Federal Government can theoretically track money flows.  However, the Federal Government cannot legally collect Personal Income Tax (PIT) from you unless you are a police officer, military personnel, or a diplomat. For the remaining 99% of the population, that right belongs to the state where you reside.

The FIRS cannot simply hand over your banking data to 36 states because of complex data privacy and banking secrecy laws that remain largely unaddressed by the new Act. A simple fix such as enacting a nominal federal income tax (say 1%) would have significantly enabled the sharing of data between Federal and State Tax agencies. It could also be used as tool to transfer funds to the vulnerable rather than the current opaque method done via the Ministry of Humanitarian Affairs.

The 35 Weak Links (State Internal Revenue Services)

If you live in Lagos, you might have reason to be slightly worried. The Lagos State Internal Revenue Service (LIRS) is an outlier, technologically advanced and aggressive. But for the rest of the country? The system is broken.

Aside from Lagos and perhaps the FCT, most State Internal Revenue Services (SIRS) are hollow institutions. They are often headed by political appointees; friends of the Governor with zero depth in tax administration or forensic accounting.

These agencies lack the software to analyze bank statements even if they had them. They lack the political will to compel their wealthy residents to pay the right amount of tax because these wealthy individuals may very well be the sponsors of those holding the highest political positions.

The State IRS rely almost exclusively on Pay-As-You-Earn (PAYE), where companies do the work for them by deducting taxes at the source. They lack the capacity to audit the millions of personal bank accounts within their domain. They are too weak to enforce collection on individuals who do not earn a salary.

The “Secondee” Loophole

The most glaring weakness of the ITA 2025 is that it was touted as a reform to capture the wealthy, yet it arguably makes it easier for the ultra-rich to slip away.

A major flaw exists in the definition of taxable income regarding “Secondees”, expatriates or Nigerians seconded from foreign firms to work in Nigeria. The Act appears to completely exempt the income of a secondee if they can prove they are paying taxes in their “home country.”

This is a massive oversight. It means a high-earning executive earning $20,000 a month in Nigeria can avoid paying any tax to the Nigerian state by presenting a tax receipt from a low-tax jurisdiction or their home country. While the average Nigerian employee has their tax deducted at source, the high-net-worth individual with complex global income sources is given a legal exit route. If the law cannot even capture the clearly defined income of a corporate executive, it certainly lacks the sophistication to scrutinize the murky inflows of a personal savings account.

Bank Turnover ≠ Taxable Income

Finally, there is a legal hurdle that the tax authorities have not cleared. A credit alert in your bank account is not proof of income. If your spouse transfers money to you for school fees, that is not income. If you sell a used car and the buyer transfers cash, that is a return of capital, not necessarily profit. If you receive a refund for a failed transaction, that is not income.

For a tax authority to tax your bank account, it must first distinguish between revenue and income. This requires a level of forensic auditing that simply does not exist at the state level. They cannot simply apply a flat tax rate to your total credit alerts without facing lawsuits they would almost certainly lose in a working judiciary.

Conclusion

While ITA 2025 has rearranged the furniture, the house remains the same. As long as the collection of personal income tax is left to 36 disparate, under-resourced, and politically compromised State Boards, your bank account remains relatively safe.  And as long as every Nigerian does not pay personal income tax to the center, the current tax reforms from a personal income perspective are inchoate.

The taxman may bark, but until the constitution is amended to centralize personal tax collection or until the States wake up and employ technocrats rather than politicians, he has no teeth to bite your savings.

Eben Joels is the Managing Partner of Stransact Chartered Accountants, an audit, tax, and consulting firm in Nigeria. He is also a subject-matter expert in International Tax and Financial Reporting Standards and a licensed attorney.

There is a pervasive fear among Nigerians—often fueled by aggressive headlines—that the government is on the verge of peering into your bank account and arbitrarily debiting “unpaid taxes” based on your daily transaction alerts.

The fear is understandable. The government is desperate for revenue. The recent passage of the Income Tax Act (ITA) 2025, a product of the current administration’s tax reform committee, was meant to modernize our archaic tax laws. Despite the fanfare, the new Act has failed to address the fundamental structural flaws in the old Personal Income Tax Act (PITA).

Here is the cold, hard reality: The Nigerian government cannot—and will not—tax your bank account directly anytime soon. Here is why.

The Wrong Taxman has the Data (Federal vs. State)

The primary safeguard preventing Nigeria from taxing your personal bank account is Nigeria’s federal structure.

Under the Nigerian constitution and retained by the ITA 2025, the Federal Government (via the FIRS or the newly proposed Nigeria Revenue Service) collects taxes from companies. The State Governments (via their State Internal Revenue Services) collect taxes from individuals.

This creates a massive disconnect. The Federal Government has the data. Through the NIBSS and BVN frameworks, the Federal Government can theoretically track money flows.  However, the Federal Government cannot legally collect Personal Income Tax (PIT) from you unless you are a police officer, military personnel, or a diplomat. For the remaining 99% of the population, that right belongs to the state where you reside.

The FIRS cannot simply hand over your banking data to 36 states because of complex data privacy and banking secrecy laws that remain largely unaddressed by the new Act. A simple fix such as enacting a nominal federal income tax (say 1%) would have significantly enabled the sharing of data between Federal and State Tax agencies. It could also be used as tool to transfer funds to the vulnerable rather than the current opaque method done via the Ministry of Humanitarian Affairs.

The 35 Weak Links (State Internal Revenue Services)

If you live in Lagos, you might have reason to be slightly worried. The Lagos State Internal Revenue Service (LIRS) is an outlier—technologically advanced and aggressive. But for the rest of the country? The system is broken.

Aside from Lagos and perhaps the FCT, most State Internal Revenue Services (SIRS) are hollow institutions. They are often headed by political appointees—friends of the Governor with zero depth in tax administration or forensic accounting.

These agencies lack the software to analyze bank statements even if they had them. They lack the political will to compel their wealthy residents to pay the right amount of tax because these wealthy individuals may very well be the sponsors of those holding the highest political positions.

The State IRS rely almost exclusively on Pay-As-You-Earn (PAYE), where companies do the work for them by deducting taxes at the source. They lack the capacity to audit the millions of personal bank accounts within their domain. They are too weak to enforce collection on individuals who do not earn a salary.

The “Secondee” Loophole

The most glaring weakness of the ITA 2025 is that it was touted as a reform to capture the wealthy, yet it arguably makes it easier for the ultra-rich to slip away.

A major flaw exists in the definition of taxable income regarding “Secondees”—expatriates or Nigerians seconded from foreign firms to work in Nigeria. The Act appears to completely exempt the income of a secondee if they can prove they are paying taxes in their “home country.”

This is a massive oversight. It means a high-earning executive earning $20,000 a month in Nigeria can avoid paying any tax to the Nigerian state by presenting a tax receipt from a low-tax jurisdiction or their home country. While the average Nigerian employee has their tax deducted at source, the high-net-worth individual with complex global income sources is given a legal exit route. If the law cannot even capture the clearly defined income of a corporate executive, it certainly lacks the sophistication to scrutinize the murky inflows of a personal savings account.

Bank Turnover ≠ Taxable Income

Finally, there is a legal hurdle that the tax authorities have not cleared. A credit alert in your bank account is not proof of income. If your spouse transfers money to you for school fees, that is not income. If you sell a used car and the buyer transfers cash, that is a return of capital, not necessarily profit. If you receive a refund for a failed transaction, that is not income.

For a tax authority to tax your bank account, it must first distinguish between revenue and income. This requires a level of forensic auditing that simply does not exist at the state level. They cannot simply apply a flat tax rate to your total credit alerts without facing lawsuits they would almost certainly lose in a working judiciary.

Conclusion

While ITA 2025 has rearranged the furniture, the house remains the same. As long as the collection of personal income tax is left to 36 disparate, under-resourced, and politically compromised State Boards, your bank account remains relatively safe.  And as long as every Nigerian does not pay personal income tax to the center, the current tax reforms from a personal income perspective are inchoate.

The taxman may bark, but until the constitution is amended to centralize personal tax collection—or until the States wake up and employ technocrats rather than politicians—he has no teeth to bite your savings.

Eben Joels is the Managing Partner of Stransact Chartered Accountants, an audit, tax, and consulting firm in Nigeria. He is also a subject-matter expert in International Tax and Financial Reporting Standards and a licensed attorney.

The Nigeria Tax Act (NTA) 2025 represents a landmark reform in the country’s fiscal landscape, particularly for individual taxpayers. Enacted to modernize and harmonize Nigeria’s tax framework, the Act introduces a suite of progressive measures aimed at enhancing equity, simplifying compliance, and delivering tangible reliefs to low and middle-income earners.

This article explores the key provisions of the NTA 2025 that affect individuals, highlighting the opportunities, reliefs, and incentives embedded in the new law and what they mean for taxpayers, employers, and the broader economy.

Read more: Stransact makes World Tax list of Tier-1 firms in tax services

A New Era for Personal Taxation

The NTA 2025 repeals and replaces the Personal Income Tax Act (PITA) 2011, addressing long-standing ambiguities and introducing a more transparent, inclusive, and equitable tax regime. The reforms are designed to align Nigeria’s tax system with global best practices while ensuring that taxation supports, rather than stifles, economic growth.

Read more: Nigeria Tax Reform Act: What Businesses Need to Know

Key Provisions of the NTA 2025 and their Implications

1. Expanded Definition of Chargeable Income: The Act now explicitly lists items such as: Prizes, winnings, and honoraria, grants, awards, laurels, etc.; profits or gains from transactions in digital or virtual assets; disposal of money or money instruments; profits or gains from the disposal of property or fixed assets; and securities; discounts or rebates, etc., under the scope of taxable income.This eliminates previous ambiguities surrounding the tax treatment of income from emerging sectors and informal sources, thereby widening the tax net and enhancing government revenue without increasing tax rates for compliant taxpayers. It reflects the government’s policy objective of modernizing the tax base to capture new forms of wealth and align Nigeria’s tax framework with global best practices [NTA 2025, Section 4].

2. Introduction of Rent Relief Deduction: Individual taxpayers can now claim 20% of their annual rent (up to a maximum of ₦500,000) as an Eligible Deduction, provided valid tenancy documentation is provided. This provision is particularly beneficial for salaried workers and urban dwellers, offering meaningful relief from housing-related expenses [NTA 2025, Section 30 (2) (vi)].

3. Abolition of the Consolidated Relief Allowance (CRA): The CRA, previously a blanket deduction for all taxpayers, has been repealed. In its place, the Act introduces a more itemized and transparent system of deductions, encouraging accurate reporting and aligning tax reliefs with actual expenses incurred.

4. Enhanced Compensation for Loss of Office: The tax-exempt threshold for compensation due to loss of office has now been increased from ₦10 million to ₦50 million (only the excess above this new threshold will constitute chargeable gains). This change provides greater financial protection for individuals facing job termination or workplace-related injuries [NTA 2025, Section 50 (1)].

5. Revised Progressive Tax Bands: The Act introduces a new progressive tax structure, adjusting rates from the previous 7%–24% under PITA to 0%–25% under the NTA. This ensures that:

• Low-income earners (earning the minimum wage and below /month) are exempt from income tax
• Middle-income earners benefit from reduced tax burdens
• High-income earners contribute a fairer share of their income towards national development
  [NTA Fourth schedule).

6. Clarified Definitions for Key Tax Terms: To eliminate ambiguity and reduce disputes, the Act provides precise definitions for terms such as:

• Non-Resident Individual (NRI); Interest; Dividend; Royalty
• This clarity enhances legal certainty and simplifies compliance for both taxpayers and tax administrators [NTA 2025, Sections 7-8, 202].

Other Notable Provisions and Compliance Implications

Beyond the major reforms highlighted above, the Nigeria Tax Act 2025 introduces several additional measures that shape how individuals earn, report, and manage their tax obligations.

• Taxation of Capital and Chargeable Gains: The Act consolidates the taxation of chargeable gains, bringing profits from the disposal of property, securities, or other assets directly within the personal income tax framework. This integration simplifies administration but also means that individuals must now evaluate the tax impact of every asset sale or transfer. Certain exemptions remain for personal residences and low-value personal assets.
• Clarified Residence and Source Rules: Sections 7 – 8 establish clearer tests for determining whether an individual is resident in Nigeria and whether income is derived from Nigerian sources. These provisions are especially relevant for Nigerians earning from remote or cross-border work, digital businesses, or offshore investments. Proper documentation of residence and income source will be critical for compliance.
• Broader Range of Allowable Deductions: In addition to the new rent relief, the NTA 2025 retains or clarifies deductions for pension contributions, National Housing Fund (NHF), and National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS) contributions, as well as verified donations to approved charitable causes. These provisions reward documented savings and social contributions, encouraging a more structured financial culture.
• Presumptive Taxation for Informal Income Earners: To improve inclusion and widen the tax net, the Act empowers the tax authorities to apply presumptive assessment frameworks for individuals or micro-enterprises with incomplete records. This ensures that self-employed and gig-economy earners contribute fairly, while still providing mechanisms for appeal and voluntary disclosure.
• Digitalization and Enhanced Compliance Obligations: Complementing the NTA are reforms under the Nigeria Tax Administration Act 2025, which mandate electronic filing, use of Tax Identification Numbers (TINs), and stricter record-keeping for individuals. Taxpayers are therefore encouraged to adopt digital compliance tools and maintain proper documentation to avoid penalties.
• Effective Date and Transition Arrangements: Most provisions of the NTA 2025 relating to individuals take effect from 1 January 2026, giving taxpayers time to understand the new framework and adjust their financial and payroll systems accordingly. Transitional guidelines are expected from the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS) and relevant State Tax Authorities to aid smooth implementation.

Read more: Why IFRS 18 Should Be a Strategic Priority for CFOs and Financial Leaders

Beyond Compliance: A Pathway to Financial Empowerment

The NTA 2025 is not merely a legislative update, it is a strategic tool for financial empowerment. By offering targeted reliefs and incentives, the Act encourages individuals to: Plan their finances more effectively, leverage available deductions and engage proactively with the tax system.

For employers, the reforms necessitate a review of payroll systems, employee benefits, and vendor engagement processes to ensure full alignment with the new tax framework.

Read more: Stransact expands horizon, unveils Deals and Advisory Services

Looking Ahead: A More Inclusive Tax Culture

The Nigeria Tax Act 2025 positions personal taxation as a catalyst for inclusive economic growth. By prioritizing fairness, transparency, and simplicity, it fosters a culture of voluntary compliance and trust in the tax system.

Whether you are a salaried employee, entrepreneur, or investor, the new law offers a timely opportunity to reassess your financial strategy, maximize your tax benefits, and contribute meaningfully to national development.