Tax: The conflict between revenue and hunger

There is a moral line every government must be careful not to cross. Taxation, though essential to state survival, becomes questionable when it ignores the lived reality of the people. In today’s Nigeria, where millions struggle daily to afford food, transport and shelter, the aggressive push to expand the tax net raises a troubling question: can a hungry nation be taxed into prosperity?

The argument for taxation is familiar and legitimate. Government needs revenue to provide security, infrastructure, healthcare and education. With oil revenues declining and debt servicing consuming a frightening share of national income, authorities insist that Nigerians must “pay their fair share.” In theory, this is sound economics. In practice, it collides with a harsh truth: a vast number of Nigerians are barely surviving.

Food inflation has turned basic meals into luxuries. Workers earn wages that evaporate before the middle of the month. Small traders operate on razor-thin margins, while artisans and informal workers face daily uncertainty. For this population, new levies, higher consumption taxes, and stricter enforcement do not feel like civic responsibility; they feel like punishment for being poor.

Tax policy does not operate in a vacuum. It draws legitimacy from trust. Nigerians are asked to pay more, yet they see little improvement in public services. Roads remain death traps, electricity supply is unreliable, public hospitals are under-equipped, and schools struggle with overcrowding and strikes. When citizens are taxed without visible returns, compliance gives way to resentment, and evasion becomes a survival tactic rather than a crime.

Even more concerning is the focus on the informal sector, which sustains the majority of Nigerians. Market women, transport operators, roadside vendors, and micro-entrepreneurs are easier to tax than multinational corporations with sophisticated accountants. The result is a regressive system where those with the least shoulder the heaviest burden, while leakages, waivers, and exemptions quietly protect the powerful.

History offers cautionary lessons. Excessive taxation in times of economic distress has often deepened poverty, slowed growth and fuelled social unrest. A government that squeezes too hard risks shrinking the very economy it hopes to grow. You cannot tax productivity out of people who are already exhausted.

This is not an argument against taxation; it is an argument for justice and timing. Nigeria does not suffer from low taxes alone, but from waste, corruption, and inefficiency. Blocking revenue leakages, curbing extravagant governance, and ensuring the wealthy and corporate actors pay what they owe would yield more goodwill—and more money—than taxing survival.

A hungry nation needs relief before revenue. It needs policies that grow incomes, stabilise prices, and restore confidence. Only then can taxation become what it is meant to be: a shared contribution to collective progress, not a daily reminder of hardship.

The post Tax: The conflict between revenue and hunger appeared first on Vanguard News.