Headline

Buhari Receives RMAFC’ Revenue Sharing Formula, States, LGs Get More

Published

3 years ago

April 8, 2022

The Revenue Mobilization Allocation and Fiscal Commission has finally presented the report of the review of the vertical revenue allocation formula to the President, Major General Muhammadu Buhari, (retd.) after failing to meet the 2021 deadline.

Last year, the Chairman of the commission, Elias Mbam, said the report would be presented to the president by December 31, 2021. However, the commission failed to meet this deadline.

New formula proposes 45.17% for FG, 29.79% for states, 21.04% for LGAs

The Chairman of the commission announced on Thursday that the proposed vertical revenue allocation formula advised 45.17 per cent for the Federal Government, 29.79 per cent for state governments and 21.04 per cent for the local governments.

Under Special Funds, he said the report by the commission recommended 1.0 per cent for Ecology, 0.5 per cent for Stabilisation, 1.3 per cent for Development of Natural Resources, and 1.2 per cent for the FCT.

The old revenue formula was designed during the tenure of former President Olusegun Obasanjo.

Under this new formula, the Federal Government gets 52.68 per cent, the 36 states get 26.72 per cent while the 774 local government areas in the country share 20.60 per cent every month.

The proposed formula, therefore, suggested an upward review for states and local governments, but a downward review for the Federal Government.

In arriving at the new vertical revenue allocation formula, Mbam told the President the commission had consulted widely with major stakeholders, public hearings in all the geo-political zones, administered questionnaires and studied some other federations with similar fiscal arrangements like Nigeria to draw useful lessons from their experiences.

He added that literature reviews were conducted on revenue allocation formula in Nigeria dating back to pre-independence period while the commission received memoranda from the public sectors, individuals and private institutions across the country.

Explaining the major reasons for the exercise, Mbam noted that since the last review was conducted in 1992, 29 years ago, the political structure of the country had changed with the creation of six additional states in 1996, which brought the number of states to 36.

Correspondingly, he said, the number of local governments councils also increased from 589 to 774.

‘‘There have been considerable changes arising from the policy reforms that altered the relative share of responsibilities of the various tiers of Government such as deregulation, privatization and the lingering controversies over funding of primary education, primary healthcare,’’ he said.

I’ll await constitution review process—Buhari

MeanwhilePresident Muhammadu Buhari, Thursday, in Abuja said he would await the final outcome of the constitutional review process before presenting the report of the review of the vertical revenue allocation formula to the National Assembly as a bill for enactment.

The President stated this while receiving the report by the RMAFC, led by Elias Mbam.

According to a statement signed on Thursday by his Senior Special Assistant on Media and Publicity, Femi Adesina, Buhari said ‘‘Ordinarily, I would have gone ahead to table this report before the National Assembly as a bill for enactment.

“However, since the review of the vertical revenue allocation formula is a function of the roles and responsibilities of the different tiers of government, I will await the final outcome of the constitutional review process, especially as some of the proposed amendments would have a bearing on the recommendations contained herein.”

The President who lamented that the present revenue allocation formula has not been reviewed since the last exercise carried out in 1992, said ‘‘Considering the changing dynamics of our political-economy, such as privatisation, deregulation, funding arrangement of primary education, Primary Health Care and the growing clamour for decentralisation among others; it is necessary that we take another look at our Revenue Sharing Formula, especially the vertical aspects that relate to the tiers of government.

‘‘This becomes more compelling as we need to reduce our infrastructural deficit, make more resources available for tackling insecurity, confront climate change and its associated global warming and make life more meaningful for our rapid growing population.’’

The President assured members of the commission that the Federal Government would immediately subject the report to its internal review and approval processes, while awaiting the finaliSation of the efforts by the National Assembly.

He commended the RMAFC for a job painstakingly done, pledging his unwavering commitment and support to them in carrying out their constitutional mandates.

In his remarks, the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, Boss Mustapha, said the RMAFC followed due process in undertaking the exercise, and sought the opinion of the Federal Government before finalising the report.

Mustapha said that it was in four volumes, including a summary in the main report.

On his part, Mbam said the leading philosophy behind the proposed review was guided ‘‘by the need for distributive justice, equity and fairness as enshrined in relevant Sections of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).’’

PUNCH.

Headline

Saudi Arabia’s Grand Mufti Is Dead

Published

1 hour ago

September 23, 2025

Editor

The Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia, Sheikh Abdulaziz, has died at the age of 82.

According to a statement from the Royal Court, the revered cleric passed away on Tuesday morning.

Born in Mecca in November 1943, Sheikh Abdulaziz rose to become one of the most influential religious authorities in the Kingdom.

He served as head of the General Presidency of Scholarly Research and Ifta, as well as the Supreme Council of the Muslim World League.

Headline

Antitrust Trial: US Asks Court To Break Up Google’s Ad Business

Published

1 day ago

September 22, 2025

Editor

Google faces a fresh federal court test on Monday as US government lawyers ask a judge to order the breakup of the search engine giant’s ad technology business.

The lawsuit is Google’s second such test this year, following a similar government demand to split up its empire that was shot down by a judge earlier this month.

Monday’s case focuses specifically on Google’s ad tech “stack” — the tools that website publishers use to sell ads and that advertisers use to buy them.

In a landmark decision earlier this year, Federal Judge Leonie Brinkema agreed with the US Department of Justice (DOJ) that Google maintained an illegal grip on this market.

Monday’s trial is set to determine what penalties and changes Google must implement to undo its monopoly.

According to filings, the US government will argue that Google should spin off its ad publisher and exchange operations. The DOJ will also ask that after the divestitures are complete, Google be banned from operating an ad exchange for 10 years.

Google will argue that the divestiture demands go far beyond the court’s findings, are technically unfeasible, and would be harmful to the market and smaller businesses.

“We’ve said from the start that DOJ’s case misunderstands how digital advertising works and ignores how the landscape has dramatically evolved, with increasing competition and new entrants,” said Lee-Anne Mulholland, Google’s Vice President of Regulatory Affairs.

In a similar case in Europe, the European Commission, the EU’s antitrust enforcer, earlier this month fined Google 2.95 billion euros ($3.47 billion) over its control of the ad tech market.

Brussels ordered behavioral changes, drawing criticism that it was going easy on Google as it had previously indicated that a divestiture may be necessary.

This remedy phase of the US trial follows a first trial that found Google operated an illegal monopoly. It is expected to last about a week, with the court set to meet again for closing arguments a few weeks later.

The trial begins in the same month that a separate judge rejected a government demand that Google divest its Chrome browser, in an opinion that was largely seen as a victory for the tech giant.

That was part of a different case, also brought by the US Department of Justice, in which the tech giant was found responsible for operating an illegal monopoly, this time in the online search space.

Instead of a major breakup of its business, Google was required to share data with rivals as part of its remedies.

The US government had pushed for Chrome’s divestment, arguing the browser serves as a crucial gateway to the internet that brings in a third of all Google web searches.

Shares in Google-parent Alphabet have skyrocketed by more than 20 percent since that decision.

Judge Brinkema has said in pre-trial hearings that she will closely examine the outcome of the search trial when assessing her path forward in her own case.

These cases are part of a broader bipartisan government campaign against the world’s largest technology companies. The US currently has five pending antitrust cases against such companies.

AFP

Headline

Google Faces Court Battle Over Breakup Of Ad Tech Business

Published

1 day ago

September 22, 2025

Editor

Google faces a fresh federal court test on Monday as US government lawyers ask a judge to order the breakup of the search engine giant’s ad technology business.

The lawsuit is Google’s second such test this year after the California-based tech juggernaut saw a similar government demand to split up its empire shot down by a judge earlier this month.

Monday’s case focuses specifically on Google’s ad tech “stack” — the tools that website publishers use to sell ads and that advertisers use to buy them.

In a landmark decision earlier this year, Federal Judge Leonie Brinkema agreed with the US Department of Justice (DOJ) that Google maintained an illegal grip on this market.
Monday’s trial is set to determine what penalties and changes Google must implement to undo its monopoly.

Google will argue that the divestiture demands go far beyond the court’s findings, are technically unfeasible, and would be harmful to the market and smaller businesses.

In a similar case in Europe, the European Commission, the EU’s antitrust enforcer, earlier this month fined Google 2.95 billion euros ($3.47 billion) over its control of the ad tech market.
Brussels ordered behavioral changes, drawing criticism that it was going easy on Google as it had previously indicated that a divestiture may be necessary.

The trial begins in the same month that a separate judge rejected a government demand that Google divest its Chrome browser, in an opinion that was largely seen as a victory for the tech giant.

That was part of a different case, also brought by the US Department of Justice, in which the tech giant was found responsible for operating an illegal monopoly, this time in the online search space.
Instead of a major breakup of its business, Google was required to share data with rivals as part of its remedies.

The US government had pushed for Chrome’s divestment, arguing the browser serves as a crucial gateway to the internet that brings in a third of all Google web searches.
Shares in Google-parent Alphabet have skyrocketed by more than 20 percent since that decision.

Judge Brinkema has said in pre-trial hearings that she will closely examine the outcome of the search trial when assessing her path forward in her own case.

These cases are part of a broader bipartisan government campaign against the world’s largest technology companies. The US currently has five pending antitrust cases against such companies.