Article Sidebar

Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 99 Download : 260

Main Article Content

Abstract

The study developed a framework for boosting revenue generation from land taxes in Ogun State Nigeria. The choice of Ogun state was hinged on the fact that it is both an economically and an industrial state. It exhibits the dynamism of land activities traceable to land taxation.  Data were collected through a well-structured questionnaire, personal interviews and review of government documents were also conducted. Questionnaires were administered to the 23 top management staff at the Board of Internal Revenue Services in Ogun State. Personal interviews were also conducted. Using the frequency table and SPSS to analyse, the result revealed that government does not have enough information on property, property owners and property transactions. These which affected the revenue from land taxed to fall-short. In conclusion, land titling should be made compulsory and at the same time be flexible, so that government can have access to property information which will in turn improve revenue mobilisation for the state government.

Keywords

Framework Taxation Land taxes Revenue Ogun state

Article Details

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite
Orekan, A. A. (2023). A Framework For Boosting Revenue Generation From Land Taxes in Ogun State, Nigeria. Ilomata International Journal of Tax and Accounting, 4(2), 358-373. https://doi.org/10.52728/ijtc.v4i2.719

References

  1. Abbasian, E., & Myles, G. D. (2006). Benefit of Taxation and Public Good Provision. University of Exeter and Institute for Fiscal Studies.
  2. Agboga, V. (2021). Beyond decentralising the Nigerian Police: how Lagos state circumvented debates on police reforms. Journal of Contemporary African Studies, 39(1), 135–150. https://doi.org/10.1080/02589001.2020.1832972
  3. Alm, J., Buschman, R. D., & Sjoquist, D. L. (2014). Foreclosures and local government revenues from the property tax: The case of Georgia school districts. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 46(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2014.01.007
  4. Borge, L.-E., & Rattsø, J. (2014). Capitalization of Property Taxes in Norway. Public Finance Review, 42(5), 635–661. https://doi.org/10.1177/1091142113489845
  5. Cho, S., & Choi, P. P. (2014). Introducing property tax in China as an alternative financing source. Land Use Policy, 38, 580–586. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2014.01.001
  6. Copper, G. S. (1994). II Aus. II Tax F.397.
  7. Cui, W. (2015). Administrative decentralization and tax compliance: A transactional cost perspective. University of Toronto Law Journal, 65(3), 186–238. https://doi.org/10.3138/UTLJ.2605
  8. Dixon, R., & Elston, T. (2019). Should councils collaborate? Evaluating shared administration and tax services in English local government. Public Money and Management, 39(1), 26–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2019.1537704
  9. Drucker, J., Funderburg, R., Merriman, D., & Weber, R. (2020). Do local governments use business tax incentives to compensate for high business property taxes? Regional Science and Urban Economics, 81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2019.103498
  10. Ellahi, A. (2020). Corruption, Tax Evasion, and Economic Development in Economies with Decentralised Tax Administrative System. Pakistan Development Review, 59(3), 419–438. https://doi.org/10.30541/v59i3pp.419-438
  11. Grassi, C. M. (2015). Status and Impact of the ability to pay principle in the ECJ’s case law concerning tax benefits based on personal and family circumstances. CFE Working Papers Series, 52.
  12. Grover, R., Walacik, M., Buzu, O., Gunes, T., Raskovic, M., & Yildiz, U. (2019). Barriers to the use of property taxation in municipal finance. Journal of Financial Management of Property and Construction, 24(2), 166–183. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFMPC-10-2018-0059
  13. Houeland, C. (2022). The social contract and industrial citizenship: Nigerian trade unions’ role in the recurring fuel subsidy protests. Africa, 92(5), 860–879. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0001972022000523
  14. Jones, S. M., & Rhoades-Catanach, S. C. (2010). Principles of Taxation for Business and Investment Planning. McGraw-Hill Irvin.
  15. Kete, E. K. (2018). Determinants of Tax Administration Effectiveness: The Case of Amaro Woreda Kele Town SNNPR, Ethiopia. A M.Sc.
  16. Kim, J., & Park, N. (2020). Assessing the effects of financial sources on the fiscal soundness of local government: With a focus on special grants and non-tax revenue. Lex Localis, 18(1), 71–93. https://doi.org/10.4335/18.1.71-93(2020)
  17. McCluskey, W. J., & Trinh, H.-L. (2013). Property tax reform in Vietnam: Options, direction and evaluation. Land Use Policy, 30(1), 276–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.03.007
  18. Mcclusky, O. (2012). Rental Value versus Capital Value: Alternative Bases for the Property.
  19. Mogues, T., & Olofinbiyi, T. (2020). Budgetary influence under information asymmetries: Evidence from Nigeria’s subnational agricultural investments. World Development, 129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2020.104902
  20. Nuhu, B. (2008). Effective Property Tax Administration as a tool for good Governance. A paper presented at a two day 2008 mandatory continuing professional development workshop, organised by the Nigeria Institution of Estate Surveyors and Valuers. Niger State Branch.
  21. Ocheni, S., Atakpa, M., & Nwankwo, B. C. (2013). The Nigerian union of local government employees (NULGE) and promotion of good employer-employee relations in Nigeria local government service in the 21st century. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 4(2), 607–614. https://doi.org/10.5901/mjss.2013.v4n2p607
  22. Okwori, S., & Sule, M. (2016). Revenue Sources and Economic Growth in Nigeria: An Appraisal. Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development, 7(N2222).
  23. Olowu, D. (2002). Property Taxation and Democratic Decentralization in Developing Countries. In a seminar on Taxation Perspectives: A Democratic Approach to public Finance in Developing. Institute of Development Studies.
  24. Overton, M., & Nukpezah, J. (2020). Investigating Sales Tax Revenue Competition Among Principal Cities and Their Neighboring Cities in Texas. International Journal of Public Administration, 43(11), 937–948. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2019.1661433
  25. Oyegbile, S. O. (1996). Principles and Practice of Property Rating and Taxation. Jameson Graphic Publishers.
  26. Patrick, C., & Mothorpe, C. (2017). Demand for new cities: Property value capitalization of municipal incorporation. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 67, 78–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2017.09.002
  27. Samuel, S. E., & Simon, S. (2011). The effect of Income Tax on Dividend Policy of Financial Institutions in Nigeria. Continental Journal of Social Sciences, 3, 1–6.
  28. Trojanek, M., Kisiala, W., & Trojanek, R. (2021). Do local governments follow their neighbours’ tax strategies? Tax mimicking amongst Polish municipalities. Land Use Policy, 108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105576
  29. Umezuruke, N. O. (1998). Property Taxation: an overview, a paper presented at a National Workshop on Property Taxation organised by the Ogun State Branch of the Nigeria Institution of Estate Surveyors and Valuers. In in conjunction with Ogun State Government held in Abeokuta between 19th -20th.
  30. Wang, J., Skidmore, M., Wu, Q., & Wang, S. (2022). The impact of a tax cut reform on land finance revenue: Constrained by the binding target of construction land. Journal of Urban Affairs, 44(9), 1311–1340. https://doi.org/10.1080/07352166.2020.1803750
  31. Yunusa, A. A. (2003). Understanding the Principles and practice of Taxation in Nigeria. Jimsy Colour print.
  32. Zdrazil, P., & Pernica, B. (2021). Stimuli contributing to local property taxation - With the focus on spatial effects of industry and functional urban areas. Central European Journal of Public Policy, 15(5), 55–66. https://doi.org/10.2478/cejpp-2021-0004