Tax Laws: Gov Abiodun Commends Tinubu, Says Reform Will Benefit Nigerians

Dapo Abiodun, the governor of Ogun State, praised President Bola Tinubu for passing the tax reform legislation, claiming that it would benefit Nigerians and promote economic growth.

Abiodun cited President Tinubu’s tax reform’s anticipated benefits, including tax relief for those who earn less than $50,000, support for small businesses, increased revenue generation, and simplified tax laws.

He praised the President’s willingness to support broad-based consensus, accepting input and criticism from a range of backgrounds, and taking into account people’s concerns.

Read more about Tinubu’s signing of four tax bills into law and the establishment of a new tax regime in 2026.

He added that the bill’s emphasis on a fair and equitable distribution of value-added tax (VAT) revenue, which would allow states to fund more projects independently, was of particular significance.

The signing of four new tax reform bills that the National Assembly passed represents a significant milestone, in all intents and purposes, says President Bola Tinubu. They are essential to Nigeria’s prosperity, according to the President.

The bills have been well thought out, grounded in economic research, and have, among other things, been based on the inputs of various stakeholders, including the business community, regional organizations, and the Nigerian Governors’ Forum, he said.

Abiodun continued, “The bills represent a crystallization of advocacy for tax transparency and efficiency, thereby establishing a link between tax transparency and the use of public funds.” Nigerians should be proud of this achievement in all respects.

The bills address a pressing need for economic growth by streamlining taxation and removing the poor from excessive tax burdens. They will facilitate business growth, increase customer satisfaction, and encourage job creation. Really, the message is that all Nigerians will experience positive things in the future.

The four tax reform bills that the National Assembly recently passed had opposition on Thursday, according to President Bola Tinubu.

After extensive discussions with various stakeholders and interested parties, the National Assembly passed the four bills, the Nigeria Tax Bill, the Nigeria Tax Administration Bill, the Nigeria Revenue Service (Establishment) Bill, and the Joint Revenue Board (Establishment) Bill.

The new tax laws, in the opinion of the president, will significantly alter how tax administration operates in the nation, leading to more revenue generation, a better business environment, and a rise in domestic and foreign investments.

‘Explosive’: US Supreme Court deals blow to those challenging Trump’s power

Washington, DC – The United States Supreme Court has dealt a major blow to those challenging Donald Trump’s use of presidential power, in what the president and his allies have hailed as a major victory.

In its decision on Friday, the nine-member panel weighed whether courts could block an executive order on birthright citizenship.

The court did not rule directly on the president’s order, which would limit citizenship for US-born children based on their parents’ immigration status.

But in a six-to-three ruling, the court’s conservative supermajority did severely curtail the ability of judges to issue so-called universal injunctions: blanket bans on presidential actions stemming from legal challenges.

The court’s move, according to Allen Orr, the former president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA), is nothing short of “explosive”.

“For lawyers and people who practice law, this is a drastic change from the way we’ve had courts run in the past,” he told Al Jazeera. “It’s weakening the judiciary yet again, as a balancing act [against the executive branch].”

Friday’s ruling lifts the nationwide block on Trump’s executive order that seeks to redefine birthright citizenship, which generally allows those born on US soil to be recognised as American citizens.

However, Trump’s order, signed just hours after he took office for a second term on January 20, would restrict citizenship for individuals born to undocumented parents in the US.

That “opens the door to partial enforcement” of Trump’s order, according to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), one of several groups that have challenged the attempted policy.

That is, at least until the Supreme Court makes a determination on whether birthright citizenship is indeed protected by the US Constitution, as proponents – and the court’s own precedents – have long maintained.

If no further action is taken, in theory, the order could be blocked in the handful of states where judges have already issued injunctions related to at least 10 individual lawsuits. But it could go into effect in dozens of other states where judges have issued no such injunction.

The Supreme Court’s ruling says Trump’s order will not be enforceable for at least 30 days.

But Leon Fresco – a former deputy assistant attorney general who oversaw immigration at the Justice Department under President Barack Obama – warned that, after that 30-day period, there could be grave consequences for the newborn children of immigrants.

“If there isn’t an injunction in your jurisdiction that prevents the executive order from being implemented and you’re born to a parent without a status that confers you citizenship, then the government could deny you either a passport, if you apply for a passport, or a Social Security number,” he told Al Jazeera.

Class action challenge

The decision on Friday does not completely remove the possibility of a judge issuing a nationwide injunction to an executive order. Legal experts say it just severely restricts the avenues.

Prior to the decision, groups and individuals could launch a panoply of legal challenges in federal courts across the country, any of which could result in nationwide injunctions.

Now, a judge can only issue a blanket pause in response to a class action lawsuit, which is a complaint brought on behalf of an entire “class” of people. The process is typically more complex, time-consuming and costly.

The Supreme Court’s majority opinion, Fresco explained, also clarified that only one nationwide class action lawsuit can represent a specific challenge.

“There wouldn’t be this ability, which happens now, where plaintiffs can file cases in five or six different courts, in hopes of getting one judge in any of those courts to issue a nationwide injunction,” he said.

“With the class action, you’ll only have the one time to win,” he added. “If you lost, you’d have to hope that the appellate court changed it, or that the Supreme Court changed it.”

Class action lawsuits also have stringent requirements for who can participate. A judge must agree that all plaintiffs are pursuing the same case and that there are no substantial differences in their claims.

Shortly after Friday’s ruling, the plaintiff, CASA Inc, an immigration advocacy group, swiftly refiled its legal challenge against Trump’s birthright citizenship order. Now, it is pursuing the case as a class action lawsuit.

Critics, meanwhile, took aim at the Supreme Court’s conservative supermajority. Even Justice Sonia Sotomayor, a liberal judge on the nine-member panel, criticised her colleagues for ruling on national injunctions but not on Trump’s executive order, which she called blatantly unconstitutional.

“The majority ignores entirely whether the President’s Executive Order is constitutional, instead focusing only on the question whether federal courts have the equitable authority to issue universal injunctions,” Sotomayor wrote.

“Yet the Order’s patent unlawfulness reveals the gravity of the majority’s error.”

Absent a class action lawsuit, individuals and groups will be forced to launch their own lawsuits to get individual reprieves from potentially illegal presidential orders.

That’s because the conservative supermajority ruled that court injunctions in most cases should only apply to the plaintiffs in the lawsuit at hand.

In a post on the social media platform X, Democratic Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz wrote that the Supreme Court’s decision allows Trump to “rip away birthright citizenship, forcing individuals to file burdensome lawsuits to get it back”.

Wider implications

But Friday’s decision not only restricts who is protected by a given court injunction, it also has sway over how much the judicial branch of government can continue to serve as a bulwark against the executive branch.

Critics of universal injunctions have long accused federal judges of overstepping their authority by blocking presidential action.

Among those celebrating Friday’s decision was Senator Chuck Grassley, who has spearheaded legislation on the issue.

In a statement, he called such injunctions an “unconstitutional affront to our nation’s system of checks and balances” that “ought to be stopped for good”.

Proponents, however, say the ability for judges to issue swift, wide-reaching pauses on controversial policies is needed to safeguard against presidential overreach.

Many see Trump as taking the expansion of presidential powers to a new level during his second term.

Since returning to office for a second term, Trump has issued 164 executive orders, surpassing the 162 issued by former President Joe Biden during his entire presidency. That number – for a span of about five months – is rapidly approaching the total for Trump’s entire first term: 220.

Meanwhile, federal judges issued at least 25 national injunctions to Trump’s orders during his first 100 days in office, some of which paused cuts to federal funding, attacks on diversity initiatives and overhauls to the US immigration systems.

Some of those court cases will likely be re-challenged in light of the latest ruling, experts said.

In a post on X, Senator Chris Coons, a Democrat, warned the courts ruling “will only embolden Trump and his dismantling of our federal government”.

“It will create an unworkable patchwork of laws that shift depending on who you are or what state you’re in.”

Orr, the former law association president, agreed with that assessment.

Katie Price forced to delete Princess’ birthday post after awkward blunder

As Princess Andre prepares to celebrate her milestone 18th birthday, Katie Price was forced to delete a loving message from her blog.

Princess and Katie(Image: @katieprice/instagram)

Katie Price quickly deleted a gushing post to daughter Princess as she gets ready to celebrate her 18th birthday. The mum-of-five took to social media to share a loving upload – but quickly removed it.

The 47-year-old former glamour model shares the teen with ex-husband Peter Andre. And taking to her Instagram Stories to mark the latest milestone, she said: “Happy 18th birthday to the most amazing daughter and my best friend @princess_andre I love you so much.”

However, Princess’ birthday is not until Sunday, so she was a few days too early to say what she meant. Katie quickly deleted her upload.

Katie Price
Katie Price’s initial post(Image: @katieprice/instagram)

She continued, “2 days until Princess turns 18 can’t believe it xx,” by replacing it with a new post.

Princess Andre showed off the lavish top-of-the-range Audi she bought for herself a few days before turning 18 with some help from her father. She also stated that she has a number of celebrations planned.

Continue reading the article.

But she admitted she won’t be going crazy to mark the milestone. “To be honest, I’m not fussed on doing a big thing,” she told us in her exclusive photo shoot for the occasion.

As long as it’s memorable and the people I love, my family and friends, are with me, I’ll be very happy with a quiet dinner and possibly a trip there afterwards. My dad and Emily’s hands are in charge of it. It will surprise you, I suppose.

She continued, “Maybe we’ll have a nice dinner together,” while describing how she will celebrate with her mother. I’m certain that my mother will make plans for me.

Katie Price Insta
Katie switched up the post(Image: @katieprice/instagram)

However, it seems as though going to the club is not on the cards. Although I don’t usually enjoy drinking or going out with my friends, it’ll be nice to be able to go to bars and other places. “But at the same time, I’m not the type of person who would make fun of myself.” I’ll never place myself in a bad light.

Earlier this month Princess modelled beachwear at Ibiza Fashion Festival 2025, which was hosted by TV presenter Jenny Powell. She was among those who helped open the festival at Bibo Park in Ibiza on June 12. The event is described as an independent sustainable fashion show on the island off the coast of Spain.

Continue reading the article.

Princess represented the beachwear brand Greta, which has a flagship store in the Dominican Republic, at the event. It comes after she made her modelling debut for PrettyLittleThing last year. She had also collaborated with the fashion retailer previously.

Rumours had suggested Princess could have sorted a deal with the brand, with speculation saying it could be worth a four-figure fee.

Hull KR beat Wakefield to extend Super League lead

SWPIX
  • 11 Comments

Betfred Super League

Hull KR (12) 34

Davies 3, Burgess, Lewis, Hiku, Mourgue 5, and Hiku.

Wakefield (10) 10

With a stylish 34-10 victory over Wakefield Trinity at Craven Park, Hull KR extended their Super League lead to six points.

Rovers won 15 league games to extend their astonishing run, thanks to Tom Davies’ hat-trick and Joe Burgess, Mikey Lewis, and Peta Hiku’s one each.

The Robins, who had five goals in the second half, stopped their foes in scoring with French full-back Arthur Mourgue.

In the 20th minute, Wakefield’s Rhyse Martin was offloaded to Davies, who had the ball well on the bounce and pirouetted away from Wakefield’s centre Johnstone to dive over.

After three minutes, Wakefield was level thanks to a wonderful flowing move that saw Jake Trueman find Johnstone and score his seventh try of the Super League season.

After the final tackle, Wakefield waited patiently for an overload on the right and scored a try for a side that, at the time, was dripping with confidence following their victory against Wigan last time out.

At the end of the first half, Hull KR put their foot in the door when Burgess launched himself into the line for a trademark try before Mourgue added the extras to give the visitors a 12-10 half-time lead.

Wakefield was caught out by Lewis’ opportunistic linebreak five minutes after the break, and he was able to extend his arm to the line and surpass his 500 career points.

After Davies’ superb dummy tricked three Wakefield players, he dipped his second goal of the match over the top to give the Robins a 2-0 lead.

The all-action Lewis was then sent to the sin-bin in the 54th minute after blocking Cameron Scott’s attempt to score a try by kicking the ball past him.

Davies’ third career hat-trick against Wakefield came when he collected Hiku’s straightforward pass to dot down despite having just 12 men.

After returning to the field, Lewis darted through and outrageously offloaded Hiku to score a try, underlining his true star status.

Morgue, Davies, Hiku, Broadbent, Burgess, Lewis, May, Sue, Litten, Hadley, Whitbread, Martin, Minchella, KR:

Interchanges: Leyland, Brown, Tanginoa, Luckley

Sin-bin: Lewis (54 mins)

Wakefield includes Walmsley, Hall, Pratt, Johnstone, Trueman, Lino, Pitts, Smith, Faatili, Nikotemo, Scott, and Griffin.

Hood, Vagana, Rourke, and Croft are the exchanges.

related subjects

  • Wakefield Trinity
  • Rovers from Hull and Kingston
  • Rugby League

Hull KR beat Wakefield to extend Super League lead

SWPIX
  • 11 Comments

Betfred Super League

Hull KR (12) 34

Tries: Davies 3, Burgess, Lewis, Hiku Goals: Mourgue 5

Wakefield (10) 10

Hull KR extended their lead at the top of Super League to six points with a stylish 34-10 victory against Wakefield Trinity at Craven Park.

A hat-trick from Tom Davies and one each from Joe Burgess, Mikey Lewis and Peta Hiku earned Rovers a 15th league win from 16 matches to continue their astonishing run.

French full-back Arthur Mourgue added five goals for the Robins who stopped their opponents scoring in the second half.

The hosts opened the scoring in the 20th minute when returning Rhyse Martin offloaded to Davies who gathered the ball well on the bounce and pirouetted away from Wakefield centre Johnstone to dive over.

Three minutes later, Wakefield were level thanks to a wonderful flowing move which ended with a pass over the top from Jake Trueman who found Johnstone to score his seventh try of the Super League season.

Wakefield then went ahead when, on the last tackle, they patiently created an overload on the right and Jowitt found Hall to score a try for a side which at that stage was dripping with confidence following their victory against Wigan last time out.

Hull KR put their foot down at the end of the first half when Burgess catapulted himself towards the line to score a trademark try before Mourgue nailed the extras to give the hosts a 12-10 half-time lead.

Five minutes after the break, Lewis’ opportunistic linebreak caught Wakefield out and he managed to extend his arm to score on the line and move past 500 career points.

Moments later, Davies’ superb dummy deceived three Wakefield players before diving over to score his second of the match and put the Robins in cruise control.

In the 54th minute, the all-action Lewis was then sent to the sin-bin for preventing a try-scoring opportunity when he hauled down Cameron Scott who had kicked the ball past him.

Despite being down to 12 men, Davies completed his third career hat-trick against Wakefield when he collected Hiku’s simple pass to dot down.

After returning to the field, Lewis then darted through and outrageously offloaded to Hiku to score a try underlining his true star quality.

Hull KR: Morgue; Davies, Hiku, Broadbent, Burgess; Lewis, May; Sue, Litten, Hadley, Whitbread, Martin, Minchella

Interchanges: Luckley, Tanginoa, Brown, Leyland

Sin-bin: Lewis (54 mins)

Wakefield: Jowitt; Walmsley, Hall, Pratt, Johnstone; Trueman, Lino; Pitts, Smith, Faatili, Nikotemo, Scott, Griffin

Interchanges: Hood, Vagana, Rourke, Croft

Related topics

  • Wakefield Trinity
  • Hull Kingston Rovers
  • Rugby League

Sean Combs Defence Takes Derisive Aim At Accusers In Closing Argument

The music mogul’s accusers’ attorneys were out for money in closing arguments, and they rejected the idea that Sean “Diddy” Combs was the one who led a criminal ring on Friday, according to his attorney.

Attorney for the defense, Marc Agnifilo, scoffed at the depiction of a violent, domineering man who “used his employees, wealth, and power to foster a climate of fear” and obliterate women through sex parties that were demeaning and unlawful.

According to Agnifilo, Combs, 55, is a “self-made, successful Black entrepreneur” who had romantic relationships that were “complicated but ultimately consensual love stories.

Agnifilo’s meandering closing arguments were intended to confound the narrative that US attorney Christy Slavik had outlined one day earlier.

She had nearly five hours of meticulously walking the jury through the allegations, bringing together nearly seven weeks of testimony from 34 witnesses, as well as thousands of phone, financial, travel, and audiovisual records.

Combs led a criminal enterprise of “loyal lieutenants” and “foot soldiers” who “existed to serve his needs,” the prosecution claimed in explaining the most serious charge of racketeering.

The claim that senior employees, including his chief of staff and security personnel, were aware of and actively supported his actions is central to their case.

Agnifilo’s point was that neither of those accused of conspiring against Combs nor were they identified as conspirators in the indictment.

The defense attorney told the jury that “this is supposed to be simple.” “Maybe it’s because it’s not there,” you might find yourself in the weeds of this great complexity.

In his final statement, he said, “It takes a lot of courage to acquit.”

Combs could receive a possible life sentence if found guilty.

On May 13, 2025, Sean “Diddy” Combs’ family arrived at Manhattan’s Federal Court in New York City. Both parties have rested from Sean “Diddy” Combs’ trial on June 24, and attorneys will now deliver marathon closing arguments to jurors.
Combs, a 55-year-old music mogul, is accused of racketeering, sex trafficking, and using public transportation with the intent to prostitution. If found guilty, he will face life in prison. (Photo by Leonardo Munoz/AFP)

– Coercion or consent? –

Agnifilo spent a lot of time dissecting the testimony of Jane, a singer, and Casandra Ventura. In harrowing detail, both witnesses described Combs’ abuse and coercion.

Combs’ defense acknowledged in their opening statements that despite the artist’s relationship history, his outbursts did not constitute the kind of sex trafficking he is accused of.

The prosecution provided “crystal clear” evidence of trafficking that included coercion into drug-addled sex with paid escorts under the threat of reputational, physical, or financial harm, according to the prosecution.

The defense countered that the women were adult consenters making their own decisions and occasionally even mocking their terrifying witness accounts.

According to Agnifilo, “Cassie would be the one who would win this entire thing,” he said in Ventura’s civil lawsuit against Combs, in which case she received $ 20 million.

Ventura described brutal physical abuse, emotional manipulation, and fear Combs would end her career or reputation if she left him while speaking through tears on the witness.

Agnifilo acknowledged that the video was “terrible” and “very much domestic violence,” but insisted that it wasn’t “sex trafficking.”

On June 18, 2025, Attoreny Marc Agnifilo arrives in New York City’s lower Manhattan. At the end of the week, the prosecution’s case is expected to be finished with Sean Diddy Combs’ sex trafficking and racketeering federal trial. John Lamparski/GETTY IMAGES NORTH AMERICA/Getty Images/AFP (Photo by Frank Lamparski/Getty Images/AFP)

The women involved were “drugged, covered in oil, sore, and exhausted,” according to the prosecution’s statement to jurors.

Ventura and Jane’s testimony about being coerced into having sex with male escorts, which were both refuted by Agnifilo in light of prostitution-related charges.

“This was a way of life.” All it is is, according to Agnifilo, “you want to call it swingers, you want to call it threesomes.”

Agnifilo said that was just Combs’ party boy lifestyle when he referred to the drug distribution accusations, which are one of the eight possible acts that could lead to a racketeering conviction.

The attorney claimed that “they seem to be doing what people in creative fields do.”

Jurors were shown a large number of phone records throughout the trial, including those that included messages from both women to show their affection and desire, but prosecutor Slavik argued that interpreting those words literally and in their entirety doesn’t provide a complete picture.

Slavik made numerous references to a forensic psychologist’s testimony, explaining how victims become victims of their abusers.

The final item in the proceedings that jurors will hear before the weekend is when the government has the final word: prosecutor Maurene Comey will refute Agnifilo’s argument.