No political victimisation through FBR

EDITORIAL: That the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) is no longer known for being a political Hit Man is something of a relief in a country where the line between accountability and political witch-hunts has long been erased.

Unlike NAB (National Accountability Bureau) — which many believe was tailor-made to serve exactly that purpose — the FBR has, to the credit of the present government, largely stayed out of headlines accusing it of partisan targeting. Chairman Rashid Mahmood Langrial’s categorical statement before the Senate Standing Committee on Finance that there is “no political victimisation” and “no pressure from high-ups” is therefore welcome. But it does not put the matter to rest.

Complaints have now surfaced — and not from fringe quarters but from inside the Senate. Senator Afnanullah Khan has alleged that a notice was issued to an IT company registered under his name for a project that never materialised due to the Covid pandemic.

He claims the case, spearheaded by an official from the Corporate Tax Office in Islamabad, was deliberately fabricated. Another senator, Mohsin Aziz, pointed out that it has become common practice for cases to be reopened against taxpayers without sufficient cause.

These are serious allegations. And while Langrial has promised action, including prosecution, if wrongdoing is proven, it is important that such probes are not allowed to fade away quietly. If a tax official has indeed filed a wrongful case for ulterior motives, then it is not just a matter of abuse of power — it is sabotage of public trust in the tax system. And a country that already struggles with chronically low tax compliance simply cannot afford to further erode confidence in the FBR’s impartiality.

That concern is even more pertinent when viewed in light of the FBR’s well-documented institutional weaknesses. The Board remains woefully inefficient at performing its core function — broadening the tax net and enforcing equitable compliance.

It continues to lean heavily on a narrow base of registered filers while leaving vast sections of the economy, including large segments of the elite, untouched. Add political harassment to this mix, and the FBR risks going the way of NAB — feared, loathed, and eventually dysfunctional.

Langrial’s efforts to clean house, such as warning officers against lobbying for postings and issuing notices against undue influence in administrative matters, deserve credit. But the test lies in follow-through. If the FBR is to avoid becoming another instrument of political engineering, it must demonstrate — quickly and clearly — that internal complaints are handled with transparency and resolve. There is also an urgent need to institutionalise whistleblower protections and accountability mechanisms within the revenue service.

There is no question that the state needs a strong, independent, and capable tax authority. But independence cuts both ways. It protects against political meddling, but it also demands internal discipline. The moment tax notices start being seen as weapons to settle scores or pressure adversaries, the institution begins to lose legitimacy. For an economy as fragile and indebted as Pakistan’s, the damage from such erosion could be long-lasting.

The government would do well not to tempt fate by ignoring the red flags. The moment a tax official steps out of line, the response must be swift and public. Because once the perception sets in that the tax authority is being used for harassment — even occasionally — it becomes very hard to undo.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2025