RRS implementation: FBR facing potential legal challenges
KARACHI: The Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) is facing significant internal backlash and potential legal challenges over the newly implemented Reward & Rating System (RRS), which was introduced as a replacement for the existing Performance Evaluation Report (PER) system.
The officers from both Pakistan Customs and Inland Revenue Services have expressed strong resentment against what they described as a 'discriminatory system designed to gratify blue-eyed officers,' according to sources familiar with the matter.
The controversy has escalated further when an advocate of the Supreme Court emailed a formal complaint to the Finance minister, FBR chairman, and other high-ranking officials, labelling the rewards as 'illegal donation of taxpayer's money' and a potential 'cognizable offence under Section 9 of the National Accountability Ordinance 1999.'
FBR revises procedure for monetary reward payment
The RRS, which was implemented for the period of July-December 2024, was initially presented as an initiative to objectively assess and uplift the performance of civil servants working in the FBR. However, sources claimed that the new system is 'inherently flawed, manipulative, and discriminatory.'
A key concern raised by officers is that many with 'decent repute' and 'impeccable careers' were either downgraded or not considered for rewards despite performing professionally and protecting the interests of the national exchequer, sources said.
One officer, in a letter addressed to the FBR chairman, expressed deep regret about participating in the multi-rater integrity and performance management feedback scheme. The officer claimed to have been directed to rate more than 45 colleagues, many of whom were 'complete strangers.'
'I have inadvertently contributed to unfair discrimination against several officers, under a forced categorization scheme, which was never my intention,' the officer stated in his letter.
The discontent has reached such levels that some officers are now declining the financial rewards they have been granted.
Business Recorder has obtained a copy of a letter from a customs officer, who formally declined a Category 'B' award that would have provided three additional salaries.
'As per the categorization framework, a Category 'B' rating implies a degree of inefficiency and questions an officer's integrity – a characterization I categorically reject,' the letter said.
'Throughout my service, I have upheld the highest standards of integrity, professionalism, and dedication, and I find it deeply inappropriate and disturbing to be placed in a category that does not reflect my conduct or performance.'
The officer further criticized the assessment mechanism, noting that it 'heavily relied on evaluations by officers – seniors and peers – who may have had little to no direct working relationship with the individuals they are rating.'
The letter concluded: 'Any reward system must be grounded in transparency, impartiality, and a well-informed understanding of an officer's actual performance and professional conduct. A system lacking these foundational principles risks compromising both credibility and morale.'
Meanwhile, the formal complaint by an advocate of the Supreme Court described the system as a 'daylight robbery on public money.'
According to the complaint, the reward structure is based on peer rating for integrity and quality of output for a six-month period, where each officer evaluates peers and is evaluated by 45 other officers.
The complaint stated: 'The reward distribution is substantial, with Grade 'A' officers reportedly receiving four months' worth of salary for each month of the evaluation period, totalling 24 salaries for six months. Grade 'B' officers receive 18 salaries, Grade 'C' officers 12 salaries, and Grade 'D' officers 6 salaries, while Grade 'E' officers receive nothing. The complaint also included a sample case where a Chief Collector of Customs in Peshawar allegedly received Rs 4.7 million in addition to regular salary.
Meanwhile, sources pointed out fundamental issues with the current RRS structure, arguing that the system primarily revolves around peer assessment, which they said failed to incorporate multilayered factors related to training and professional development. The manual intervention through an 'anomaly committee' is said to severely affect objectivity, allowing 'personal likes and dislikes' to influence decisions, they added.
The sources recommended that a team of well-reputed professionals, headed by the Finance minister, should be constituted to conduct a system audit and investigate the role of the anomaly committee in ensuring impartiality during manual interventions.
However, the legal challenges raised by the Supreme Court advocate questioned the very authority of the FBR to implement such a system, citing the section 20 of the FBR Act as requiring approval from the policy board for establishing performance standards and criteria for rewards.
According to the complaint, this approval was never obtained, rendering the entire reward distribution illegal.
Further allegations include irregularities in the constitution of the 'Board in Council' that approved the FBR Transformation Plan 2024, claiming that not all members were appointed by the federal government as required by law.
The complaint has also requested the Chairman of the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) to initiate proceedings against the FBR chairman and board members for causing loss to the public exchequer, demanding that the Accountant General of Pakistan Revenue (AGPR) immediately stop disbursement of rewards and initiate recovery proceedings against officers who have already received payments.
The complaint has also sought transparency by requesting the FBR to publish the list of officers graded A, B, C, and D on its web portal, and disclose instances where officers' grades were upgraded by the chairman or anomaly committee.
When contact, the FBR officials refused to give official comment on the matter.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Express Tribune
3 days ago
- Express Tribune
Govt walks a tight rope
FDI in various sectors, including power, oil and gas exploration, financial, and petroleum refinery sectors, witnessed a 6.4-fold increase, reaching $211 million in December 2023 compared to $33 million last year. photo: afp Listen to article The government will walk a tight fiscal rope in the next fiscal year, too, as it plans to unveil the second budget on Tuesday envisaging a federal budget deficit of Rs6.2 trillion or 4.8% of size of the economy. The total size of the budget is expected to be around Rs17.6 trillion, which is 7.3% less than this year's original budget due to relatively lower allocations for the interest payments in fiscal year 2025-26, according to the Finance Ministry's budget estimates. The government sources said that the proposed budget deficit is 2% of the GDP or Rs2.3 trillion less than the original estimates of this fiscal year. The deficit may still be appearing large in absolute terms. But it is, for the first time, lower than this year's gap, both in terms of size of the economy and in absolute numbers. The tight budget envisages fiscal consolidation of 2% of GDP, as the government is planning to set the budget deficit target at 4.8% of GDP, the sources said. This will be 2% of GDP or Rs2.6 trillion lower than this fiscal year's target. Finance Minister Muhammad Aurangzeb will deliver his second budget speech on June 10. The expenditure path is known to be narrower and predicted. However, it seems that the government may again adopt the business as usual approach on the revenue front, which is unsustainable and puts the country's marginalized salaried class and corporate sector at risk of being insolvent. The fiscal consolidation is the need of the hour but it will drastically reduce the government's ability to spend due to no space left for any productive spending after making payments for the interest servicing and defense. However, whatever space is left is not prudently used and the sources said that the quality of spending becomes poorer with large allocations for provincial projects, discretionary spending on the schemes recommended by the Parliamentarians at the expense of space technology and atomic energy programmes. The sources said that the fiscal consolidation is again planned to be achieved by putting more burden on the people, directly as well as indirectly. The government is projecting gross federal revenues at record Rs19.4 trillion for next fiscal year, higher by Rs1.6 trillion. The gross revenues are based on the Federal Board of Revenue's tax target of Rs14.13 trillion and Rs5.2 trillion non-tax revenues. The non-tax income will mainly come from the Petroleum Levy, which the government wants to increases to nearly Rs100 per liter, and the profit by the State Bank of Pakistan. The sources said that like this fiscal year, the FBR may remain the weak area in the next fiscal year, too, despite the required growth to achieve the goal will be far lower than this year. The new tax collection target will become challenging from first day of next fiscal year because the FBR will not be able to achieve even the downward revised target of Rs12.3 trillion, said the sources. This will erode the base of new tax target. Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif tried everything to put the FBR house in order but all those measures backfired. The FBR's ability to predict revenue estimates is also not up to the mark and this year the World Bank experts helped in projecting numbers, said the sources. Out of the Rs14.1 trillion FBR tax collection, the provinces will get Rs8 trillion as their shares in the federal taxes under the National Finance Commission award, the sources added. This leaves the federal government with Rs11.4 trillion net revenues for next fiscal year, which will not be sufficient to meet the interest payments and inclusive all defense spending, according to the government sources. The government will borrow Rs6.2 trillion in the next fiscal year to finance the Rs17.6 trillion total federal budget. Under the IMF programme, the four provinces are also required to save Rs1.33 trillion from their revenues as cash surplus to bring down the national budget deficit to Rs4.8 trillion or 3.7% of GDP, the sources said. This is steeper fiscal consolidation and would require all the five governments to meet all their revenue and expenditures related targets. The four provinces have indicated nearly Rs2.9 trillion for their development spending in the next fiscal year. This is Rs850 billion more than what the IMF has allowed to spend to the four provinces under the national fiscal framework. Punjab has indicated Rs1.2 trillion record spending on development, followed by Rs995 billion by Sindh.
Business Recorder
3 days ago
- Business Recorder
WHT regime: Finance Bill will introduce major changes
ISLAMABAD: Finance Bill (2025-26) will introduce major changes in withholding tax regime in budget (2025-26) to generate additional revenue. According to sources, the difference of withholding taxes between filers and non-filers would be further widened from next fiscal year. The heavy reliance on withholding taxes would continue in the next fiscal year. The withholding taxes (collected in sales tax mode) constitute over 70 percent of the direct taxes collection. One of the proposals under consideration is to raise tax rate on interest income. Cash withdrawals from banks: FBR proposes raise in WHT for non-filers The Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) has proposed to raise withholding tax on cash withdrawal from the banks by non-filers from 0.6 percent to 1 to 1.2 percent. Another proposal is to impose 1.5 percent withholding tax on the value of imports. The rates of Withholding Tax on immovable properties are expected to be rationalized in the upcoming budget (2025-26) to facilitate buyers and sellers of real estate sector from July 1 2025. Other proposals under consideration included raise in withholding tax on supplies, services and contracts. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Business Recorder
3 days ago
- Business Recorder
Expiry of statutory time limits: ST Department criticised for passing orders
LAHORE: Tax experts have objected to the sales tax department for passing orders after expiry of statutory time limits while treating the tax cases. They are of the view that the departmental proceedings after the expiry become invalid because these time limits are mandatory. They asserted that the specific insertion of time periods through statutory amendments showed a clear legislative intent to make these timelines mandatory. The use of 'shall,' they argued, indicated a mandatory requirement, particularly since no such time limit existed prior to 2000, and its later inclusion was deliberate. The department, on the other hand, believes that the time limits are meant only to ensure speedy proceedings and should not invalidate lawful tax liabilities. Ironically, the department deals with all such time limits as directory, saying that in fiscal laws, especially, such time limits are aimed at efficient and timely tax collection. They contended that the time limits are intended to enforce administrative discipline, not to cancel tax liabilities entirely. According to the departmental sources, the absence of any explicit penalty for missing these deadlines supports their view that the time limits are not mandatory, rather than mandatory. According to the department, the time limits prescribed for passing orders under sections 11(5), 11G, and the former section 36 of the Sales Tax Act are mandatory or merely directory and the use of the term 'shall' in these provisions does not impose a strict legal obligation to adhere to the specified timelines. However, the tax circles are of the considered view that the language of sections 11(5), 11G(2), and section 74 suggests that both uses of 'shall' in the provisions are mandatory, especially when combined with the words 'in no case.' They said that reading the timelines as directory would render critical parts of the statute meaningless. Section 74 does not give FBR unlimited power to extend time. Any extension must be based on objective and reasonable grounds to strike a fair balance between administrative discretion and legal certainty, helping prevent delays, abuse of power, and uncertainty in tax matters. Furthermore, they added that the 2024 amendments retaining the same time structure strongly confirmed Super Asia's interpretation. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
