KATHMANDU: Concerns have been raised over changes made to the Finance Bill related to the upcoming fiscal year 2026/27 after it was presented in Parliament on May 29.
The updated version of the bill available on the parliamentary website states that corrections were made on Jestha 17 based on a letter from Finance Minister Swarnim Wagle, citing error correction.
According to the revised document, several changes were made after the bill was tabled, including adjustments in taxes related to vehicles, cinema halls, electricity-related charges, and certain customs duties.
However, speaking at the parliamentary Finance Committee meeting on Wednesday, Minister Wagle dismissed allegations of wrongdoing, saying journalists had misrepresented the changes.
He said last year’s budget also included corrections in 73 tariff headings and argued that the current amendments were only for clarification and correction of errors.
“There is only one specific customs rate change related to a carrier for blood or vaccines. Everything else is clarification or correction,” he said, adding that media reports had created unnecessary confusion.
Wagle also criticized media reporting, saying it created exaggeration and confusion among lawmakers.
He further remarked that some journalists may not fully understand technical document formats such as Word files, suggesting that formatting changes may have caused misunderstanding in interpreting the document.
However, questions continue to be raised over several amendments, including changes related to income tax relief provisions for education fees, electricity trading tax exemptions, customs duty adjustments, and revisions in infrastructure-related charges on imported vehicles.
Critics have pointed to amendments affecting pre-cleared vehicles and changes in infrastructure investment fees, arguing that the timing of imports and tax revisions raises concerns.
The ministry, however, maintains that the changes are procedural, technical, and aimed at clarifying the bill rather than altering tax policy in a controversial manner.
Comment