In a recent turn of events that has the telecom industry at odds with the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR), Cellular Mobile Operators (CMOs) in Pakistan have voiced significant apprehensions regarding the FBR’s directive to block SIM cards of tax non-filers.
The sweeping decision, announced under the Income Tax General Order (ITGO) issued on April 29, targets 506,671 individuals who did not file their tax returns for the tax year 2023. This move, meant to enforce tax compliance, has sparked a heated debate over consumer rights and operational challenges.
The CMOs, in a concerted response, have dispatched a critical letter to both the Ministry of Information Technology and the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA). They argue that the FBR’s rushed decision violates several fundamental tenets of consumer protection and could severely disrupt the daily lives of hundreds of thousands of citizens. According to the operators, their mandate is to provide uninterrupted services, barring specific exceptions outlined in the Telecom Act—not to enforce tax laws by disconnecting services.
“The ITGO, forced through with undue haste, will not only infringe on the customers’ rights but also adversely impact their ability to access essential services, which have been recognized as a right to life under various judgments of superior courts,” the letter stated. The CMOs highlighted that any service suspension must be preceded by a statutory notice—something the current ITGO does not accommodate due to its legal shortcomings.
Furthermore, the telecom operators warned of potential legal battles that could ensue if they comply with the ITGO. Individuals affected by the SIM block might seek to recover damages for losses incurred, posing a significant legal and financial risk to the operators. “It is unjust, unreasonable, and unacceptable for CMOs to be exposed to such risks,” the letter expressed, emphasizing the need for legal amendments to provide indemnities to the telecom sector against such repercussions.
The CMOs also raised technical and logistical concerns regarding the bulk blocking of SIMs. They pointed out that implementing such a directive would require substantial system updates and process overhauls, necessitating reasonable time and resources which are not currently available. They suggested that customers be warned multiple times via SMS before any blocking is executed, a step that would align with their contractual obligations to provide advance notice.
In their concluding remarks, the telecom industry leaders called for a more measured approach to enforcing tax compliance. They proposed that individuals be given fair and equitable treatment, with due process as guaranteed by law. This would include an extensive media campaign to inform those affected by the ITGO, coupled with the issuance of show cause notices, thereby affording them the opportunity to present their case in a tribunal or court of law.
This pushback from the CMOs underscores a broader tension between regulatory enforcement and consumer rights, highlighting the complex interplay between governmental tax collection efforts and the operational realities of service providers. As this situation develops, it remains to be seen how the authorities will balance these competing interests, ensuring tax compliance without compromising on the rights and daily needs of the populace.
