ONE of the government’s ‘novel’ proposals to snag tax evaders has collided with some harsh realities. On Friday, the National Assembly’s Standing Committee on Finance and Revenue rejected a budgetary proposal to grant the FBR direct access to citizens’ bank account data, with committee members warning of potential misuse. They had good reasons to be sceptical. Data security is not one of the strong suits of Pakistan’s government bodies, and the thought that the personal financial details of high-net-worth individuals could leak out to the public and, potentially, land in the hands of criminal elements or be abused by corrupt officials would give any policymaker pause. Lawmakers would also have considered the fact that the FBR already has considerable coercive powers, yet those have not yielded the level of compliance promised, so why risk citizens’ financial privacy as well? At the same time, however, the proposal should not be dismissed outright. Pakistan’s tax-to-GDP ratio has stubbornly hovered in single digits, lagging well behind regional peers. According to the FBR, it has no information regarding roughly 800,000 account holders sitting on enormous sums, who currently exist entirely outside the tax net. They must be made to pay.

The FBR’s case for cross-referencing bank data with tax returns is, in principle, sound. However, given the authority’s own weaknesses, the FBR cannot and should not be given direct and unfettered access to bank account data without strong safeguards in place to prevent leakage and abuse. It appears that the FBR is content with accessing this data through the State Bank as an intermediary: lawmakers can ensure that the proposed mechanism is made more restrictive and subject to strict independent oversight. Critically, even where the State Bank acts as intermediary, access to an individual’s account data should only be triggered where there is credible and specific evidence that the account holder is concealing income or evading tax — not as a routine fishing exercise across the broader depositor base. Secondly, the FBR must demonstrate to and assure lawmakers that it is strengthening its data protection capabilities and policies, and detail what measures it will take to prevent and penalise misuse of information. The FBR’s proposal is not an inherently bad one. Instead of outright rejecting it and ending the discussion there, lawmakers should revisit their decision and lay down the conditions in which it could possibly be reconsidered.

Published in Dawn, June 22nd, 2026