National Housing Fund (Establishment) Act, 2018: Analysis & Recommendations For Legislative Review

remittance to the FMB, in the prescribed manner, for investment in the Fund[17]. Failure of any insurance company to make available to NAICOM at the end of a year, the stipulated contribution for investment in the Fund, is equally stated to be an offence[18] for which sanction – including cancellation of the operating licence of the erring insurance company – may be applied by NAICOM through the Commissioner for Insurance[19].

Worthy of note is the fact that under the 1992 Act, insurance companies are only required to invest a minimum of 20% of their non-life funds and 40% of their life funds in real property development (of which not less than 50% shall be paid into the Fund through the FMB) at an interest rate not exceeding 4%. Also, we note that, save for application of sanction on erring insurance companies, NAICOM plays no role under the 1992 Act with respect to the collection and onward transmission to FMB the contribution by insurance companies for investment in the Fund. In other words, under the extant regime, the FMB determines the contribution by insurance companies for the purposes of investment in the Fund and issue a Demand Notice to this effect, after a careful examination of the audited annual accounts of each insurance

Investment in the Fund by Pension Fund Administrators:
Every registered Pension Fund Administrator (“PFA”) is mandated by the new NHF Act to invest a minimum of 10% of its PBT in the Fund, at an interest rate not exceeding 1% above the interest rate payable on current accounts by banks[20]. The required investment by a PFA shall not be affected by any provision contained in the Pension Reform Act, 2014 relating to investment by PFAs in real estate development[21]. The new NHF Act gives to the National Pension Commission (“PenCom”) the duty to

17 Section 11(2), ibid.
18 Section 11(3), ibid.
19 Section 11(4), ibid.
20 Section 6(4), ibid.
21 Section 6(5), ibid.