FBR’s Controversial New Reward System Sparks Uproar

The Federal Board of Revenue’s (FBR) newly introduced performance management system has sparked a firestorm of criticism within the bureaucracy, with officers denouncing it as a flawed, biased, and demoralizing mechanism dictated from the top by the Chairman FBR. Under the system, both Inland Revenue Service (IRS) and Pakistan Customs officers were instructed to grade one another, including on sensitive attributes such as integrity and performance, despite often having no direct working relationship with the individuals they were rating. “This is a dangerous precedent,” sources told ProPakistani on condition of anonymity. “We are being asked to pass judgment on some of our colleagues’ integrity without knowing anything about their work or character. It’s not just flawed, it’s absurd.” Sources further said FBR officers have evaluated each other under the new performance management system, with some junior officers assigning D or E grades to senior officials, including members, chief commissioners, and chief collectors. The FBR has also formed a grievance committee to address concerns over low grades.  Reportedly, senior FBR officials have upgraded some disputed D or E ratings to A or B after complaints were filed, sources added. Meanwhile, sources also revealed that the FBR has released millions of rupees in rewards for the officers serving in field formations after the evaluation, while grade 1 to 16 employees are also staging a protest for unfreezing their allowances. Interestingly, the FBR chairman was excluded from the peer rating system, which some officers described to Propk as unfair, arguing that even the chairman should be subject to evaluation. One officer from the Collectorate of Customs (Enforcement) went so far as to formally decline a financial reward granted under the system, citing the categorization as offensive and professionally damaging. “I have been placed in Category ‘B’ and awarded three additional salaries. But this rating implies inefficiency and casts doubt on my integrity, something I categorically reject,” the officer wrote in a letter obtained by Propk. The officer called the peer-based assessment method “deeply inappropriate and disturbing,” pointing out that it relies on evaluations from peers and seniors with “little to no direct working relationship” with those they are rating. The letter stressed that any credible evaluation system must be grounded in transparency, impartiality, and firsthand understanding of performance. Sources say the system, hurriedly implemented without proper consultation, has already sown confusion and discontent among officers across the country. Many fear that politically motivated or personally biased evaluations will undermine the credibility of the entire performance grading process—and damage careers in the process. “The FBR is risking institutional morale to push through a system that lacks objectivity and logic,” said another Customs officer. “If this continues, honest officers will have no incentive to stay.” Critics are also questioning the role of the FBR Chairman in orchestrating the move without broader input. “This is being dictated from the top, bypassing meaningful stakeholder consultation,” said an insider familiar with internal deliberations. “It’s more about control than improvement.” The growing backlash signals a deeper crisis within the tax machinery, where reforms imposed in haste are increasingly being perceived as damaging rather than developmental. As one officer put it, “This isn’t a performance evaluation—it’s bureaucratic roulette.” The high-ups of FBR were not available for comments.