This study investigated the impact of taxation on economic development of Nigeria from 2003 to 2017.Vector Error Correction Model (VECM), Augmented Dickey-Fuller (ADF) unit root test, Autoregressive Distributed Lag (ARDL) bounds test, Jarque-Bera Normality Test and Eigenvalue stability condition were utilised in this study. The study revealed that companies’ income tax, petroleum profit and value added tax have a long run impact of -0.225(p-value=0.000),-0.0005 (p-value=0.699), and 0.211(p-value=0.000) respectively on the economic development of Nigeria.It was concluded that taxation has a significant long run relationship with Nigeria’s economic development. The study recommended that the government should not increase companies’ income tax rate because it is detrimental to the economic development of the country in the long run, instead the government should increase the value added tax because it has the potentiality to improve economic development of Nigeria. Also, the government should not concentrate effort on petroleum profit tax as it not significant on economic development of the country.

We examine the implication of CEO hubris on the performance of Nigerian firms. Our study reveals that the determinants of hubristic managers like age, tenure, ownership, and political appointment adversely affect firm performance in the country. We propose that regulatory agencies of government should reduce; the age bracket of CEOs and the percentage of shares owned by CEOs. Besides, firms should not be allowed to make people with political connections or those who have once or presently in a political office a CEO because of its adverse effect on firm performance. Our study contributes to the extant literature on CEO hubris in at least two ways. First, we extend CEO hubris's implication on performance to Nigerian firms, since extant studies on firm performance in the country assume CEO rationality. Besides, existing studies on CEO hubris are from the eastern and western worlds. We take into consideration of the multidimensional nature of CEO hubris and firm performance than existing literature.