Brent oil prices jumped more than $3 a ‌barrel on Monday, initially spooked by Israel's launch of renewed strikes on Lebanon a day earlier, but also gaining further steam after sounds of explosions were heard in Iran, reports Reuters.

Sounds of blasts were heard - in Tehran, Tabriz and Isfahan, local media reported early on ​Monday, eroding hopes for an imminent end to the wider war and a restart to crude ​flows through the Strait of Hormuz.

Brent crude futures rose $3.20 or 3.39% to $96.24 a barrel, while US crude futures were up $2.87 or 3.17% at $93.41 per barrel.

Those gains erased ​Friday's losses, when prices fell on hopes of a de-escalation in the US-Iran conflict, which has seen oil prices ​rise over 50% since March.

Though Iran on Sunday fired a salvo of missiles at Israeli targets in retaliation, US President Donald Trump insisted that an agreement to end the wider war remains well within reach.

Trump also reportedly told Israeli Prime Minister ​Benjamin Netanyahu to refrain from further attacks.

"It's not going to have any impact on the deal," Trump told ​the Financial Times. "I call the shots. I call all the shots. He doesn’t call the shots."

Iran has made a ceasefire with ‌Lebanon a ⁠condition for a peace deal with Washington.

Israel invaded Lebanon in March after Iran-backed Hezbollah fired rockets and drones across the border.

Lebanon and Israel said on June 3 that they had agreed to a ceasefire following negotiations in Washington.

The two countries had previously agreed to a cessation of hostilities in April, but violence continued.

The wider ​war has been stalemated ​since the US and Israel paused their attacks on Iran in early April, with Tehran blocking most shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, the main transit route for one-fifth of the ​world's oil.

Washington has imposed its own blockade of Iranian ports.

Amid the resulting ​supply crisis, OPEC+ on Sunday agreed to its fourth increase in oil output in four months.

But analysts said the decision would have little impact since most OPEC+ members could not meet their output targets because of the Hormuz closure or, in the case ​of Russia, infrastructure attacks that have eroded its production capacity.

"In ​the current market, the physical impact of such a decision would be close to zero," Rystad Energy's head of geopolitical analysis, Jorge Leon, ​said in a note to clients.

END/REUTERS/ASA

Companies and organisations will be required to file tax returns on the income generated by employee welfare funds from the current fiscal year and pay a 27.5 percent tax on the earnings. 

The Income Tax Act 2023 incorporates the provision, lifting the tax exemption and amnesty on the compulsion to file returns for funds such as provident funds, gratuity funds and workers' profit participation funds maintained by the private sector.

The law, however, has exempted government-managed provident funds from taxation, raising questions.

TIM Nurul Kabir, executive director of the Foreign Investors' Chamber of Commerce & Industry, said there were many other avenues to collect tax.

"Employees benefit from provident funds after their retirement. So, the authority should not slap taxes on retirement benefit."

He said while levying the tax, the government has not treated provident funds of the private and public sectors equally.

"It is discriminatory," he said, adding that they would appeal to the tax authority for the withdrawal of the tax on income from provident funds.

Debabrata Roy Chowdhury, director for legal, regulatory and corporate affairs at Nestlé Bangladesh PLC, said the introduction of income tax on trust funds would lower the overall income from such schemes.

"This will have an adverse long-term impact on retired employees of private organisations."

Chowdhury urged the authority to address the issue in line with the spirit of the government's initiatives aimed at ensuring social security for private sector employees.

"The recent introduction of the universal pension scheme for private sector employees is a good example of that."

A senior official of the NBR, on condition of anonymity, said the income of government-managed provident funds was exempted in line with the Provident Fund Act 1925.

He said provident funds under the private sector had been historically exempted and there was no requirement to submit tax returns. As a result, it was unclear whether the funds were properly utilised.

"From now onwards, we will see proper disclosure."

The tax official said the contribution of payroll tax is about 3 percent of the total income tax although it should increase as the economy is growing.

Md Shahadat Hossain, a former president of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Bangladesh, said income from investment in savings certificates, where people invest as a source of future earnings, is already taxed.

"From that perspective, the imposition of tax on provident and other employee welfare funds seems okay."

However, Towfiqul Islam Khan, senior research fellow at the Centre for Policy Dialogue, said social protection for private sector employees was low.

"Provident and other workers' welfare-related funds provide little social protection. The imposition of tax will increase inequality. But there can't be any discrimination in taxation between private and government provident funds."

Khan, citing the latest income tax law that replaced the Income Tax Ordinance 1984, said the NBR tried to find new avenues to increase tax collection and improve the nation's revenue-gross domestic product ratio, which is one of the lowest in the world.

"We can see the desperation of the tax authority to boost collection. This ultimately reveals the inability of the NBR to catch the tax evaders and illicit money makers."