Nigeria’s Fiscal Crisis Deepens as Trump Tariffs Spur Eurobond Sell-Off and Naira Plunge
Nigeria’s international debt market is under intense pressure as investors react to a series of external shocks. President Donald Trump’s latest tariff measures have driven Eurobond yields higher and significantly weakened the naira, further destabilizing Nigeria’s fiscal outlook and trade prospects amid global financial turbulence. President Donald Trump recently announced a sweeping tariff regime—dubbed “Liberation Day”—that imposes a baseline duty on nearly all imports from U.S. trading partners. In addition to this universal tariff, his administration has imposed extra charges on countries it deems to be engaging in unfair trade practices. For example, Nigeria is facing a 14% tariff on its exports (primarily crude oil), even though under Trump’s stated methodology this could have warranted an even higher rate. The intention behind these measures is to protect American jobs and industries by making imported goods more expensive, though the move has also triggered retaliatory tariffs and significant global market volatility. Recent reports reveal that Nigeria’s Eurobonds have tumbled significantly, with yields spiking to their highest levels this year as market participants digest the impact of Trump’s tariffs. The heightened yields suggest that investors now demand a considerably higher premium for holding Nigerian debt, reflecting not only concerns over sovereign risk but also the broader uncertainty in global markets induced by protectionist U.S. policies. At the heart of the current economic distress is the imposition of a 14% tariff on Nigerian imports by the United States—a move aimed at “liberating” American jobs but with far-reaching consequences for Nigeria. Although crude oil exports constitute about 80% of Nigeria’s annual trade with the U.S., the added tariff burden is forcing American refiners to reconsider their purchasing decisions. Under the new regime, every $100 worth of Nigerian crude oil will cost U.S. buyers $114, a markup that could lead to a significant contraction in demand. Analysts have estimated that even a modest 14% drop in demand could translate to a loss of roughly $1.12 billion in annual revenue for Nigeria, a figure that looms large given the nation’s heavy reliance on oil earnings to finance public services and infrastructure. The repercussions extend well beyond trade imbalances. Nigeria’s currency—the naira—has come under severe pressure amid these developments. Data from Nairametrics reveal that the official exchange rate crashed to approximately N1,600 per U.S. dollar by the close of trading on April 4, 2025, marking a 1.9% depreciation from the previous day and a 3.9% slide in the first days of April. This rapid depreciation further complicates debt servicing, as a weaker naira means higher local currency costs for repaying dollar-denominated debt. The CBN’s recent intervention, which saw nearly $200 million sold to shore up reserves, underscores the urgency of the situation, yet many experts warn that these measures may only provide temporary relief in an already volatile environment. Adding to the strain, broader market uncertainty is compounding Nigeria’s economic woes. Global investors, unsettled by Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs and subsequent retaliatory measures by trading partners like China, have shifted away from riskier assets. This risk aversion has not only increased the cost of borrowing for Nigeria but also undermined confidence in the nation’s ability to manage its fiscal challenges. The potential loss of preferential trade frameworks such as the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) further complicates the landscape. An Al Jazeera report suggests that the tariffs could effectively undermine decades-long trade benefits that have allowed African countries, including Nigeria, to export duty-free to the U.S. Losing these privileges would force Nigeria to look for alternative markets—likely at less favorable terms—and necessitate a painful restructuring of its trade policies. In response to these multifaceted challenges, the Nigerian government has been exploring diverse strategies to stabilize its fiscal position. Bloomberg reported earlier plans for a $1.7 billion Eurobond issuance as part of a broader debt management strategy designed to finance budget deficits without resorting to currency printing. Such moves are intended to diversify Nigeria’s funding sources and reduce overreliance on oil revenues. However, the current market conditions have cast a shadow over these efforts, as investors demand higher yields to compensate for perceived risks. The rising cost of borrowing, coupled with the depreciating naira, poses a formidable challenge to achieving fiscal targets set by the government—targets that include reducing the budget deficit and eventually lowering the debt-to-GDP ratio. There are several pain points that Nigeria now faces. First, the immediate revenue loss from a reduction in oil exports could have a cascading effect on government spending, particularly in critical areas such as health, education, and infrastructure. A significant shortfall in oil revenue may force the government to cut back on essential services, exacerbating social unrest in a country already grappling with high unemployment and inflation. Second, the increased cost of servicing external debt due to a depreciating naira could crowd out public investment, further hampering economic growth. Finally, if Nigeria loses its preferential trade status under AGOA, the nation may struggle to find new markets that can match the volume and price stability offered by the U.S. market—a scenario that would necessitate a comprehensive rethinking of its export strategy. While the situation is undeniably challenging, there is also a potential turning point on the horizon. Some experts argue that Nigeria could use this crisis as an impetus to diversify its economy, reducing overdependence on crude oil and investing in domestic industries. Strengthening regional trade through mechanisms such as the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) could provide alternative revenue streams and cushion the blow from external shocks. Moreover, engaging in bilateral currency swap arrangements and negotiating trade deals that allow transactions in local currencies could help mitigate the pressure on the naira, providing some relief from the ongoing currency depreciation. In summary, Nigeria is currently navigating a perfect storm of fiscal and financial challenges precipitated by external tariff shocks, investor panic, and a weakening currency. The combination of a 14% U.S. tariff on Nigerian imports, soaring Eurobond yields, and a rapidly depreciating naira creates significant headwinds for the nation’s economic stability. As the government looks to
Zenith Bank Plc
Zenith Bank Plc has announced a rather important financial performance for the 2024 fiscal year, posting a record profit after tax of N1.03 trillion. This figure represents a 52.5% increase from the N676.9 billion reported in the previous year, underscoring the bank’s robust growth even amid challenging economic conditions. The bank also achieved a record pre-tax profit of N1.32 trillion – a 66.6% year-on-year increase – setting a new milestone in its financial history cite60†. The bank’s earnings report reveals that gross earnings reached N3.971 trillion, an 86.28% increase compared to the prior year. A major contributor to this impressive growth was the surge in interest income, which jumped from N1.14 trillion to N2.721 trillion, reflecting a 137.74% increase. This boost was driven by an expanding loan book and significant gains from investments in government securities, such as treasury bills, as Nigerian banks continue to benefit from the prevailing high-interest-rate environment. At the same time, interest expenses also rose by nearly 143% to N992.474 billion, a reflection of the increased cost of funds in tighter monetary conditions. Despite these higher costs, Zenith’s net interest income climbed to N1.73 trillion, marking an increase of 134.85% year-on-year cite60†. In addition to interest revenue, the bank recorded substantial contributions from non-interest sources. Net fees and commission income grew to N206.867 billion, while trading gains reached an all-time high of N1.1 trillion – almost double the N566.9 billion recorded in the previous year. These figures highlight the bank’s successful diversification of income streams. A significant portion of its earnings, approximately N3.5 trillion of the consolidated N3.97 trillion, was generated within Nigeria, with its African and European operations contributing an additional N510 billion cite60†. Zenith Bank’s operational efficiency also improved in 2024. The cost-to-income ratio increased modestly from 27% to about 30%, primarily due to inflation-driven rises in personnel and operating expenses. The bank’s balance sheet remains exceptionally strong, with total assets growing by 47.08% to N29.958 trillion and customer deposits increasing by 44.78% to N21.959 trillion. Its shareholders’ funds expanded to N4.029 trillion, bolstered by a 127.02% rise in share capital and share premium, and a 70.89% increase in retained earnings. Notably, to comply with new minimum capital requirements set by the Central Bank of Nigeria, Zenith Bank successfully conducted a hybrid capital raise through rights and public offers that generated N343 billion. This oversubscribed offer – by 160% – increased its share capital to N614.6 billion, providing the bank with a solid foundation for future growth cite60†. The bank’s performance is not only a result of favorable market conditions but also of strategic investments in technology and risk management. By focusing on deepening its financial inclusion and enhancing digital banking capabilities, Zenith Bank has positioned itself to capture new segments of the market. The management’s ability to reprice risk assets effectively – as seen in the impressive growth in both loan-related and treasury bill income – has reinforced the bank’s leadership status in Nigeria’s competitive banking sector. In summary, Zenith Bank’s record-breaking 2024 results – with a profit after tax of N1.03 trillion and a pre-tax profit of N1.32 trillion – are a testament to its sound financial strategy, robust revenue diversification, and effective cost management. These achievements have cemented the bank’s reputation as one of Nigeria’s largest and most dynamic financial institutions, capable of delivering superior shareholder value even in a high-interest-rate, inflationary environment
9Mobile and Keystone Bank
The ongoing ownership dispute involving Emerging Markets Telecommunication Service (EMTS), the operator of 9Mobile, has intensified with Keystone Bank’s recent move to join the legal proceedings. The Federal High Court in Abuja resumed hearing the case involving plaintiff Abubakar Funtua against defendants including General Theophilus Danjuma (retd) and his company, LH Telecommunication Limited. Keystone Bank has filed a motion to be included as a party in the suit, presenting a proposed statement of defense and counter-claim that highlights its interest in the matter. The bank contends that a resolution passed on May 9, 2023, approving the transfer of control of the 5th defendant from the 3rd defendant to the 8th defendant, violated facility agreements and a court order from February 20, 2023, rendering the resolution illegal. Additionally, Keystone challenges a December 7, 2023, resolution that increased the share capital of the 6th defendant from ₦90 million to ₦2 billion, which reduced the 3rd defendant’s shareholding to approximately 4.5%, asserting that this action is null and void. This development sheds light on the intricate dynamics of corporate power struggles within Nigeria’s telecommunications sector, the influential role of financial institutions in mergers and acquisitions, and the broader implications for regulatory frameworks and investor confidence. The involvement of Keystone Bank in the 9Mobile ownership dispute is not an isolated event but part of a broader pattern where financial institutions wield significant influence in corporate control, particularly in Nigeria’s telecommunications industry. Banks often serve as key facilitators in telecom mergers and acquisitions, providing financing, restructuring debt, and, in some cases, playing an active role in decision-making when companies face financial distress. In the case of 9Mobile, the telecom operator has had a turbulent financial history, dating back to when it was Etisalat Nigeria. The company defaulted on a $1.2 billion loan from a consortium of banks, which ultimately led to its rebranding and restructuring. This precedent underscores how banks can transition from being mere lenders to active stakeholders seeking to protect their financial interests. When a telecom firm struggles with loan repayments, banks often step in, influencing ownership structures or facilitating the takeover of assets by new investors. Keystone Bank’s attempt to join the legal battle suggests that it may hold financial claims or interests tied to 9Mobile’s shareholding, similar to past instances where Nigerian banks have been instrumental in corporate reshuffling. For example, in 2019, Access Bank played a major role in the takeover of Diamond Bank following financial struggles, demonstrating how banks can shape corporate outcomes. Similarly, banks have been known to initiate debt-to-equity conversions, where unpaid loans are exchanged for shares, effectively granting them ownership stakes and decision-making power in distressed companies. The ongoing ownership disputes and financial challenges surrounding 9mobile, one of Nigeria’s prominent telecommunications companies, have had significant repercussions on its employees and customers. These internal conflicts have raised concerns about the company’s ability to maintain operational stability and deliver quality services. In recent years, 9mobile has faced a series of internal disputes that have reportedly affected its operations. These conflicts have led to concerns that the company’s focus on resolving operational issues is being undermined by power struggles at the top. As a result, many subscribers believe that the ongoing leadership crisis may prevent 9mobile from overcoming its challenges and delivering the reliable service they expect. The company’s financial troubles have also led to legal battles with creditors. A Federal High Court in Lagos ordered Teleology Nigeria Limited, the owners of 9mobile, to pay ₦55.7 billion owed to Keystone Bank Limited. However, 9mobile has refuted reports suggesting that a court ordered the company to pay this debt, stating that it was neither a party to any suit nor affected by the order. These financial and legal challenges have had a direct impact on 9mobile’s workforce. After Huawei canceled its contract with 9mobile in 2021, many engineers who were previously on contract became full-time employees of 9mobile. Over time, however, many of these engineers have been poached by competitors, leading to a talent drain within the company. For customers, the internal disputes and financial instability have raised concerns about the quality and reliability of services. Subscribers fear that the leadership crisis may hinder 9mobile’s ability to address operational challenges, potentially affecting service delivery and customer satisfaction. In summary, the ownership disputes and financial challenges facing 9mobile have had tangible effects on both employees and customers. The internal conflicts have led to employee attrition and raised concerns among subscribers about the company’s capacity to provide reliable services. Beyond 9Mobile, Nigerian banks have historically been deeply involved in the telecom sector, not only through direct lending but also by influencing acquisitions and boardroom decisions. Their vested interests often extend beyond financial recovery; they may also seek to influence management changes or the strategic direction of a telecom firm to ensure profitability and sustainability. This financial entanglement raises concerns about the broader implications of bank-led corporate restructuring. While banks may act to protect their financial exposure, their involvement can also prolong disputes, delay operational stability, and create an environment where financial institutions, rather than market forces, dictate ownership transitions. The 9Mobile case is a critical example of this phenomenon, illustrating how Nigeria’s banking sector remains a powerful force in shaping corporate control within the telecom industry. Financial institutions like Keystone Bank play pivotal roles in the telecommunications sector, often extending beyond traditional banking services to become key stakeholders in corporate transactions. Keystone’s involvement in the 9Mobile case highlights how banks can influence mergers, acquisitions, and ownership structures. Such participation is crucial, especially when telecom companies seek financing for expansion or restructuring. However, it also introduces complexities, particularly when financial institutions assert their interests in corporate governance matters. Prolonged legal battles over ownership can have significant repercussions on regulatory oversight and investor confidence. The Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC) faces challenges in maintaining industry stability amid such disputes. Investors may perceive these conflicts as indicators of an unpredictable business environment, potentially deterring future investments. Ensuring transparent and efficient resolution of such disputes is
Stripping Immunity: A New Era of Accountability or Political Instability in Nigeria?
The Nigerian House of Representatives recently advanced a bill seeking to remove the constitutional immunity currently granted to the Vice President, Governors, and their deputies. This proposed amendment aims to promote accountability in public office by allowing these officials to be subject to civil and criminal proceedings while still in office. The bill successfully passed its second reading on March 26, 2025, indicating significant legislative support for this change. However, on March 27, 2025, the House rescinded its decision on the second reading of the bill. The reversal was attributed to the need for further debate on certain provisions of the proposed amendment. This development underscores the complexity and contentious nature of altering the immunity clause within Nigeria’s Constitution. The concept of immunity for high-ranking officials varies globally: •India: Article 361 of the Indian Constitution grants the President and state Governors immunity from legal proceedings during their tenure. However, this protection does not extend to the Vice President or other officials, allowing them to be prosecuted while in office. •United States: The U.S. provides certain immunities to its President, primarily concerning official acts. However, this immunity is not absolute, and former Presidents can face legal actions for conduct outside their official duties. Notably, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that a sitting President does not have absolute immunity from civil litigation for actions undertaken before assuming office. •Malaysia: In 1993, Malaysia amended its Constitution to allow for the prosecution of its monarch and state rulers in a special court, removing the absolute immunity they previously enjoyed. This change was aimed at enhancing accountability among the nation’s highest officials. Nigeria’s 1999 Constitution provides immunity to the President, Vice President, Governors, and Deputy Governors under Section 308, shielding them from civil and criminal prosecution during their tenure. Over the years, there have been multiple attempts to amend this provision: •July 2021: A bill was introduced in the House of Representatives seeking to remove immunity from the President, Vice President, Governors, and Deputy Governors, especially in cases involving corruption, murder, treason, or other personal crimes. The bill aimed to promote accountability and was sponsored by Representative Rimamnde Kwewum. •December 2024: The Senate considered a bill to alter Section 308, proposing the removal of immunity for the Vice President, Governors, and Deputy Governors in cases involving misappropriation of public funds or incitement of violence. This bill, sponsored by Deputy Senate President Ovie Omo-Agege, successfully passed its second reading. The concept of immunity for high-ranking officials varies globally: •United States: The President has absolute immunity from civil litigation for official acts but not for actions taken before office. In 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a sitting President is subject to subpoenas in criminal prosecutions for personal conduct. •United Kingdom: Members of Parliament enjoy parliamentary privileges, protecting them from prosecution for statements made during parliamentary debates, but there is no general immunity from criminal prosecution. •France and Germany: Both countries provide parliamentary immunity, but their parliaments can vote to lift immunity for specific members to allow prosecution. •Chile: Serving Presidents do not have immunity and can be prosecuted immediately after leaving office. •Côte d’Ivoire: The President is liable for acts done in the exercise of office and can be prosecuted for high treason. That said—Should Nigeria proceed with removing immunity for the Vice President, Governors, and their deputies, several long-term effects could emerge: 1.Enhanced Accountability: Allowing legal proceedings against these officials during their tenure could deter misconduct and promote a culture of transparency and responsibility in public office. 2.Political Stability Concerns: The removal of immunity might lead to an increase in politically motivated lawsuits, potentially distracting officials from governance and leading to instability within the political system. 3.Judicial System Burden: The judiciary may experience an increased caseload, necessitating additional resources and reforms to handle cases involving high-ranking officials effectively. 4.Public Perception: Such a constitutional amendment could bolster public trust in the government, demonstrating a commitment to combating corruption and upholding the rule of law. For the Nigerian populace, the removal of immunity could have several effects: •Increased Confidence in Governance: Citizens may feel more assured that public officials are held to account, potentially leading to greater civic engagement and trust in governmental institutions. •Potential for Political Disruptions: If legal actions against officials become frequent, it could lead to disruptions in governance, affecting policy implementation and public services. •Legal Precedents: Cases brought against high-ranking officials could set important legal precedents, shaping the future interpretation and application of Nigerian law. In conclusion, while the proposed removal of immunity for Nigeria’s Vice President, Governors, and their deputies aims to enhance accountability, it is imperative to carefully consider the broader implications to ensure that such a change strengthens the nation’s democratic institutions without inadvertently causing political or administrative instability.
No more argument; the President has all powers
Following the application of the State of Emergency in Rivers State by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and the charade endorsement by the National Assembly, the public response has been loud – the President’s action is illegal. Indeed, the SoE debacle fits the public narrative of the President, his party, and his advisers. That narrative, which is to crush any form of opposition ahead of the 2027 general elections, is deafening. I hope the President can redeem himself. The supporters of the President, his party, and advisers think differently. They argue that there is a near breakdown of law in Rivers State, and trace this to the intransigence of Governor Fubara. According to them, there are a million and one things Governor Fubara could have done differently, which often points to him been totally and unequivocally subservient to his benefactor and the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Wike. This is the stalemate, and that will remain for a while. What bothers me is how President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and the ones before him are only quick to provide and implement State of Emergency options when it threatens them and not when it threatens the future of Nigeria. If the President has the powers to apply State of Emergency to a political problem that has implications for his 2027 second term bid, why has the President not applied the same urgency and pressure on governors after the greatest transfer of wealth from the private sector to the public sector through his removal of petroleum subsidy programme? After all, it is obvious that most of those resources have been wasted. Why is the President so quick to apply SoE in Rivers while Fulani herders are rampaging farms and killing farmers in Ondo and Bayelsa States. As shared by Nextier, Nigeria’s foremost security think tank, these are the latest States affected by this lingering conflict, while the North Central States have borne the brunt for a long time. While many lives are lost, it is obvious that it does not yet meet the criteria for SoE with the President and his advisers. Just recently, there was a crisis in the Lagos State Assembly. The Speaker was removed while out of the country. The police and military were called in at a point. While this crisis lasted, there was no legislative activity in the State. However, the President did not deem it fit to declare a State of emergency. Instead, the President recognized he needed the “graveyard peace” in the State ahead of 2027 and called everyone to Abuja and sorted the matter. So, the question is whether the President’s powers to declare a state of emergency does not include or extend to good governance in the States? The President cannot see trouble in Rivers State and pretend not to see that most of the governors have wasted most of the resources from the removal of subsidies. In the same States, public primary and secondary education has collapsed, threatening the future of skills and education in Nigeria, while there is concentration on the absurd daily addition to the number of higher education institutions in the country. The President has evoked emergency powers to remove a Governor, but the same President has not used emergency powers to deal with the Oronsanye report that they promised us over a year ago. Finally, in all of this, I find the current National Assembly most reprehensible. I suppose it is lost on them that the crisis in Rivers State is because the Governor does not have any sort of control over the legislative members in the State. The Godswill Akpabio and Tajudeen Abbas led National assembly are not even pretending that they do not have their own minds even in the most delicate of national issues. The President already declared a State of emergency before bringing the matter to the National Assembly. Even after that, there was no semblance of debate, nor their pretence whether there was a quorum. It’s a joke. In conclusion, everything that has been said about the powers and responsibilities of a governor has fallen to pieces with the declaration of the State of emergency in Rivers State. It is now clear to everyone that the President has the powers to do good, bad, ugly, shameful, for the people or simply focus on building his coalition for 2027. I thank you.
UBA Reports Strong 2024 Financial Performance with ₦804 Billion Profit, Declares ₦3.00 Final Dividend
United Bank for Africa (UBA) Plc has released its audited financial results for the full year ended December 31, 2024, showing significant growth across all key performance indicators. The 2024 financial statements, filed with the Nigerian Exchange Limited (NGX) on Monday, highlight a remarkable increase in profit after tax, which rose by 26.14 percent to ₦766.6 billion, compared to ₦607.7 billion in the 2023 fiscal year. The bank’s gross earnings also saw substantial growth, increasing by 53.6 percent from ₦2.08 trillion in 2023 to ₦3.19 trillion in 2024. As in previous years, UBA’s total assets surged significantly, growing by 46.8 percent from ₦20.65 trillion in 2023 to ₦30.4 trillion in December 2024. This marks a milestone for the bank, which has the widest presence across the African continent. Despite the challenging global economic environment, UBA recorded a profit before tax of ₦803.72 billion, representing a 6.1 percent increase from the ₦757.68 billion recorded in 2023. UBA Group Shareholders’ Funds also saw impressive growth, rising by 68.39 percent from ₦2.03 trillion in December 2023 to ₦3.419 trillion by the end of 2024. In fulfilment of the promise made by UBA Group Chairman, Tony Elumelu, at the last Annual General Meeting, the bank has proposed a final dividend of ₦3.00 per ordinary share of 50 kobo for the financial year ended December 31, 2024. This brings the total dividend for the year to ₦5.00 per share. The final dividend is subject to shareholder ratification at the upcoming Annual General Meeting (AGM). UBA’s Group Managing Director/Chief Executive Officer, Oliver Alawuba, expressed excitement about the results, emphasizing the bank’s continued focus on earnings growth, asset quality preservation, business expansion, and increased market share. “Our continued investment in our highly diversified global network allows UBA to deliver high-quality, consistent earnings. Our businesses have been able to grow product and service income and expand our deposit base, allowing the Group to increase earnings while maintaining strong spreads and margins,” Alawuba stated. With total deposits increasing by 42.03 percent from ₦17.4 trillion in 2023 to ₦24.7 trillion and total assets reaching ₦30.4 trillion, the results reflect broad-based growth across all core business segments. This growth was achieved despite macroeconomic challenges, geopolitical uncertainties, and exchange rate volatilities. Alawuba also highlighted the bank’s increasing revenue contributions from its operations outside Nigeria. “Our ex-Nigeria (Rest of Africa & International) operations have expanded significantly over the past five years, now contributing 51.7 percent of Group revenue, up from 31 percent in 2019. This diversification enhances long-term shareholder value. We are currently upgrading our business scope and authorization in France and considering expansion into other viable markets in the short to medium term,” he noted. The CEO reaffirmed UBA’s commitment to continuous investment in technology, data analytics, product innovation, and staff training to enhance customer experience. UBA’s Executive Director for Finance and Risk Management, Ugo Nwaghodoh, noted that the bank recorded triple-digit growth in net interest income, leading to an improvement in net interest margin from 6.83 percent in 2023 to 9.02 percent in 2024. Fee and commission income also grew by 91.66 percent. “UBA Group continues to demonstrate strong capital levels, with shareholders’ funds increasing by 68.4 percent to ₦3.42 trillion and a solid capital adequacy ratio of 31.0 percent,” Nwaghodoh said. He further stated that asset quality improved, with the non-performing loan (NPL) ratio moderating to 5.58 percent and strong provision coverage at 81 percent. As the bank navigates evolving risks, its management remains focused on responsible growth and delivering customer-centered value propositions while ensuring regulatory compliance across all jurisdictions. United Bank for Africa is one of the largest employers in Africa’s financial sector, with 25,000 employees serving over 45 million customers globally. Operating in 20 African countries, as well as the United Kingdom, the United States, France, and the United Arab Emirates, UBA continues to lead in retail, commercial, and institutional banking while driving financial inclusion and leveraging cutting-edge technology.
Nigerians express shock as FCT IRS Claims it spent nearly N250 million on Microsoft 365 Licenses
Many Nigerians have expressed shock after the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) say it has approved ₦242.8 million for Microsoft 365 licenses as part of the digitisation efforts at the agency. The Chairman, FCT IRS Michael Ango made the statement on a presentation captured on Africa Independent Television (AIT) shown on X, formerly Twitter, many Nigerians have queried how Microsoft licences for the agency could be that expensive. Morris Monye @Morris_Monye said, “may be I’m not tech savvy but how much is Microsoft 365 licence. Or am I not hearing it well? Dr. Fames tweeting @Eronsjohnson said, “We have 1200 users in my firm and I purchased this for GBP 7,000 plus other jara packages. How did they arrive at that figure? Esscanorrr tweeting @ozill_ said, “Microsoft E3 license is $33.75, E5 is $35.75. Now if you purchase that for 1000 staffs and covert it to naira, that is about 55 million naira. Mind you, not all staffs would use the E3 and E5 licenses, some would be given lesser ones the business standard license which is $12.50. In conclusion, corruption is deeply rooted in this country and it ain’t changing soon.” Victor Bassey tweeting @Vicbersong tweeted, “It will depend on the license tier and number of users. The highest tier is Microsoft 365 E5 and can be quite costly. However, I still don’t trust that figure. No be naija again.” It is still clear that the total cost of license to the agency is dependent on the number of licenses and the category of licenses. With a staff strength of 623, questions arise about how many employees will receive licenses and whether the allocated amount aligns with actual Microsoft pricing. Microsoft offers different plans, each with varying costs. However, the specific plan chosen by the FCT IRS has not been disclosed. Following clips of the presentation on Africa Independent Television (AIT) shown on X, formerly Twitter, many Nigerians have queried how Microsoft licences for the agency could be that expensive. Table 1. Microsoft License Prices Plan Price (USD per user/ month Price (N per user / Month) Price (N per user / Year) Key Features 365 Business Basic 6.0 9,600 115,200 Web & Mobile apps, 1Tb Onedrive, Teams, Emails 365 Apps for Business 8.25 13,200 158,400 Desktop & Mobile apps, 1TB Onedrive, No Email 365 Business Standard 12.5 20,000 240,000 Desktops Apps, 1TB Onedrive, Teams, Emails, Webinars 365 Business Premium 22.0 35,200 422,000 All features standard +Advanced Security, Device Management 365 E3 36.0 57,600 691,200 Enterprise Security, compliance, unlimited storage 365E5 57.0 91,200 1,09,440 Advanced security, analytics, compliance, voice calling Microsoft 365 Business Premium, the highest speculatively for a business, which includes security, device management, and collaboration tools, currently costs ₦35,200 per user per month, amounting to ₦422,400 per user per year. If all 623 staff were to receive this plan, the total cost would be around ₦263 million per year, which is higher than the ₦242.8 million approved. However, it is unlikely that every staff member will be assigned a license, as some roles may not require Microsoft 365 access. In many organizations, only certain employees require full Microsoft 365 access, particularly those in administrative, managerial, and IT roles. Field officers and lower-level employees may either not need access or may be assigned more basic plans with fewer features, which could lower the total cost. Another possibility is that the government secured a bulk discount, which is common in enterprise and government contracts with Microsoft. Additionally, the ₦242.8 million may cover more than just licenses—it could include IT support, cybersecurity, data migration, or even training for staff. While digital transformation is necessary, the government has a history of procurement deals coming under scrutiny for overpricing or inefficiencies. To ensure transparency, it is important for the FCT IRS to clarify the number of licenses purchased, the specific Microsoft 365 plans used, and whether additional services are included in the contract. This would provide a clearer picture of how the ₦242.8 million will be utilized. A closer look at past government deals suggests that this may not be an isolated case. Public funds have repeatedly been mismanaged through questionable procurement practices, with projects often costing far more than their actual market value. One such example is the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC), which, in 2009, approved a contract worth US $25.57 million to implement an electronic management system. However, instead of modernizing operations, the project became a financial drain. Years later, investigations revealed that successive NNPC management teams had manipulated loopholes in the project’s execution, leading to billions in losses. The system, which was meant to enhance efficiency, was never fully implemented, yet the allocated funds had already been spent. A similar case of procurement irregularity occurred at the Abuja Geographic Information System (AGIS). In 2015, AGIS awarded contracts totaling about ₦25 million for office equipment repairs and maintenance. However, it was later discovered that these contracts had been funneled through proxy companies, with discrepancies in company addresses and execution. The contracts appeared to be a front for siphoning public funds rather than genuine infrastructure improvements. In Osun State, between 2019 and 2021, projects worth ₦1.3 billion were awarded to companies that did not even exist. This raised serious questions about the transparency of the procurement process under former Governor Gboyega Oyetola’s administration. The contracts, instead of being awarded through competitive bidding, were handed to ghost companies—further proof of how public funds are mismanaged. Similarly, Oyo State faced scrutiny when the government awarded ₦694 million to produce notebooks. Investigations revealed that the cost per notebook was significantly inflated, far above standard market prices. Furthermore, the contracts were linked to individuals close to the administration, indicating clear conflicts of interest. Instead of prioritizing efficiency and cost-effectiveness, public funds were directed into the hands of political allies. These cases demonstrate a pattern: government contracts in Nigeria are frequently overpriced, mismanaged, or awarded without due process. The FCT IRS’s Microsoft 365 deal may very well fit into
Nigeria’s Social Media Bill: A New Cloak for Old Censorship?
The Nigerian Senate has passed a bill mandating social media companies to establish physical offices in the country, a move that has raised alarms among digital rights advocates. While the government presents this as a step toward better regulation and accountability, history suggests otherwise. Given Nigeria’s track record of suppressing dissent, this requirement could become a tool for censorship, data control, and corporate strong-arming—thinly veiled as governance. Nigeria has long wrestled with the idea of controlling social media. In 2019, the government attempted to pass the Protection from Internet Falsehoods and Manipulations Bill, infamously known as the “Social Media Bill.” The bill, modeled after Singapore’s fake news law, sought to criminalize the spread of “false statements” online—a vague term that critics feared could be weaponized against dissent. Public outcry, both local and international, led to its rejection. Then in 2021, the Nigerian government suspended Twitter for seven months after the platform deleted a tweet from President Muhammadu Buhari that threatened violence against separatist groups. During the ban, the government attempted to force Twitter to set up a local office, among other demands, before lifting the suspension. This new bill appears to be a more systematic attempt to institutionalize that demand. Nigeria is not the first country to attempt such a move. •Russia (2021): Russia passed a law requiring foreign tech companies with more than 500,000 Russian users per day to open local offices. This gave the Kremlin leverage to pressure companies into compliance with its strict internet laws. As a result, companies like Google and Apple have been accused of quietly complying with censorship demands, including the removal of opposition-linked apps from their stores. •India (2021): The Indian government introduced rules forcing social media companies to appoint local compliance officers. Soon after, Twitter’s office in India was raided by police over a fact-checking dispute. The requirement made it easier for authorities to intimidate tech firms into self-censorship. •Turkey (2020): Turkey mandated that social media firms appoint local representatives. In the months that followed, the government began imposing heavy fines on companies like Facebook and Twitter for refusing to remove “undesirable” content. Eventually, some platforms were forced into compliance. Requiring physical offices in Nigeria places social media companies under local jurisdiction, making them vulnerable to government pressure. Here’s what that could mean for citizens: 1.Increased Government Censorship: Platforms may be coerced into removing content critical of the government. With the threat of fines or bans, companies may resort to proactive censorship to avoid conflict. 2.Surveillance and Privacy Risks: With a local presence, authorities could demand user data more easily. Given Nigeria’s history of clamping down on activists—such as during the #EndSARS protests—this raises concerns about the safety of outspoken citizens. 3.Economic and Innovation Setbacks: The regulatory burden may discourage global platforms from investing in Nigeria, potentially reducing job opportunities and limiting the digital economy’s growth. While the bill is presented as a necessary measure for oversight, the pattern of government behavior suggests a deeper motive: control over digital discourse. If history is anything to go by, this requirement may not only affect corporate compliance but also the fundamental rights of Nigerian citizens to free expression. With this bill moving forward, the question remains: is Nigeria truly regulating social media—or silencing it? To fully grasp the potential impact of Nigeria’s new bill requiring social media companies to set up local offices, it’s important to examine the broader implications from multiple angles. 1. Historical Context: Government Actions During #EndSARS Protests During the #EndSARS protests in October 2020, the Nigerian government took significant measures to suppress the movement’s momentum: •Financial Suppression: The Feminist Coalition, a prominent group supporting the protests, faced financial blockades. Their payment link, managed by Flutterwave, became inoperative on October 13, 2020. Media reports indicated that this was an attempt to obstruct funding channels for the protests. Additionally, the Coalition’s Naira bank account was reportedly blocked, hindering their ability to receive donations. •Targeting Supporters: Organizations like Gatefield, which provided financial support to journalists covering the protests, experienced account freezes. On October 15, 2020, Gatefield’s bank account, operational for seven years, was suddenly blocked, disrupting their efforts to document the protests. These actions highlight the Nigerian government’s readiness to leverage financial systems to stifle dissent, raising concerns about potential misuse of mandated local offices of social media companies. 2. Comparative Analysis: Uganda’s Social Media Tax Uganda’s experience with regulating social media offers valuable insights: •Introduction of Social Media Tax: In July 2018, Uganda imposed a daily tax of 200 Ugandan Shillings (approximately $0.05) on users accessing platforms like WhatsApp, Facebook, and Twitter. President Yoweri Museveni justified the tax as a means to curb “gossip.” •Public Backlash and Freedom of Expression: The tax faced significant opposition, with critics arguing it was a tactic to suppress free speech and limit government criticism. Amnesty International condemned the tax, stating it undermined the right to freedom of expression. •Economic Impact: Given that 27% of Ugandans lived on less than $1.25 a day, the tax rendered social media access unaffordable for many, effectively silencing a substantial portion of the population. This case illustrates how governmental policies can curtail digital freedoms under the guise of regulation, serving as a cautionary tale for Nigeria. 3. Economic and Innovation Implications: Ghana’s Appeal to Tech Giants Nigeria’s regulatory environment may influence tech companies’ decisions on regional investments: •Twitter’s Choice of Ghana: In April 2021, Twitter announced Accra, Ghana, as the location for its African headquarters. The company cited Ghana’s support for free speech, online freedom, and the Open Internet as key factors in its decision. •Regulatory Climate Considerations: Ghana’s favorable regulatory environment contrasts with Nigeria’s increasing attempts to control digital spaces, potentially deterring tech investments. This scenario underscores the potential economic repercussions of restrictive digital policies, as companies may seek more accommodating environments for their operations. By examining these aspects, we can better understand the potential consequences of Nigeria’s bill on social media companies and the broader
Beyond Cash: Will Nigeria’s Payment System Vision 2025 Truly Transform Everyday Transactions?
Nigeria’s financial landscape has undergone significant transformations over the past decade, driven by strategic initiatives aimed at modernizing the payment system and enhancing financial inclusion. The Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) has been at the forefront of these efforts, implementing the Payment System Vision 2020 (PSV 2020) and subsequently the Payment System Vision 2025 (PSV 2025). Launched in 2007, PSV 2020 aimed to position Nigeria’s payment system as “nationally utilized and internationally recognized.” The initiative sought to modernize the financial infrastructure, promote electronic payments, and reduce the reliance on cash transactions. One of its major achievements was the implementation of the Nigeria Uniform Bank Account Number (NUBAN) in 2010, which standardized bank account numbers across all financial institutions, simplifying transactions and reducing errors. The introduction of the Treasury Single Account (TSA) in 2012 consolidated government revenues into a single account, enhancing transparency and efficient cash management. The CBN also promoted a cashless policy to encourage electronic payments and reduce cash handling, leading to increased adoption of digital payment platforms. These initiatives contributed to a more efficient payment system, increased financial inclusion, and set the foundation for further advancements in the financial sector. Building on the successes of PSV 2020, the CBN unveiled PSV 2025, focusing on leveraging emerging technologies and addressing contemporary challenges. The new vision aims to enhance payment infrastructure, ensuring it meets current demands and supports innovations such as contactless solutions and Request for Payment (RfP) schemes. It also seeks to establish a regulatory framework for Open Banking, forming a working group to define regulatory environments and structures, facilitating the development of an Open Banking roadmap tailored to the Nigerian market. Financial inclusion remains a key priority, with a focus on supporting agent banking and deploying solutions to provide unbanked populations with access to financial services, thereby enhancing financial literacy. PSV 2025 also explores blockchain technology, smart contracts, and Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs), including the potential regulation and implementation of stablecoins and Initial Coin Offerings (ICOs). Additionally, the plan emphasizes the utilization of big data and artificial intelligence within the payment ecosystem to improve decision-making, risk management, and customer satisfaction. In line with the objectives of PSV 2025, Nigeria has introduced several initiatives to modernize its payment system. One of the most notable is the launch of the eNaira in October 2021, making Nigeria the first African country to introduce a central bank digital currency (CBDC). The eNaira was designed to complement existing payment systems, enhance financial inclusion, and facilitate easier transactions. However, its adoption has been slow, with less than 0.5% of Nigerians using the eNaira within a year of its launch, attributed to factors such as technological infrastructure challenges and low trust in government initiatives. Another significant development was the introduction of AfriGo in January 2023, a domestic card scheme launched by the CBN in collaboration with the Nigeria Inter-Bank Settlement System (NIBSS). AfriGo provides a cost-effective alternative to international card schemes, reduces operational costs, alleviates pressure on foreign exchange reserves by settling transactions in naira, and ensures data sovereignty by keeping transaction data within Nigeria. While PSV 2025 outlines a comprehensive roadmap for advancing Nigeria’s payment system, several challenges need to be addressed. Technological infrastructure remains a major hurdle, as reliable internet connectivity and electricity are crucial for the widespread adoption of digital payment solutions. Financial literacy is also a concern, as educating the population on the benefits and usage of digital payment platforms is essential to drive adoption and trust. Cybersecurity is another pressing issue, as the rise in digital transactions makes robust security measures vital to protect against fraud and data breaches. Additionally, regulatory adaptation must keep pace with technological advancements while fostering innovation. Nigeria’s Payment System Vision initiatives have laid a solid foundation for modernizing the financial ecosystem. PSV 2025’s focus on leveraging emerging technologies, enhancing financial inclusion, and building robust infrastructures positions Nigeria to overcome existing challenges and harness the full potential of a digital economy. At the heart of these efforts is the everyday Nigerian—the small business owner trying to expand beyond cash transactions, the student making their first online payment, the market trader embracing mobile banking for the first time. The success of PSV 2025 will not be measured by policies alone but by how seamlessly Nigerians can ultimately trust and then adopt these systems in their daily lives. If the vision is realized, the future of payments in Nigeria won’t just be about efficiency; it will be about empowerment, accessibility, and a financial ecosystem that truly and sincerely works for everyone.
NNPC Clarifies Crude Supply Agreement with Dangote Refinery, Highlights Commitment to Domestic Refining
The Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPC Ltd.), Nigeria’s government owned oil corporation, has addressed recent media reports alleging the unilateral termination of its crude oil supply contract with the Dangote Refinery, Africa’s largest single train refinery. In a press release issued on March 10, 2025, NNPC Ltd. confirmed that the six-month Naira-denominated sales agreement, initiated in October 2024, remains active until the end of March 2025, with negotiations underway for a renewal. In the agreement, NNPC is committed to supplying up to 300,000 barrels per day (bpd) to the Dangote Refinery, subject to availability, while the transactions are conducted in Naira, aligning with a 2023 federal directive mandating domestic crude sales in local currency to stabilize foreign exchange reserves. NNPC said in its report that it has delivered 48 million barrels of crude oil to the Dangote Refinery, bringing total supplies since the refinery’s operational launch in mid-2023 to 84 million barrels, supplying the previous 38 million barrels of crude in US $, the globally acclaimed currency for crude oil transactions. The NNPC-Dangote agreement is a cornerstone of Nigeria’s strategy to end costly fuel imports and retain value within its economy. Prior to 2023, Nigeria—Africa’s top oil producer—imported over 90% of its refined petroleum due to underperforming state-run refineries. The 650,000 bpd Dangote Refinery, alongside newer modular plants like Waltersmith’s 5,000 bpd facility, aims to reverse this trend. Latest figures suggests that Nigeria still imports a significant portion of petroleum needs. The Petroleum Industry Act (PIA) 2021 prioritized domestic crude supply obligations, requiring producers to allocate portions of output to local refineries. In late 2023, the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission (NUPRC) mandated that all domestic sales be settled in Naira, easing dollar demands amid a currency crisis. NNPC’s partnership with Dangote dates to 2021, when both parties signed an initial 20-year crude supply agreement ahead of the refinery’s commissioning. However, delays in construction and operational start-ups necessitated shorter-term contracts. In 2023, NNPC Ltd. secured a 15% equity stake in the Dangote Refinery for $2.76 billion, cementing its role as a strategic partner, which has now been cancelled. In 2024, a six-month Naira-denominated contract replaced prior dollar-based deals, reflecting Nigeria’s foreign exchange conservation efforts. Other refineries, such as BUA Group’s 200,000 bpd facility (under construction), have similar agreements with NNPC Ltd., though Dangote remains the largest beneficiary. While the partnership has been largely collaborative, challenges persist. Nigeria’s crude output remains below its 1.78 million bpd OPEC quota, struggling at approximately 1.3 million bpd due to theft and underinvestment. Critics argue that Naira payments expose refiners to exchange rate volatility. However, NNPC insists this stabilizes the local economy. Meanwhile, the Dangote Refinery’s full operational capacity has been delayed to late 2025, pending pipeline infrastructure completion. Dangote Industries’ Group Executive, Devakumar Edwin, confirmed in February 2025 that the refinery now meets 50% of Nigeria’s diesel and aviation fuel demand, with gasoline production expected by Q3 2025. With the March 2025 contract expiry approaching, NNPC and Dangote are negotiating terms for a multi-year agreement. Key considerations will include volume guarantees, aligning supply commitments with Nigeria’s production recovery efforts, pricing mechanisms that account for global crude benchmarks like Brent, and infrastructure upgrades, implementing improvements to streamline deliveries. The refinery’s success is pivotal to Nigeria’s economy; the World Bank estimates that eliminating fuel imports could save the country $26 billion annually. NNPC Ltd. reaffirmed its commitment to “supporting local refining capacity through equitable crude supply agreements,” signalling continued collaboration with Dangote and other domestic refiners. Market observers anticipate the new contract terms to be finalized ahead of the March 2025 expiry date.