Connect with us

E-Financial

Ecobank Denies Cooking Books to Look Healthy

Published

on

Kindly share this post

Ecobank Transnational Incorporated (ETI) has refuted a media report claiming it tampered with its accounts in order to make shareholders feel the company was doing well.

 

In a report by South Africa-based Sunday Times, it was claimed the Financial Reporting Council of Nigeria (FRCN) was already looking into the matter raised by Altu Sadie, former CFO of Ecobank’s card division, that the financial institution applied incorrect exchange rates, which resulted in it overstating balance sheet items and income statements.

 

It was reported that Olumuyiwa Ajibade, principal manager in the directorate of inspection and monitoring at FRCN, confirmed that “The council is working on it (issue). That’s as much as we can divulge at this time.”

 

Reacting to the issue, Ecobank, in a statement made available to Business Post on Wednesday, December 19, 2018, denied the “unfounded allegations,” urging its “shareholders, creditors, and other stakeholders” to disregard them.

 

It noted that, “The deterioration of the Naira in 2016 led to the creation of different windows for various segments of the economy leading to foreign currencies being traded in these markets/windows at different rates and thus leading to a multiple exchange rate system in Nigeria.

 

“The existence of multiple FX markets with different exchange rates as well as the accessibility to such markets necessitates the review of the appropriate exchange rates that entities should use in accounting for and reporting its foreign currency transactions as well as foreign investments into Nigeria under International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRSs). IAS 21 ‘The effects of changes in foreign exchange rates’, requires that a foreign currency transaction should be recorded at initial recognition in the functional currency using the spot exchange rate at the date of transaction (IAS 21, paragraph 21). IAS 21 paragraph 8 defines the spot exchange rate as the exchange rate for immediate delivery. Where a country has multiple exchange rates, an official quoted rate should be used as the spot rate.

 

“Nigeria currently has multiple exchange rates and judgment is required to determine which exchange rate qualifies as a spot rate that can be used for translation under IAS 21. In determining whether a rate is a spot rate, an entity is required to consider whether the currency is available at an official quoted rate and whether the quoted rate is available for immediate delivery.

 

“The CBN official rate, Nigeria Inter-bank Foreign Exchange Fixing (NIFEX) rates and the Nigerian Autonomous Foreign Exchange Fixing (NAFEX) rates are all quoted and can be used to convert or translate foreign currency transactions. Thus, the CBN official, NIFEX or NAFEX rates all technically comply with the requirements of IAS 21.

 

“As a policy within Ecobank Group, we use the official rate in the respective jurisdictions in which we operate to translate the results and balances of our affiliates into the Group’s reporting currency, the US Dollar. As a result, and in exercising the judgment allowed for within IAS 21, the Group currently uses the CBN official rate which is one of the 3 quoted rates and the official exchange rate according to the CBN.

 

“The use of this rate complies with IAS 21 and has been publicly disclosed to the market in all our press releases along with the impact of using the other available rates.

 

“This is done so that users of our financial statements can easily quantify and adjust for the use of the other exchange rates if necessary. Most of our peers in Nigeria used the CBN rate in 2017, before switching to NIFEX towards the end of the year. In 2018, they have gradually settled at a blend of both NIFEX and NAFEX.

 

“The use of the CBN rate is in accordance with the group’s policy which is to apply the official rates. This policy and its application are compliant with IFRS and specifically IAS 21.

Emefiele, CBN gov

“To enable comparison and to ensure that the user of the group’s financial statements is not prejudiced in any way, we have adequately disclosed in our various press releases and investor presentations the fact that we have used the CBN official rate in addition to disclosing the expected impact on our results of using alternative available rates.

 

“At its November board meeting, the Board of ETI approved the adoption of the NAFEX rate as the rate to be used for the translation of our operations in Nigeria. The change has been necessitated and approved in response to developments in the industry especially with the ETI’s peers moving away from the use of the CBN official rate.

 

“Ecobank Group adopted IFRS 9 as issued by the IASB in July 2014 with a date of transition of 1 January 2018, which resulted in changes in accounting policies and adjustments to the amounts previously recognised in the financial statements.

 

“Similarly to our peers in Nigeria, as well as other African and global banks, and, as permitted by the transitional provisions of IFRS 9, the Group has elected not to restate comparative figures. Adjustments to the carrying amounts of financial assets and liabilities at the date of transition were recognised in the opening retained earnings and other reserves of the current period. Overall, the adoption of the standard resulted in the group recording higher impairment allowance than that recognised under IAS 39. This had a negative impact on the group equity by $299m.

 

“The main drivers for the significant increase in IFRS 9 impairment figures when compared to IAS 39 impairment figures are:

 

  • Replacement of the emergency period under IAS 39 with 12 months ECL on all exposures under IFRS 9.

 

  • IFRS 9 introduces the stage 2 bucket where higher impairment (Lifetime losses) is recognised for facilities with significant increase in credit risk. Under IAS 39, same assets were classified as performing with minimal impairment recognised.

 

  • Off balance sheet exposure & undrawn balances: Under IAS 39, impairment was not required to be recognised on these items, however, IFRS 9 requires that impairment provision on these items is calculated.

 

  • Other financial instruments: Historically very little or no impairment has been held on non-customer loans/ instruments such as placements with other banks, government treasury bills and bonds, corporate bonds, items in the course of clearing and other debtors. These are now clearly within the scope of IFRS 9 and impairment has been computed on these.

 

“IFRS 9 2014 does not require restatement of comparative period financial statements except in limited circumstances related to hedge accounting (not applicable to Ecobank Group) or when an entity chooses to restate (the Group has not, nor have most of its peers).

 

“The standard requires that where comparative periods are not restated, the difference between the previous carrying amounts and the new carrying amounts be recorded in opening retained earnings or other components of equity, as appropriate. This is the approach that has been followed by the Group and as a result the transition impact of $299m has been recognised in equity.

 

“In conclusion, we can confirm to all stakeholders that there were no misstatements in our financial statements as alleged in our financial statement for the year ended 31 December 2017 or in our three quarterly reports released during the 2018 year.

 

“We also note that this unfounded allegation was made by a former employee of the Group who is currently in court claiming payment of 13 years’ salary for an alleged unlawful termination of his employment contract.”

 


Kindly share this post

Nigeria CommunicationsWeek believes that technology makes life more exciting and helps improve the lives of people around Nigeria and indeed the world. So since 2007, we have devoted our energy to independent reportage of technology and how they affect lives.

E-Financial

N4.65 Trillion in the Vault, but is the Real Economy Locked Out?

Published

on

Kindly share this post

By Blaise Udunze

Following the successful conclusion of the banking sector recapitalisation programme initiated in March 2024 by the Central Bank of Nigeria, the industry has raised N4.65 trillion. No doubt, this marks a significant milestone for the nation’s financial system as the exercise attracted both domestic and foreign investors, strengthened capital buffers, and reinforced regulatory confidence in the banking sector. By all prudential measures, once again, it will be said without doubt that it is a success story.

N4.65 Trillion in the Vault, but is the Real Economy Locked Out?

CBN

Looking at this feat closely and when weighed more critically, a more consequential question emerges, one that will ultimately determine whether this achievement becomes a genuine turning point or merely another financial milestone. Will a stronger banking sector finally translate into a more productive Nigerian economy, or will it be locked out?

This question sits at the heart of Nigeria’s long-standing economic contradiction, seeing a relatively sophisticated financial system coexisting with weak industrial output, low productivity, and persistent dependence on imports truly reflects an ironic situation. The fact remains that recapitalisation, by design, is meant to strengthen banks, enhancing their ability to absorb shocks, manage risks and support economic growth. According to the apex bank, the programme has improved capital adequacy ratios, enhanced asset quality, and reinforced financial stability. Under the leadership of Olayemi Cardoso, there has also been a shift toward stricter risk-based supervision and a phased exit from regulatory forbearance.

These are necessary reforms. A stable banking system is a prerequisite for economic development. However, the truth be told, stability alone is not sufficient because the real test of recapitalisation lies not in stronger balance sheets, but in how effectively banks channel capital into productive economic activity, sectors that create jobs, expand output and drive exports. Without this transition, recapitalisation risks becoming an exercise in financial strengthening without economic transformation.

Encouragingly, early signals from industry experts suggest that the next phase of banking reform may begin to address this long-standing gap. Analysts and practitioners are increasingly pointing to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) as a key destination for recapitalisation inflows, which is a fact beyond doubt. Given that SMEs account for over 70 percent of registered businesses in Nigeria, the logic is compelling. With great expectation, as has been practicalised and established in other economies, a shift in credit allocation toward this segment could unlock job creation, stimulate domestic production, and deepen economic resilience. Yet, this expectation must be balanced with reality. Historically, and of huge concern, SMEs have received only a marginal share of total bank credit, often due to perceived risk, lack of collateral, and weak credit infrastructure.

Indeed, Nigeria’s broader financial intermediation challenge remains stark. Even as the giant of Africa, private sector credit stands at roughly 17 percent of GDP, and this is far below the sub-Saharan African average, while SMEs receive barely 1 percent of total bank lending despite contributing about half of GDP and the vast majority of employment. These figures underscore the structural disconnect between the banking system and the real economy. Recapitalisation, therefore, must be judged not only by the strength of banks but by whether it meaningfully improves this imbalance.

Nigeria’s economic challenge is not merely one of capital scarcity; it is fundamentally a problem of low productivity. Manufacturing continues to operate far below capacity, agriculture remains largely subsistence-driven, and industrial output contributes only modestly to GDP. Despite decades of banking sector expansion, credit to the real sector has remained limited relative to the size of the economy. Instead, banks have often gravitated toward safer and more profitable avenues such as government securities, treasury instruments, and short-term trading opportunities.

This is not irrational. It reflects a rational response to risk, policy signals, and market realities. However, it has created a structural imbalance in which capital circulates within the financial system without sufficiently reaching the productive economy. The result is a pattern where financial sector growth outpaces real sector development, a phenomenon widely described as financialisation without productivity gains.

At the center of this challenge is the issue of credit allocation. A recapitalised banking sector, strengthened by new capital and improved buffers, should theoretically expand lending. But this is, contrarily, because the more important question is where that lending will go. Will Nigerian banks extend long-term credit to manufacturers, finance agro-processing and value chains, and support scalable SMEs or will they continue to concentrate on low-risk government debt, prioritise foreign exchange-related gains, and maintain conservative lending practices in the face of macroeconomic uncertainty? Some of these structural questions call for immediate answers from policymakers.

Some industry voices are optimistic that the expanded capital base will translate into a broader loan book, increased investment in higher-risk sectors, and improved product offerings for depositors; this is not in doubt. There are also expectations that banks will scale operations across the continent, leveraging stronger balance sheets to expand their regional footprint. Yes, they are expected, but one thing that must be made known is that optimism alone does not guarantee transformation. The fact is that without deliberate incentives and structural reforms, capital may continue to flow toward low-risk assets rather than high-impact sectors.

Beyond lending, experts are also calling for a shift in how banking success is measured. The next phase of reform, according to the experts in their arguments, must move from capital thresholds to customer outcomes. This includes stronger consumer protection frameworks, real-time complaint management systems and more transparent regulatory oversight. A more technologically driven supervisory model, one that allows regulators to monitor customer experiences and detect systemic risks early, could play a critical role in strengthening trust and accountability within the system.

This dimension is often overlooked but deeply significant. A banking system that is well-capitalised but unresponsive to customer needs risks undermining public confidence. True financial development is not only about capital strength but also about accessibility, fairness, and service quality. Nigerians must feel the impact of recapitalisation not just in improved financial ratios, but in better banking experiences, more inclusive services, and greater economic opportunity.

The recapitalisation exercise has also attracted notable foreign participation, signaling confidence in Nigeria’s banking sector. However, confidence in banks does not necessarily translate into confidence in the broader economy. The truth is that foreign investors are typically drawn to strong regulatory frameworks, attractive returns, and market liquidity, though the facts are that these factors make Nigerian banks appealing financial assets; it must be made explicitly clear that they do not automatically reflect confidence in the country’s industrial base or productivity potential.

This distinction is critical. An economy can attract capital into its financial sector while still struggling to attract investment into productive sectors. When this happens, growth becomes financially driven rather than fundamentally anchored. The risk therefore, is that recapitalisation could deepen Nigeria’s financial markets but what benefits or gains when banks become stronger or liquid without addressing the structural weaknesses of the real economy.

It is clear and explicit that the current policy direction of the CBN reflects a strong emphasis on stability, with tightened supervision, improved transparency, and stricter prudential standards. These measures are necessary, particularly in a volatile global environment. However, there is an emerging concern that stability may be taking precedence over growth stimulation, which should also be a focal point for every economy, of which Nigeria should not be left out of the equation. Central banks in emerging markets often face a delicate balancing act and this is putting too much focus on stability, which can constrain credit expansion, while too much emphasis on growth can undermine financial discipline, as this calls for a balance.

In Nigeria’s case, the question is whether sufficient mechanisms exist to align banking sector incentives with national productivity goals. Are there enough incentives to encourage long-term lending, sector-specific financing, and innovation in credit delivery? Or does the current framework inadvertently reward risk aversion and short-term profitability?

Over the past two decades, it has been a herculean experience as Nigeria’s economic trajectory suggests a growing disconnect between the financial sector and the real economy. Banks have become larger, more sophisticated and more profitable, yet the irony is that the broader economy continues to struggle with high unemployment, low industrial output, and limited export diversification. This divergence reflects the structural risk of financialization, a condition in which financial activities expand without a corresponding increase in real economic productivity.

If not carefully managed, recapitalisation could reinforce this trend. With more capital at their disposal, banks may simply scale existing business models, expanding financial activities that generate returns without contributing meaningfully to production. The point is that this is not solely a failure of the banking sector; it is a systemic issue shaped by policy design, regulatory priorities, and market incentives, which needs the urgent attention of policymakers.

Meanwhile, for recapitalisation to achieve its intended purpose and truly work, it must be accompanied by a deliberate shift or intentional policy change from capital accumulation to productivity enhancement and the economy to produce more goods and services efficiently. This begins with creating stronger incentives for real sector lending with differentiated capital requirements based on sector exposure, credit guarantees for high-impact industries, and interest rate support for priority sectors can encourage banks to channel funds into productive areas and this must be driven and implemented by the apex bank to harness the gains of recapitalisation.

This transformative process is not only saddled with the CBN, but the Development finance institutions also have a critical role to play in de-risking long-term investments, making it easier for commercial banks to participate in financing projects that drive economic growth. At the same time, one of the missing pieces that must be taken into cognizance is that regulatory frameworks should discourage excessive concentration in risk-free assets. No doubt, banks thrive in profitability, as government securities remain important; overreliance on them can crowd out private sector credit and limit economic expansion.

Innovation in financial products is equally essential. Traditional lending models often fail to meet the needs of SMEs and emerging industries as this has continued to hinder growth. Banks must explore new approaches, including digital lending platforms, supply chain financing, and blended finance solutions that can unlock new growth opportunities, while they extend their tentacles by saturating the retail space just like fintech.

Accountability must also be embedded in the system. One fact is that if recapitalisation is justified as a tool for economic growth, then its outcomes and gains must be measurable and not obscure. Increased credit to productive sectors, higher industrial output and job creation should serve as key indicators of success. Without such metrics, the exercise risks being judged solely by financial indicators rather than its real economic impact.

The completion of the recapitalisation programme represents more than a regulatory achievement; it is a defining moment for Nigeria’s economic future. The country now has a banking sector that is better capitalised, more resilient, and more attractive to investors. These are important gains, but they are not ends in themselves.

The ultimate objective is to build an economy that is productive, diversified, and inclusive. Achieving this requires more than strong banks; it requires banks that actively power economic transformation.

The N4.65 trillion recapitalisation is a significant step forward. It strengthens the foundation of Nigeria’s financial system and enhances its capacity to support growth. However, capacity alone is not enough and truly not enough if the gains of recapitalisation are to be harnessed to the latter. What matters now is how that capacity is deployed.

Some of the critical questions for urgent attention are as follows: Will banks rise to the challenge of financing Nigeria’s productive sectors, particularly SMEs that form the backbone of the economy? Will policymakers create the right incentives to ensure credit flows where it is most needed? Will the financial system evolve from a focus on profitability to a broader commitment to the economic purpose of fostering a more productive Nigerian economy and the $1 trillion target?

The above questions are relevant because they will determine whether recapitalisation becomes a catalyst for change or a missed opportunity if not taken into cognizance. A well-capitalised banking sector is not the destination; it is the starting point. The real journey lies in building an economy where capital works, productivity rises, and growth becomes both sustainable and inclusive.

Blaise, a journalist and PR professional, writes from Lagos and can be reached via: [email protected]


Kindly share this post
Continue Reading

E-Financial

Ecobank Assures of Seamless Easter Banking Services

Published

on

Kindly share this post

Ecobank Nigeria has reaffirmed its commitment to providing customers with seamless and uninterrupted banking services throughout the Easter public holidays.

Ecobank Assures of Seamless Easter Banking Services

The Bank assured customers that its secure and robust digital platforms will remain fully operational to support financial activities during the festive period.

According to the bank, all digital channels, including the Ecobank Mobile App, Ecobank Business App, USSD *326#, Ecobank Online, OmniPlus, Omnilite, EcobankPay, Ecobank Cards, ATMs, PoS terminals, and over 35,000 Ecobank Xpress Point agent locations nationwide will remain accessible throughout the holiday.

Speaking on the Bank’s preparedness, Victor Yalokwu, head, Products & Analytics, Consumer & Commercial Banking, Ecobank Nigeria, assured customers of a smooth and secure banking experience during the Easter break.

He noted that customers can conveniently conduct transactions at any time using the Bank’s wide range of digital solutions.

“Customers will continue to enjoy a full bouquet of services during the holiday, including local and international funds transfers, bill payments, airtime top-ups, merchant payments, balance enquiries, account statements, and cardless cash withdrawals via ATMs.

“We understand that festive seasons come with increased financial activity, and our priority is to ensure our customers enjoy fast, reliable, and secure banking wherever they are. Our digital channels are designed to support uninterrupted transactions, and we have strengthened our systems to guarantee optimal performance throughout the Easter break,” Yalokwu said.

He also encouraged customers to maximise the Bank’s alternative channels for transfers, bill payments, airtime purchases, card services, and account management.

He also advised customers to stay vigilant by shopping only on trusted websites; avoiding the sharing of PINs, passwords, and one-time passwords (OTPs); refraining from banking on public Wi-Fi networks; being cautious of urgent or emotionally charged messages; and regularly monitoring their account activity.

“Ecobank remains committed to providing innovative financial solutions and exceptional customer service. We wish all our customers and partners a peaceful and joyful Easter celebration.” He stated.

“We understand that festive seasons come with increased financial activity, and our priority is to ensure our customers enjoy fast, reliable, and secure banking wherever they are. Our digital channels are designed to support uninterrupted transactions, and we have strengthened our systems to guarantee optimal performance throughout the Easter break,” Yalokwu said.

He also encouraged customers to maximise the Bank’s alternative channels for transfers, bill payments, airtime purchases, card services, and account management. He also advised customers to stay vigilant by shopping only on trusted websites; avoiding the sharing of PINs, passwords, and one-time passwords (OTPs); refraining from banking on public Wi-Fi networks; being cautious of urgent or emotionally charged messages; and regularly monitoring their account activity.

“Ecobank remains committed to providing innovative financial solutions and exceptional customer service. We wish all our customers and partners a peaceful and joyful Easter celebration.” He stated.


Kindly share this post
Continue Reading

E-Financial

Anchor Gets Nigerian, Canadian Licences as Transactions Crosses $2.5Bn

Published

on

Kindly share this post

Anchor, a global banking and payments platform that enables businesses to integrate financial products into their own systems, has processed over $2.5 billion in transactions since its inception in 2022, according to its 2025 End-of-Year Review.

Anchor Gets Nigerian, Canadian Licences as Transactions Crosses $2.5Bn

Segun Adeyemi, CEO of Anchor

The company expanded its regulatory footprint by securing new Microfinance Bank and International Money Transfer Operator licences in Nigeria, and a Money Service Business license in Canada.

Since launching, Anchor has onboarded over 1,000 businesses across 18 countries in Africa, North and South America, and Europe, whilst enabling more than 20 million local and international payments.

“Acquiring these licences reinforces our commitment to building durable and trusted infrastructure,” said Segun Adeyemi, CEO of Anchor.

The regulatory licences represent a defining shift for Anchor, moving the company from operating purely as infrastructure to becoming a fully licensed financial institution in key markets.

Its Microfinance Bank licence in Nigeria enables it to offer banking services directly, while the International Money Transfer Operator licence supports cross-border remittances.

The Canadian Money Service Business licence expands its ability to serve businesses operating in North America.

The regulatory progress followed a period of intensive engagement with authorities in multiple jurisdictions and operational strengthening to meet compliance standards.

In 2025, Anchor introduced several enhancements, including USD virtual cards for global spending, improved account structures, and streamlined payment flows for international teams.

The company positions itself as an infrastructure for businesses building financial products, offering embedded accounts, payments, and card services that companies can integrate directly into their own platforms.

Anchor’s growth comes during a period of consolidation in African fintech, with several players either shutting down, scaling back operations, or pivoting business models due to regulatory pressure and funding challenges.

The company’s focus on securing licences across multiple jurisdictions suggests a strategy of building sustainable, compliant infrastructure rather than pursuing growth at the expense of regulatory relationships.

The 2025 End-of-Year Review highlights broader trends in how startups and enterprises are adopting embedded financial services and the increasing need for scalable, compliant infrastructure as regulators across Africa tighten oversight of fintech operations.

 


Kindly share this post
Continue Reading

Trending