E-Financial
Is Nigeria Borrowing to Survive or to Build?
By Blaise Udunze
Nigeria is no longer flirting with deficit financing. As a country, it is living with it, not occasionally but structurally, routinely, almost comfortably. It became evident when the National Assembly rose to defend the proposed N25.91 trillion deficit in the N58.47 trillion 2026 budget that it did more than justify another year of borrowing. It normalised it. Again, the message had been clearly defined that deficit financing is no longer a temporary response to shocks; it is now a structural feature of Nigeria’s fiscal architecture.
President Bola Tinubu
This was confirmed by the Senate, which, led by Senator Solomon Adeola, who defended continued borrowing as inevitable. In agreement with his defence, Senator Olamilekan Adeola argued that borrowing is inevitable in the face of unpredictable revenue and vast development needs. He is not wrong. No modern economy runs without deficits. The United States borrows. European economies borrow. Even fast-growing Asian Economies have used deficits strategically.
The real issue, as Adeola himself admitted, is how Nigeria borrows and what it borrows for.
That is where the debate becomes uncomfortable. Looking at it objectively, in a plain calculation, almost half of what the federal government hopes to earn will go straight to creditors. The chronic issue is that Nigeria’s projected revenue for 2026 stands at N33.19 trillion, while expenditure is estimated at N58.47 trillion, leaving a yawning gap of over N25 trillion. Debt service alone is expected to gulp nearly N15.9 trillion. In other words, before roads are built, before hospitals are equipped, before schools are renovated, almost half of the projected revenue is already committed to servicing yesterday’s loans.
Of paramount concern is that the action being discussed does not serve as a policy that supports the economy; it is a counter-cyclical stimulus during downtime to stabilise growth. It is a structural dependence. This is to say that at the core of Nigeria’s deficit dilemma lies revenue weakness. Despite the much-touted diversification of the economy, the country remains heavily dependent on crude oil for foreign exchange and for a significant share of public revenue. The fearful part is that when oil prices fall, when production drops due to theft or quotas, or when global demand weakens, government revenue collapses. Expenditure, however, does not fall with oil prices. Salaries must be paid. Pensions must be honoured. Political offices must function. Debt must be serviced. Borrowing fills the gap.
Beyond oil, the non-oil tax base remains shallow. Nigeria’s tax-to-GDP ratio lags far behind peer economies. One of the challenges is that, as a vast informal sector, weak tax administration, compliance gaps, waivers, and leakages mean that even in years of non-oil growth, revenue does not rise proportionately. One truth the country must yield to is the advice of Minister of Finance, Wale Edun, who rightly warned that Nigeria must reduce its dependence on debt and build a stronger domestic revenue base. This stems from his understanding that in a world of high global interest rates and retreating multilateral support, borrowing is becoming more expensive and less forgiving. Yet the borrowing continues.
One troubling fact from the disclosure of the Debt Management Office, is not that Nigeria’s public debt stood at over N152 trillion by mid-2025 but it is projected to climb further. What makes this figure more of a trouble is not just its size, but its purpose. Historically, Nigeria once escaped the weight of unsustainable debt through the Paris Club exit negotiated under President Olusegun Obasanjo. Two decades later, the country finds itself in a far more complex web of domestic and external obligations. The question is simple in the sense of what has the borrowing built?
If deficits finance productive infrastructure that expands the economy’s capacity, power plants that reduce production costs, rail lines that ease logistics, digital infrastructure that boosts exports, then borrowing can be justified. Future growth will expand the tax base and service the debt. Hence, it will be agreed that deficits, in that scenario, become bridges to prosperity.
But if deficits finance recurrent expenditure, salaries, overheads, fuel subsidies, political patronage, interest payments, then borrowing becomes a treadmill. The country runs harder each year, yet moves nowhere.
Nigeria’s fiscal pattern increasingly resembles the latter. Recurrent expenditure consumes a significant portion of revenue. In some years, debt service has exceeded the federal government’s retained revenue. This forces further borrowing simply to keep government machinery running. Borrowing to service old debt is the classic signature of a fiscal trap.
Meanwhile, the crowding-out effect is becoming pronounced. With the government aggressively issuing domestic debt instruments, over 70 percent of risk assets in the financial system are reportedly tied to government securities. Banks prefer lending to the government at high yields rather than financing private businesses. Lending rates, influenced by a high monetary policy rate, hover between 35 and 40 percent. For manufacturers, farmers, and tech entrepreneurs, such rates are prohibitive.
In effect, the state is absorbing liquidity that could otherwise power private-sector growth. The engine of sustainable revenue, the productive economy, is being starved.
Supporters of the current approach argue that deficits are necessary to close Nigeria’s massive infrastructure gap. Contrary to their argument, the roads are dilapidated. Power supply remains unreliable. Security spending has ballooned in response to persistent threats. With a fast-growing population, social spending pressures are immense. In such a context, refusing to borrow would mean freezing development.
That argument carries weight. Nigeria cannot austerity its way to prosperity. While slashing expenditure indiscriminately could worsen unemployment and deepen poverty.
However, borrowing without institutional reform is a lot more dangerous. Economist Adi Bongo has warned that asset sales, privatisations, and new borrowing will fail without strong oversight and accountability. Nigeria’s history of public-private partnerships and sectoral reforms, particularly in the power sector, offers cautionary tales. Assets sold to politically connected entities without capacity did not deliver efficiency gains. Institutions were created but not empowered. Data was published but not interrogated. Borrowing into weak institutions is like pouring water into a leaking basket.
There is also the issue of political budgeting. Election cycles often bring expanded spending and proliferating projects. Revenue does not necessarily rise in tandem. Structural deficits become politically convenient. Once normalised, they are difficult to reverse.
The Senate President, Godswill Akpabio, who recently framed the 2026 budget as a “moral document,” said it must therefore be judged not by its size, but by its outcomes. The question that should follow such a comment is, will the N26 trillion capital allocation translate into completed roads, functional health centres, and reliable electricity? Or will delayed releases, procurement bottlenecks, and weak oversight roll projects into yet another fiscal year?
Nigeria’s history of overlapping budgets and low capital implementation rates raises legitimate skepticism. Economists have cautioned that attempting to execute multiple large budgets concurrently strains administrative capacity and encourages rushed, low-value spending. When execution falters, the borrowed funds do not generate returns. Yet the interest meter keeps running.
Subsidy reform illustrates both the promise and the risk. The removal of fuel subsidy under President Bola Tinubu was described as a turning point, which was commended by an international organisation. In theory, eliminating subsidies should free fiscal space for productive investment like infrastructure, health, or education, as expected. But transparency in how those savings are redeployed remains crucial, especially in how the subsidy removal is being used. The truth remains that trust erodes if citizens do not see tangible improvements in infrastructure and services to showcase how the money realized from subsidies is being expended. Compliance weakens because once trust and fairness decline, people will easily default or be less willing to obey rules (like paying taxes or following regulations). Revenue mobilisation becomes harder. Trust is the invisible currency of fiscal reform.
Exchange rate pressures add another layer of complexity. When the naira weakens, external debt servicing costs rise in local currency terms. Import-related spending increases. Even if reserves appear strong, they are not freely spendable funds; they are buffers against external shocks. Mistaking reserves for budgetary liquidity is a dangerous illusion.
The global context is also less forgiving. Developing countries now pay far more in debt service than they receive in aid. Capital flows are volatile. In such an environment, fiscal discipline is not optional; it is survival.
So, are Nigeria’s deficits building future revenue capacity or merely financing present consumption?
The evidence is mixed, but the tilt is worrying. There are genuine reform efforts underway, such as tax administration overhaul, digitised revenue monitoring, electricity sector reforms, and efforts to attract capital importation. There are signs of macroeconomic stabilization that are moderating inflation, improving reserves, and modest GDP growth. These are not trivial.
Yet the scale and persistence of deficits, the heavy burden of debt service, the crowding-out of private credit, and the lack of transparency around execution suggest that borrowing is increasingly funding continuity rather than transformation or driving meaningful structural change.
Deficit financing becomes a growth strategy only when three conditions are met, such as when borrowed funds are channeled into productivity-enhancing investments (such as infrastructure, energy, manufacturing, education, and these things must expand the economy’s capacity to produce); institutions ensure transparency and value for money; and economic growth outpaces debt accumulation, so the country can comfortably service and repay what it has borrowed. When those conditions weaken, deficits mutate into a fiscal trap.
Nigeria stands at that junction. The Senate is right that borrowing in itself is not evil. But normalising structural deficits without tightening or simultaneously enforcing expenditure discipline, expanding revenue beyond oil, strengthening institutions, and reducing the cost of governance, then the country is taking a significant risk.
A nation can borrow to build bridges. Or it can borrow to pay salaries. The former compounds growth. The latter compounds debt.
If Nigeria’s deficits do not translate into visible infrastructure, expanded industrial capacity, thriving private enterprise, and rising tax revenues, history will record this era not as bold reform, but as deferred reckoning.
Deficits are not destiny. But when they become routine, they stop being temporary tools, unexamined, and politically convenient; they shape the destinies of Nigerians. From today, as a sovereign nation, Nigeria must decide whether it is borrowing to survive the present or to secure the future. The choice Nigeria makes about how it uses deficit financing will determine whether it becomes a growth ladder or locks it into a worsening cycle of debt that becomes harder and more expensive to escape over time, while it grows costlier each year.
Blaise, a journalist and PR professional, writes from Lagos and can be reached via: [email protected]
The Senate yesterday recorded two major milestones in Nigeria’s financial sector, passing a landmark Insurance Regulatory Commission Bill to replace the nearly three-decade-old National Insurance Commission (NAICOM) Act of 1997.
Also in a separate development, the Committee on Banking Insurance and other Financial Institutions, overwhelmingly cleared former Director-General of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and current Deputy Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), Mr. Lamido Yuguda, for appointment as Chairman of the Board of the Asset Management Corporation of Nigeria (AMCON).
The insurance reform legislation, described by lawmakers as one of the most comprehensive overhauls of Nigeria’s insurance regulatory framework in decades, seeks to modernise regulation, strengthen consumer protection, enhance financial stability and align the nation’s insurance industry with global best practices.
The bill, passed during plenary presided over by the President of the Senate, Senator Godswill Akpabio, followed the adoption of the report of the Senate Committee on Banking, Insurance and Other Financial Institutions chaired by Senator Mukhail Adetokunbo Abiru (APC, Lagos East).
The legislation repeals the National Insurance Commission Act, 1997 and establishes a new Insurance Regulatory Commission with broader supervisory and enforcement powers designed to respond more effectively to the changing dynamics of the insurance industry.
Presenting the committee’s report, Abiru told senators that the existing legal framework had become grossly inadequate for regulating a rapidly evolving insurance sector.
He said: “The current National Insurance Commission Act 1997 is outdated and does not adequately address the emerging economic growth, needs and development of the insurance business.”
According to him, although NAICOM had made significant contributions to regulating insurance companies, brokers and loss adjusters while protecting policyholders and enforcing industry standards, its enabling law had failed to keep pace with international developments.
Abiru explained: “Despite its significant contributions, the enabling law has become obsolete, failing to align with current realities and global best practices, and unable to keep pace with the evolving nature of the insurance industry, exposing numerous gaps in the law, necessitating urgent amendments.”
He disclosed that the proposed law guarantees the independence of the Insurance Regulatory Commission while substantially expanding its powers to supervise operators and safeguard the stability of the financial system.
According to him, the commission would have authority to issue regulations, standards, guidelines and directives, collaborate with domestic and international regulatory institutions, exchange supervisory information and intervene promptly in troubled insurance companies before their problems escalate.
He stressed that the strengthened intervention powers would remove bureaucratic bottlenecks that had previously delayed regulatory actions against distressed insurance firms.
Abiru said the legislation also introduces stricter corporate governance requirements by prescribing higher qualifications for members of the commission’s governing board.
He explained that only individuals with proven competence in insurance, finance, law, risk management and corporate governance would qualify for appointment, thereby ensuring more professional oversight of the industry.
The committee chairman further revealed that the bill significantly strengthens enforcement mechanisms by imposing stiffer sanctions on erring operators.
According to him, the law provides for heavier financial penalties, suspension of operating licences, additional liabilities for defaulting operators and disqualification of persons responsible for the collapse or regulatory failure of insurance institutions from occupying positions within the industry.
Abiru also noted that the legislation broadens the commission’s mandate beyond regulation to include the effective administration, supervision, control, integrity and overall development of insurance business in Nigeria.
He said the proposed change of name from the National Insurance Commission to the Insurance Regulatory Commission would eliminate longstanding confusion about the agency’s role and better reflect its statutory responsibility as the country’s insurance regulator.
Giving insight into the legislative process, Abiru disclosed that the committee subjected the bill to rigorous scrutiny, including a public hearing held on November 12, 2025.
He said more than 50 memoranda and several oral submissions were received from critical stakeholders, including the Federal Ministry of Finance, CBN, Nigeria Deposit Insurance Corporation, SEC, Federal Mortgage Bank of Nigeria, Nigerian Insurers Association, Nigerian Council of Registered Insurance Brokers and the Chartered Insurance Institute of Nigeria. Africans& Diaspora
According to him, the overwhelming consensus among stakeholders was that urgent reforms had become inevitable.
Abiru said: “The inputs made on the proposed bill will go a long way in providing a comprehensive legal framework for the regulation and supervision of all manner of insurance businesses in Nigeria to ensure that the industry is able to successfully compete on a global level and improve international competitiveness of Nigeria’s insurance industry.”
After considering the bill clause-by-clause in the Committee of the Whole, the Senate unanimously passed it for third reading.
Akpabio commended Abiru and members of the committee for championing what he described as a far-reaching reform capable of transforming Nigeria’s insurance industry.
He assured the committee that the National Assembly would continue to enact laws that would strengthen the country’s financial services sector, improve transparency and promote international competitiveness.
The bill will now proceed to the House of Representatives for concurrence before being transmitted to President Bola Tinubu for presidential assent.
After the plenary on Tuesday, the Senate Committee on Banking, Insurance and Other Financial Institutions overwhelmingly cleared Yuguda as Chairman of the Board of AMCON after granting him the rare privilege of a “take a bow and go” screening.
The committee dispensed with the conventional screening process on the grounds that Yuguda had previously appeared before the Senate for confirmation into several strategic public offices and had consistently demonstrated exceptional competence.
Presenting the nomination, the Special Adviser to the President on National Assembly Matters (Senate), Senator Basheer Lado, reminded lawmakers that Yuguda had undergone rigorous screening in the past.
He explained that the latest appearance was simply to comply with the provisions of Section 10(1)(a) of the AMCON Establishment Act, 2019, as amended. Abiru described Yuguda as one of the most trusted public officials appointed by President Tinubu.
He told committee members: “As all of us may recall, the appointee, Mr. Lamido Yuguda, whose résumé is before every member, has appeared before this committee on previous occasions.”
He added: “More recently, he also appeared before us for screening as Deputy Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria.”
In a light-hearted remark that drew laughter from members, Abiru observed: “If you ask me, I think he is probably the luckiest person in this administration, having been appointed by the same president on three different occasions for three different responsibilities.
“I am sure you will agree with me that he is more than qualified for the role he is about to assume.”
Former Senate Chief Whip, Senator Orji Uzor Kalu, immediately moved the motion for Yuguda to “take a bow and go”.
Kalu said: “President Tinubu has, on three occasions, appointed the same man to important national assignments. I therefore move that Mr. Lamido Yuguda be allowed to take a bow and go.”
The motion was seconded by the committee’s Acting Vice-Chairman, Senator Mohammed Sani Musa, who described the nominee as eminently qualified.
Musa said: “Looking at the résumé of the nominee and considering that Mr. President has repeatedly found him worthy of appointment to critical national offices, there is no doubt that he is eminently qualified.” ExecutiveBranch
The committee unanimously adopted the motion through a voice vote, after which Abiru formally declared Yuguda cleared.
The committee, however, quickly shifted attention to AMCON’s future, with Musa calling for a comprehensive briefing on the corporation’s performance as it approaches its statutory wind-up date in 2030.
He reminded the management that AMCON was established to resolve non-performing loans, distressed banks and systemic financial risks, stressing that lawmakers needed a comprehensive assessment of its achievements and pending obligations.
Musa said: “It has a statutory lifespan and is expected to wind up around 2030. Looking at that timeline, there is a need for this committee to receive an up-to-date report on the status of AMCON.
“We need to know where the corporation stands today, what it has achieved since inception and what outstanding responsibilities remain before its expected sunset.”
Responding, Abiru assured the committee that the requested briefing would be provided.
He said: “I am sure the leadership of AMCON understands the point you have raised, and it is well noted.
“I have no doubt that, in the not-too-distant future, the committee will receive a comprehensive response on the issues you have highlighted.” The recommendation confirming Yuguda’s appointment is expected to be presented before the Senate in plenary for final approval.
E-Financial
CBN Retains Interest Rate at 26.5% as Cardoso Cites Global Uncertainty Despite Inflation Drop
Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) has retained the Monetary Policy Rate (MPR), the nation’s benchmark interest rate, at 26.5 per cent, citing heightened global uncertainties despite signs of resilience in the domestic economy.
The CBN Governor, Mr Olayemi Cardoso, announced the decision on Tuesday after the conclusion of the 306th meeting of the Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) held in Abuja from July 20 to July 21.
Cardoso said the committee resolved to maintain the current monetary policy stance after reviewing domestic and international economic developments.
“The Committee decided to retain the Monetary Policy Rate at 26.5 per cent,” he said.
The governor said renewed geopolitical tensions, particularly in the Middle East, continued to pose risks to global energy prices and inflation, necessitating a cautious approach.
He said the committee also retained the Standing Facilities Corridor at +50/-450 basis points around the MPR.
The Cash Reserve Ratio (CRR) was also left unchanged at 45 per cent for Deposit Money Banks, 16 per cent for merchant banks and 75 per cent for non-Treasury Single Account public sector deposits.
According to Cardoso, the MPC’s decision followed an assessment of the balance of risks confronting the economy.
“Although headline inflation moderated marginally in June 2026, global uncertainties have intensified, largely due to renewed hostilities in the Middle East,” he said.
He added that despite the challenging global environment, Nigeria’s economy had remained resilient, supported by ongoing structural reforms.
The governor noted that the committee would continue to monitor economic developments and adjust policy measures when necessary to maintain price stability.
The latest decision represents the second time in 2026 that the MPC has maintained the benchmark interest rate at 26.5 per cent.
The announcement came shortly after the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) reported that Nigeria’s headline inflation rate eased slightly to 15.91 per cent in June 2026 from 15.93 per cent recorded in May.
National Insurance Commission (NAICOM) has declared that it has no plans to extend the 31 July 2026, deadline for the ongoing insurance industry recapitalisation exercise, asserting that the date is firmly rooted in the new Insurance Act.
Speaking at the investiture of Mr Akinjide Oluwarotimi-Orimolade as the 53rd president of the Chartered Insurance Institute of Nigeria (CIIN) in Lagos, Olusegun Omosehin, commissioner for Insurance, emphasised that the exercise remained central to building a resilient market.
With less than two weeks left before the window closes, the regulator commended operators making steady progress but stressed that the timeline must be treated with absolute urgency.
Omosehin said, “A stronger capital base must translate into stronger service delivery, prompt claims settlement, improved consumer protection, and a market that Nigerians can trust.
“The industry’s future will be determined by the quality of leadership, depth of competence, and discipline in serving the public interest.”
The ongoing exercise follows the historic signing of the Nigeria Insurance Industry Reform Act by President Bola Tinubu, which effectively repealed the outdated 2003 Insurance Act. Under the new framework, the sector is transitioning from a static baseline model to a dynamic risk-based capital structure. This regulatory shift aims to fortify operators against systemic economic shocks and better position the industry to contribute significantly to the Federal Government’s target of a $1tn economy.
Consequently, the exercise requires a massive capital lift across the board, pushing life underwriters from N2bn to N10bn, non-life operators from N3bn to N15bn, and reinsurers from N10bn to N35bn.
The push comes amid strong legislative alignment, with the National Assembly pledging its full backing to ensure these reforms translate into deeper market penetration.
Also speaking at the event, Ahmadu Jaha, chairman of the House of Representatives Committee on Insurance and Actuarial Matters, reaffirmed the parliament’s dedication to providing the necessary legal frameworks to drive sector growth.
Jaha said, “As Chairman of the House Committee on Insurance and Actuarial Matters, I wish to reaffirm the unwavering commitment of the House of Representatives to supporting legislative initiatives that will strengthen the insurance industry, improve regulatory effectiveness, enhance consumer protection and promote wider insurance penetration across Nigeria.
“The National Assembly recognises the critical role of the insurance industry in mobilising long-term capital, financing infrastructure development, protecting businesses and households against unforeseen risks, promoting financial stability and driving sustainable economic growth.”
Responding to the charge, the newly inaugurated Orimolade, president, CIIN, stated that his administration would aggressively protect the public interest by advancing the core mandates of the institute.
Orimolade promised “to build on the programmes of my predecessors while evolving new ideas that can further increase insurance education, awareness and acceptance across the country.”
NPC Opens Nationwide Digital Birth, Death Registration Platform
FG Launches C.L.I.C.K.D., Consumer Credit Scheme for Tech Devices
Airtel Nigeria Expands Retail Footprint to Strengthen Customer Access Nationwide
Ovaloop Technologies Unveils Digital Tools to Formalize SMEs Operations Across Africa
Kaspersky Survey Highlights the Need for Smartphone Security
NRC, Ponzi Scheme Collapses Resulting Loss of Billions of Naira
NASENI Moves to Digitize CCB’s 5m Assets Declaration and Operations
Lebara Nigeria Launches Lebara Play, Africa’s First Telecom-Owned Micro-Drama Platform
CANAL+ Partners Samsung to Pre-Load DStv Stream on New Samsung TVs In Nigeria, Other African Countries
Tokenization, Blockchain Technology will Transform Financial Institutions – IMF
News3 days agoAdebutu, PDP Chieftain Accuses Nigerian Governors of Embezzling LG Allocations
E-Financial3 days agoAccess Holdings Sells 7.44% Stake in Ghana Unit
E-Financial3 days agoNDIC Urges Youths to Shun Ponzi Schemes, Embrace Savings
News3 days agoNIMASA Unveils Accelerator Scheme to Drive Innovation, Sustainable Growth
E-Business3 days agoSERAP to Sue NASS over Bill Empowering NDPC to Regulate Social Media
E-Financial3 days agoNRS Issues July 31 Deadline for e-Invoicing Compliance
News3 days agoICPC Secures Final Forfeiture of N941m Linked to IPPIS Fraud
News3 days agoeBusinessLife Advocates Greater Support for Girls in ICT as Students Showcase AI Innovations