Connect with us

Broadcasting

Recapitalisation Reality Check: Uncovering the Truth Behind Nigeria’s Banking Boom

Published

on

Kindly share this post

By Blaise Udunze

When the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) announced a new round of bank recapitalisation in March 2024, many expected the leading banks, especially those boasting record-breaking profits in the hundreds of billions and trillions, to sail through with ease. Their financial statements glistened with prosperity, with expanding balance sheets, rising dividends, and bullish share prices.

Indeed, five of Nigeria’s top 10 banks reported a combined pre-tax profit of N4.6 trillion in 2024, showing a staggering 70 percent increase from the previous year, with Zenith Bank and Guaranty Trust Holding Company crossing the trillion-naira mark for the first time. The results painted a picture of robust profitability and resilience.

Yet, barely months after the profit announcements, the same banks found themselves racing back-to-back to the capital market to raise fresh funds. By the first half of 2025, Nigeria’s banking industry was at a crossroads. Behind the glitter of trillion-naira profits lay a more sobering reality of an industry scrambling to meet the CBN’s recapitalisation directive.

The contradiction is stark: record profits on one hand, desperate fundraising on the other. If the banks were truly as profitable and resilient as they claimed, they wouldn’t be begging investors for fresh equity to meet new thresholds.

Behind the strong showing of the market leaders lies an even deeper concern. The smaller commercial and regional banks are struggling to formulate credible recapitalisation strategies. As the March 31, 2026 deadline looms, the CBN has confirmed that only 14 banks have so far scaled the recapitalisation hurdle. That leaves nearly 19 institutions still in search of capital in a market already skeptical of their true worth.

The recapitalisation push has therefore become the clearest indicator of the sector’s underlying fragility. The CBN’s new capital requirements of N500 billion for international banks, N200 billion for national banks, and N50 billion for regional banks have forced lenders to confront a fundamental question. How much of their reported profits actually represents real financial strength?

Much of Nigeria’s profit boom has been a deception, a mirage built on foreign exchange revaluation gains and arbitrary fees rather than genuine operational efficiency. The unification of exchange rates and subsequent naira depreciation in 2023 and 2024 delivered massive revaluation windfalls on dollar-denominated assets, inflating balance sheets overnight. But these were paper gains, not cash profits, and could not be deployed to strengthen capital or fund new loans.

Beyond FX gains, Nigerian banks have increasingly relied on fees and charges as easy revenue. Despite repeated CBN sanctions for breaching its Guide to Charges, banks continue to extract billions from customers through transfers, withdrawals, ATM fees, SMS alerts, and account maintenance. With over 312 million active bank accounts, these charges now contribute more to profitability than traditional lending or genuine financial intermediation.

It is little surprise, then, that the recapitalisation exercise has exposed the widening gap between declared profitability and true solvency. While five Tier-1 banks together raked in N4.6 trillion in pre-tax profit in 2024, nearly 70 percent higher than in 2023, many mid-tier banks can barely keep pace. The recapitalisation gap across the sector is now estimated at N4.7 trillion.

As of September 2025, only 14 banks had crossed the line, while others scramble for mergers, rights issues, or license downgrades to survive. The CBN’s insistence that only paid-up capital and share premium will count while excluding retained earnings has stripped away the accounting camouflage that once masked weakness.

For the market leaders, the race has been aggressive but achievable. Access Holdings raised N351 billion through a fully subscribed rights issue. Zenith Bank’s N350.4 billion hybrid offer was oversubscribed by 160 percent. Wema Bank, once a mid-tier lender, successfully raised N200 billion and became a national success story. Among specialised institutions, Greenwich Merchant Bank sealed its own recapitalisation, supported by capital injections and debt-to-equity conversions that secured its merchant banking license, while Jaiz Bank rose above the N20 billion target to remain the flagship of Islamic banking. Lotus has met the N10 billion bar, consolidating its place in Nigeria’s fast-growing alternative sector.

Another notable entrant is Globus Bank, which in 2024 raised N52.9 billion to lift its capital to N98.6 billion and followed in 2025 with a further N102 billion via rights issues and private placements. The raise subscribed entirely by existing shareholders took its capital above N200 billion. The bank now awaits final verification from the CBN before being formally recognized as compliant.

For others, however, it has been a painful crawl. Fidelity Bank’s N205.45 billion hybrid offer still leaves a N160 billion gap to the N500 billion benchmark. Guaranty Trust Bank reached its own target through a two-phased approach that started with a rights issue in Nigeria that netted N365.8 billion. Subsequently, GT listed shares on the London Stock Exchange with proceeds of $105 million to reach the required target, while UBA Plc launched a N157 billion rights issue in July 2025, following a N239 billion offer in November 2024 that was oversubscribed at N251 billion, with N240 billion accepted. The new offer, extended to September 19, 2025, helped the bank meet the CBN’s N500 billion capital requirement.

As of September 2025, First Bank has secured N187.6 billion and plans an additional N350 billion in private placements, but it still needs to secure the remaining funds to meet the CBN’s requirements.  FCMB Group Plc launched a N160 billion public share offer to meet the CBN’s N500 billion capital requirements for international banks, with the offer closing on November 6, 2025. The offer follows a successful N147.5 billion share sale in 2024.

Fidelity raised N176 billion in fresh capital in 2024 and is moving to get an additional N195 billion via private placement before the end of the year. Sterling Bank has not yet completed its recapitalisation as it commenced an N87.067 public offer. This offer follows completion of a N75 billion private placement and a N28.79 billion rights issue, which was significantly oversubscribed by its shareholders.

Consolidation pressures are once again reshaping Nigeria’s banking landscape. Titan Trust’s acquisition of Union Bank and the completed Providus and Unity Bank’s merger reflect the reality that not every institution will raise sufficient equity alone. More combinations are expected in the months ahead, with smaller lenders likely to be folded into stronger franchises as the recapitalisation deadline approaches.

This trend mirrors the 2005 consolidation era, which trimmed 89 banks down to 25, ushering in a new era of scale and scrutiny. The 2024-2026 recapitalisation may well repeat history, producing fewer but sturdier players, banks large enough to finance Nigeria’s economic transformation.

But history offers a warning that recapitalisation is not reform. Bigger balance sheets may shield banks from global shocks, but they do not guarantee developmental relevance. Unless the philosophy of Nigerian banking itself changes from profit-first to purpose-driven intermediation, the sector will keep producing “giant banks in a fragile economy.”

The real challenge is not size, but substance. Nigeria doesn’t just need bigger banks; it needs better banks. It needs institutions that see SMEs as partners rather than liabilities, that lend to real producers rather than recycle deposits into government securities. It needs lenders that adopt fintech-driven underwriting, regulators that reward productive lending, and policymakers that create the infrastructure, power, and security needed to make risk-taking viable.

Recapitalisation, in this light, should not be seen merely as a regulatory hurdle but as a mirror reflecting both the success and the shame of Nigeria’s banking system. The trillion-naira profits may have dazzled investors, but the scramble for new capital reveals the truth that the sector’s foundations remain fragile, its governance inconsistent, and its contribution to real economic development still limited.

The CBN’s policy, painful as it may be, is a necessary reality check. It forces banks to prove that their wealth is more than paper-deep and that their balance sheets can support Nigeria’s ambitious $1 trillion economy vision. For investors and depositors, it is a wake-up call that what glitters in the financial statements may not always be gold.

In the end, recapitalisation is not just about raising funds; it is about restoring credibility. Because trust, once eroded by profit manipulation and corporate posturing, takes far more than a balance sheet to rebuild.

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


Kindly share this post

Ugo Onwuaso is an ICT enthusiast. He believes technology should be used for general good. He holds a Master of Public Administration (MPA) degree from the Lagos state University. Dear Reader, Your support matters. But we believe that technology makes life more exciting and helps improve the lives of people around Nigeria and indeed the world. That is why, we have devoted our energy to independent reportage of technology and finance and how they affect lives. Our incisive and analytical view of how technology news affects the daily life help individuals and organizations make up their minds. Quality journalism costs money. Today, we're asking that you support us to do more. Kindly support our effort to deliver technology and finance journalism to everyone in the world. Donate as little as N1,000. Bank transfers can be made to: UBA Plc 1017156876 Communication Week Media Ltd

Broadcasting

Is Nigeria Economically Broke? Challenges and Opportunities in Africa’s Largest Economy

Published

on

Kindly share this post

By Blaise Udunze

Is Nigeria, Africa’s largest economy, economically broke? It is a question no patriotic citizen wants to confront, yet one that confronts every Nigerian daily at the fuel pump, the market stall, the school gate, the hospital reception, and increasingly, in the national accounts. The country’s fiscal reality is no longer a debate in economic circles alone; it is a lived experience for millions and a gathering storm for future generations.

To understand the gravity of the nation’s situation, one must look beyond political speeches and interrogate Nigeria’s borrowing patterns, revenue profile/debt numbers, public spending, and the economic behavior of both federal and state governments under President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s. administration. What emerges is a troubling picture as taxation is squeezing small businesses, borrowing is mortgaging the nation’s tomorrow, and shockingly, the trillions shared among federal, state, and local governments every month translate into little visible development. Nigeria’s books show figures, but her streets show a different reality.

Since President Bola Ahmed Tinubu assumed office in June 2023, Nigeria’s public debt has spiraled from N33.3 trillion to N152.4 trillion by mid-2025 which represents a staggering 348.6 percent increase in just two years. Economies do not collapse overnight; they weaken gradually, sending warning signs that only become obvious in hindsight. Nigeria is flashing all the red signals today. Between July and October 2025 alone, the government secured over $24.79 billion, €4 billion, ¥15 billion, N757 billion, and another $500 million in sukuk bonds. These figures, in a functional economy, should translate into expanded electricity capacity, world-class healthcare systems, vibrant industries, better roads, thriving SMEs, and export-oriented value chains. Instead, much of Nigeria’s real sector remains stagnant as energy is unstable, industrial output is weak, and infrastructure remains largely stuck in the realm of political promises.

Borrowing, in itself, is not the crime. Nations borrow to grow. Borrowing becomes a problem when the funds are not directed toward productive, self-liquidating projects capable of paying back the debt through increased economic activity. Nigeria borrows aggressively but produces too little. The loans are not translating into productivity or growth, which is why the debt-servicing burden continues to rise. Today, more than 90 percent of government revenue is spent on servicing old debts. In some quarters, debt servicing now consumes 25 percent of Nigeria’s entire annual revenue. This means that governance has been reduced to fiscal survival, with vital sectors such as education, healthcare, and industrialization competing for the crumbs left after creditors take their share.

Professor Uche Uwaleke of Nasarawa State University captured it aptly: “Nigeria’s debt service ratio is inimical to economic development… The opportunity cost for the country is high.” The tragedy is clear as the country has substituted borrowing for revenue and debt servicing for development. At the 2025 IMF and World Bank Meetings, global leaders lamented Africa’s growing debt, which has now exceeded $1.3 trillion. Sub-Saharan African governments spent over $89 billion servicing debts in 2025 alone. Yet Nigeria’s case stands out because of its size, population, weak industrial base, and persistent revenue leakages. Nigeria continues to borrow through Eurobonds, multilateral loans, bilateral facilities, and sukuk instruments, even without a corresponding rise in productivity. This raises a painful but necessary question: if these loans are development financing, where is the development?

Recently, the House of Representatives approved President Tinubu’s request to borrow $2.35 billion to finance part of the 2025 budget deficit. This is not borrowing to invest, it is borrowing to plug holes, pay salaries, and service existing debts. This is fiscal survivalism, not economic transformation. Countries that borrow to build infrastructure grow out of debt. Countries that borrow to fund recurrent expenditure sink deeper into it. Nigeria is drifting toward the latter.

The African Democratic Congress (ADC) bluntly accused the president of being “addicted to debts,” noting that if all requested loans for 2025 are approved, Nigeria’s debt stock could reach N193 trillion. The Debt Management Office confirmed the possibility. In the ADC’s words: “You cannot claim your house is in order while taking new loans to stop the roof from collapsing.” The loan in question was the N1.15 trillion request by President Tinubu to fund the 2025 budget deficit, which the Senate and House of Representatives gave their approval during last Wednesday’s plenary.

Despite government assurances that inflation is easing by recording 18.02 percent headline inflation and 16.87 percent food inflation, Nigerians feel no relief. Prices remain high, purchasing power continues to collapse, and businesses are shutting down. There is no statistical comfort in an empty dinner plate.

While federal borrowing continues to dominate conversations, an equally critical yet often ignored dimension lies at the state level. Since the fuel subsidy removal in June 2023, state governments have become quiet but major beneficiaries of the enlarged FAAC allocations as a feeding bottle.

NEITI and OAGF/NBS records show that between June 2023 and June 2025, FAAC distributed N25.65 trillion yet few Nigerians can point to commensurate development in their states. Roads remain terrible. State industries are dead. Capital projects are abandoned. Health and education sectors are underfunded. Internally generated revenue remains weak.

Many states have weaponized FAAC allocations into a system of dependence. They line up monthly for their share but fail to harness the natural resources, agricultural potential, tourism corridors, or industrial hubs available within their territories.

Nigeria’s fiscal health is not a function of what federal government collects alone, it is a function of what the states produce. Development is a chain; a weak link breaks the entire system. Many states have become consumption centers instead of production hubs, contributing significantly to the national productivity crisis. Until FAAC allocations are tied to measurable development outcomes, Nigeria will continue to share poverty, not prosperity.

All these realities force Nigerians to ask again if Nigeria is economically broke?

A country is economically broke:

·       when it borrows to survive rather than to grow;

·       when it spends the bulk of its income servicing old debts;

·       when its states depend on allocations instead of productivity;

·       when taxation cripples rather than empowers businesses; and

·       when development is measured by political speeches, not real outcomes.

By these metrics, Nigeria is edging dangerously close to fiscal insolvency, living on borrowed money and borrowed time.

Yet despite this troubling landscape, Nigeria’s economic prospects are not irredeemable. The country possesses immense opportunities that, if harnessed, could transform its economic future to becoming one of the most vibrant in the world.

1.     Diversification: Agriculture, Technology, and Services –

Nigeria’s over-reliance on oil remains its most dangerous economic vulnerability. Oil accounts for more than 90 percent of export earnings and over half of government revenue. A single fluctuation in global oil prices can destabilize the entire economy. Diversification is not optional; it is a national emergency.

Agriculture, however, offers a powerful alternative. With vast arable land, abundant labor, and high domestic demand, agriculture can drive food security, export expansion, and industrial value chains.

Technology stands as another frontier of opportunity. Nigeria’s youthful population, fast-rising digital economy, and growing tech hubs offer pathways for innovation, employment, and global competitiveness.

The services sector which consists of telecommunications, finance, logistics, entertainment, and tourism also holds massive potential to absorb millions of jobs and stimulate economic growth and reduce reliance on oil revenue.

2.     Job Creation and Youth Productivity:

Nigeria’s unemployment and underemployment rates remain dangerously high, particularly among young people. A productive youth population is an economic asset; an idle youth population is a socio-economic risk. Entrepreneurship support, industrial hubs, vocational training, and SME financing can unlock millions of new jobs.

3.     Infrastructure Development:

However, none of these sectors can thrive without addressing Nigeria’s infrastructural deficit. Poor power supply, crumbling roads, inefficient transport systems, and inconsistent regulatory policies continue to choke businesses. Infrastructure is the backbone of any modern economy; without it, productivity remains low regardless of potential.

4.     Governance, Transparency, and Anti-Corruption:

Governance and transparency play an equally critical role. Nigeria cannot build a productive economy on the foundation of corruption, mismanagement, and opaque financial practices. Strengthening institutions, enforcing accountability, digitizing public services, and ensuring full transparency in FAAC disbursements, budget execution, and loan utilization are essential steps toward restoring public trust and investor confidence. Transparency must become the norm not the exception.

The path to a resilient Nigerian economy requires a national reset in fiscal discipline. The following steps are critical:

–       Borrowing must be tied strictly to revenue-generating, self-liquidating projects.

–       Recurrent expenditure borrowing must stop.

–       Debt ceilings should be legally enforced.

–       States must be compelled to boost local productivity and mobilize internal revenue.

–       FAAC allocations should be linked to measurable development benchmarks.

–       Public finance transparency must be non-negotiable

–       Economic diversification must be pursued with urgency, not rhetoric.

Currently, Nigeria stands at an intercession. One path leads to deeper debt, economic stagnation, and a future where the next generation inherits nothing but liabilities. The other path leads to reform, productivity, innovation, and the emergence of a strong, resilient economy capable of withstanding global uncertainties.

So, is Nigeria economically broke? The uncomfortable truth is that Nigeria is not yet bankrupt but it is dangerously close. A nation cannot continue borrowing to survive, consuming more than it produces, or neglecting the engines of real growth. The time for action is now. Nigeria’s challenges are vast, but so are her opportunities. With discipline, transparency, and visionary leadership, Africa’s largest economy can still reclaim its promise and chart a sustainable path toward shared prosperity.

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


Kindly share this post
Continue Reading

Broadcasting

FG’s Suspension of 15% Fuel Import Duty: A Holistic Step Toward Economic Relief and Market Stability

Published

on

Kindly share this post

By Blaise Udunze

In a welcome display of policy sensitivity and economic rationality, the Federal Government has suspended the planned 15 percent ad-valorem import duty on petrol and diesel. This move, announced by the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA), is more than a technical adjustment, it is a timely intervention that reflects empathy for the prevailing economic realities confronting citizens and businesses alike.

Just weeks ago, in my earlier article titled, “Tinubu’s 15% Fuel Duty: Taxing Pain in a Broken Economy,” I had argued that the proposed import duty, though designed with reformist intentions, was ill-timed and risked compounding Nigeria’s inflationary crisis. The central message was simple, which is reform must not inflict further hardship on already struggling citizens. It is therefore commendable that the Federal Government heeded that call, demonstrating a rare responsiveness to constructive public criticism. The decision to suspend the 15 percent duty shows that this administration is willing to listen, to adjust, and to prioritise the welfare of Nigerians above bureaucratic rigidity.

Nigeria’s economy is still recovering from the inflationary aftershocks of subsidy removal, exchange rate harmonization, and fiscal tightening. Against that backdrop, any additional import tariff on fuel which is the single most critical commodity in the nation’s cost structure would have triggered a cascade of price increases across transportation, food, manufacturing, and logistics. The government’s decision to halt the policy therefore represents a holistic step toward economic relief and market stability.

When the import duty was first approved in October 2025, it was presented as a forward-looking reform. The Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS), led by Zacch Adedeji, proposed the measure to align import costs with local refining realities and discourage importers from undercutting domestic producers. In principle, the idea had merit. It sought to strengthen local refining, promote crude oil transactions in the naira, and ensure a stable, affordable supply of petroleum products.

Yet, good intentions alone cannot override economic timing. The implementation, scheduled for late November, risked amplifying inflation at a time when Nigerians were already grappling with high transport fares, shrinking disposable incomes, and rising living costs. It would also have widened the gap between policy aspiration and market readiness, given that domestic refineries, including the Dangote Refinery and several modular plants, are still ramping up to full capacity.

By suspending the policy, the Tinubu administration has demonstrated that economic reform is not about rigid adherence to plans but about flexibility and responsiveness to market signals. This decision not only stabilizes prices but also strengthens public confidence that government is capable of balancing fiscal goals with social welfare.

The economic logic of this suspension is straightforward that in an energy-dependent economy like Nigeria’s, any increase in fuel import cost transmits directly into inflation. Transport fares go up. Food distribution costs rise. Manufacturing inputs become more expensive. Even small scale traders in the street feel the pinch as diesel prices affect electricity alternatives. Therefore, by preventing an artificial rise in fuel prices, the government has effectively averted another wave of inflationary pressure. It has also given room for other economic stabilisers such as improved power supply, localized production, and currency management to take effect.

Moreover, the NMDPRA’s assurance of a robust domestic fuel supply underscores the government’s effort to ensure market stability while preventing hoarding or profiteering. Its commitment to monitor distribution and discourage arbitrary price increases is a critical safeguard for consumers and businesses alike.

However, while the suspension offers immediate relief, it also presents an opportunity to rethink the broader framework for achieving energy security and local refining growth. If the ultimate goal is to strengthen local refining, stabilize fuel prices, and secure energy independence, there are smarter and more inclusive alternatives than import tariffs. The government should guarantee crude oil supply to modular refineries through transparent contracts and fair pricing mechanisms. Many smaller refineries struggle not because they lack capacity, but because they face erratic access to feedstock. Ensuring predictable crude allocation will allow them to operate profitably and contribute meaningfully to domestic supply.

Instead of penalizing importers through duties, the government can offer targeted tax incentives and financing support for smaller refineries to expand capacity. Access to credit at concessionary rates and tax holidays for equipment importation would accelerate output growth, create jobs, and foster competition. Regulatory fairness is equally essential. The downstream sector must remain open and competitive. The government must ensure regulatory equity so that no single player, whether public or private, dominates the market. Fair competition, not favoritism, will drive efficiency, innovation, and lower prices for consumers.

Nigeria must also address the hidden costs embedded in its energy logistics. The government should invest heavily in energy infrastructure like pipelines, depots, and transport networks to reduce non-tariff costs that inflate fuel prices. Currently, poor infrastructure adds unnecessary layers of cost to the final pump price. Reforming the power sector remains pivotal. Many industries and small businesses rely on diesel generators due to inadequate grid supply. A more reliable electricity system would ease demand for diesel, freeing up supplies for transport and export, while improving overall energy efficiency.

The government should also adopt a transparent pricing mechanism that allows market participants and consumers to understand how fuel prices are determined. Transparency discourages manipulation, hidden subsidies, and monopolistic practices. When prices reflect actual costs, trust grows, and market discipline follows. Such reforms will not only strengthen local capacity but also build a foundation for competition, accountability, and long-term sustainability, which are the true pillars of a resilient energy economy.

As the government nurtures the growth of local refining, it must also guard against a creeping danger of monopolistic capture. Protecting Dangote’s investment as the largest single-train refinery in the world is understandable. The refinery represents national pride and an enormous private commitment to Nigeria’s industrialization. However, promoting a monopoly, even unintentionally, would undermine the very goals of competition and consumer protection. No single operator, however efficient, should control access to crude supply, dictate market prices, or influence import policy. The Petroleum Industry Act (PIA) empowers the government to create fiscal measures that promote investment, but these must be implemented with fairness, transparency, and a clear focus on public interest.

A healthy downstream sector requires multiple active players involving modular refineries, state refineries under revitalization, and independent marketers, all operating on a level playing field. The government must therefore guarantee open access to crude oil, enforce transparent pricing of both feedstock and finished products, and prevent any operator from cornering market advantage through political influence. Monopoly breeds inefficiency, stifles innovation, and ultimately hurts consumers. What Nigeria needs is a competitive ecosystem that rewards efficiency, not proximity to power. A balanced and inclusive market structure is the surest path to sustainable self-sufficiency.

Beyond economics, this policy reversal underscores a deeper truth showing that reform must be humane. Citizens are not fiscal instruments but human beings whose welfare defines the legitimacy of policy. The suspension of the 15 percent import duty shows that the government can still listen, learn, and adapt, which is a welcome shift from the top-down approach that has often characterized Nigerian policymaking. But this responsiveness must become institutionalized. Policymaking should be driven by data and dialogue, not decrees. Stakeholders from refinery operators to transport unions and consumer groups must be part of the conversation before policies take effect. Reform, to succeed, must be sequenced with empathy, not arrogance.

Economic transformation is not measured merely by revenue gains or fiscal alignment, but by how it improves the quality of life of ordinary citizens. A humane reform process ensures that no policy, however noble, becomes a burden too heavy for its people to bear. The reversal of the 15 percent import duty on petrol and diesel is more than a temporary reprieve; it is a course correction toward sustainable and inclusive growth. It demonstrates that reform, when guided by compassion and common sense, can build confidence rather than resentment.

But government must go further to institutionalize competition, prevent monopolistic dominance, and pursue energy self-sufficiency without sacrificing fairness. Only by balancing protection with competition, efficiency with empathy, and ambition with accountability can Nigeria achieve the promise of the “Renewed Hope” Agenda. If this new direction is sustained, the suspension will not merely be remembered as a fiscal decision but as a moment when government rediscovered its moral compass, proving that in economic policy, the best outcomes are those that serve both the market and the people.

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


Kindly share this post
Continue Reading

Broadcasting

CBN’s $1 Trn Mirage: Why Nigeria’s Real Sector Holds the Missing Key

Published

on

Kindly share this post

By Blaise Udunze

When the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) recently declared that the country was on course to becoming a $1 trillion economy through ongoing banking reforms, the statement was met with cautious optimism. To many, it sounded like a long-awaited promise of prosperity as a declaration that Nigeria’s economic renewal is finally underway. But behind the projection lies a critical question, if banking reforms alone drive the kind of broad-based, sustainable growth required to make Nigeria a trillion-dollar economy?

The truth, according to several experts and economic data, is that banking reforms though necessary are insufficient. The structure of the Nigerian economy is still too fragile, the real sector too weak, and the policy framework too inconsistent to sustain such lofty growth. Without targeted reforms that strengthen production, industry, and exports, the trillion-dollar dream risks remaining what one economist aptly described as a “mirage.”

Tilewa Adebajo, Chief Executive Officer of CFG Advisory, did not mince words when he addressed the subject on ARISE NEWS earlier this year. “We said Nigeria already has the potential of a $1 trillion economy. But $1 trillion economy is a mirage. We shouldn’t go there again,” he said. “If you do not have your policies in place, you cannot reach that $1 trillion economy.”

Adebajo’s caution strikes at the heart of the matter, saying potential is not performance. Nigeria has abundant human and natural resources, but poor policy implementation, weak governance, and persistent inflation continue to choke productivity and investment.

According to Adebajo, reforms alone cannot drive growth. “Reforms on themselves cannot be the solution or answer to growing the economy,” he explained. For him, the CBN’s focus on financial sector restructuring must be complemented by microeconomic solutions such as job creation, poverty alleviation, and social intervention policies that ease the hardship of ordinary Nigerians.

“There has to now be a human face,” he emphasized. Economic transformation, he argues, must not only be about GDP numbers but about improving the quality of life for millions trapped in poverty.

While the CBN’s recapitalisation directive aims to strengthen the banking system and attract foreign capital, many industry players insist that banking strength is meaningless without productive outlets for credit. The Group Managing Director of UBA Plc, Oliver Alawuba, made this clear at the Annual Conference of the Finance Correspondents Association of Nigeria (FICAN).

He stated that achieving the $1 trillion economy target “requires not just incremental growth, but structural shifts in how we approach banking, financial innovation, and sectoral development.”

For Alawuba, the real sector in agriculture, manufacturing, and services must become the true engine of growth.

“A vibrant real sector will drive employment, foster innovation, and strengthen the overall economy by reducing dependency on the oil sector,” he said.

Recapitalization alone, he noted, “is not enough; it must be followed by focused lending to strategic areas that promise the highest economic returns.”

This sentiment reflects a broader consensus among economists that credit must flow to where value is created. Yet, Nigerian banks often prefer the comfort of investing in risk-free government securities over financing industrial or agricultural expansion. The result is a financial system that thrives on paper profits but contributes little to real economic output.

Indeed, Nigeria’s real sector has remained under pressure for years. Manufacturing’s share of GDP still hovers around 10 to 12 percent, hampered by erratic power supply, high logistics costs, and dependence on imported inputs. Agriculture, employing over one-third of the population, remains largely subsistence-based and technologically backward. Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs), which make up 90 percent of businesses and contribute 48 percent of GDP, continue to struggle with limited access to affordable, long-term credit.

Alawuba suggests that this is where the banking recapitalisation drive must meet fintech innovation. By creating products specifically tailored to SMEs such as flexible loan packages, digital lending tools, and market access platforms which banks can unlock exponential growth. He argues that the future of Nigeria’s economy depends on “the strategic alignment of policy, investment, technology, and, most importantly, our collective will to innovate and grow.”

However, achieving this alignment requires more than monetary engineering; it demands a complete rethink of fiscal and industrial policy. As Isa Omagu of the Bank of Industry (BoI) explained during the same forum, “The economy stands on both the monetary and fiscal sides; we need both sides to work together.” While the monetary side stabilizes prices, fiscal authorities must “come in on the issue of governance.” Nigeria’s biggest economic problem, he said, is simple: “We are not producing enough, and we cannot continue to consume imported goods and expect the economy to be robust.”

Omagu’s statement underscores the country’s most pressing contradiction as a consumption-driven economy that produces little of what it consumes. He called for deeper investment in agriculture, infrastructure, and services to minimize importation and reduce pressure on the foreign exchange market. “We cannot achieve a $1 trillion economy without focusing or boosting our production capacity,” he warned.

The Deputy Director of the Banking Examination Department at the Nigeria Deposit Insurance Corporation (NDIC), Emeka Udechukwu, echoed a similar concern. He warned that “without a vibrant real sector, the economy might not grow fast enough to hit the $1 trillion target.” He argued that while the CBN’s loan-to-deposit ratio policy was designed to compel banks to lend more to the productive sector, “fundamental infrastructural deficits” and policy inconsistencies have undermined its impact. “If there is challenge in the real sector of any economy, that economy is already challenged,” he said. “We have to go back to the real sector and do what we are supposed to do.”

This diagnosis aligns with what many analysts have long argued that Nigeria’s economic problem is not lack of money but lack of production. Trillions of naira circulate within the financial system, yet they rarely translate into new factories, expanded farms, or exportable goods. A $1 trillion GDP projection, therefore, may reflect currency devaluation or statistical rebasing more than genuine productivity gains.

The country’s overreliance on oil further complicates the path to sustainable growth. Data from the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) shows that in the last quarter of 2023, crude oil accounted for over 81 percent of total exports, while non-oil exports amounted to just around N1 trillion. Even though non-oil exports grew by 38.5 percent in early 2024, their value remains meagre for an economy seeking diversification.

Nigeria’s non-oil export base including manufactured goods, agricultural products, and services remains underdeveloped. Experts argue that to escape this trap, Nigeria must learn from Asian success stories like Singapore and Vietnam, where industrialization, export-oriented manufacturing, and human capital investment transformed poor economies into global competitors.

Singapore, for instance, transitioned from high unemployment and poor infrastructure in the 1960s to one of the world’s richest nations through massive investment in education, manufacturing, and technology. Its top exports today include integrated circuits and machinery products that drive global industries. Similarly, Vietnam evolved from an agrarian, war-torn economy to a manufacturing hub exporting electronics, textiles, and footwear worth over $370 billion in 2022. Nigeria, by contrast, has watched its GDP fall from $400 billion in 2013 to around $250 billion by 2023.

Both countries demonstrate that industrialization, not financial speculation, drives long-term growth. As Uchenna Uzo, a marketing professor at Lagos Business School, put it, “Manufacturing and local production are the key things that can set Nigeria apart.” He added that Nigeria can also attract diaspora investment if it builds the right infrastructure and policy stability.

The lesson is clear; a trillion-dollar economy cannot be decreed from monetary policy statements or achieved through banking reforms alone. It must be earned through production, value addition, and innovation. Nigeria’s manufacturing base must expand, its agricultural productivity must rise, and its infrastructure such as power, transport, and logistics must be modernized.

Banking reforms should therefore serve as an enabler, not a substitute, for real sector development. The CBN’s recapitalization drive, while commendable, must be tied to sectoral targets. Banks that expand credit to manufacturing, agriculture, or export-oriented businesses should enjoy regulatory incentives, while speculative investments in non-productive assets should be discouraged.

Equally important is the need to tame inflation and stabilize the currency. As Adebajo noted, Nigeria can only sustain GDP growth of 8-10 percent if inflation is kept below 12 percent. Persistent inflation erodes purchasing power, deters investment, and undermines long-term planning. Without macroeconomic stability, even the best-intentioned reforms will falter.

Furthermore, there must be a coordinated industrial policy that aligns monetary, fiscal, and trade objectives. For instance, while the CBN seeks to strengthen the naira, the fiscal authorities must simultaneously support local manufacturers through tax incentives, infrastructure investment, and export facilitation. Import restrictions, when necessary, should be strategically designed to protect emerging industries without stifling competition.

Nigeria’s SME ecosystem also deserves targeted support. As the Bank of Industry’s Omagu and UBA’s Alawuba both emphasized, SMEs are the backbone of employment and innovation. Yet, they are often the most credit-starved. Government-backed credit guarantees, venture funds, and fintech-driven micro-lending could bridge this gap, helping small enterprises become the foundation of Nigeria’s industrial base.

Equally, agricultural transformation must move beyond subsistence farming to agro-industrialisation such as processing, packaging, and exporting value-added products rather than raw materials. This approach will not only increase farmers’ incomes but also create jobs and reduce pressure on foreign exchange demand. A focus on value chain development from farm to factory to market will ensure that the benefits of growth reach ordinary citizens.

At a time when 133 million Nigerians are multidimensionally poor, according to NBS data, the urgency for real sector reforms cannot be overstated. An economy that depends overwhelmingly on oil exports, consumes more than it produces, and imports most of its essential goods cannot claim to be on the path to a trillion dollars in any meaningful sense.

The government’s projection of achieving a $1 trillion economy by 2030 could still be attainable but only if the country embarks on deep structural reforms. These include ensuring reliable power supply, revamping transport infrastructure, tackling corruption that inflates project costs, and improving governance and policy consistency.

Nigeria must also invest aggressively in education and skills development, following the example of countries like Singapore, which turned human capital into its greatest economic asset. A young, skilled population can drive innovation, entrepreneurship, and technological adoption which is the real levers of modern economic power.

The road to a trillion-dollar economy will not be paved by balance sheets and banking reforms alone. It will be built by factories, farms, and entrepreneurs. It will depend on a nation’s ability to produce, innovate, and trade competitively. It will require a deliberate shift from policy announcements to policy execution, where government actions translate into measurable outcomes for citizens.

Nigeria’s trillion-dollar dream is achievable, but not on the current trajectory. Without revitalizing the real sector, ensuring macroeconomic stability, and investing in people and production, the CBN’s optimism risks sounding like rhetoric detached from reality. Banking reforms may stabilize the system, but only real sector reforms can sustain growth.

In the end, Nigeria’s economic destiny will not be determined in banking halls but in the fields, factories, and workshops where real value is created. The trillion-dollar economy will not come from financial statements, it will come from the sweat of productive Nigerians who, if properly empowered, can transform potential into prosperity.

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


Kindly share this post
Continue Reading

Trending