E-Financial
Tinubu’s 15% Fuel Duty: Taxing Pain in a Broken Economy
By Blaise Udunze
When a nation is bleeding economically, with inflation at historic highs and citizens gasping for survival, one expects government policy to offer relief, not suffocation. Yet, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s approval of a 15 per cent import duty on petrol and diesel does the exact opposite for it taxing pain in a broken economy.
According to a presidential letter dated October 21, 2025, and addressed to the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS) and the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA), Tinubu directed the immediate implementation of the new import tariff as part of what the government described as a “market responsive import tariff framework.”
Signed by his Private Secretary, Damilotun Aderemi, the memo followed a proposal by the Executive Chairman of the FIRS, Zacch Adedeji, who claimed the measure was part of “ongoing reforms to boost local refining, ensure price stability, and strengthen the naira-based oil economy” in line with the so-called Renewed Hope Agenda.
In theory, it sounds noble with the aim to protect local refineries, promote energy security, and build a self-sustaining oil economy. But in practice, this policy is another dagger in the heart of Nigerians already crushed by the triple burden of fuel inflation, currency collapse, and dwindling purchasing power.
Because let’s face it, you cannot tax your way out of poverty when the people are already too poor to pay for survival.
The New Tariff: A Policy with Pain Written All Over It
Under the directive, importers will now pay a 15 per cent ad-valorem duty on the cost, insurance, and freight (CIF) value of imported petrol and diesel. The government argues that this will “align import costs with domestic market realities” and “protect local producers from unfair pricing.”
But industry data reveal what this truly means at current CIF levels, the new tariff will raise the landing cost of petrol by about N99.72 per litre. In other words, the already painful pump price hovering around N920 per litre in many parts of Nigeria could easily surpass N1,000 per litre within weeks.
This isn’t speculation, it is arithmetic. Depot operators have already sounded the alarm.
“As it is, the price of fuel may go above N1,000 per litre. I don’t know why the government will be adding more to people’s suffering,” one operator lamented in an interview.
Another industry source added, “Some of the importers are working in alignment with Dangote, which is why the last price increase was general. All players raised their prices at once. Without a clear framework to stabilise market forces, this import duty will worsen the hardship faced by consumers.”
So, while the government insists the duty “won’t choke supply or inflate prices beyond sustainable thresholds,” market realities tell a different story. The moment you tax importation of essential energy products in a country that barely refines any petrol domestically, you are effectively taxing the daily lives of millions who depend on that fuel to move, work, and eat.
An Economy Already in Free Fall
Nigeria’s economy today stands on the brink. The naira has lost nearly half its value since mid-2023, driving annual inflation above 34 percent, while food inflation hovers at 40 percent, according to the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS). In one of the world’s largest oil producing nations, fuel prices quintupled, increasing more than 514 percent from N175 in May 2023 to N900, transportation costs have skyrocketed with the “agbuero” extortion compounding issues, small businesses are collapsing, and households are cutting meals to survive.
When fuel prices rise, everything else follows, from food to transportation, rent, and the cost of living. The import duty therefore becomes a multiplier of misery, cascading through the economy in ways the government either underestimates or deliberately ignores.
Manufacturers who depend on diesel to power their factories will pass the extra cost to consumers. Transporters will raise fares. Traders will hike prices. Schools, hospitals, and logistics companies will all adjust their rates upward.
Within a few months, the 15 percent duty will translate into another round of inflationary spiral, deepening poverty and eroding the value of wages even further.
According to the National Bureau of Statistics, over 133 million Nigerians already live-in multidimensional poverty. While the World Bank’s 139 million estimate translates to roughly six in 10 Nigerians living below poverty line. This new tax could easily push millions more into deeper deprivation.
Protecting Local Refineries or Creating a Monopoly?
The government justifies this new tariff as a way to “protect local refineries.” But this explanation exposes the deeper structural danger that Nigeria may be walking straight into a private monopoly in the petroleum sector with Dangote Refinery as the ultimate winner.
While protecting local industry is a legitimate policy goal, doing so without ensuring fair competition is economic suicide. The reality today is that Dangote Refinery dominates the refining landscape both in size and political influence.
Most of the smaller modular refineries in the Niger Delta are struggling to start production due to lack of crude supply, high financing costs, and regulatory uncertainty. The government’s import duty, therefore, does not create a level playing field; it simply tilts the market decisively in favour of Dangote.
If importers are taxed heavily while one giant refinery backed by political access and incentives controls the supply chain, the result is a monopoly, not a free market. And when one player dominates fuel production and pricing in a country of over 200 million people, the economy is at his mercy.
Dangote could dictate wholesale prices, influence market supply, and quietly shape government policy, all under the banner of “local protection.” Already, marketers allege that the last round of price increases was coordinated across the board, hinting at a shadow monopoly forming in plain sight.
This is dangerous for any economy, but for Nigeria where corruption and patronage distort every policy, it is catastrophic.
Energy Security Built on Fragile Foundations
The FIRS memo to the President claimed that the new tariff aims to “strengthen local refining capacity and ensure affordable supply.” But local refining remains largely aspirational.
As of today, Nigeria still imports nearly all its petrol, despite having four state owned refineries that are perpetually moribund. The Dangote Refinery, although a technical marvel, is still struggling to achieve full-scale petrol output and relies on imported crude for much of its operations.
The modular refineries, which were supposed to fill the gap, are barely surviving. Without access to crude oil feedstock often monopolised by larger operators, they cannot compete.
So, who exactly is being protected by this policy?
Certainly not the small modular refineries in Edo, Bayelsa, or Rivers. Not the ordinary Nigerian who will now pay N1,000 for a litre of fuel. Not even the struggling logistics sector, already crippled by high energy costs.
The only entity that benefits is a dominant private player who can withstand the short-term shock and then profit massively once competitors are priced out.
Policy Contradictions and Economic Disconnect
The tragedy of this decision lies not only in its cruelty but in its confusion. The same administration that preaches “ease of doing business” and “market freedom” is imposing tariffs that stifle competition and hurt consumers.
When President Tinubu removed fuel subsidy in May 2023, he promised that “subsidy is gone” and that market forces would drive fair pricing. But over a year later, Nigerians have learned that what replaced subsidy is not a free market but it is a managed monopoly, backed by selective protectionism and opaque pricing.
The contradiction is stark. You cannot remove subsidies on one hand and then impose punitive tariffs on the other. You cannot preach deregulation while protecting a single dominant player.
This isn’t market reform; it is economic confusion disguised as policy innovation.
The Human Cost: Everyday Nigerians Paying the Price
For the ordinary Nigerians, the macroeconomics of import tariffs mean little. What matters is survival.
A family man who spends N2,000 daily on transport now faces N3,000. A small business owner running a diesel generator must now budget twice as much for power. Food vendors, farmers, delivery riders, all are trapped in a cycle of rising costs and shrinking incomes.
Each increase in fuel price is another wound to the working class. And when government justifies it with lofty phrases like “energy security” and “local capacity protection,” it insults the intelligence of citizens who know that their suffering funds elite comfort.
The average Nigerian no longer trusts policy announcements because they have learned that every “reform” means more hardship.
Inflationary Tsunami Ahead
Economic experts have already warned that this new import duty could ignite a fresh wave of inflation. Since transportation is a key cost component in nearly every sector, a 15 percent increase in fuel import costs will ripple through the entire economy.
Analysts at SBM Intelligence estimate that transport fares could rise by another 25–30 percent, while food inflation could easily cross 45 percent by early 2026 if the policy is not reversed.
This isn’t mere speculation. We have been here before. After subsidy removal in 2023, inflation jumped from 22 percent to 34 percent within months. The difference now is that citizens have exhausted their coping mechanisms.
When people can no longer eat, they revolt. The Nigerian state risks pushing its citizens to that breaking point.
Killing Local Competition Before It is Born
Ironically, while the government claims to be “protecting local refining,” this policy will likely kill smaller refineries before they gain traction.
Most modular refineries were financed by private capital at high interest rates. They need steady cash flow and competitive margins to survive. But when the government grants one mega-refinery privileged protection and imposes heavy duties on imports, it destroys the business case for smaller players.
No investor will finance modular refineries if the regulatory environment favours one company. And when competition dies, innovation dies with it.
Nigeria could have built a diversified refining ecosystem, with multiple regional players supplying local markets and driving down costs. Instead, it is creating a single industrial empire whose influence will dwarf even that of the Nigerian National Petroleum Company (NNPC).
That is not industrial policy. It is economic feudalism.
A Mirage of Regional Price Comparisons
The government argues that even with the new tariff, Nigeria’s pump prices would remain below regional averages: N964 per litre compared to Senegal’s $1.76, Côte d’Ivoire’s $1.52, and Ghana’s $1.37.
But this comparison is disingenuous. Those countries have stable power grids, working public transportation, and better social safety nets. Nigerians don’t.
In a nation where fuel directly powers homes, businesses, and schools due to epileptic electricity supply, any increase in fuel price hits far harder. Comparing Nigeria to Senegal or Ghana ignores the structural poverty and infrastructure decay that amplify every price shock.
It is like comparing a man who walks barefoot to another who drives a car and both are on the road, but one feels every stone.
Taxing Misery in the Name of Reform
Policies like this expose the moral blindness of governance in Nigeria. They treat citizens as economic statistics, not human beings.
The government sees fuel as a fiscal problem to be taxed, not a lifeline that millions depend on. It assumes that raising revenue justifies raising suffering.
But no reform can succeed if it crushes the very people it is meant to uplift.
Even from a fiscal standpoint, this duty will not deliver the revenue the government expects. Higher pump prices will reduce demand, encourage smuggling, and fuel black-market trading. The result will be less revenue, more inflation, and higher corruption.
Policy Alternatives That Make Sense
If the goal is truly to strengthen local refining and energy security, there are better, smarter paths to take.
- Provide access to crude oil for modular refineries under transparent, fair terms.
- Offer tax incentives for local refiners, not punitive import tariffs that hurt consumers.
- Encourage competition through regulatory equity, not protectionism.
- Invest in energy infrastructure, including pipelines, storage, and distribution to reduce logistics costs.
- Reform the power sector so that industries are not forced to rely on diesel for survival.
Nigeria doesn’t need more taxes; it needs intelligent policies that balance protection with affordability.
The Politics of Pain
Let’s be clear, this 15 percent duty is as political as it is economic. It serves powerful business interests cloaked in nationalist rhetoric.
Tinubu’s government has consistently framed hardship as “sacrifice” for a better future. But when sacrifice becomes perpetual, it ceases to be patriotic, it becomes exploitation.
The political cost of this decision could be severe. Nigerians who tolerated subsidy removal with the promise of reform may not tolerate another shock that pushes them into darkness.
Already, discontent is growing. Labour unions are preparing for protests, civil society groups are calling for reversal, and the opposition is mobilising public anger.
If unchecked, this could become the defining crisis of the Tinubu presidency as a symbol of reform gone wrong.
The Road Not Taken
There was an opportunity to rebuild Nigeria’s energy sector through inclusive, transparent reforms. The government could have used the subsidy savings to fix refineries, support modular operators, and invest in renewables.
Instead, it has chosen the easy route by taxing more, explaining less, and hoping for miracles.
But the laws of economics are unforgiving. You cannot squeeze revenue from an economy that is shrinking. You cannot build energy security on policies that destroy purchasing power. You cannot claim to protect the poor by enriching monopolies.
A Nation at the Crossroads
President Tinubu’s 15 percent fuel import duty is not just a fiscal measure, it is a moral test of governance.
It asks whether the Nigerian state still sees its people as citizens or merely as consumers to be taxed. Whether “Renewed Hope” means renewed hardship. Whether government policy can still reflect empathy, not elitism.
As petrol edges beyond N1,000 per litre and diesel costs strangle businesses, Nigerians are once again left to bear the consequences of decisions they did not make and cannot afford.
History will judge this administration not by its slogans, but by how it handled the suffering of its people.
And if the story of this fuel duty becomes the story of another failed reform of monopolies masquerading as markets, and citizens sacrificed for profit, then “Renewed Hope” will be remembered not as a promise, but as a warning.
Blaise, a journalist and PR professional writes from Lagos, can be reached via: [email protected]
E-Financial
Iran-Israel-US Conflict and CBN’s FX Gains: A Stress Test for Nigeria’s Monetary Stability
Blaise Udunze
At the 304th policy meeting held on Wednesday, the 25th February, the Central Bank of Nigeria’s (CBN) Monetary Policy Committee cut the rate by 50 basis points to 26.5 percent from 27 percent, which has been widely described as a cautious transition from prolonged tightening to calibrated easing.
CBN
The CBN stated that the decision followed 11 consecutive months of disinflation. The economy witnessed headline inflation easing to 15.10 percent in January 2026, and food inflation falling sharply to 8.89 percent. Foreign reserves are climbing to $50.45 billion, their highest level in 13 years. The Purchasing Managers’ Index is holding at an expansionary 55.7 points.
As reported in the paper, no doubt that the macroeconomic narrative appears encouraging. On a closer scrutiny, the sustainability of these gains is now being tested by forces far beyond the apex bank’s policy corridors. This is as a result of the clear, direct ripple effect of the escalating conflict between Iran and Israel, with direct military involvement from the United States, has triggered one of the most significant geopolitical energy shocks in decades. For Nigeria, the timing is delicate. Just as the CBN signals confidence in disinflation and stability, global volatility threatens to complicate and possibly distort its monetary path.
The rate cut, though welcomed by many analysts, must be understood in context. Nigeria remains in an exceptionally high-rate environment. An MPR of 26.5 per cent is still restrictive by any standard. The Cash Reserve Ratio (CRR) remains elevated at 45 per cent for commercial banks, and this effectively sterilises nearly half of deposits, while liquidity ratios are tight, and lending rates to businesses often exceed 30 per cent once risk premiums are included. The adjustment is therefore incremental, not transformational.
The Director/CEO of the Centre for the Promotion of Private Enterprise (CPPE), Dr. Muda Yusuf, has repeatedly noted that Nigeria’s deeper challenge lies in weak monetary transmission. According to him, even when the benchmark rate falls, structural rigidities, high CRR, elevated deposit costs, macroeconomic uncertainty, and crowding-out from government borrowing prevent meaningful relief from reaching manufacturers, SMEs, agriculture, and other productive sectors. Monetary easing, without structural reform, risks becoming cosmetic. The point is that even before structural reforms take effect, the fact is that an external shock will first reshape the landscape.
The Iran-Israel conflict and US involvement have reignited fears in global energy markets. Joint U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iranian targets and retaliatory missile exchanges across the Gulf have unsettled oil traders. Brent crude, already rising in anticipation of escalation, surged toward $70-$75 per barrel and could climb higher if shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, through which nearly 20 per cent of global oil supplies pass, faces disruption. It is still an irony that a major crude exporter is also an importer of refined petroleum products.
Higher crude prices offer a theoretical windfall. For Nigeria’s economy, it is well known that oil remains its largest source of foreign exchange and accounts for roughly 50 per cent of government revenue. The good thing is that rising prices could boost reserves, improve forex liquidity, strengthen the naira, and ease fiscal pressures. In theory, this external cushion could support macroeconomic stability and reinforce the CBN’s easing posture.
However, the upside is constrained by structural weaknesses. Nigeria’s oil production remains below optimal capacity. A significant portion of crude exports is tied to long-term contracts, limiting immediate gains from spot price surges. As SB Morgen observed in its analysis, Nigeria’s “windfall” is volatile and limited by soft production performance.
More critically, Nigeria’s dependence on imported refined products exposes it to imported inflation. Rising global crude prices increase the cost of petrol, diesel, jet fuel and gas. With fuel subsidies removed, these increases are passed directly to consumers and businesses. Depot pump prices have already adjusted upward amid Middle East tensions.
Energy costs are a primary driver of Nigeria’s inflation and this has remained sacrosanct. When fuel prices rise, transportation, logistics, food distribution, power generation, and manufacturing costs will definitely skyrocket, as well as the inflationary impulse spreads quickly through the economy. This will push households to face higher food and transportation costs. Businesses see shrinking margins. Real incomes erode.
Thus, the same oil shock that boosts government revenue may simultaneously reignite inflationary pressure, precisely at a moment when the CBN has begun cautiously easing policy.
This dynamic introduces a difficult policy dilemma, even as this could be for the fragile gains of the MPC. This is to say that if energy-driven inflation resurges, the CBN may be forced to pause or reverse its easing cycle. It is clearly spelled that high inflation typically compels tighter monetary conditions. As Yusuf warned, geopolitical headwinds that elevate inflation often push central banks toward higher interest rates. A renewed tightening would strain credit conditions further, undermining growth prospects.
There is also the risk of money supply expansion. Increased oil revenues, once monetised, can expand liquidity in the domestic system. Historically, surges in oil receipts have been associated with monetary growth, inflationary pressure, and exchange rate volatility. Without sterilisation discipline, a revenue boost could ironically destabilise macro fundamentals.
The exchange rate dimension compounds the complexity. Heightened geopolitical risk, just as it is currently playing out with the Iran-Israel conflict, often triggers global flight to safety. This will eventually lure investors to retreat to U.S. Treasuries and gold. Emerging markets face capital outflows. If it happens that foreign portfolio investors withdraw from Nigeria’s fixed-income market in response to global uncertainty, pressure on the naira could intensify.
Already, the CBN has demonstrated sensitivity to exchange rate dynamics by intervening to prevent excessive naira appreciation. A sharp rate cut in the midst of global volatility could destabilise carry trades and spur dollar demand. What should be known is that the 50-bps reduction reflects not just domestic disinflation, but global risk management such as geopolitical tensions, oil prices, and foreign investor sentiment.
Beyond macroeconomics, geopolitical implications carry security concerns. Analysts warn that a widening Middle East conflict could embolden extremist narratives across the Sahel and it directly has security consequences for Nigeria and the broader region. Groups such as Boko Haram and ISWAP may exploit anti-Western framing to recruit and mobilise more followers in the Sahel region, thereby giving the extremist groups new propaganda opportunities. The pebble fear is that a diversion of Western security resources away from West Africa could create regional vacuums. What the Nigerian economy will begin to experience is that security instability will disrupt agricultural output, logistics corridors, and investor confidence, feeding back into inflation and slow economic growth and as ripple effects, the economy becomes weaker.
Nigeria’s diplomatic balancing act adds another layer of fragility because it is walking on a tactful tightrope. The country is trying not to upset anyone, but maintains cautious neutrality, urging restraint while preserving ties with Western allies and Middle Eastern partners. Yet rising tensions globally between major powers, including Russia and China, complicate the geopolitical chessboard. Invariably, this will have a direct impact as trade flows, remittances, and investment patterns may change unexpectedly, affecting Nigeria’s economy.
With the current conflict in the Middle East, the prospects for economic growth also face renewed strain or are under increased pressure. The stock markets in developed countries have been fluctuating a lot because people are worried that there will be problems with the energy supply. If the whole world does not grow fast, then people will use less oil over time. This means that the good things that happen to Nigeria because of oil prices will probably not last, and any extra money Nigeria gets from oil prices now will be lost. Nigeria will not get to keep the money from high oil prices for a long time. The oil prices will affect Nigeria. Then the effect will go away. One clear thing is that since Nigeria relies heavily on oil exports, this commodity dependence exposes the country to significant risk.
Meanwhile, Nigeria’s domestic fundamentals remain structurally challenged. The recapitalisation of banks, with 20 of 33 institutions meeting new capital thresholds, strengthens resilience, but does not guarantee credit expansion into productive sectors. Banks continue to prefer risk-free government securities over private lending in uncertain environments.
Fiscal discipline remains essential. Elevated debt service obligations absorb substantial revenue. Election-related spending poses upside inflation risks. This understanding must be adhered to, that without credible deficit reduction and revenue diversification, monetary easing may be undermined by fiscal expansion.
At the moment, given the current global and domestic uncertainties, the 50 percent interest cut rate appears less like a pivot toward growth and more like a signal of cautious optimism under conditional stability. The policy decision is based on several key expectations with the assumptions that disinflation will persist, exchange rate stability will hold, and global conditions will not deteriorate dramatically.
But the Iran-Israel-U.S. conflict introduces uncertainty into all three assumptions, which is wrongly perceived as behind the rate cut that inflation will keep coming down, that the exchange rate will stay stable, and global conditions won’t worsen, are all undermined by the unfolding conflict.
If the global oil prices rise sharply and fuel becomes more expensive locally, overall prices in the economy could increase again, which means inflation could accelerate. Another dangerous trend is that if foreign investors pull capital out of Nigeria, exchange rate stability could weaken, seeing the naira coming under pressure. If global growth slows, export earnings could decline. Each of these scenarios would constrain the CBN’s flexibility.
This is not to dismiss potential upsides. Higher oil prices, if production improves, could bolster reserves and moderate fiscal deficits. Forex liquidity could strengthen the naira. Investment in upstream oil and gas could gain momentum. Historically, crude price increases have correlated with improved GDP performance and stock market optimism in Nigeria.
Yet history also warns of volatility. A good example is during the 2022 Ukraine conflict, oil prices spiked above $100 per barrel, which created a potential revenue windfall oil exporting countries, but Nigeria struggled to translate that temporary advantage into sustained economic improvement. Inflation persisted. In the case of Nigeria, the deep-rooted systemic or structural weaknesses and inefficiency diluted the benefits that should have been gained.
The lesson is clear because temporary external windfalls or short-term luck cannot substitute for structural and deep internal economic reforms.
The point is that sustainable development demands diversification beyond oil, to strengthening multiple parts of its economy at the same time, such as improved refining capacity, infrastructure investment, agricultural security, logistics efficiency, and fiscal consolidation. Monetary policy, as the action taken by the CBN at the MPC meeting by adjusting interest rates or attempting to control money supply, can anchor expectations and moderate volatility, but it cannot build productive capacity; it will only help to reduce short-term economic swings.
The CBN’s decision to cut the interest rate appears cautious. It is not a bold shift but rather a small adjustment. This shows that the bank is being careful and optimistic about the economy. It also knows that there are still problems. The trouble in the Middle East, like the fighting that affects the oil supply, reminds the people in charge that Nigeria’s economy is closely tied to what happens with energy around the world. This includes things like inflation, the value of money, and how fast the economy grows.
Until structural reforms reduce dependence on volatile oil cycles and imported fuel, Nigeria’s monetary policy will remain reactive to external crises. To really make the economy strong and stable, Nigeria needs to make some changes. It requires resilience against geopolitical storms.
The MPC has taken a step. Whether it marks a turning point depends less on 50 basis points and more on how Nigeria navigates a world increasingly defined by conflict-driven volatility.
Blaise, a journalist and PR professional, writes from Lagos and can be reached via: [email protected]
House of Representatives has moved to establish a regulatory commission to regulate fintech in the country.
The regulatory commission is to be established through a bill sponsored by Hon. Fuad Kayode Laguda, titled, “A Bill For An Act To Provide For The Establishment Of Nigerian Fintech Regulatory Commission In Nigeria And For Related Matters, 2025”.
The bill has been passed and referred to the House Committees on Digital and Electronic Banking; Banking Regulations; Science and Technology; Communications; and Capital Market and Institutions.
According to its ‘Explanatory Memorandum’, the bill seeks to establish a legal framework for the Nigerian fintech industry.
It stated, “The Commission, when established, will oversee the licensing, regulation, and supervision of fintech services in Nigeria.”
It added that the Act promotes the implementation of the national fintech policy, establishes regulatory authority, and seeks to protect consumer rights.
The proposed bill further stated that the Commission “is mandated to facilitate investments, ensure fair competition, and develop performance standards for fintech services.”
It further added, “The Commission will be structured into departments with regional offices in all geopolitical zones of Nigeria.
“A Governing Board consisting of 14 members, including a Chairman and commissioners from each geopolitical zone, will manage the Commission.”
On the qualifications for members of the Commission’s governing board, it stated that they must have expertise in finance, public administration, or relevant fields.
It added, “Members must be Nigerian citizens and are barred from holding conflicting interests during their tenure.”
The bill further proposed that the Commission be granted financial authority to establish a fund from various sources, including appropriations by the National Assembly and fees from licensing.
Annual financial reports will also be submitted to the National Assembly for approval.
The Minister of Finance holds responsibility for formulating and monitoring general policies for the fintech sector, but he must consult with the Commission for public input before policy changes.
The National Fintech Management Council is to assist the Minister in international fintech negotiations and data collection.
It further added that, “The Council comprises representatives from various governmental agencies and is tasked with advising on fintech development.
“The Act prohibits operating fintech services without a proper license and outlines penalties for violations.
“The Commission will regulate licensing processes, specifying conditions that promote transparency and fairness.
“The Commission has the authority to resolve disputes within the fintech sector effectively.
“It is empowered to conduct inquiries, publish findings, and maintain registers of licences and agreements related to fintech operations.”
It further informed that the “Act encompasses provisions aimed at protecting consumer interests and ensuring quality of service in fintech transactions.
“It mandates the establishment of consumer codes and addresses complaint resolution processes in alignment with regulatory objectives.”
Mutual Benefits Assurance Plc has allayed concerns arising from recent media reports referencing a sanction previously imposed by the Nigerian Exchange Limited (NGX) over delays in the filing of certain audited and unaudited financial statements.
The leading insurance company clarified that the matter relates to prior reporting periods and was fully resolved in accordance with NGX regulatory procedures at the time.
It confirmed that all outstanding filings have since been regularised and that the company is fully compliant with NGX listing rules and reporting obligations.
According to the company, following the occurrence of the referenced delays, it undertook a comprehensive review of its governance, reporting and compliance frameworks, leading to the implementation of strengthened internal controls and oversight structures.
Among the measures introduced are enhanced financial reporting architecture, including stricter internal timelines, improved cross-functional coordination and strengthened review protocols to ensure timely and accurate disclosures.
Mutual Benefits also reinforced Board oversight through its Audit and Risk Committees, establishing clearer accountability frameworks and structured periodic compliance reviews.
In addition, upgraded compliance monitoring systems were deployed across finance and company secretariat functions to optimise regulatory tracking and reporting processes.
The Management of Mutual Benefits Assurance Plc further noted that investments have been made in technology, human capital and governance processes to support sustained operational transparency and regulatory adherence.
These reforms, the company stated, have significantly improved reporting efficiency and compliance discipline across the organisation, positioning it for continued stability and long-term growth.
Reaffirming its commitment to transparency and stakeholder confidence, Mutual Benefits Assurance Plc stated that it remains dedicated to the highest standards of corporate governance, accountability and regulatory compliance.
The company added that it continues to operate from a position of financial and operational stability, focused on delivering sustainable value to shareholders, policyholders, business partners and the investing public.
The company also expressed appreciation to stakeholders for their continued confidence, while reiterating its unwavering commitment to sound corporate governance practices and full compliance with all regulatory requirements.
Leo Stan Ekeh at 70; thanks Tinubu, Obasanjo, Nigerians, Global Tech Community
Iran-Israel-US Conflict and CBN’s FX Gains: A Stress Test for Nigeria’s Monetary Stability
JAMB Uncovers AI-Driven Fraud Targeting UTME Candidates, Warns Parents
SERAP Asks FCCPC to Investigate Google, Meta, Others over Alleged Rights Abuses
Reps Mull Commission to Regulate Fintech Operations
Accidental Billionaire Opts for Jail Instead of Returning Money Credited Him by Mistake
New Horizons Nigeria Breaks Ground: First to Fuse Mandarin into ICT Curriculum
Kaspersky Brings more Transparency to Threat Detection with New Hunt Hub
NDPC Commits to Balancing Data Privacy, Protection Information
OADC Lagos Reinforces Commitment to Local Data Hosting and Digital Transformation @ NDPC’s National Privacy Week Summit
General News3 days agoMore 14m Farmers to Benefit from AfDB-backed Initiative
Telecom3 days agoMTN Nigeria Posts Record N1.70 Trillion Pre‑Tax Profit, Declares N20 Dividend for 2025
Telecom3 days agoDimension Data Nigeria Secures ₦20Billion Funding to Strengthen Digital Infrastructure
News3 days agoGalaxy Backbone Confirms Over 150,000 Active Official Government Email Accounts, Clarifies Status of GOVMAIL
Telecom3 days agoAlerzo Liquidates Delivery Fleet as N4.38bn Moniepoint Loan Row Deepens
General News3 days agoNewmark Webinar Explores How AI Could Transform Healthcare in Africa
E-Financial21 hours agoIran-Israel-US Conflict and CBN’s FX Gains: A Stress Test for Nigeria’s Monetary Stability
General News21 hours agoSERAP Asks FCCPC to Investigate Google, Meta, Others over Alleged Rights Abuses