Business
President Tinubu’s New 15% Imported Petrol and Diesel Tariff: A Bold Step or a Monopoly Trap?
President Tinubu’s New 15% Imported Petrol and Diesel Tariff: A Bold Step or a Monopoly Trap?
By George Omagbemi Sylvester | Published by saharaweeklyng.com
“A policy pitched as industrial protection and forex salvation; but does it protect Nigerians or consolidate a refinery monopoly?”
President Bola Tinubu’s recent approval of a 15 per cent ad-valorem import duty on refined petroleum products – petrol (PMS) and diesel (AGO) – was sold to Nigerians as tough, necessary medicine, protect domestic refining, preserve foreign exchange and reward a multi-billion-dollar private investment that finally began producing at scale. The logic is tidy in boardroom slide decks; raise the cost of cheap imports, make locally refined product price-competitive, nurture domestic industry and reduce the chronic hemorrhage of foreign exchange on refined fuels. Though policy is about consequences, not slogans. What the government calls protection risks becoming patronage; what it calls industrial policy could become the legal scaffolding for a monopoly.
The 15% duty was first approved and announced late October 2025 as part of a package of fiscal measures intended to shore up non-oil revenues and to secure the gains of the country’s nascent private refining capacity. The move came after the Dangote Petroleum Refinery (a $20 billion megaproject that began producing refined fuels in 2024) reached commercial throughput, prompting the government to incentivise local supply over imports. Proponents argue that the tariff would close the gap between imported product and locally refined output, prevent undercutting by underpriced foreign loads and protect what the government now frames as strategic industrial security.
On paper the argument has merit. Nigeria, paradoxically one of the world’s major crude oil producers, has for decades exported crude and imported refined products, a distortion that the Dangote refinery promised to end. Shielding nascent domestic refining from predatory pricing can be a legitimate industrial policy. Economies of scale take time; infant industries sometimes need temporary protection to survive; and the nation stands to gain from jobs, downstream activity and a retained share of the petroleum value chain. These are not fanciful claims, they are the underpinnings of industrial strategy everywhere.
The devil is in the detail and the distribution of beneficiaries. From the moment the policy was mooted, alarm bells rang among independent marketers, traders and many civil society groups. Their fear is simple and stark, a 15% import tariff applied in a market where one private refinery already produces a volume close to national demand risks removing competitors from the market, leaving one dominant supplier to set prices, ration supply and extract rents. In short: protection can calcify into monopoly. The concerns were not idle: within weeks of the tariff’s announcement traders warned that importers (many of whom supply the country’s internal distribution network and buffer the system in times of shortages) could be pushed out of the market, reducing supply diversity and increasing vulnerability to shortages and price shocks.
The Dangote Group and others publicly welcomed the policy, arguing it would stabilise supply and prevent substandard imports. Dangote’s spokesperson argued the tariff would not push up pump prices but would protect the industry and the economy. Yet a policy that appears to hand advantage to one private operator (even if unintentionally) invites suspicion. Critics pointed out that the refinery’s special economic arrangements (including Free Trade or EPZ-style privileges in some reporting) could leave independent importers bearing the full cost of the new duty while the privileged refinery remains insulated; a recipe for market capture.
And then the backlash swelled. Fuel marketers, unions, manufacturing bodies and some economists warned of immediate inflationary pass-through, higher transport costs and pressure on households already pushed to the brink by earlier economic reforms. Economist Gbolahan Olojede warned the duty could “reignite inflationary pressures” and cautioned against opaque implementation. Opinion pieces and industry briefs argued that a 15 per cent levy could add close to ₦95–₦100 per litre before storage, transport and margins, a reality with direct consequences for food prices, commuting costs and the competitiveness of Nigerian industry. These are not academic concerns in a country where a marginal uptick in fuel cost ripples quickly through the economy.
Faced with rising public unease and warnings from the trade and logistics end of the value chain (and with the peak holiday demand season approaching) the government stepped back. In mid-November 2025 the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA) announced a halt/suspension of the planned tariff implementation, signalling a reversal of the deadline and committing to continued monitoring of supply to prevent disruption. That pause exposed the core political arithmetic, a policy that hits the pump in the short term is politically toxic, even if defensible in the abstract. The suspension also exposed the weak consultative process around the measure; a rushed political fiat had to be walked back after stakeholders made their costs plain.
So where does that leave us? First, industrial protection without clear, time-bound guardrails is dangerous. Tariffs and duties can be used for legitimate industrial nurturing – but only when accompanied by competition safeguards, transparent exemptions, clearly published beneficiary lists, and sunset clauses. Second, the policy exposes Nigeria’s policy-making pathologies: an over-reliance on headline fiscal fixes announced without rigorous stakeholder modelling and without mandated impact assessments. Third, the episode highlights a deeper governance question: when a single private actor commands such strategic weight in a sector, policy needs to be exquisitely careful not to create the impression (or the reality) of state policy tailored to a single firm’s advantage.
There is a third dimension: currency and balance-of-payments logic. Reducing fuel imports would save foreign exchange and strengthen the naira (a true national boon) but only if domestic refineries can reliably meet demand, maintain quality standards and supply at competitive prices. Short-run protection that drives up the pump price without commensurate increase in domestic output simply trades forex savings for inflation pain and social discontent. In that light, the responsible path would have been a staged approach: phased tariffs tied to verified increases in domestic refining output, mandatory wholesale price monitoring, strong anti-hoarding enforcement and legislative guardrails against anti-competitive behaviour.
If we are to be patriotic (if we genuinely want Dangote and any other domestic refiner to succeed) then success must be broad, lawful and visibly pro-competitive. Policy should reward production, not penalise competition. The state must ensure that any tariff is matched by clear rules: fixed windows for imports for small marketers, credit facilities to help domestic distribution adapt and legal anti-monopoly protections enforced by an empowered regulator. Without such mechanisms, the 15% duty risks becoming a short cut to concentrated market power and, eventually, to higher prices for ordinary Nigerians.
President Tinubu’s impulse to protect domestic refining is understandable and defensible in principle. But good intent does not substitute for prudent design. The recent suspension was a salutary reminder: economic management in Nigeria cannot be a monthly toggle between headline reform and crisis control. If this tariff is ever reintroduced, it must be transparent, time-bound, conditional on measurable domestic output increases, and paired with competition safeguards and social mitigation measures for low-income households.
In the end, Nigerians will judge policy by what they pay at the pump and whether they can feed their families. A tariff that secures refining jobs and strengthens the naira while keeping pumps stable would be a courageous, strategic win. A tariff that quietly abets market concentration and hands an overwhelming commercial advantage to a single refinery will be remembered as a policy that traded public interest for private gain. The difference between a bold step and a monopoly trap is not rhetorical (it is procedural, technical and enforceable. It is also, crucially, reversible) if we have the political will to put transparent guardrails in place before it is too late.
Business
Inside the $510,000 Scandal: EFCC Drags Former Access Bank Staff to Court Over Alleged Forgery, Diversion
Inside the $510,000 Scandal: EFCC Drags Former Access Bank Staff to Court Over Alleged Forgery, Diversion
A former senior operations executive at Access Bank Plc, Obinna Nwaobi, has been arraigned by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) after the bank flagged suspicious transactions involving the alleged diversion of a customer’s $510,000.
Bank
Fidelity Bank Grows Gross Earnings by 46% to ₦748.7 billion for H1 2025
*Fidelity Bank Grows Gross Earnings by 46% to ₦748.7 billion for H1 2025*
Fidelity Bank Plc has announced its audited financial results for the half-year ended 30 June 2025, demonstrating resilience and sustained growth across key performance indicators.
Highlights of the financial results which was uploaded on the Nigerian Exchange (NGX) portal on Thursday, 13 November 2025 shows that the bank delivered robust results across key financial metrics including Gross Earnings, which stood at ₦748.7 billion, up from ₦512.9 billion in H1 2024; Interest Income, which rose to ₦557.9 billion, compared to ₦357.9 billion in H1 2024; and Total Deposits, which grew to ₦7.20 trillion, from ₦6.94 trillion in H1 2024.
Similarly, the bank’s Low-Cost Deposits increased to ₦4.85 trillion, compared to ₦4.83 trillion in H1 2024.
Fidelity Bank continued to expand its digital banking footprint, enhance customer experience, and support key sectors of the economy. The bank’s loan book grew, with Net Loans and Advances expanding to ₦1.69 trillion, up from ₦1.59 trillion in H1 2024, reflecting increased support for businesses and individuals. Asset quality remained stable, with non-performing loans well within acceptable limits.
The bank’s capital raising initiatives have further strengthened its financial position, ensuring readiness to meet new regulatory requirements and pursue growth opportunities. Fidelity Bank’s strong liquidity profile and robust governance framework provide a solid foundation for continued success.
Ranked among the best banks in Nigeria, Fidelity Bank Plc is a full-fledged Commercial Deposit Money Bank serving over 9.1 million customers through digital banking channels, its 255 business offices in Nigeria and United Kingdom subsidiary, FidBank UK Limited.
The Bank is a recipient of multiple local and international Awards, including the 2024 Excellence in Digital Transformation & MSME Banking Award by BusinessDay Banks and Financial Institutions (BAFI) Awards; the 2024 Most Innovative Mobile Banking Application award for its Fidelity Mobile App by Global Business Outlook, and the 2024 Most Innovative Investment Banking Service Provider award by Global Brands Magazine. Additionally, the Bank was recognized as the Best Bank for SMEs in Nigeria by the Euromoney Awards for Excellence and as the Export Financing Bank of the Year by the BusinessDay Banks and Financial Institutions (BAFI) Awards.
Business
FG’s Suspension of 15% Fuel Import Duty: A Holistic Step Toward Economic Relief and Market Stability
FG’s Suspension of 15% Fuel Import Duty: A Holistic Step Toward Economic Relief and Market Stability
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]
-
Politics5 months agoNigeria Is Not His Estate: Wike’s 2,000‑Hectare Scandal Must Shake Us Awake
-
society6 months agoOGUN INVESTS OVER ₦2.25 BILLION TO BOOST AQUACULTURE
-
celebrity radar - gossips6 months agoFrom ₦200 to ₦2 Million: Davido’s Barber Reveals Jaw-Dropping Haircut Fee
-
society5 months agoJUSTICE DENIED: HOW JESAM MICHAEL’S KINDNESS WAS TURNED AGAINST HIM




