Business
How Inside Jobs and Policy Shocks Trigger Nigeria’s Rising Loan Crisis
How Inside Jobs and Policy Shocks Trigger Nigeria’s Rising Loan Crisis
BY BLAISE UDUNZE
The latest in the Nigerian banking sector, as banks grapple with the recapitalization compliance deadline, is confronted with a familiar yet unsettling problem that stems from rising loan defaults amid expanding credit. Data from the Central Bank of Nigeria’s (CBN’s) latest macroeconomic outlook of 2025 showed that the banking industry’s Non-Performing Loans ratio climbed to an estimated 7 percent, pushing the sector above the prudential ceiling of 5 percent.
This deterioration has occurred even as banks report improved credit availability and strong loan demand across households and corporates. At first glance of the development, the narrative seems to defy logic in a real sense. However, below this lies a deeper story of macroeconomic strain, policy-induced shocks, and, most worryingly, persistent corporate governance abuses that continue to erode asset quality from within.
To be clear, Nigeria’s current wave of loan defaults cannot be blamed on reckless borrowers alone. The operating environment has become unusually hostile. Inflation, as reported by the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS), recently suggests that headline inflation is cooling and growth indicators show tentative improvement; regrettably, more Nigerians are slipping below the poverty line, eroding household purchasing power and raising operating costs for businesses.
Especially in the small and medium-sized enterprises, though, the economic growth appears positive, but has been uneven and insufficient to offset cost pressures in this space. This has heralded weak consumer demand that has squeezed revenues across retail, manufacturing and services, causing shrinking cash flows and also loan obligations remain fixed or, in many cases, rise. In such conditions, repayment stress is inevitable.
Tight monetary policy has compounded the problem. The CBN’s aggressive rate hikes, aimed at restoring price and exchange-rate stability, have significantly raised lending rates. Variable-rate loans have become more expensive mid-tenure, and businesses that borrowed under lower-rate assumptions now face repayment shocks. Even otherwise viable firms have found themselves pushed into distress as interest expenses consume a growing share of income. Going by the official survey for the last quarter of 2025, it shows that financial pressure on borrowers has intensified as more borrowers are failing to repay loans across all major categories for both secured loans, unsecured loans and corporate loans.
Exchange-rate volatility has delivered another blow. The naira’s depreciation and FX reforms have sharply increased the burden on borrowers with dollar-denominated loans but naira income. Import-dependent businesses have seen costs surge, while FX scarcity continues to disrupt production and trade cycles. For many firms, the problem is not poor management but currency mismatch. Loans that were sustainable under a more stable exchange regime have become unserviceable almost overnight.
Layered onto these macro pressures is Nigeria’s weak business environment, which has further worsened the situation, alongside chronic power shortages forcing firms to rely on costly alternatives, logistics challenges and insecurity disrupting supply chains, and regulatory uncertainty complicates planning. More on the burner that has continued to heighten the challenges is the multiple taxation and compliance burdens, further compressing margins. In survival mode, businesses naturally prioritise payrolls, energy, and raw materials over debt service. Defaults, in this context, are often a symptom rather than the disease.
Yet while these systemic pressures explain much of the stress, they do not tell the whole story. A critical and often underemphasised driver of rising loan defaults lies within the banks themselves, most especially corporate governance abuse, which emanates particularly from insider-related lending. This is the uncomfortable truth that Nigeria’s banking sector has struggled to confront decisively.
Corporate governance, at its core, is about discipline, accountability, and oversight. In the banking context, it determines how credit decisions are made, how risks are assessed, and how early warning signs are addressed. Where governance is weak, loan quality inevitably suffers. Nigeria’s history offers painful lessons, especially the banking failures of the 1990s to the post-2009 crisis clean-up, insider lending and boardroom abuses have repeatedly emerged as central culprits.
Recent evidence suggests that the problem has not disappeared. Industry estimates indicate that a significant portion of bad loans remains linked to insider and related-party exposures. Former NDIC officials have disclosed that, historically, directors and insiders accounted for as much as 40 per cent of bad loans in deposit money banks, with a handful of institutions holding the majority of insider-related NPLs. It would be said that governance frameworks have improved since then, but enforcement gaps still persist.
Insider abuse manifests in several ways. Loans are extended to directors, executives, or connected parties with inadequate due diligence. Credit decisions are influenced by relationships rather than repayment capacity, and this has been one of the critical problems as collateral is overvalued, covenants are weak, and stress testing is often superficial. When early signs of distress emerge, enforcement is delayed, restructuring is repeated without fundamental improvement, and recoveries are treated with undue caution to avoid internal embarrassment or exposure.
The result is predictable. These loans default faster and are harder to recover. Worse still, they distort bank balance sheets by crowding out credit to productive sectors. When insiders default, the signal to the wider market is corrosive. Here, credit discipline is optional, and accountability is selective, and it further fuels moral hazard, encouraging strategic defaults even among borrowers who could otherwise repay.
Governance failures also weaken loan recovery processes. Poorly empowered risk and audit committees miss warning signs or fail to act decisively because the system has been built to fail. Legal remedies are pursued slowly, if at all. In an environment where judicial delays already undermine contract enforcement, such reluctance turns manageable problem loans into fully impaired assets. Over time, NPLs accumulate not because recovery is impossible, but because it is poorly pursued.
Compounding these internal weaknesses are government policy shifts and fiscal stress, which have become major external shock absorbers for bank balance sheets. Policy inconsistency has made cash flow planning increasingly difficult for borrowers. For instance, the sudden tax changes or aggressive enforcement drives will definitely alter cost structures overnight. Delays in government payments to contractors starve businesses of liquidity, and this will surely push otherwise solvent firms into default. In theory, although removing fuel subsidies, while economically justified, have often occurred without adequate transition buffers, transmitting immediate cost shocks across energy, transport, and consumer goods sectors.
The banking sector, heavily exposed to government-linked projects and regulated industries, absorbs these shocks directly. Loans tied to this sector showed that the banks are hugely exposed to oil and gas, power, and infrastructure; they are particularly vulnerable when fiscal pressures delay receivables or alter contract economics. For instance, a total of 9 banks’ exposure to the Oil & gas sector increased to N15. 6 trillion in 2024, representing about 94.4per cent increase from N10. 17 trillion reported in 2023 financial year. It is therefore no coincidence that NPL concentrations remain high in these sectors. In effect, fiscal stress is being intermediated through bank balance sheets.
When the CBN ended the special leniency measures known as forbearance in 2025, the real extent of loan stress in the banking industry became much clearer. For a longer time, pandemic-era reliefs allowed banks to renegotiate stressed loans without immediately classifying them as non-performing. While this helped preserve surface stability, it also masked underlying vulnerabilities. With the end of forbearance, many restructured facilities have crystallised as bad loans, pushing the industry NPL ratio above the prudential ceiling. This does not mean risk suddenly increased; it means it is now being recognised.
To the CBN’s credit, transparency has improved as the industry witnessed stricter classification rules and reduced forbearance have forced banks to confront economic truth rather than regulatory convenience. And, despite the challenges, the financial system appears to be generally sound because banks have enough cash to meet obligations and sufficient capital buffers that still exceed regulatory floors, while these buffers are under pressure. Though the ongoing recapitalisation efforts are expected to provide additional buffers.
However, stability should not be confused with health. Rising NPLs, even in a liquid system, carry real consequences. Banks must set aside provisions, eroding profitability and capital. Credit supply tightens as lenders grow cautious, starving the real economy of funding. One known fact is that the moment governance and transparency concerns grow, investors, particularly foreign ones, become less willing to commit capital and this loss of confidence eventually slows down overall economic growth.
The policy response, therefore, must go beyond macroeconomic management. While stabilising inflation and the exchange rate is essential, it is not sufficient. Governance reform within banks must be treated as a systemic priority, not a compliance exercise. Insider lending rules must be enforced rigorously, with real consequences for violations. Boards must be strengthened, not merely in composition but in independence and courage. Risk and audit committees must be empowered to challenge management and act early.
Equally important is addressing the fiscal-banking nexus. The government must recognise that policy volatility and payment delays are not costless. They translate directly into higher credit risk and weaker financial intermediation. A more predictable policy environment, timely settlement of obligations, and credible transition frameworks for major reforms would significantly reduce default risk without a single naira of direct intervention.
The Global Standing Instruction framework, which the CBN continues to promote, can help improve retail and MSME recoveries. But frameworks cannot substitute for culture. Credit discipline begins at the top. When banks lend to themselves without consequence, the entire system pays the price.
Nigeria’s rising loan defaults are not merely an economic statistic; they are a governance signal. They reflect a system under stress, yes, but also one still wrestling with old habits. If recapitalisation is to be meaningful, it must be accompanied by recapitalisation of trust, through transparency, accountability, and consistent policy. Otherwise, the cycle will repeat the same strong balance sheets on paper, weak loans underneath, and another reckoning deferred, but not avoided.
Blaise, a journalist and PR professional, writes from Lagos and can be reached via: [email protected]
Riceocracy: When Tinubu and the APC Government Substitutes Governance with Handouts
By George Omagbemi Sylvester
“Tinubu’s administration faces mounting criticism as rice palliatives replace real solutions to Nigeria’s deepening crisis.”
ABUJA, Nigeria — March 17, 2026
A growing wave of public frustration is sweeping across Nigeria as citizens decry what has now been dubbed “Riceocracy” a governance pattern where the government of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) respond to systemic failures with the distribution of rice rather than meaningful reforms.
Across the country, from major cities like Lagos and Abuja to underserved rural communities, Nigerians are voicing anger over persistent issues: no stable electricity, deteriorating road networks, unaffordable fuel and cooking gas, and a struggling education system. Yet, in response to these structural problems, the government’s most visible intervention has been the distribution of food palliatives; particularly rice.
The central figures in this unfolding crisis are President Tinubu and the APC-led federal and state governments, who have overseen the rollout of these relief measures. On the other side are millions of Nigerians battling rising inflation, joblessness, and declining living standards.
The trend gained momentum following the removal of fuel subsidies in May 2023, a policy decision by the Tinubu administration that triggered a surge in transportation and commodity prices. By 2024 and into 2025, the government intensified the distribution of rice and other palliatives as a stopgap measure to quell public discontent. Now, in 2026, the approach has become a defining feature of the administration’s response to economic hardship.
The “Riceocracy” phenomenon is nationwide. Reports from states such as Kano, Rivers, and Borno show large crowds gathering for rice distribution exercises, even as basic infrastructure continues to decay. Urban centers are not exempt; in cities like Lagos, residents still grapple with erratic power supply and high living costs despite periodic palliative programs.
Analysts point to political convenience and immediate optics. Distributing rice is quick, visible, and politically advantageous, especially in a climate of widespread hardship. However, critics argue that it reflects a deeper governance failure; an inability or unwillingness to implement long-term solutions.
Nobel laureate Wole Soyinka has long warned against superficial governance, describing such approaches as “a betrayal of democratic responsibility.” In the same vein, global economist Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala has stressed that “palliatives may provide temporary relief, but they cannot replace sound economic management and structural reform.”
Political economist Pat Utomi offers a sharper critique: “A state that reduces its responsibility to food sharing risks institutionalizing poverty rather than eliminating it.” His statement captures the growing concern that Nigeria’s leadership is addressing symptoms rather than causes.
The implications are severe. Nigeria’s power sector remains unreliable, forcing businesses to depend on costly alternatives. Road infrastructure continues to hinder economic activity, while the education sector suffers from underfunding and frequent disruptions. Despite these challenges, rice distribution has become the most consistent government response.
Critics further argue that this strategy fosters dependency and weakens civic engagement. Instead of demanding accountability, citizens may feel compelled to accept handouts as substitutes for rights and services. Allegations of mismanagement and politicization of palliative distribution also persist, raising questions about transparency and fairness.
The term “Riceocracy” may sound satirical, but it reflects a sobering reality. It highlights a governance model where survival replaces development, and where public policy is reduced to emergency relief rather than strategic planning.
As Nigeria marks this moment on March 17, 2026, the message from scholars, civil society, and frustrated citizens is unmistakable: rice cannot fix a broken system. Only deliberate investments in infrastructure, education, energy, and economic productivity can restore confidence and chart a sustainable path forward.
Until then, the image of Nigerians queuing for bags of rice will remain a stark symbol of a nation still searching for leadership that goes beyond palliatives to deliver real progress.
ZENITH BANK OPENS MANCHESTER BRANCH TO SUPPORT CROSS-BORDER TRADE AND INVESTMENT
Zenith Bank Plc has announced the opening of a new branch in Manchester, United Kingdom, marking another significant milestone in the bank’s international growth and its commitment to strengthening financial connections between Africa and global markets.
The official opening ceremony, scheduled to hold on Tuesday, March 17, 2026, is expected to attract government officials from Nigeria and the United Kingdom, regulators, investors, customers, and business leaders from both countries, underscoring the growing economic ties and investment opportunities between the two markets.
The new Manchester branch will complement Zenith Bank’s existing operations in the United Kingdom and serve as a strategic hub for supporting businesses engaged in international trade and investment. Through the branch, the bank will provide corporate banking, trade finance, treasury and related financial services to clients operating across the United Kingdom, Europe and Africa.Speaking ahead of the launch, the Group Managing Director/Chief Executive Officer of Zenith Bank Plc, Dame Dr. Adaora Umeoji, OON, said: “The opening of our Manchester branch represents another important step in Zenith Bank’s growth as a leading African financial institution connecting businesses and markets across continents. Manchester is one of the United Kingdom’s most dynamic commercial centres, and our presence here will further strengthen financial connections between businesses in the UK and opportunities across Africa’s rapidly expanding markets.
”Founded in 1990 by its Founder and Chairman, Jim Ovia, CFR, Zenith Bank has grown into one of Africa’s most respected banking institutions, boasting a robust capital base and a remarkable history of year-on-year profitability. Built on a strong foundation of people, technology and service, the Bank has consistently delivered innovative financial solutions while maintaining a disciplined approach to growth and risk management. The impressive performance of the Bank has consistently earned it excellent ratings, recognition and endorsement from local and international agencies and institutions.Headquartered in Lagos, Nigeria, Zenith Bank operates over 500 branches and business offices across the 36 States of the Federation and the Federal Capital Territory (FCT). The Bank currently operates subsidiaries in several African countries including Ghana, Sierra Leone, Gambia, and Cote d’Ivoire, while maintaining a presence in major international financial centres including the United Kingdom, France, UAE and China.
In recent years, Zenith Bank has continued to expand its international network as part of its strategy to support global trade and investment flows involving Africa.Manchester, widely regarded as one of the United Kingdom’s most vibrant economic centres, hosts a diverse base of businesses across sectors such as manufacturing, engineering, logistics, technology and consumer goods. The city’s strong commercial ecosystem and international outlook align closely with Zenith Bank’s expertise in corporate banking, structured finance and trade finance.The Manchester branch will work closely with the Bank’s London operations and its broader international network to support clients seeking to expand across markets and unlock new opportunities in both the United Kingdom and Africa.
With the opening of the Manchester branch, Zenith Bank continues to advance its vision of building a truly global African banking institution that connects businesses, facilitates trade and investment, and creates stronger economic bridges between Africa and the world.
Business
New Petrol Import Permits May Reverse Nigeria’s Push for Domestic Refining and Increase Pressure on Foreign Reserve” — Energy Policy Group Tells President Tinubu
*“New Petrol Import Permits May Reverse Nigeria’s Push for Domestic Refining and Increase Pressure on Foreign Reserve” — Energy Policy Group Tells President Tinubu*
An energy policy group has advised President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to reconsider the wider economic consequences of newly issued permits allowing marketers to import petrol into the country, warning that the move could undermine Nigeria’s efforts to strengthen domestic refining and stabilise the economy.
In a statement released on Sunday in Abuja, the Energy Transparency and Market Justice Initiative (ETMJI) said the approvals granted by the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA) could produce unintended consequences if not carefully managed.
The group’s president, Dr. Salako Kareem, said Nigeria was at a delicate moment in its energy transition and that policy choices made now would determine whether the country finally escapes its decades-long dependence on imported refined petroleum products.
Kareem said while the regulator’s responsibility to guarantee adequate fuel supply is understood, expanding import permissions at this stage could weaken the policy direction required to encourage local production and long-term sector stability.
“Our respectful appeal to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu is that decisions concerning petrol importation must be carefully weighed against their long-term economic consequences,” Kareem said.
“Nigeria has spent decades trying to overcome the paradox of being a major crude oil producer while relying heavily on imported refined products. Any policy action that appears to reopen the floodgates of importation may slow down the progress that has been made toward strengthening domestic refining capacity.”
He warned that increasing petrol imports could place additional pressure on the country’s foreign exchange reserves, especially at a time when the government is pursuing difficult economic reforms aimed at stabilising the naira and improving fiscal discipline.
“For many years, the country has lost enormous volumes of foreign exchange importing petroleum products that could ideally be refined locally,” Kareem said.
“If import volumes begin to rise again, the demand for foreign currency will inevitably grow. This could place renewed strain on the naira and undermine the broader economic stabilisation programme that the government is currently pursuing.”
The group also warned that excessive reliance on imported petrol could create opportunities for product dumping and the entry of substandard fuel into the Nigerian market, a challenge that has troubled regulators and consumers in the past.
According to Kareem, Nigeria’s downstream sector has historically struggled with quality control issues whenever importation becomes widespread, because imported fuel often travels through multiple intermediaries before reaching domestic depots.
“One of the lessons from the past is that when imports dominate the supply chain, the market sometimes becomes vulnerable to the dumping of inferior petroleum products,” he said.
“This not only creates regulatory complications but also exposes Nigerian consumers to fuels that may damage vehicles, affect industrial machinery and ultimately impose hidden economic costs on the country.”
He added that encouraging domestic refining and strengthening local supply chains would provide better product traceability and improve overall market transparency.
Kareem stressed that the group’s intervention was not intended as criticism of the NMDPRA, noting that regulators must often make complex decisions to prevent supply disruptions in a volatile energy market.
However, he urged the federal government to ensure that short-term supply management does not weaken long-term national objectives in the petroleum sector.
“We recognise that the regulator has the responsibility to ensure that Nigerians do not experience fuel shortages, and that duty is extremely important,” he said.
“But at the same time, policy coherence is essential. The country must avoid sending signals that could discourage investment in local refining or create uncertainty about Nigeria’s commitment to energy self-sufficiency.”
Kareem said Nigeria now has a rare opportunity to restructure its downstream petroleum industry in a way that strengthens domestic production, protects foreign exchange reserves and builds long-term industrial capacity.
He urged the president to ensure that the country’s regulatory framework reflects that strategic vision.
“Our appeal is simply for policy alignment. If Nigeria truly wants to build a resilient energy economy, then every major decision in the downstream sector must reinforce the goal of reducing import dependence, strengthening domestic production and protecting the country’s economic stability,” Kareem noted.
The group added that careful policy coordination between regulators and the presidency would help ensure that Nigeria avoids repeating the costly fuel import cycles that have historically drained public resources and weakened the national economy.
-
society6 months agoReligion: Africa’s Oldest Weapon of Enslavement and the Forgotten Truth
-
news3 months agoWHO REALLY OWNS MONIEPOINT? The $290 Million Deal That Sold Nigeria’s Top Fintech to Foreign Interests
-
society6 months ago“You Are Never Without Help” – Pastor Gebhardt Berndt Inspires Hope Through Empower Church (Video)
-
society7 months agoWho is Chief Kestin Pondi? Niger Delta’s “People’s Chief” Winning Hearts With Hundreds of Millions in Generosity