Economy
BudgIT Urges Transparency as FG Defers 70% of 2025 Capital Projects to 2026
By Adedapo Adesanya
BudgIT, a leading civic-tech organisation promoting transparency and accountability in Nigeria’s public finance, has called on the federal government to be transparent after it deferred the implementation of 70 per cent of capital projects initially appropriated in the 2025 fiscal year to 2026.
“From our analysis, while this development is not entirely surprising, we hold cautious reservations about the implications of this decision,” it said in a statement.
The group said the deferment suggests the federal government intends to limit the number of capital projects under implementation, to use available funds more efficiently, prioritise critical projects, and reduce the long-standing problem of abandoned projects.
“In this sense, the move appears to be an attempt to retain the 2025 capital projects—many of which are based on existing economic plans and strategies—rather than introduce an entirely new set of projects in the next fiscal year.
“We view this as an effort by the federal government to restructure the sequencing of capital project implementation. Rather than rolling out a fresh budget filled with new capital projects, the government appears to be attempting a reset by carrying forward existing projects and improving implementation discipline,” it said.
BudgIT said this approach, if properly managed, could help salvage a challenging fiscal situation and strengthen budget credibility.
Recall that BudgIT has consistently raised concerns about Nigeria’s budgeting process, particularly the government’s failure to adhere to the approved budget calendar and its practice of running multiple fiscal programmes concurrently.
“We have maintained that budget timelines must be treated as sacrosanct and that unfinished but still relevant projects should be consolidated through a supplementary budget passed within the same fiscal year, rather than endlessly rolled over,” it said.
“Consequently, the continued inclusion of numerous uncoordinated and low-priority projects has bloated federal capital expenditure and increased public debt, often without clear developmental value.
“This pattern weakens the impact of capital investment, as spending decisions increasingly appear driven by project insertions rather than sound planning, prioritisation, and fiscal discipline. This is compounded by the fact that the federal government does not publish disaggregated reports on capital expenditure implementation. So, citizens are at a loss in knowing precisely what has or has not been implemented,” the statement added.
This challenge, it said, is further illustrated by developments during the 2024 fiscal year, in which the federal government extended the implementation of capital expenditure components of both the 2024 Appropriation Act and the 2024 supplementary Appropriation Act into mid-2025, and subsequently to December 2025.
“As a result, although the 2025 Appropriation Act was duly passed and assented to, it appears that only its recurrent components—such as personnel and overhead costs—were implemented in 2025. This is further evidenced by the absence of federal budget implementation reports for the 2025 period and official statements indicating that revenues from the 2025 fiscal year were used to fund the implementation of the 2024 budget.”
It revealed that it remains unclear whether the 2024 fiscal year has been formally closed.
“The recently published Q4 2024 federal budget implementation report is explicitly described as “provisional,” raising concerns about proper fiscal closure. Formal closure of fiscal accounts is essential, as failure to do so undermines financial reporting, fiscal transparency, and consolidation standards.”
In light of these, BudgIT stressed that this decision to defer capital project implementation must be robustly defended during the upcoming budget defence sessions at the National Assembly.
“The Executive arm of government must clearly demonstrate to the Legislature that this action is necessary to restore order to Nigeria’s fiscal framework and to end the damaging practice of implementing multiple budgets concurrently. By the time the annual Appropriation Act is passed by the National Assembly and transmitted for presidential assent, it is often heavily bloated with additional projects. While the National Assembly’s power to increase or decrease the budget is constitutionally recognised, BudgIT has long argued that this power has been widely abused, often disregarding fiscal planning and national development priorities.”
Commenting, BudgIT’s Deputy Country Director, Mr Vahyala Kwaga, underscored the need for discipline and clarity in implementing the deferment.
“Deferring 70 per cent of capital projects is neither a solution nor a setback on its own. What matters is whether this decision marks a clear break from the cycle of bloated budgets, overlapping fiscal years, and weak project implementation. Without strict adherence to budget timelines, proper fiscal closure, and transparent payment processes, the risk is that we simply postpone inefficiencies rather than resolve them,” Mr Kwaga said.
In addition, BudgIT urged the federal government to fully adhere to its “Bottom-Up Cash Plan” as outlined by the Federal Ministry of Finance.
“This approach—where payments are made directly to verified contractors rather than routed through MDAs—has the potential to improve efficiency and accountability in capital project implementation. The government must ensure strict compliance with payment protocols, contractor verification processes, and timely disbursement of funds.
“To this end, we call on the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Budget and Economic Planning, the Budget Office of the Federation, the Bureau of Public Procurement, relevant MDAs, and the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, Bola Ahmed Tinubu, to uphold the principles of transparency, legal compliance, and accountability in the management of public funds and public projects.
“We also encourage citizens, civil society, the private sector, and the media to actively support and scrutinise capital expenditure implementation, as the benefits of effective public spending ultimately accrue to all Nigerians.”
Economy
Nigeria, Türkiye to Raise Trade Volume to $5bn from $2bn
By Modupe Gbadeyanka
Steps are now being taken by the Republic of Türkiye to increase its trade volume with Nigeria to $5 billion from the current $2 billion.
The President of Türkiye, Mr Recep Tayyip Erdogan, during a meeting with his Nigerian counterpart in Ankara on Tuesday, said the establishment of a Joint Economy and Trade Committee between the two countries would create opportunities to expand Turkish investments in Nigeria to realise the target.
The bi-continental nation presently exports aircraft, machinery, iron and steel, chemical products, fabrics, furniture and others to Nigeria, while the West African nation exports crude oil and agricultural products to Türkiye.
“Today, we conducted a comprehensive review of our relations with the esteemed President and his delegation in the fields of trade, investments, energy, education and defence industry.
“Firstly, we see that we have significant potential in the fields of trade and investment. In today’s meetings, our commitment is to the $5 billion trade volume target, and we discussed the steps needed.
“We also discussed opportunities to support our investments in Nigeria. We believe that the joint Economy and Trade Committee, which we agreed to establish today, will be instrumental in this regard,” Mr Erdogan told newsmen during a press conference yesterday.
He promised to assist Nigeria in tackling insurgency, given its history with a similar problem, saying, “Terrorist organisations emerging, particularly in Africa’s Sahel region, unfortunately, pose a threat to the peace of the entire continent. We stand by the friendly people of Nigeria in their fight against terrorism under the leadership of President Tinubu.”
“In fact, today, we addressed opportunities for closer cooperation in the fields of military training and intelligence. We stated that we are ready to share our country’s significant experience in combating terrorism.
“Also, I believe that we will soon see positive outcomes from the meetings that Nigerian officials will hold with our leading defence industry companies during this visit,” he added.
In his remarks, Mr Tinubu thanked the Turkish leader for his willingness to collaborate in promoting global freedom, stability, and prosperity.
“What is very important to the countries being discussed, trade, business, no restrictions, giving opportunity to those who are ready to learn to work and prosper. How do we build an inclusive economy together? How do we reform the economy and involve vulnerable people? How do we ensure peace in the world?” he asked.
Economy
NGX Performance Indices up 0.12% Amid Low Activity Level
By Dipo Olowookere
The performance indices of the Nigerian Exchange (NGX) Limited were up by 0.12 per cent on Tuesday amid waning appetite for local stocks by investors.
Data revealed that the activity level was lower during the trading day, with the volume of trades declining by 19.71 per cent to 483.1 million stocks from the 601.7 million stocks recorded a day earlier, and the number of deals down by 28.98 per cent to 41,499 deals from 58,429 deals. However, the value of transactions increased by 0.59 per cent to N17.4 billion from N17.3 billion.
Access Holdings was the most active equity yesterday with a turnover of 26.5 million units sold for N599.8 million, GTCO traded 25.3 million units worth N2.5 billion, Secure Electronic Technology exchanged 24.7 million units valued at N23.8 million, Japaul transacted 21.4 million units for N54.2 million, and Tantalizers sold 20.3 million units valued at N72.7 million.
The market breadth index turned positive on Tuesday unlike the preceding session, as Customs Street ended with 33 price gainers and 26 price losers, implying strong investor sentiment.
SCOA Nigeria gained 9.94 per cent to sell for N28.75, Union Homes REIT also appreciated by 9.94 per cent to close at N86.25, Deap Capital expanded by 9.94 per cent to N8.63, Morison Industries improved by 9.92 per cent to N9.09, and RT Briscoe soared by 9.89 per cent to N7.22.
Conversely, Austin Laz declined by 9.96 per cent to N4.34, Neimeth depreciated by 9.62 per cent to N10.80, Prestige Assurance tumbled by 7.37 per cent to N1.76, Africa Prudential lost 6.96 per cent to N14.70, and Veritas Kapital dipped by 6.86 per cent to N1.90.
Business Post reports that when the bourse closed its doors to trading for the session, the All-Share Index (ASI) climbed by 196.26 points to 165,713.82 points from 165,517.56 points and the market capitalisation gained N126 billion to finish at N106.089 trillion compared with the previous day’s N105.963 trillion.
Economy
How U.S. and Nigerian Borrowing Policies Differ
Borrowing rules in the United States and Nigeria may share some similarities. Both systems serve the same human need, access to cash when life gets complicated. What separates them is how each country balances control and opportunity.
In the U.S., a loan is not just a transaction but a data point in a lifetime of credit history. In Nigeria, borrowing is often a leap of faith between a lender and a customer with no paper trail. These differences affect not only how people get money but also how they build financial stability.
Borrowing in the U.S.: Quick Overview
The U.S. credit environment is built on documentation and transparency. Every adult with a bank account is part of a vast credit network monitored by three major bureaus: Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion. They build credit reports that reflect an individual’s financial behavior and translate it into the FICO score. This number can open or close financial doors. The U.S. system rewards discipline. The better your credit score, the lower your borrowing cost.
Lenders here make decisions based on strict verification and legal protection. Key regulations include:
- Truth in Lending Act (TILA) – requires clear disclosure of fees and APRs.
- Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) – sets standards for how credit data can be used.
- State-level lending laws – define limits on loan amounts, APRs, and other terms.
Short-term loans in the U.S. are legal only where local law allows. In some states, they’re banned entirely, while in others, they are strictly regulated to prevent exploitation. Borrowers know the total cost in advance, and auto-debit payments minimize missed deadlines.
Borrowing in Nigeria: Quick Overview
Nigeria’s credit system is young but growing fast. Over the past decade, fintech innovation has brought financial services to millions who never had a bank account. Apps now approve loans in minutes, using mobile data instead of a credit bureau report.
This convenience, however, comes with a price. Borrowers often face unclear interest rates and hidden service fees, aggressive collection tactics, including public “debt shaming,” and little or no credit-building effect, even after on-time payments. On top of that, short repayment periods, sometimes less than 30 days, make debts difficult to handle.
The Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) has tried to impose order by licensing Credit Reporting Companies and enforcing transparency rules. But many lenders still operate outside the formal system. Inflation and limited employment push citizens toward quick, high-cost borrowing just to manage daily expenses.
Short-Term Borrowing in the U.S. and Nigeria
This is where the contrast becomes sharpest. In the U.S., payday loans are strictly regulated at both the state and federal levels. They usually range from $100 to $1,000 and are due in about two weeks. The fees, while steep, are disclosed upfront and standardized. Most borrowers take them for emergencies, such as rent, car repairs, or medical bills, and repay automatically on their next payday.
U.S. borrowers can borrow money from payday lenders safely, provided that they are dealing with a top-rated lending platform. When choosing a reliable loan provider, applicants can rest assured that their personal data is safe and that the company fully complies with all consumer protection rules. However, short-term loans in the US usually come with high costs, which are $10 to $30 for each $100 borrowed. Therefore, some states fully prohibit payday lending.
In Nigeria, digital microloans dominate. Some require no collateral or even identification beyond a phone number. Approval takes minutes, but repayment deadlines are so tight that re-borrowing is common. Rates can vary from 10% to 30% per month, depending on the platform.
Short-term loans in the U.S. function within a regulated system, while risks of predatory lending still exist. Nigerian short-term credit runs on speed and accessibility but often lacks guardrails.
Long-Term Credit and Consumer Protection
Long-term lending reveals the maturity gap between the two countries. In the United States, borrowers can access a full range of structured loans, including mortgages with 15–30-year repayment terms, auto loans backed by the purchased vehicle, and personal installment loans with fixed monthly payments and interest rates.
Each loan builds credit history when managed responsibly, allowing borrowers to access better terms in the future. Consumers also benefit from protection under the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), which monitors fairness and prevents predatory lending.
In Nigeria, long-term credit remains a luxury. Commercial banks require collateral, employment proof, and detailed income statements. For many citizens, these conditions are unreachable. As a result, they rely on rolling short-term loans from digital lenders. This pattern can trap them in high-interest cycles.
Still, local fintechs are experimenting with longer repayment models. The results are mixed: flexibility has increased, but oversight hasn’t caught up.
Credit Scores in Both Economies
A person’s credit score is a fingerprint of trust. In the United States, credit scoring has been part of daily life for decades. The three major bureaus, Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion, collect repayment data, credit card limits, loan applications, and even utility bills. These factors form the FICO score, a universal measure that determines an individual’s trustworthiness and directly affects borrowing terms.
Your credit behavior in the U.S. affects nearly everything. It determines whether a bank will issue a personal or car loan, the rate you’ll pay for insurance, and even your ability to rent a home or land certain jobs.
The advantage is stability. Borrowers can rebuild credit by paying on time, disputing inaccurate reports, and keeping credit utilization low. Over time, this creates a transparent feedback loop between lenders and borrowers.
Nigeria is just starting this journey. Its Credit Reporting Companies (CRCs), established under the Credit Bureau Act, are building a database from scratch. However, most lenders still rely on alternative data, such as mobile phone activity, including call history and airtime top-ups, utility and rent payments, and e-commerce and wallet transactions.
While these sources help extend loans to people with no banking history, they lack consistency. Not all digital lenders report back to credit bureaus, so on-time payments don’t always improve a borrower’s record. The result is uneven progress. People borrow more, but their financial profiles stay invisible.
Cultural and Economic Factors Behind Borrowing Behavior
Money habits grow from social roots as much as from regulation. In the U.S., personal finance education and widespread access to banking make credit a predictable tool. People use loans strategically. Among the most common reasons are debt consolidation, investing in education, or funding small businesses. Even short-term borrowing carries an expectation of repayment discipline, although many borrowers end up being trapped in debt.
In Nigeria, the motivation to borrow is different. Most citizens turn to credit for survival or micro-entrepreneurship. Inflation above 20% and unstable income streams mean that cash shortages are frequent, especially among market vendors, gig workers, and small traders. The informal economy determines how people think about debt. They often treat it as a community affair rather than a personal contract.
Social lending groups, called ROSCAs (Rotating Savings and Credit Associations), remain common. They rely on trust and peer accountability instead of paperwork. This culture of shared obligation fills the gaps left by limited formal credit.
Yet, as digital lending grows, that sense of personal responsibility is shifting. Borrowers are moving from face-to-face agreements to app-based decisions made by algorithms. The cultural adjustment is still ongoing, and regulators are racing to keep pace with behavior that changes faster than the law.
What Both Countries Can Learn from Each Other
The United States could learn from Nigeria’s creativity. Fintech innovation in Nigeria has redefined what accessibility looks like. Peer-to-peer lending, mobile-first onboarding, and microloans show how technology can reach people ignored by the traditional system. U.S. lenders, often slowed by paperwork, could adopt lighter, data-driven verification for smaller loans without sacrificing compliance.
Nigeria, meanwhile, could take cues from the American model of regulation and transparency. Establishing consistent reporting standards across all lenders would make credit scores meaningful and protect borrowers from predatory practices. Integrating mobile data into official credit systems could also help people transition from informal borrowing to formal finance, unlocking larger, safer loan options.
Both nations face the same global challenge: building credit systems that balance innovation with fairness. The U.S. has mastered structure, while Nigeria has speed. The future of lending may depend on combining both strengths.
Final Thoughts
Borrowing, at its core, reflects a country’s priorities. The United States prides itself on predictability, where every transaction leaves a record. Nigeria prioritizes accessibility, sometimes at the expense of oversight. This happens because its people can’t afford to wait for old systems to catch up.
As these economies evolve, their borrowing models may slowly converge. With technology bridging data gaps and governments refining consumer protections, the distance between Washington and Lagos might shrink, at least in financial terms. For now, both nations remind us that credit isn’t just about money; it’s about trust, time, and the stability of a paycheck and economy.
-
Feature/OPED6 years agoDavos was Different this year
-
Travel/Tourism9 years ago
Lagos Seals Western Lodge Hotel In Ikorodu
-
Showbiz3 years agoEstranged Lover Releases Videos of Empress Njamah Bathing
-
Banking8 years agoSort Codes of GTBank Branches in Nigeria
-
Economy3 years agoSubsidy Removal: CNG at N130 Per Litre Cheaper Than Petrol—IPMAN
-
Banking3 years agoSort Codes of UBA Branches in Nigeria
-
Banking3 years agoFirst Bank Announces Planned Downtime
-
Sports3 years agoHighest Paid Nigerian Footballer – How Much Do Nigerian Footballers Earn












