News
Ex-N’Assembly members, groups fault Reps 31 new states’ proposal
The House of Representatives Constitution Review Committee’s proposed creation of 31 additional states besides the country’s 36 existing states has sparked widespread reactions from prominent Nigerians and groups across the country.
The proposal was contained in a letter to the House of Representatives read during Thursday’s plenary by the Deputy Speaker, Benjamin Kalu, who presided over the session in the absence of the Speaker, Tajudeen Abbas.
However, the proposal was rejected by the Yoruba socio-cultural organisation, Afenifere, and its northern counterpart, the Arewa Consultative Forum, which described it as ridiculous.
The committee, chaired by Kalu, proposed an additional six new states in the North-Central, four in the North-East, five in the North-West, five in the South-South, and seven in the South-West.
The states being considered include Okun, Okura and Confluence from Kogi; Benue Ala and Apa from Benue; FCT State; Amana from Adamawa; Katagum from Bauchi; Savannah from Borno; Muri from Taraba; New Kaduna and Gujarat from Kaduna State; Tiga and Ari from Kano; Kainji from Kebbi; Etiti and Orashi as the sixth states in the South-East; Adada from Enugu; and Orlu and Aba.
Others are Ogoja from Cross River, Warri from Delta, Ori and Obolo from Rivers, Torumbe from Ondo, Ibadan from Oyo, Lagoon from Lagos, and Ogun, Ijebu from Ogun, and Oke Ogun/Ijesha from Oyo/Ogun/Osun States.
The letter read in part, “The Committee proposes the creation of 31 new states. As amended, this section outlines specific requirements that must be fulfilled to initiate the process of state creation, which include the following:
“New state and boundaries; An act of the National Assembly for the purpose of creating a new state shall only be passed if it requires support by at least the third majority of members.
‘’The House of Representatives, the House of Assembly in respect of the area, and the Local Government Council in respect of the area is received by the National Assembly.
“Local government advocates for the creation of additional local government areas are only reminded that section 8 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, as amended, applies to this process.
“Specifically, in accordance with section 8 (3) of the Constitution, the outcome of the votes of the State Houses of Assembly in the referendum must be forwarded to the National Assembly for fulfilment of state demands.
“Proposals shall be resubmitted in strict adherence to the stipulations. Submit three hard copies of the full proposal of the memoranda to the Secretariat of the Committee in Room H331, House of Representatives, White House, National Assembly Complex, and Abuja.
“Sub-copies must also be sent electronically to the committee’s email address at info.hccr.gov.nj. For further information or contact, please contact the Committee Clerk at 08069-232381.
“The committee remains committed to supporting the implementing efforts that align with the Constitutional provisions and would only consider proposals that comply with the stipulated guidelines. This is coming from the Clerk of the Committee on Constitutional Review.’’
Taking a dim view of the bill, the National Organising Secretary of Afenifere, Abagun Kole Omololu, explained that the proposed state creation negated Afenifere’s demand for true federalism.
He said, “The recent proposal by the House of Representatives Committee on Constitution Review to create 31 new states does not align with Afenifere’s long-standing demand for true federalism.
“Instead of addressing the core structural issues plaguing Nigeria, this initiative appears to be a mere political exercise that will further weaken governance and deepen economic inefficiencies.’’
Afenifere has consistently advocated genuine fiscal federalism, similar to what Nigeria’s founding fathers agreed upon before independence.
Omololu noted, “The creation of more states without a viable economic foundation will only compound the financial burden on the nation, as many existing states are already struggling to generate sufficient Internally Generated Revenue and rely heavily on federal allocations to survive.
‘’Turning every local government into a state is not the solution to Nigeria’s governance challenges. The real issue is not the number of states but the dysfunctional federal structure that has concentrated power at the centre, stifling regional development.’’
Instead of proliferating states that may later be unviable, Afenifere urged the National Assembly to focus on constitutional reforms that would devolve power, return resource control to the regions, and grant states the autonomy to develop at their own pace.
“Nigeria needs a system where states or regions control their resources and contribute an agreed percentage to the federal government, just as it was during the First Republic. This is the only path to sustainable development, not the reckless creation of more administrative units.
“Afenifere rejects this proposal and calls on well-meaning Nigerians to resist attempts to distract from the real conversation—restructuring and true federalism,” Omololu declared.
The Arewa Consultative Forum similarly expressed strong opposition to the proposed creation of 31 new states, describing the idea as unnecessary.
The National Publicity Secretary of the ACF, Prof Tukur Muhammad-Baba, stated that the forum was not in support of the proposed creation of new states, citing the country’s complexity and the potential for creating more problems.
According to him, the more states created, the more demands that will emerge, leading to more acrimonies.
He questioned the economic viability of the existing 36 states, highlighting the administrative burdens and overhead costs associated with governorship and civil service.
The ACF spokesperson emphasised that creating new states would be too expensive and unnecessary, and would only provide opportunities for the elite to assume leadership positions without necessarily improving the economic viability of the states.
He said, “We have not seen the details of the proposed states, but it’s ridiculous. How long are we going to be creating states and creating problems in this country?
“How many of the 36 states are viable economically? How many of the states can carry the administrative burdens of governorship and all it takes – the civil service and the amount of expenditure on overhead?
“Honestly, I don’t think the creation of states is our priority because it’s too expensive and unnecessary, and there is no way it will stop. It’s opening up room for more demands and more acrimony.”
Instead of creating new states, he advised the government to focus on addressing the social and economic challenges facing the people.
“We hope that more rational heads will prevail over the issue, but right now, honestly, it’s not the priority; affecting the lives, and the social-economic standing of the people is a better objective to pursue.
“Creation of state as we have seen will not solve our problems. It will give some elites a chance to assume leadership positions with all the perks that are attached to the office, but honestly, we don’t think economically, they will be viable,” Muhammad-Baba said.
But the National President of the Middle Belt Forum, Dr. Bitrus Pogu, endorsed the proposal for additional states.
Speaking in Jos on Thursday, Pogu described the proposal as a welcome development that addresses the country’s long-standing issues of equity and governance.
As a proponent of the Savannah state, Pogu emphasized that the MBF supports the proposal, citing the need for a more inclusive and representative system of government.
“The challenge of Nigeria requires a lot of tinkering to get it right. There has been no equity in the whole process of governing Nigeria”, he said
Pogu highlighted the example of Southern Borno, which has never produced a governor, with the position always being held by either Northern or Central Borno.
He argued that the proposed creation of new states would help address the plurality of Nigeria and promote a more equitable distribution of power and resources.
The MBF has long advocated for greater autonomy and representation for the region’s diverse ethnic groups
The proposed creation of new states is seen as a significant step towards addressing the historical injustices and imbalances in the country’s governance structure.
The apex Igbo socio-cultural organisation, Ohanaeze Ndigbo Worldwide declared that the South-East should be allocated more states to address ‘’the wrongs that had been done to the region on state creation.’’
Ohanaeze’s National Publicity Secretary, Dr Ezechi Chukwu, stated, “It is unfortunate that such a bill is also aimed at suppressing the South-East as usual. It is completely unacceptable that Southeast should be appropriated only five states.
‘’South-East, all these while, is the only zone in the Federal Republic of Nigeria that has the least number of states irrespective of our population and our contributions both economically and infrastructural development of the nation.
“So, giving southeast such a small number of five states in this bill when others that already have advantages orchestrated by successive governments before now is quite unacceptable and unfortunately, it is above all antithetical to the commonwealth of the South-Easterners and the so-called equity we are preaching in the country.”
He added, “South-East deserves more states more than any other zone in the country because South-East is the only zone that has been short-changed over the years by successive governments. So, if justice and equity should prevail southeast must be given the highest number of states.’’
“So, if the Federal Government fails to correct the wrongs that had been done to the South-East over the years, this is the time to at least give this equation some terms of balance by appropriating more number states to the South-East to make up with the other geopolitical zones.”
The Pan-Niger Delta Forum observed that the creation of more states could be meaningful if all the geo-political zones in the country have equal states as agreed in the last constitutional conference.
The spokesman for PANDEF, Christopher Ominimini, however, queried the viability of new states, pointing out that states should be created based on self-sustainability.
If the creation of more states became necessary, he argued it should be done equally across the board to even with the North-West, which has seven states.
Anything short of that, he noted, would be a perpetuation of the injustice in the country.
He said a situation where more states would be created to depend on the oil and gas from the Niger Delta region, while other states with mineral resources are allowed to exploit theirs is not the way to go.
He stated, “ Well, it is the right of the people to call for the creation of states. However, the most important thing is that in the last constitutional conference, it was agreed that all the geopolitical zones should have seven states each as it is in the North-West.
“So, the South -East should have additional two states so that it would be seven states. The South- West should have additional states to make it seven states.
He added, “But the question we want to ask is ‘will the states be viable?’ Do they have the means of survival if the vision of our forefathers are kept to? Because the vision of our forefathers who fought for the independence of this country is that the various states should control their resources and pay tax to the centre.”
Ex- Senators condemn move
A former Ambassador to Kuwait, Senator Haruna Garba, described the Reps proposal as “unbelievable.”
Garba, who represented Gombe North in the Senate, said, “The number is unbelievable, how can you talk about 30 more states. What are we turning ourselves into? What kind of democracy are we talking about? The number is too much. The number is unacceptable.”
He added, “Can we afford the paraphernalia of 31 more states? Where do we get the resources to take care of 67 states? What we should do is to give every zone one more each to amount to 42 more states, 67 is too much, we are not serious.”
Also, a former Senator representing Ondo South Senatorial District, Nicholas Tofowomo, condemned the proposal of the Reps.
Tofowomo, who was in the Senate between 2019 and 2023, described the proposal of the lawmakers as useless, saying the country should focus more on the development of local government areas, rather than states creation. He added that many of the present states were not economically viable.
He said, “The viability of states in Nigeria should be a pressing concern to the lawmakers, not creation of states. Currently, many states rely heavily on federal allocations, which raise questions about their economic independence. There is the need to reform local governments, which are closest to the people, rather than creating more states.
“In Nigeria, there are 774 local governments, which are struggling to deliver basic services. The 1976 Local Government Reforms aimed to the “basket of Nigeria” due to their rich agricultural land. However, even these states face challenges in terms of infrastructure and economic development. Rather than creating more states, the focus addresses these challenges, but more needs to be done.”
“Some states, like Benue, have been dubbed should be on strengthening local governments and giving them more responsibilities, especially in agriculture.
“Ultimately, Nigeria needs to rethink its approach to governance and economic development. By empowering local governments and promoting agricultural production, the country can move towards a more sustainable and equitable future.”
Ex-Reps kick
In the same vein, a former House of Representatives member from Anambra, Barth Nnanna, kicked against the proposed additional 31 states, saying it would be unmanageable, cumbersome and chaotic to handle.
Nnanna, who represented Ogbaru Federal Constituency between 1999 and 2003, added that “even from the proposal, the South-East is shortchanged with a shortfall of four states compared to North-West and South-West.”
He said what Nigeria needed now was not additional states but a return to regional system of government with federating components making up the state.
He said, “We look at the proposal and we can say that proposing additional 31 states to join the already existing 36 states will be too unwieldy to manage. Most of the existing 36 states are not viable and can’t stand on their own with the exception of three states, every other states depend on the handout from Abuja for survival and now they are proposing additional 31 states.
“What we had expected them to do is to first balance the states of the geopolitical regions. For instance, like the South-East that has five states should be giving additional states to balance the equation.
“Even with the proposal, it means South-East will be given additional five states totalling 10 states. It means the region will be trailing North-West and South-West which may likely have 14 states each. You can see it is not balanced and there is no equity in the whole thing.
“Anyway, it is still a proposal; it will still be subjected to public scrutiny and acceptance. When it comes to that stage, the people will either accept it or reject it. But the truth is Nigeria doesn’t need additional states at the moment.”
Another former member of the House of Representatives, Ogbona Nwuke, has said Governors may not support the creation of additional states.
Nwuke, who represented Etche-Omuma Federal Constituency of Rivers State in the Green Chamber, also questioned the viability of the proposed states.
“It is very clear that state creation will not be possible without the support of the governors. And the way it stands state governors may not back state creation.
“Anyway, as we speak, not all states appear to be viable. And to talk about that number of states being created, if that is the will of the people across the country, then one will perhaps say there is nothing wrong with that. But let me note that state creation has never been handled by any civilian administration in Nigeria
“And previous attempts to create states have also not been successful. So, it will be nice to see what stakeholders will say when the issue of states creation is tabled before them.
“But looking at history, most states created in the country were by fiat by the military and none has been created by any civilian administration.
Asked if he supports the creation of more states, he added, “We have six geo-political zones and we know that in the South East has been clamouring for one additional state.
“Now, in order to achieve a level of balance, which is missing at this time, we need to know the number of states because there has to be some balancing with Nigeria’s geographical expression.
“So, it is a critical matter, very serious matter which will demand more information, additional information on how the committee came to that number of states and then how those states will be distributed when it comes to Nigeria’s geo-political spread.”
When Alhaji Atiku Abubakar recently said he would restore petroleum subsidy if elected president, he tapped into a familiar frustration. Fuel prices are high, transport costs bite, and households are feeling the squeeze. That pain is real. But the promise to bring back the old subsidy regime is not relief. It is a return to a policy that bled the treasury, starved the states, and kept Nigeria dependent on borrowing to buy fuel.
For decades the subsidy was sold as a welfare program for the poor. In practice it became the most expensive welfare program for smugglers, marketers, and a handful of importers. The Nigerian National Petroleum Company would claim billions monthly, and no one could audit where the product actually went. That was not social protection. That was fiscal leakage at scale.
The first and most immediate benefit of subsidy removal is fiscal breathing room. In 2022 alone, subsidy gulped over 4 trillion naira. That was more than we spent on education, health, and capital projects combined. When that money stopped going to fuel, it did not disappear. It stayed in government coffers, and a large share of it flows directly to the sub nationals through FAAC.
The sub nationals are where the difference is being felt most. States and local governments now receive significantly higher monthly allocations. Governors in Rivers, Lagos, Kano, and others have reported FAAC receipts nearly doubling compared to pre-removal levels. That is money that can pay teachers, fix primary health centers, and clear pension arrears without waiting for Abuja bailouts.
In Rivers State, for example, the additional resources have allowed the state government to accelerate road projects, expand the school feeding conversation, and invest in water and sanitation. Across the country, states are using the windfall to clear salary backlogs and to fund security. That is the direct link between subsidy removal and better services at your doorstep.
Beyond recurrent needs, the removal unlocked capital spending. With subsidy gone, the federal government and states are no longer borrowing just to keep petrol cheap. Instead, we are seeing commitments to CNG buses, mass transit, student loans, and conditional cash transfers. These are targeted interventions. They reach the vulnerable without subsidizing a businessman in Cotonou who drives across the border to buy cheap fuel.
One of the quietest but biggest wins is the end of the subsidy-driven smuggling economy. When Nigerian petrol was artificially cheap, an estimated 30 to 40 percent was leaving our borders daily. That drained our forex and rewarded criminal networks. With prices aligned to market, the incentive to smuggle collapsed almost overnight. That saves dollars and restores integrity to our supply chain.
Sub nationals also gained policy space. Before, states were trapped. They could not raise IGR fast enough to match their responsibilities because the center was spending all its revenue on fuel. Now, with more money coming from FAAC and with subsidy no longer a federal albatross, states can plan medium-term budgets. They can borrow for infrastructure knowing their revenue base is real, not propped up by a phantom fuel bill.
The macroeconomic case is just as strong. Subsidy removal freed up foreign exchange that was being used to import and “subsidize” fuel. That pressure contributed to naira volatility. With the drain gone, the CBN has more room to stabilize the market, and investors see a government willing to make hard choices. Confidence matters for FDI, and FDI builds factories, not just fuel stations.
Let us be honest about the counterargument. Atiku and others argue that Nigerians cannot afford the current prices and that government should cushion the pain by restoring subsidy. The compassion is understandable. But the method is wrong. A blanket subsidy is the bluntest tool possible. It subsidizes the rich who own three cars, it subsidizes generators in malls, and it subsidizes our neighbors.
Targeted support is both cheaper and fairer. The savings from subsidy removal are already funding student loans, nano-grants, and public transport reforms. Those programs can be scaled. If we put 1 trillion naira directly into transport, health insurance, and food support, the impact on the poor will be ten times what the same 1 trillion did when spread thinly across every liter of petrol.
International experience backs this. Indonesia, India, and Ghana all removed fuel subsidies and redirected the savings to health, education, and cash transfers. In each case there was short-term pain, followed by stronger public services. Countries that reversed course and brought subsidies back, like Egypt in 2014 before its second reform, ended up in deeper debt crises.
Restoring subsidy now would also reverse private sector investment. Since the removal, private companies have begun investing in refineries, CNG conversion centers, and logistics. Dangote Refinery, modular refineries, and gas infrastructure are viable only because prices reflect costs. If we announce that subsidy will return, those investors pause. That means fewer jobs in Port Harcourt, Warri, and Lagos.
For the sub nationals, a return to subsidy is a direct pay cut. FAAC would shrink again. States would go back to borrowing to pay salaries. Projects started with the new revenues would stall. Local governments, which depend almost entirely on federal transfers, would be the first to feel it. That is not theoretical. We lived it for 20 years.
Atiku’s argument rests on the idea that the timing was wrong and the palliatives were insufficient. Fair critique. But the solution to poor implementation is better implementation, not abandoning the reform. We should demand faster rollout of CNG buses, more transparency in how FAAC windfalls are spent, and stronger monitoring of state budgets. We should not demand a return to the policy that caused the weakness.
The subsidy was also a corruption magnet. It created a system where claims were king and verification was optional. Removing it broke that cycle. Bringing it back without fixing the governance structure is inviting the same fraud, only now with higher global oil prices and a weaker naira.
There is also a climate and energy angle. Cheap petrol discouraged gas adoption and kept us locked into generators. With market pricing, CNG, electric tricycles, and solar become economically sensible. States can lead this transition because they now have the funds to subsidize conversion kits, not fuel itself.
Politically, the promise to restore subsidy sounds popular in the short term. But governance is about trade-offs. The trade-off here is clear: cheap fuel for a few months versus hospitals, roads, and jobs for years. Sub nationals have already shown what they can do with the extra money. To take it away is to punish the very level of government closest to the people.
Finally, debt. Subsidy was financed largely by borrowing and by unpaid arrears to NNPC. That debt was crowding out everything else. Every naira we do not spend on subsidy is a naira we do not have to borrow. That lowers interest payments, which in turn frees more money for states and local governments.
Nigeria does not need a return to the past. We need to finish the work of this reform. That means plugging leakages, auditing state spending, and scaling targeted support so no family is left behind.
Alhaji Atiku is a respected Nigerian, but on this point he is wrong. Restoring subsidy would undo the single most important fiscal correction we have made in a generation. It would hurt the states, weaken the naira, and put us back on the borrowing treadmill.
The better path is forward. Keep the subsidy gone. Let the sub nationals keep the resources. And let government prove that the savings can translate into tangible relief. That is how we turn pain into progress, and that is how we build a Nigeria that works beyond election cycles.
CHINEDUM ENYINNAYA ORJI writes from Amaokwe Ugba, Umuahia Ibeku and the All Progressives Congress Candidate for Ikwuano Umuahia Federal Constituency.
Seven people have died and seven others sustained injuries in a fatal road crash on the Bida-Kutigi road in Niger State, the Federal Road Safety Corps (FRSC) has confirmed.
The FRSC Niger Sector Commander, Corps Commander Aishatu Sa’adu, confirmed the incident to the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) on Sunday.
Sa’adu said the crash occurred on Sunday afternoon at Shebe village, a few kilometres from Kutigi town.
According to her, the accident involved a Mazda vehicle and a Siena bus travelling along the Bida-Kutigi road.
“Seven people lost their lives, seven others were injured while four were rescued without injuries, bringing the total involved to 18,” she said.
The sector commander said the seven victims who died were confirmed dead at the scene, while the injured victims sustained injuries of varying degrees.
She said the injured were evacuated to Kutigi General Hospital for medical attention, while the remains of the deceased were deposited at the hospital’s mortuary.
The FRSC official did not immediately disclose the identities of the victims or provide further details on the circumstances surrounding the collision.
The crash involved a total of 18 people, comprising seven fatalities, seven injured persons and four uninjured survivors.
Authorities are expected to investigate the cause of the accident and determine the circumstances that led to the fatal collision.
The presidential candidate of the People’s Redemption Party (PRP), Donald Duke, has described as a “lie” the claim that Nigeria is Africa’s wealthiest country, arguing that the country remains one of the poorest on the continent when measured by per capita income.
Duke, a former governor of Cross River State, stated this during an interview with journalists in Lagos.
He said Nigeria’s position as Africa’s largest economy by Gross Domestic Product (GDP) did not necessarily reflect the living standards of its citizens.
“It is embarrassing that a country that was considered one of the wealthiest in Africa still thinks today that it is the largest economy in Africa. That is not true.
“We are living a lie. It is a nice sound bite, though, to say that Nigeria is the largest economy in Africa. No. Nigeria is just one of the poorest when you take per capita income into consideration,” he said.
Duke said productivity remained critical to economic development, noting that several countries Nigerians considered smaller had higher per capita incomes.
On insecurity, the PRP presidential candidate said he preferred not to describe terrorists operating in Nigeria as “Islamic terrorists”, arguing that their activities were not driven by Islam.
He attributed part of the security challenges, particularly in Northern Nigeria, to the collapse of Libya, which he said contributed to the movement of arms into Nigeria through its land borders.
Duke said the government needed short-, medium- and long-term measures to tackle kidnapping, banditry and terrorism.
“Right now, you have got to deal with the security problems as they exist today — kidnapping, banditry, terrorism and all that.
“But even beyond that, those things are consequences of other things. They are consequences of a very poor economy and, of course, the failure to properly manage our borders,” he said.
He also called for measures to improve citizens’ productivity through increased local production and the use of modern technology to strengthen border security.
On the economic development of Northern Nigeria, Duke said that, if elected president, he would restructure mining activities in the region to ensure that local and state governments, as well as host communities, benefited from the sector.
He said the region’s mineral deposits, rather than oil in the Chad Basin, represented a major economic opportunity.
“There must be a structured way of mining. Today, it is artisanal, and the broader community, the border communities, society and the nation itself do not adequately benefit from those resources,” Duke said.
He cited gold deposits in Zamfara State as an example, saying insecurity had affected mining activities in the area.
Duke proposed that each state should be treated as an economic entity, with the Federal Government working with state governments to assess mineral deposits and establish proven reserves capable of attracting investors.
He said mining development should involve a partnership between the Federal and state governments, with revenues shared between both levels of government.
However, Duke stressed that security remained essential to attracting investment into the mining sector.
“Nobody is going to invest if there is no security,” he said, citing the experience of the Niger Delta, where insecurity had contributed to oil companies moving their operations to offshore locations.
This scrutiny follows the revelation that the Federation Account disbursed about N47tn to the three tiers of government in the three years since the removal of petrol subsidy.
This was as the Federal Government, 36 states and 774 local governments shared a cumulative N93.216tn as revenue from the Federation Account between 2017 and 2025, with more than half of the amount distributed in the three years following the economic reforms introduced by the Federal Government in 2023.
These figures were disclosed in a document obtained by our correspondent from the Federal Ministry of Finance on Sunday.
It showed that N47.25tn, representing about 50.7 per cent of the N93.13tn shared during the period, was distributed between 2023 and 2025 alone, highlighting the sharp expansion in revenues following the removal of petrol subsidy, exchange rate reforms and increased revenue mobilisation.
But policy analysts, civil society groups and other critics say the increase in revenue has not translated into a corresponding improvement in the living conditions of Nigerians facing rising living costs, unemployment, poverty and inadequate public services.
In an interview, a policy analyst, Adebayo Abubakar, said the removal of subsidy had increased government revenues but argued that the additional funds had not always translated into spending that reflected the economic hardship facing Nigerians.
“Roads, bridges, drainage and other infrastructure remain important, but some governments appear to favour conspicuous projects while schools, healthcare facilities, water supply and other basic services receive inadequate attention,” he said.
The removal of petrol subsidy and other economic reforms introduced by the Federal Government in 2023 have triggered an unprecedented surge in revenue flowing into the Federation Account, with the 36 states and 774 local government areas receiving significantly higher allocations amid growing questions over how the windfall has translated into improved infrastructure, security and public services.
The sharp increase in Federation Account Allocation Committee payouts has, however, placed state governors under renewed scrutiny, as many Nigerians continue to grapple with high living costs, poor infrastructure and worsening insecurity despite the substantial growth in revenues available to subnational governments.
While some governors have linked higher FAAC receipts to road construction, bridges, healthcare, education, workers’ welfare and other projects, residents in some states said the increased revenue had not resulted in improved public services or reduced economic hardship.
Findings by The PUNCH showed that the Federal Government, states and local governments received about N47tn from the Federation Account in the three years following the reforms, exceeding the amount shared in the preceding six-year period and reigniting the debate over the benefits and consequences of the subsidy removal policy.
FAAC disbursements
The document showed that FAAC distributions rose from N5.64tn in 2017 to N21.90tn in 2025, representing an increase of about 288 per cent over the nine-year period.
Year-by-year, net FAAC stood at N5.64tn in 2017, N7.98tn in 2018, N7.85tn in 2019, N7.11tn in 2020, N8.12tn in 2021 and N9.18tn in 2022. It subsequently rose to N10.09tn in 2023, N15.26tn in 2024 and a record N21.90tn in 2025.
The development highlights the dramatic transformation in Nigeria’s federation revenue following the removal of petrol subsidy, reforms in the foreign exchange market and efforts to improve revenue mobilisation.
It also exposes the limits of measuring Nigeria’s revenue growth in naira terms alone. While the removal of petrol subsidy, foreign exchange reforms and improved revenue mobilisation helped to push FAAC allocations sharply higher, a significant part of the increase reflects the devaluation of the naira.
For instance, Nigeria shared N7.98tn through FAAC in 2018, which, at the Central Bank of Nigeria exchange rate at the time, was equivalent to about $26bn. By 2025, the amount shared had risen almost threefold to N21.9tn. However, when converted at the CBN exchange rate for 2025, the allocation was worth only about $14.4bn.
In other words, while FAAC distribution increased by about 174 per cent in naira terms between 2018 and 2025, its dollar value fell by roughly 45 per cent, or about $11.6bn.
The comparison suggests that the apparent surge in federation revenue was driven not only by increased revenue generation and reforms, but also by the weaker naira, which translated dollar-denominated oil and other foreign currency earnings into substantially larger amounts of naira.
The document showed that net FAAC allocations stood at N5.64tn in 2017 and rose to N7.98tn in 2018, representing a 29 per cent increase. However, growth was not sustained in the following two years.
The distributable revenue fell by two per cent to N7.85tn in 2019. It declined further by 10 per cent to N7.11tn in 2020, reflecting the economic disruptions associated with the COVID-19 pandemic and developments in the oil market.
The distributable revenue, however, recovered to N8.12tn in 2021 and increased to N9.18tn in 2022. The document put the average annual growth rate for the pre-reform period at eight per cent. But the sharpest increase came after the reforms introduced in 2023.
Net FAAC rose to N10.09tn in 2023, representing a nine per cent increase. It then jumped by 34 per cent to N15.26tn in 2024 and expanded by another 30 per cent to a record N21.90tn in 2025.
This means the average annual growth rate accelerated from eight per cent in the pre-reform period to 24 per cent between 2023 and 2025. In effect, the pace of growth in distributable federation revenue was three times higher in the post-reform period than the average recorded before the reforms.
The figures also showed the extraordinary weight of the last three years in Nigeria’s federation revenue history. Of the N93.13tn shared between 2017 and 2025, the N47.25tn distributed between 2023 and 2025 alone exceeded the combined allocations recorded in several earlier years, meaning that every N2 shared over the nine-year period contained more than N1 distributed after the reforms.
Finance ministry speaks
The Federal Ministry of Finance, in its assessment of the reforms, said states and local governments had received substantially higher allocations, increasing the resources available to subnational governments for salaries, pensions, infrastructure and other public responsibilities.
The ministry said, “States and local governments received significantly higher allocations through the Federation Account, increasing the resources available to meet salaries, pensions, infrastructure and other responsibilities at the subnational level that benefit the people.”
It added that, compared with the monthly run-rate before the removal of petrol subsidy, “states received about N9.17tn in additional allocations from June 2023 to December 2025,” while local governments received about N6.66tn in additional allocations during the same period.
Further analysis of tier-by-tier annual distribution figures for 2022 to 2025 showed that the Federal Government received N1.996tn in 2022, N3.749tn in 2023, N4.570tn in 2024 and N7.024tn in 2025, bringing its four-year allocation to about N17.34tn.
The figures showed that the states emerged as the biggest beneficiaries of the post-reform expansion in FAAC receipts. Their annual allocation jumped from N4.18tn in 2023 to N8.93tn in 2025, more than doubling within two years. In 2024, states received N6.53tn, exceeding the Federal Government’s N4.57tn allocation in the figures contained in the document.
A World Bank analysis similarly identified 2024 as a turning point when state governments received more from FAAC distributable revenues than the Federal Government, reflecting a structural shift in the pattern of federation revenue distribution.
The expansion in FAAC receipts has been linked largely to the fiscal reforms introduced by President Bola Tinubu’s administration after it assumed office in May 2023.
The reforms included the removal of petrol subsidy and changes to the foreign exchange regime, alongside efforts to improve tax collection and revenue remittances.
News
Nwabueze Denies Running ‘Fake Agency’, Says Made-in-Nigeria Project Has Operated Under OSGF for 16 Years
The National Coordinator and Executive Director of the National Brands Development and Made in Nigeria Special Project Office, George Nwabueze, has denied the allegation of running a “fake agency” in the country.
Nwabueze, who spoke with newsmen on Saturday, noted that he oversaw an office which was under the supervision of the Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation.
He noted that the office had been in existence for 16 years.
The Independent Corrupt Practices and other related offences Commission had on Friday said the President had ordered Nwabueze’s arrest for leading and promoting the outfit, which it tagged as a fake federal agency.
The ICPC said the accused was running it with the collaboration of senior public servants in the Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation.
But responding to our correspondent, the embattled executive director said, “Made in Nigeria Special Project Office is a project office in the OSGF. We don’t know where fake agency comes from. A programme that has been in the SGF’s office since 16 July 2010 was just discovered yesterday (Friday). After 16 years; Nigeria is a funny country.”
Nwabueze spoke while responding to our correspondent’s enquiries on LinkedIn, where he had earlier posted his appointment letter to rebuff ICPC’s claim of illegality.
The letter, dated October 3, 2025, was purportedly issued by the Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation.
It was referenced OSGF/MIN/59310/11/205 and signed by the Permanent Secretary, Political and Economic Affairs Office, Nadungu Gagare.
The letter, addressed to “Hon. George Buchi Nwabueze, National Coordinator, Made in Nigeria Project Office, OSGF, Three Arms Zone, Abuja,” conveyed the approval of his appointment as National Coordinator/Executive Director of the Made in Nigeria Project Office under the OSGF.
According to the document, the appointment was for a five-year tenure beginning from July 2025 and was renewable.
“I am directed to formally convey the approval of your appointment as National Coordinator/Executive Director of the Made in Nigeria Project Office under the Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation,” the letter stated.
It added that the appointment followed “a careful evaluation of your commitment, contribution, and capacity in delivering on the mandate of the Special Project Office.”
The document listed Nwabueze’s responsibilities to include the supervision and development of programmes, projects and policies; supervision of regional and state coordinators across the 36 states; and organisation of exhibitions, trade expos, economic summits and other promotional initiatives aimed at promoting indigenous products and services.
It further stated that the project was to operate temporarily from Room B53, Ground Floor, within the OSGF complex.
“Please note that this appointment is at the pleasure of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, and in line with the objectives of the Made in Nigeria initiative under the Renewed Hope Agenda,” the letter said.
Efforts to engage Nwabueze further on the matter proved abortive as he declined response.
-
Politics4 days agoAwkunanaw Clan gives ‘Ofo’ to their son, Sir Chinyeaka Ohaa, the NDC 2027 Enugu state Guber candidate
-
Politics5 days agoHon. Chief Kevin Tobias Chukwu: Bringing Enterprise, Experience and Grassroots Leadership to Ezza South/Ikwo
-
News4 days agoPlane crash kills eight at US Air Force site in Alaska
-
News4 days agoUN security council holds second poll to select next secretary-general
-
News4 days agoAFRAA admits Enugu Air, Strengthens National Domestic Aviation Growth
-
News5 days agoFG Says It Won’t Publish Details of $5bn First Abu Dhabi Bank Loan
-
Foreign4 days agoUK: 11 Drug Couriers Convicted Over £13.8m Cannabis Smuggling Plot Through Birmingham Airport
-
Crime4 days agoAnambra Police Arrest Four Over Alleged Murder of 56-Year-Old Man in Awkuzu