India and China lead the chart with 1.43 and 1.42 billion people, respectively, followed by the United States with 0.339 billion. Indonesia, Pakistan, and Nigeria complete the list, with populations ranging from 0.223 to 0.277 billion, showcasing global demographic diversity and distribution. 

In developmental economics, there has been a concern with population growth, which evokes much controversy and concern, as does the concept of overpopulation. Conventional wisdom often portrays overpopulation as a harbinger of underdevelopment, invoking images of strained resources, environmental degradation, and economic stagnation.

However, upon closer examination, this narrative reveals itself to be a simplistic myth rather than an accurate reflection of reality.

Q: “One of the primary flaws in the overpopulation-underdevelopment narrative lies in its failure to account for the complexities of economic dynamics and human ingenuity.”

The notion that overpopulation inevitably leads to underdevelopment is deeply ingrained in popular consciousness. It stems from the Malthusian theory proposed by Thomas Malthus in the late 18th century, which posited that population growth outstrips the capacity of resources to sustain it, resulting in poverty, famine, and societal collapse.

While Malthus’s theory gained traction during his time and continues to influence public discourse today, empirical evidence and modern economic theory challenge its validity.

One of the primary flaws in the overpopulation-underdevelopment narrative lies in its failure to account for the complexities of economic dynamics and human ingenuity. Contrary to Malthusian predictions, history has shown that increases in population can coincide with periods of economic growth and prosperity.

In the latest update on global population in 2023, World Bank data uncovered an extraordinary trend: India and China, collectively hosting over 2.8 billion individuals, account for a staggering 35.60 percent of the world’s population, which stood at over 7.95 billion. What’s even more remarkable is that these two populous nations were at the forefront of significant economic development.

This revelation challenges the conventional wisdom that population size alone dictates a nation’s level of development.

India, having surpassed China to become the world’s most populous nation with over 1.43 billion people, stands as a testament to this paradigm shift. Leveraging its vast workforce as a demographic dividend, India has propelled itself forward as an economic powerhouse in recent decades.

This data highlights a critical insight: population size is not a limiting factor in a nation’s development trajectory. Instead, it is how countries harness their human capital and resources that determines their economic prosperity.

India’s ascent to the top spot in population size serves as a compelling example of the potential for growth and innovation inherent in populous nations.

The country has become a global hub for information technology (IT) and business process outsourcing (BPO) services, employing millions of skilled workers.

India’s vast labour pool has also fueled growth in manufacturing, agriculture, healthcare, and other sectors. Moreover, the country’s growing middle class presents a significant consumer market, attracting both domestic and foreign investment.

According to World Bank data, India boasts $3.41 trillion as its gross domestic product (GDP), demonstrating how the country has been able to use its population to its advantage.

China, now the second-most populated country in the world with a population exceeding 1.4 billion, has utilised its workforce to become the world’s manufacturing powerhouse.

The biggest economy out of Asia not only has a large population, it doubles as the second strongest economy after the US with $17.9 trillion as its GDP.

The country’s labour-intensive industries have propelled its economic growth, with sectors like electronics, textiles, and machinery driving exports and foreign investment. Additionally, China’s large domestic market has fueled consumer spending, contributing to its economic expansion.

Moreover, China’s emphasis on education and skill development has resulted in a highly skilled workforce, further boosting its competitiveness on the global stage.

The United States has proven itself to be the dominant economy in the world, having a GDP over five times bigger than India’s.

The US boasts a whopping $25.4 trillion as the country’s economic output, according to the World Bank.

With a population of over 330 million people, the US has harnessed its diverse and skilled workforce to drive innovation and economic growth.

The country’s emphasis on research and development (R&D) has led to breakthroughs in technology, healthcare, and other sectors, driving productivity and competitiveness.

Moreover, the entrepreneurial spirit in the US has resulted in the creation of numerous startups and large corporations, further stimulating economic activity.

Additionally, immigration has played a crucial role in supplying talent and labour, contributing to the country’s economic dynamism.

However, of the top ten most populous nations, Nigeria, Pakistan, and Bangladesh have a relatively lower national income, affirming the need for these countries to focus on wealth creation through improved productivity and value creation.

Nigeria, now the fourth-largest economy in Africa, according to the International Monetary Fund, has about 218 million people as its population. But the country’s economic output pales, with a staggering $472.6 billion.

The country has recently witnessed an upheaval in its economy, from low foreign direct investment to a decrease in oil remittances and various reforms by the government in power that have seen the former largest economy contend with skyrocketing prices, exchange rate fluctuations, and spiralling inflation.

Analysts who spoke to BusinessDay hold that Nigeria has failed to invest in human capital, which serves as the major drive for development and economic stability.

“No country develops with a perpetually low human capital. If you don’t invest in your citizens through quality education and access to technology, there won’t be productivity,” a leading economist and university lecturer said.

“China and the US have constantly been at the top because they understand the importance of strengthening their workforce by investing in them. If they had left their people with no skills to spur growth, they would have remained like us (Nigeria),” Michael Anagun, a lecturer of economics, said.

Pakistan is the fifth-most populous country in the world, followed by Nigeria. It has about 235 million people living in its territory. But the country has equally been faced with a series of challenges, thereby hurting the growth of the country’s economy.

The country is plagued with deep-rooted structural challenges, including weak institutions, political instability, and inadequate infrastructure. These issues have hindered the country’s ability to attract investment and foster sustainable growth. No wonder it’s a staggering $374.7 billion in GDP.

Beyond weak institutions, the country is faced with persistent macroeconomic imbalances, such as high fiscal deficits, inflation, and external debt, which have put strain on the economy. Weak fiscal management and a reliance on borrowing to finance expenditures have exacerbated these imbalances.

There have also been issues of security concern, including terrorism and regional instability, which have adversely affected investor confidence and economic activity. These challenges have deterred both domestic and foreign investment, particularly in sectors like tourism and manufacturing.

“Pakistan’s economy has been growing slowly over the past two decades. Annual per capita growth has averaged only 2 percent,” the World Bank said.

Moreover, the belief that overpopulation strains resources overlooks the role of technological innovation and resource management in addressing scarcity. Throughout history, humanity has continually found ways to increase agricultural productivity, harness renewable energy sources, and develop more efficient technologies to meet growing demand.

The Green Revolution of the mid-20th century, for example, saw the adoption of high-yield crop varieties and modern agricultural techniques that dramatically increased food production, debunking predictions of widespread famine due to overpopulation.

Furthermore, the relationship between population growth and economic development is not linear but rather shaped by a multitude of factors, including governance, education, healthcare, and institutional quality.

Countries with effective governance structures, robust education systems, and accessible healthcare tend to experience demographic transitions where declining fertility rates accompany improvements in living standards, as seen in the likes of India, China, the United States, and even Indonesia. This phenomenon, observed in many developed nations, illustrates that sustainable population growth is achievable within the framework of socioeconomic development.

Critics of the overpopulation narrative also point out its tendency to scapegoat vulnerable populations, particularly in the Global South, while ignoring underlying structural issues such as the unequal distribution of resources and economic exploitation.

Blaming overpopulation for underdevelopment absolves governments and institutions of responsibility for addressing systemic inequalities and promoting inclusive growth strategies.

In light of these insights, it becomes clear that overpopulation alone is not a determining factor in economic development or underdevelopment. Instead, it is the interaction of population dynamics with social, economic, and environmental factors that shapes the trajectory of nations.

By dispelling the myth of overpopulation as a driver of underdevelopment, we can foster more nuanced discussions and policies that address the root causes of poverty and inequality while promoting sustainable development for all.

Thus, the belief that overpopulation inevitably leads to underdevelopment is a simplistic myth that fails to account for the complexities of economic and social dynamics. While population growth presents challenges, it also offers opportunities for innovation, entrepreneurship, and human progress.

By reframing the discourse on overpopulation and development, we can move towards more inclusive and effective approaches to addressing global challenges and building a prosperous future for generations to come.

President Bola Tinubu has congratulated the President-Elect of the Republic of Chad, Mahamat Déby, on his election victory.

Ajuri Ngelale, Special Adviser to the President on Media and Publicity, in a statement, said the successful conduct of elections in Chad underlined the commitment of the government and the people to democracy and orderly transitions in the region.

He said, “The president assures President-elect Déby that Nigeria will continue to work closely with the Republic of Chad, as both countries seek to enhance peace, security, and shared prosperity for the mutual benefit of their peoples.

“The president also calls for sustained, friendly cooperation between both nations, while wishing the President-Elect success as he undertakes this noble service to the people of Chad.”

[DailyTrust]

The political crisis rocking Rivers State deepened last week, with shots fired from each side of the divide.

Leadership of the All Progressives Congress, APC, in the state had asked the state lawmakers to begin the process of impeaching Governor Siminalayi Fubara.

Fubara’s estranged godfather and FCT Minister, Nyesom Wike, on his part, described the choice of his successor as a mistake.

Wike, who spoke at an event in Rivers, begged God and his political family to forgive him.

According to him: “I want to say this clearly: in life, we make mistakes. I have made a mistake. I own it up and I say God forgive me. I have said all of you forgive me. But we will correct it at the appropriate time.

“I am human. I am bound to make mistakes. So forgive me for making a wrong judgment. So nobody should kill.”

Wike also urged his supporters in the state assembly not to succumb to intimidation, saying: “Don’t be afraid. Nobody will remove you as lawmakers.

“Most of you don’t understand. This is our work. Our business is to make them to fear. That is what I am doing. We will make them to be angry every day and they will continue to make mistakes.”

Mr Edison Ehie, the Chief of Staff to the governor did not waste time to respond, as he used the opportunity of another event in the state to vow that Fubare would teach his opponents a political lesson.

He attributed the crisis in the state to the struggle for resource control.

According to Ehie: “We are going to teach them a lesson of political arithmetic. What that small boy (Fubara) will do to you, you’ll know that khaki no be leather.

“The problem we have in the state is that 11 persons said they would control the resources of Rivers State. These 11 persons now called 20 others to allocate resources to themselves.”

However, recent happenings show that the factional state lawmakers are living up to Wike’s directive.

DAILY POST recalls that the now suspended House had earlier overruled the governor when it passed into law several bills, which Fubara’s camp believes were aimed at weakening the governor’s control of the state.

But in what appeared to be a fight-back, a Rivers State High Court barred the pro-Wike speaker and 24 other lawmakers from parading themselves as members of the House of Assembly.

Meanwhile, Fubara earlier on Friday ordered an immediate relocation of the legislative business of the state House of Assembly to Government House in Port Harcourt, where the Oko-Jumbo and the other two lawmakers are expected to carry out legislative functions.

The relocation order was contained in the state’s official Gazette, Executive Order of the Rivers State Government 001-2023.

The order came about 24 hours after Victor Oko-Jumbo, a lawmaker loyal to the governor, emerged as a new factional speaker of the assembly.

DAILY POST recalls that the governor on Monday, April 6, declared that members of the state assembly, as currently led by the Speaker, Rt. Hon. Martins Amaewhule, were no longer lawmakers, saying they do not even exist.

Fubara noted that in seeking peaceful resolution to the political crisis that erupted in the state last year, he had attended several reconciliation meetings, whose resolutions the other party, where the state’s lawmakers belong, had rebuffed.

The comment, which marked the beginning of the current face-off, was not unconnected to the inability of the assembly to approve some requests from the governor.

This is even as the lawmakers also accused the governor of deliberately withholding his assent from bills already passed, terminating the peace deal brokered by President Bola Tinubu on December 18, 2023.

DAILY POST recalls in a bid to quell the lingering political crisis in the state, Fubara and Wike alongside other stakeholders including the Rivers Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, chairperson, Aaron Chukwuemeka, and the Speaker of the state assembly, Martin Amaewhule, in December last year, signed a resolution document after a meeting with Tinubu.

However, keen watchers of the activities in Rivers say whatever is contained in the resolution now belongs to the dustbin of history as both factions have returned to trenches.

What triggered the recent crisis

DAILY POST gathered that the recent feud followed the enactment of the Rivers State Local Government (Amendment) Bill and the refusal of the governor to assent same.

On March 13, 2024, the House passed the bill and forwarded it to Governor Fubara for assent, but he declined.

Overriding the governor, the House led by its Speaker, Hon Martin Amaewhule, at its 159th Legislative sitting held at the Assembly Quarters in Port Harcourt on Monday, passed the bill into law.

The lawmakers wanted the tenure of the Local Government chairmen extended.

The chairmen are all loyal to former governor and FCT Minister, Nyesom Wike.

DAILY POST reports that the Chairmen in the 23 local government areas of the state are expected to bow out of office on June 17, 2024 as their tenure elapses.

A source privy to the happenings told DAILY POST that the House members, particularly the 27 lawmakers loyal to the FCT Minister, by the amended law, wants the office of the Chairmen extended at least by six months.

The source, who does not want to be mentioned, however, alleged that the governor withheld his assent because he was nursing the plan to appoint caretaker chairmen who will be loyal to him.

“His plan is to ensure that everyone in the government who is loyal to Chief Wike is pushed out. We all know that the current chairmen are not with him, in fact, they also want the governor impeached.

“From the look of things, Fubara does not want to conduct elections to replace the outgoing chairmen. He wants to install his own people first before conducting the election. This is what is happening in the state.

“All these battles against the House of Assembly are because of the LG chairmen. If you could remember, when the governor wanted to pass the budget last year, he installed a factional speaker to make it possible.

“Now, he has installed another Speaker who will allow him to appoint his boys to serve as caretaker chairmen in all the local government areas”, he alleged.

The source further alleged that the lawmakers have vowed that any attempt by the governor to appoint caretaker chairmen would lead to his immediate impeachment.

Meanwhile, PDP and APC have been trading words over the call for the impeachment of Governor Fubara.

While the APC alleged that the governor no longer respects separation of powers, accusing him of abusing his office, the PDP insisted that the seat of the 27 lawmakers plotting Fubara’s impeachment does not exist owing to their defection.

Why Governor Fubara must be impeached – APC

The spokesman of the Rivers State chapter of APC, Ikenga Chibike told DAILY POST on Saturday that the impeachment call became necessary to restore normalcy in the state, alleging that the governor had taken the law into his own hands by hijacking the state assembly.

Explaining what necessitated the impeachment call, Chibike said, “we called for his impeachment because the governor has become dictatorial.

“He has no respect for due processes and he has been attacking the House of Assembly and even the LG chairmen.

“The governor has taken the law into his own hands by trying to intimidate the state assembly and all other persons who failed to agree with his opinion on issues.

“Nigerians can recall that the president intervened in the disagreement between the executives headed by the governor and the House of Assembly headed by Martins Chike Amaewhule. The special intervention came with a proclamation of about eight items.

“In the document, the lawmakers were asked to withdraw their impeachment notice, which the assembly has graciously done.

“The governor was also asked to present the budget before the properly constituted assembly headed by Hon Martins but the governor refused.

“The governor had planned to hijack the responsibility of the assembly. All the bills that were passed, the governor decided to withhold his assent.

“The assembly decided to override him and he took offense and decided to intimidate the assembly by declaring that 27 members do not exist.

“So we called for the impeachment of the governor so that we can have a responsible person who can take care of the state.”

Asked why the APC was concerned over the crisis in the state citing the fact that the two major actors, Wike and Fubara are both members of the PDP, he said, “the 27 lawmakers are members of our party, so we must stand and defend their interests.

“Secondly, because Fubara is the governor of Rivers State doesn’t mean he should govern only PDP members. He is the governor of Rivers State and that includes those in his party, those in the opposition party and those who are non-partisan.

“We are interested because the crisis affects our people and it affects the development of our state.”

On the alleged move by the governor to appoint caretaker chairmen for the 2023 local government areas, the APC spokesman said, “I will not be surprised if the impunity continues. I won’t be surprised because the governor has again proclaimed another faction of the state assembly.

“These are the signs of impunity and I won’t be surprised if the governor continues on that line.

“It was on the basis of the fact that the tenure of the current chairmen will elapse on the 17th of June that the assembly asked the executive to conduct elections so that we can have democratically elected chairmen.

“The assembly gave the Chairmen six months extension to enable the governor conduct the election.

“If the election had been conducted before the expiration of their tenure, there wouldn’t be any need for extension.”

Lawmakers with legibility issues can’t impeach Gov Fubara – PDP counters APC

In a counter reaction, the spokesman of the PDP in Rivers State, Sydney Gbara told DAILY POST that the 27 lawmakers loyal to the FCT Minister lacked the power to impeach the governor.

According to him, “the truth is that the impeachment is not possible.

“In the first place, the 27 lawmakers have eligibility issues because they defected from the PDP to APC when there was no crisis in the party.

“Ordinarily, they are not supposed to be acting except for the presidential intervention which the governor signed and accepted to recognize the Martins’ faction.

“You know at that time, we had two factions. We had the Martins’ faction and the Edison Ehie’s faction which was recognized by a court of competent jurisdiction.

“Edison would have gone ahead to function as the Speaker that is recognized by law which has not had a contrary judgement up till today.

“Because of the governor’s stance for peace, he told Edison to resign to give way to the other faction to operate.

“So they have only been operating by the lifeline given by the governor of Rivers State, His Excellency Siminalayi Fubara but they abused the privilege. Day in, day out, they continue to push out one retrogressive law or the other against the state.

“They have been causing legislative nuisance in the Rivers State politics.

“They are only for their selfish interest and that of their pay master. The governor has pronounced them non existing and the pronouncement stands.

“Today, we have a new Speaker, Hon. Victor Oko Jumbo. He has been sworn in to continue from where Edison stopped. The new assembly is the legally recognized 10th assembly in the state.

“This is why I said the impeachment cannot work. They are illegally occupying the seats. They were there on the lifeline of the governor and since the governor has withdrawn that, they cannot function.

“The Rivers Youths have vowed that they will besiege wherever they seat to pronounce any impeachment against the Governor.”

On the allegation that the new Speaker emerged to enable the governor to appoint caretaker chairmen in the 23 local government areas, the PDP spokesman said, the new faction emerged because “Martins’ faction had laid siege on the governor and the people of the state. Nothing is working.

“The government is moving in a mechanical and arithmetic progression when they are supposed to be acting in geometric progression.

“House of Assembly in other states are making laws for the development of their various states. With or without them, the government has to move on.

“That is why we now have a government recognized assembly that will work with the government for the betterment of the state.”

Meanwhile, President Bola Tinubu has told the political actors in Rivers that he would not take sides in the ongoing crisis.

Tinubu, who spoke through his Special Adviser on Media and Publicity, Ajuri Ngelale, said that anyone with the belief that President Tinubu would take their side in the political crisis would be disappointed.

The Special Adviser made the President’s position known during an interview on TVC, insisting that Tinubu won’t allow any attempt to frustrate the Rivers government.

“I believe that anyone who believes that by their actions, whether it’s from the Federal level, State level or the legislative branch in the State or the executive branch in the state, if they are banking on Mr. President to take sides on this matter, they’re mistaking and they’ll be disappointed,” he said.

[DailyPost]

• Global fund lauds Nigeria’s anti-money laundering initiatives

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has explained why the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) should issue operating licences or register cryptocurrency dealers.

In its 2024 Staff Report released at the weekend, the IMF recommends that global crypto trading platforms be registered or licensed in Nigeria, like similar operators, the Bureaux De Change (BDCs), which are licensed by the CBN to carry out forex transactions at the retail end of the market.

The IMF advised that such crypto trading platforms should be subjected to the same regulatory requirements applicable to financial intermediaries, following the principle of same activity, same risk, and same regulation.

The CBN had announced that cryptocurrency traders used peer-to-peer trading to manipulate the naira exchange rate against the dollar and other global currencies. 

The apex bank asserted in February that Binance, the largest cryptocurrency exchange by trading volume, had processed $26 billion in untraceable transactions in its Nigeria unit alone. 

Binance serves 185 million users in over 180 countries worldwide. 

To protect the naira from value erosion and reverse the negative impact in the financial system, the CBN subsequently stopped banks and other financial institutions from banking cryptocurrency traders.

Aside several other factors causing naira’s slide, like rising import bills, medical tourism, and tuition fees payment abroad, exchange rate manipulation by cryptocurrency traders remains a major contributory factor.

IMF said: “Rapid growth of transactions on FX trading platforms poses new challenges. At the end of February, the authorities closed the operations of Binance and other crypto-asset trading platforms that were being used by Nigerians to facilitate capital flight – neither the identity of traders nor the origin of their funds could be traced.”

“The authorities also revoked the licences of 4,173 Bureaux De Change (BDCs) that failed to comply with CBN accounting and reporting requirements. Staff recommends that global crypto trading platforms be registered or licensed in Nigeria and subjected to the same regulatory requirements applicable to financial intermediaries following the principle of same activity, same risk, and same regulation.”

The IMF lauded Nigeria’s progress in the fight against money laundering and terrorism financing.

It said: “Nigeria has made welcomed progress on improving its Anti-Money Laundering and Combating Financing of Terrorism (AML/CFT) framework, but further action is needed in line with Financial Action Task Force (FATF) recommendations. Nigeria has undertaken a series of measures, including legislative reform, conducted a money laundering and terrorism financing risk assessment, built awareness for competent authorities and the private sector, and increased investigation and prosecution of money laundering to correct identified deficiencies in the AML/CFT framework.”

[TheNation]

Directors and key management personnel of Deposit Money Banks borrowed about N549bn from their financial institutions in five years.

This is according to The PUNCH analysis of the banks’ annual reports filed with the Nigerian Exchange Limited between  2019 and 2023.

However, the banks’ loans and advances to some directors and key management personnel as well as related party transactions dropped significantly in 2023.

These transactions dropped to N52.40bn for eight financial institutions compared to N111.31bn in 2022, indicating a 52.92 per cent decline in one year.

Financial institutions reviewed in the 2023 review include Access Holdings, Guaranty Trust Holding Company Plc, Zenith Bank Plc, United Bank for Africa, Fidelity Bank, Wema Bank, Stanbic IBTC Holding Plc and the FCMB Group.

This decline came amid the release of new corporate governance guidelines by the Central Bank of Nigeria which went into effect August 1, 2023.

In the circular dated July 13, 2023, and signed by Director, Financial Policy and Regulation Department, Chibuzo Efobi, the guidelines which imposed responsibilities on the bank board and the executive compliance officers, supersede other previous codes, circulars and related directives, according to the apex bank.

The CBN guidelines on related party transactions said, “Banks shall establish a policy concerning insider trading and related party transactions by directors, senior executives, and employees, as well as publish the policy or a summary of that policy on their website. 22.2 The policy shall contain appropriate standards and procedures to ensure it is effectively implemented. 22.3 In addition to the requirements in Section 22.2, there shall be an internal review mechanism carried out by the internal audit function of the bank, to assess the compliance and effectiveness of the policy.

“22.4 Any director whose facility or that of his/her related interests remains nonperforming in any financial institution for more than one year shall cease to be on the board of the bank and shall be blacklisted from sitting on the board of such bank and that of any other financial institution under the purview of the CBN. 22.5 No director-related loans and/or interest thereon shall be written off without the CBN’s prior approval.”

Leading the pack in terms of major decline in loans to related parties and entities controlled by key management personnel was Fidelity Bank Plc, which went from N92.31bn at the end of December 2022 to N2.09bn at the end of last year.

In footnotes, the bank however said that some of the related parties like A-Z Petroleum Limited, Dangote Group and Genesis Group as of 31 December 2022, had “exited the related party relationship post 2022 financial year in line with CBN requirement.”

In 2022, the total value of insider loans for 10 banks including Access Holdings, Guaranty Trust Holding Company Plc, Zenith Bank Plc, United Bank for Africa, Fidelity Bank, Wema Bank, Stanbic IBTC Holding Plc, FCMB Group, Unity Bank and Sterling Bank amounted to N131.04bn.

Fidelity Bank led the highest for the year, followed by Unity Bank at N17.32bn and UBA at N13.74bn.

In 2021, the loans to related parties of these financial institutions rose to N139.16bn with Fidelity Bank and UBA leading at N97.73bn and N15.28bn, respectively. GTCO trailed in third position with N6.859bn.

Between 2019 and 2020, a total of N226.6bn was disbursed as loans. In 2019, eleven banks borrowed its key management personnel a total sum of N29.65bn. The figure also includes loans to companies related to the directors.

An analysis showed that GTCO lent N155m, Zenith Bank  (N1.76bn), UBA borrowed its directors N297m, Wema Bank (N5.2bn), Stanbic IBTC (N95m), FCMB (N4.8bn), Unity Bank(N7.14bn), Sterling Bank (N10.12bn) to related parties.

In 2020, the figure increased by 564 per cent or N167.32bn to N196.97bn.

Checks showed that Access Bank lent the highest with a total of N174bn to its directors and companies related to them. This was followed by Unity Bank with N7.55bn. Third on the list was Sterling Bank with N6.01bn.

Other banks including Fidelity borrowed its directors N986.2m, GTBank (N67.9m), Zenith Bank (N1.797bn), UBA (N206m), Wema Bank (N2.82bn), Stanbic IBTC (N332m), FCMB (N3.2bn), Unity Bank (N7.55bn), Sterling Bank (N6.01bn).

Commenting on the trend, the Chief Research Officer at InvestData Consulting, Ambrose  Omordion said “In my language, they say, it is the yam that you know that you use to make pounded yam. If an organisation feels that the insider or director can pay the loans given to them, then there is no issue. It is when they do not pay that is where there would be issues.

“Like what is happening now in the economy, banks are not giving loans to ordinary companies unless those with names because of economic headwinds. If they give loans to the public and they are unable to repay, Non-Performing Loans will rise. If the banks offer to insiders that would pay, it is better for them.”

Adding a word of caution, Omordion said, that when done in excess and without due process, then it is bad.

“It is when it is done in excess that it is wrong. Even banks know how to safeguard depositors’ money, which is the most important thing.

“Now, that it (insider loans) is reducing, that’s a good thing for the industry and it is a good thing for regulators too.”

The Head, Financial Institutions Ratings – Agusto&Co, Ayokunle Olubunmi, pointed out that there was no correlation between insider loans and an increase in banks’ NPLs.

“Although it is not a crime to give a loan to someone within the organisation, there is a rule and it may not be at what we call arms length. Having said that, there is no correlation that when you give an insider a loan, it goes bad.  There are some banks with insider loans which have been fully paid. However, the risk is there that they may not have done full diligence. Some banks are more stringent when it comes to insider-related loans.

“Majorly because of the CBN corporate governance, you must disclose the amount, the collateral, and the account’s performance. This is why you will see it in the accounts of banks, so that any analysts, investor will see it and if it is non-performing, then it is a red flag.”

A financial analyst and Chief Responsibility Officer, Peculiar Innovative Consulting, Segun Aremu, lamented the prevalence of the trend in the Nigerian banking sector saying, “Insider loans are prevalent in our Nigerian banking system. It has been happening for a long time. These insider loans display a lack of corporate governance which discourages investors.”

“This situation also leaves banks prone to high NPLs and what I call low profit to the banks. Meanwhile, the banks should improve their financial intermediation role and give loans to the people who need it, the manufacturers and employers of labour to drive the economy,” he said.

From the minority investor community, the overall stance was that if the loans were performing and disclosed, then there were no causes for concern.

Chairman, Ibadan Zone Shareholders Association, Eric Akinduro, speaking with The PUNCH, said, “The point is that, if it is performing, we are okay with it. As long as it is performing and there is disclosure, there is no problem but when these factors are not present, that is where we have issues.

“When a loan is not performing, it will lead to a higher rate of non-performing loans. At the end of the day, it is not just about the shareholders alone. When a loan is not performing, it is to the detriment of that business. And it is of concern to shareholders. Non-performing loans can run the business down.”

The National Coordinator of the Pragmatic Shareholders Association of Nigeria, Bisi Bakare, said, “If they are getting the loans and the loan is performing, that means there won’t be growth in Non-Performing Loans.

She, however, called on the regulators to ensure that insider loans are not written off.

“The regulators need to take the bull by the horns and ensure that these NPLs are not written off,” she charged.

 

Nigeria’s quest for diversified foreign exchange earnings away from oil not feasible for now as revenue from the manufacturing export sector plunged 166 per cent to N778.4 billion from the N2.1 trillion height reached in 2019.

Operators in the sector blamed poor state of infrastructure, logistics and other binding constraints which they said have worsened the operating environment in recent years.

The trend since 2019 has been downwards recording significant decline to N960.7billion attributed to COVID-19 in 2020, while a minor recovery was recorded in 2021 at N1.15trillion. But in 2022 a huge drop to N781.1billion was recorded and another significant drop to N778.4 billion was recorded in 2023.

Within the same period, the share of manufacturing exports to non-oil exports also dropped to 24.8 per cent in 2023 from 82.4 per cent in 2019.  

In its Africa Pulse publication, the World Bank specifically blamed the country’s dwindling foreign trade on poor infrastructure and inefficient logistics, among other factors.

According to the World Bank, the cost of trade in Nigeria and Ethiopia is four to five times higher than what obtains in the United States due to insecurity, higher transportation costs, topography and poor road infrastructure. 

“Studies from the Africa region consistently find spatial differences in prices of imported goods (food and non-food) as well as non-traded agricultural staples, indicating that markets are not well-integrated, and retail prices of products are affected by distance.  

“For instance, trade costs are four to five times higher in Ethiopia and Nigeria than in the United States, due to poor road infrastructure, low competition in the transportation sector, and topography,” it stated.

The report further noted that the consequences of these distortions include preference of African producers to sell locally rather than export.

In a similar vein, statistics provided by the World Trade Organisation (WTO) revealed that South African manufacturing export value was $46 billion in 2022, which is 15 times higher than that of Nigeria which was $3 billion in the same year.  

Manufacturers and operators in the export ecosystem have lamented that the harsh business environment in the country is making local products uncompetitive globally.

They noted that many businesses that are into exports have gone into extinction, even as several multinationals have also exited Nigeria over the past few years.

MAN, exporters seek govt intervention  

Giving insights into what is happening in the sector, Director General of the Manufacturers Association of Nigeria (MAN), Segun Ajayi-Kadir, said: “The rising cost of doing business has worsened competitiveness of Nigerian products in the global market, which is evident in the drastic reduction in global demand for these products.

“The reduction in global demand for Nigerian products was further buttressed by the NBS report that confirmed that the manufacturing export value of Nigeria plummeted by 166% from 2019 to 2023.  

“In addition, the exorbitant lending rate of over 30 percent has contributed largely to a drop in the share of manufacturing exports to non-oil exports from 82.4 percent to 24.8 percent in 2019 and 2023 respectively.”

Speaking to the development, Chairperson of the Export Group of MAN (MANEG), Odiri Erewa-Meggison, stated: “Indeed, it’s concerning to see exporters not doing as well as they could.

“As you must appreciate, the cost of doing business in Nigeria has increased by more than 300 percent. Just take a cue from the recently increased electricity tariffs.

“How can exporters compete on a global scale without a deliberate intervention from the government? All hands need to be on deck.  

“Exporters need deliberate interventions such as access to loans at right rates, support with eliminating administrative bottlenecks and multiple regulatory checks by different regulators. A consolidated or harmonized regulatory approach would be preferred.

“Higher costs in electricity make it more difficult to produce. Biggest elephant in the room is the incentives which need reviewing and streamlining to ensure qualifying exporters take benefit without having to compromise by settling anyone to get their incentive like Export Expansion Grant (EEG).

“There is an urgent need for a stakeholders’ engagement between government and exporters to discuss and agree on a way forward.  

“If exporters are to commit to repatriating their full export proceeds back to Nigeria, there are certain things exporters will like the government to equally commit to. For example, there is a need to review the items on the exports proceeds list in the CBN foreign exchange manual to ascertain and ensure the list is still relevant and updated to suit current needs.”

Also reacting, Chairperson of the Export Group of Lagos Chamber of Commerce and Industry (LCCI), Mrs. Bosun Solarin, said: “In 2020, the then Vice President through the office of the Presidential Enabling Business Environment Council (PEBEC) tried to help small businesses by slicing the cost of production, like NAFDAC registration. “So from 2020, many small businesses emerged into production, and some of them have entered the export market.    

“Many of such businesses have gone into extinction because of various policies that are anti-business.

“When people have even found a way to come into business through export, they are confronted with so many bottlenecks, bad policies and insecurity.

“If we don’t pay attention to security so that people can go back to the farm, if we don’t pay attention to interest rate so that the productive sector can get money to do business, if we don’t pay attention to logistics so that people can even move their products with ease, then we have not started.

“Nigeria is signing off for the guided trade of African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) very soon, and logistics is a problem to even move things.

“These, I think are places where the government should pay attention.”

Exporters must adhere to trade norms – NEPC

Meanwhile, the Nigerian Export Promotion Council (NEPC) has charged Nigerian exporters to adhere to the requirements for exporting products to different countries.

Speaking at a recent sensitisation workshop aimed at enhancing Nigeria’s export potential and strengthening trade relations with China, Mrs Nonye Ayeni, Executive Director of NEPC, emphasised the need for exporters to adhere to the General Administration of Chinese Customs (GACC).

Ayeni, who was represented by Mr Samson Idowu, North-Central Coordinator of the council, said that GACC has clear but stringent requirements for exporting products to China.

“Understanding the registration process, documentation and regulatory changes is paramount for successful export. Understanding the requirements set forth by GACC is crucial for Nigerian exporters to ensure smooth and successful trade with China,” she stated.

National Single Window will bring relief – CPPE

In his comment, CEO, Centre for the Promotion of Private enterprise (CPPE), Dr Muda Yusuf, said the implementation of the National Single Window (NSW) initiative will go a long way in enhancing Nigeria’s foreign trade.

Yusuf stated: “When you have a process that is highly bureaucratic, it gives people the opportunity for physical interaction that also gives room for discretion, which is a fertile ground for corruption, extortions, delays and inefficiencies which are also affecting the cost of goods and services.

“The impact on business will be significant. No matter what sector you talk about, what happens in the import/export sector impacts the sector, directly or indirectly. 

Whether you are in manufacturing, mining, or whatever, as long as you import or export goods. And if you talk to those who clear these goods, they will tell you the kind of experience they go through.

“So, first, there will be an impact in terms of the efficiency because when you bring technology into a space, the value proposition is the efficiency that it brings. And efficiency reduces cost of operation, it reduces the time it takes to conduct the business”.

Nigeria loses $4bn to import-export infractions annually – Tinubu

At the recent launching of the NSW project in Abuja, President Bola Tinubu stated that Nigeria currently loses about $4 billion annually to import-export infractions due to bureaucratic bottlenecks, especially at the ports.  

According to the president, the NSW project is expected to ensure 24-hour clearance of goods at the ports and simplify trade by providing a digital platform for all import and export-related activities.

Tinubu said: “This initiative will link our ports, government agencies, and key stakeholders, creating a seamless and efficient system that will facilitate trade like never before. It will reduce the need to deal with multiple agencies in multiple locations to obtain the necessary papers, permits and clearances to complete their import or export processes”.

[Vanguard]

“Nigerians pay one of the highest implicit tax rates in the world — way higher than developed countries,” African Development Bank’s president, Dr. Akinwumi Adesina, cried out in January 2021 at a Federal Inland Revenue Service Tax Dialogue. “Think of it”, he said “they provide electricity for themselves via generators; they repair roads to their neighborhoods, if they can afford to; there are no social security systems; they provide security for their own safety; and they provide boreholes for drinking water with their own monies.” Yet, more taxes and levies are rolled out daily against us like Israeli armoured tanks in Gaza.”

I do not believe that the president of any country will deliberately wreck everything. Their problem may be arrogance or ignorance – or arrogance in ignorance. Or, they may be worshipping wrong gods or feeding their gods with what they must not eat.

You remember Sir Shina Peters’ song for M.K.O. Abiola on the billionaire’s implacable friends who refused to eat his food?

“You gave smooth pounded yam to your friend,

Your friend refused to eat.

You made soft, mushy amala for your friend,

Your friend refused to eat.

You called your friend,

Your friend refused to answer you.

You do not know what they say you did wrong.”

There are at least two sides to a story such as this. Why would I give my friends food and they refuse to eat? Why would I shout their names and they ignore me? Am I calling the right names? If my offerings are right, shouldn’t I then check if they are really my friends?

The ace musician sang that song years before June 12 happened to Abiola. The musician may not know, but that chant is straight from the lore studio of the priests of life.

The foundation story of the song I tell here:

One ancient Yoruba king called Oniregba Osodi, at the beginning of his reign, asked his priests if his era would be peaceful and prosperous. The king was told to take care of all birds in his kingdom because they were hungry and angry and would hurt his happiness.

“What should I do and where are the birds?” the king should ask that question but he did not ask. He was the smartest and the wisest human being around, so he thought.

Instead of asking for directions, the king announced that he knew the road and blurted out orders. He commanded every man and woman in his kingdom to bring out all their grains and feed their ducks and fowls. The people brought out their corn and guinea corn and fed their ducks and pigeons, chicks and chickens.

The king was happy and satisfied.

But, the real hungry, angry birds were looking and watching.

“This oba is king also in idiocy,” they concluded and resolved to teach the powerful how to be wise.

Then, they struck. Nothing Oniregba did amounted to anything. He moved from market to farm, all was in vain. His efforts were like Abiku’s bangles in Soyinka’s lines. He sent his servants on an errand, they did as Alaafin Aole’s spell ordered them: The messengers did not come back. They even did worse. They created their own message, like Afonja did, and delivered the same to an audience different from their lord’s. Wracked by hunger and want, shouts of “ebi npa wá” rent the town while disease and death and general pestilence reigned.

In the midst of the commotion, the sad king, in tears, challenged his priests on the failure of their prescription. “False prophets,” he called them.

They replied the king that he did not feed the birds as they counseled him to.

He said he did. They told him he didn’t.

The king gave a detailed account of his specific orders and how they were carried out.

The priests exchanged looks and laughed. They told the king: “Kabiyesi, you offered the wrong sacrifice to the wrong birds in the wrong place.”

And, so, in Iregba till tomorrow is the song:

We made smooth and soft pounded yam,

We gave the birds of Iregba,

The birds said no, they won’t eat.

We rolled out pots of succulent amala for the birds of Iregba,

The birds said it was not their food,

They refused to eat…

When we gave the right meals to the big birds,

They ate and chirped with joy…

I did not make this story up. If you are a Yoruba and you are like me with a knowledgeable ancestor, consult him. Even if the forebears are like mine, long dead, their undying spirit should whisper to you the truth in the tale. But if you have no father and no mother, and you have no idea where their bones rest, put a call through to Professor Wande Abimbola. He has the knowledge. Or you can go to Chief Yemi Elebuibon in Osogbo. The tale is his to retell. He has a fuller version recorded in one of his books.

Except he retraces his steps and changes the deity he serves, by the time Alhaji Bola Ahmed Tinubu ends his tenure, he will be remembered for creating greater misery and more poor people than have ever lived in Nigeria. I don’t think that will be an enviable legacy. But he chose it. Every king writes the history of his era.

When a government neglects the road, opts for the bush and pumps efforts into wrong ideas, what it does is the same as starving the birds of life. Its efforts will, till eternity, roll up and down the hill like the boulder of condemned Sisyphus, the devious tyrant of Ephyra who violated “the sacred hospitality tradition” by killing visitors “to show off his power.”

Let us look at it. You moved the price of petrol from less than N200 to almost N1000 and upended every plan in every home. You pushed the naira tumbling down Mount Everest and clapped for yourself as a man of courage. Your Sango’s stone celts struck the market and shocked food prices beyond the reach of the hungry. People who need food, you continue to feed them hope in poisoned cans of tax, more tax and more levies.

Until now, I never knew that the introduction of taxes and levies could be celebrated as achievements by a government. Our government has that epaulette proudly emblazoned on its right and left shoulders. And we are so pinned down in helplessness.

The history of tax is one of intrigue. In ancient times, it was levy to fight wars. In medieval times, it was what Terence Dwyer (2014) calls “a fee derived entirely from surpluses” – the same thing Adam Smith prescribed as the “ability to pay”. In modern times, tax has become “a burden on production.” Why should people pay tax to an absent government? Tax theorists say tax is payment for government services. In ‘The Birth and Death of Taxes’ (1977) economic historians, Edward Ames and Richard Rapp, trace the history of tax as a feature of government’s economic life. They tell us that there is “a public good called protection, the suppliers of which are called governments.” They say a government “has a monopoly over the supply of protection to its subjects and taxes are the price paid to the monopolist.” They take it further, identifying two kinds of protection: one is defence, the other justice. They say when a threat is from foreigners, there is a demand for defence. When the threat is internal, one group of the same population unleashing threats against another, the good on demand is justice. Both goods should normally be exclusively government products. But, you and I know this may not always be so. A government that provides neither defence nor justice but still demands and collects tax is simply extortionate. In that case, what should the subjects do?

A newspaper on Sunday said the president had halted the proposed collection of cyber security levies from the poor and the rich. If it is true, I salute and thank the president. But, should that demand ever have been contemplated at all? What law backed the collection order in the first place? Who should collect and manage taxes under a just, normal law, the Federal Inland Revenue Service or an office created strictly to advise on security?

While we sheepishly surrender and pour libation to Abuja’s god of extortion, we are being offered as cheap ingredients for money ritual. CBN’s demand for cybersecurity tax from everyone, including sellers of pepper and locust beans, was said to be rooted in the Cybersecurity Act 2015 and its 2024 amendment. But that is not correct. The law mentions neither you nor me, nor the sweaty yam seller next street.

Let us check what the law contains. Section 44 (1) of the Cybersecurity Act 2015 says: “There is established a Fund, which shall be known as the National Cyber Security Fund (in this Act referred to as “The Fund”).” Subsection (2) adds that “There shall be paid and credited into the Fund established under subsection (1) of this section and domiciled in the Central Bank of Nigeria: (a) A levy of 0.005 of all electronic transactions by the businesses specified in the Second Schedule to this Act.” And what is in that Second Schedule? The Second Schedule is plain; it habours neither the jìbìtì nor the rìkísí which we read in the CBN circular. The Schedule says: “Businesses which section 44 (2)(a) refers to are: (a) GSM Service providers and all telecommunication companies; (b) Internet Service Providers; (c) Banks and other Financial Institutions; (d) Insurance Companies; (e) Nigerian Stock Exchange.” The 2024 Act amended the 2015 Act without touching the Second Schedule. Indeed, the Amendment Act reinforces that schedule by prescribing punishments for non-payment of the levy by the businesses so listed (see Subsection 8 of the Amendment Act). So, where did Tinubu’s Central Bank of Nigeria get its long turenchi demanding that you and I start paying cyber security levies to an office that already has its share of the budget?

Apparently some people needed more money for the next night party, they did the maths and felt what the listed companies would pay them wouldn’t be enough for their frolics. They then converted all of us to ‘businesses’ without bothering to tinker with the law as they did in February. They simply asked the CBN to help them rewrite the law with a wordy circular. They did so knowing that we are a conquered people who won’t bother to check what the law truly says.

Even the businesses listed in that cyber security law will argue that they are being unfairly taxed. You would know and agree with them if you apply the theory of tax as payment for public goods. What does the government sell to them that warrant incessant taxation? How many of those businesses get ‘defence’ or ‘justice’ from the government as we know it?

“Nigerians pay one of the highest implicit tax rates in the world — way higher than developed countries,” African Development Bank’s president, Dr. Akinwumi Adesina, cried out in January 2021 at a Federal Inland Revenue Service Tax Dialogue. “Think of it”, he said “they provide electricity for themselves via generators; they repair roads to their neighborhoods, if they can afford to; there are no social security systems; they provide security for their own safety; and they provide boreholes for drinking water with their own monies.” Yet, more taxes and levies are rolled out daily against us like Israeli armoured tanks in Gaza.

We should be afraid. There was a time in France when the people were compelled to purchase salt by the government which also forced them to pay extortionate tax on it. Kings and principalities historically taxed the most important ‘goods’ of life. Salt has always been that important – even the word ‘salary’ is related to salt; you may check the history of its Latin root ‘salarium’. And, so it was heavily taxed. The French called the salt tax la gabelle. Historians Theodore Sands and Chester Higby in 1949 published an article on ‘France and the Salt Tax’. In it, they recall that the history of the gabelle under the Ancien Regime is “largely a story of increasing taxation and flourishing abuses.” They say there was even a king of France who monopolized the sale of salt and made the people pay salt tax without selling salt to them. They add that it was a period when the government was “satisfied to receive the money supplied by the system and forgot the people who paid it.” The repercussion was an insurrection that pillaged the rich and, later, ignited the French Revolution.

Today’s Nigerians are like the birds of ancient Iregba. They are hungry and angry. In his ‘Salt, Politics and the French Revolution’, Toby Jaffe warns that “everyday commodities, including food, have the power to uproot, shatter and recreate societies…The revolutionary events around the salt tax of 18th-century France teach us that something as deceptively simple as salt can be a spark plug for civil unrest and revolution.” Now that Nigeria taxes everything including hunger, may God give us the fortitude to bear what may be coming.

A few weeks ago, Nigerians were startled by a legislation that had largely escaped public awareness. This legislation, which has since undergone substantial amendment carries profound implications for the financial health of every Nigerian, sparking widespread controversy.

The law raises several concerns regarding our legislators’ rigour, effort, and dedication to enacting laws. The legislation, which is known as the Cybercrime (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) (Amendment] 2024 Act. Section 44 (2] (a] of the Act, mandated a levy of 0.5% of all electronic transactions value by businesses specified in the second schedule of the Act, which includes GSM service providers and telecommunication companies, Internet Service Providers, Banks and other financial institutions, Insurance companies and Nigeria Stock Exchange.

To implement this law, the CBN, on the 6th of May 2024, sent a circular to all banks and financial institutions in Nigeria to charge a cybersecurity levy starting from the 20th of May 2024 on electronic transactions by customers, barring a few exemptions. Industry watchers have claimed that the government aimed to earn about N2 trillion per annum, judging by the over N600 trillion values of all such transactions in 2023. This caused an uproar in the country, and most civil society organizations, private sector businesses, labour organizations, and concerned Nigerians used all the media available to them to voice their condemnation of this imprudent law.

The banks and other mandated institutions are to collect the levy and remit it monthly to a designated fund (National Cybersecurity Fund) at the CBN for transmission to the Office of the National Security Adviser (ONSA). The fund’s stated primary purpose is to provide financial resources for fighting cybersecurity crimes in Nigeria.

There are many things wrong with this levy beyond the fact that Nigerians are discontented with government and non-governmental levies and fees plaguing the living light out of them. Some have argued about the interpretation of the law by CBN that the transactions to be charged should be on the businesses mentioned in the Act, not their customers or Nigerians. Others have questioned why this law, created, and signed into law in 2015 by the Jonathan administration, was amended now to include the cybersecurity levy and why the haste to implement it now, especially given the harsh economic conditions occasioned by good-intentioned policies that have had a devastating impact on Nigeria.

The argument on timing is germane given the level of inflation and the devastating degradation of the value of the Naira and, by extension, the purchasing power of Nigerians. Some still argue about the increasing focus of government to use tax as a significant economic policy for revenue generation, especially in an increasingly volatile economic climate where productivity is low, and businesses are shutting down because of increasing cost of doing business, ranging from the cost of labour, energy, and raw materials. My take on this anchor on the morality behind the levy given Nigeria’s social contract with the state, procedural antecedents in institutional revenue collection for government, the burden on Nigerians on financial transaction-related charges, and the imperfections of our legislative processes. 

The pertinent question is why should Nigerians who pay personal and business taxes pay for security in whatever guise or nomenclature? Whether cybersecurity, physical security, or any form of security, it is the Nigerian government’s exclusive and primary responsibility, which is why we pay  tax to the government. Under the social contract between Nigerians and the state, we accept and give out our rights, especially the right to security of our lives, to the state and expect the state to protect us by whatever means necessary. The state provides the security infrastructure, architecture, and personnel to provide security for all. The government singling out an aspect of security and levying citizens to pay for it is tantamount to double taxation when we already pay income tax and allow the government income from our natural resources to provide this service. Unbundling security and taxing some is a prelude to other security tax forms. Should we expect a Banditry levy, terrorist levy, or armed robbery levy soon?

The second question is, when did the office of the National Security Adviser become a revenue-generating and collecting centre? The Nigerian state has explicit provisions for regulatory agencies or public enterprises that provide public goods and services. The office of the NSA is not such and does not have such a mandate. It is an anomaly procedurally to saddle this office with the mundane task of revenue issues, and as a government unit coordinating security, it should receive its funding from the federal government budget. Enacting and implementing laws that go against established procedures affects the structures and systems of the state and sometimes goes against the mandate on which institutions are created. 

The third issue is why the national assembly members were screaming at the top of their voices against this law when the same body amended it. Does it mean that they did not understand the law they passed? Or is it that the law was amended and passed without the knowledge of many members passing through the due processes? Is the interpretation of the law by CBN not in tandem with the intentions of the lawmakers? Is there a problem with framing the law caused by language failure? Did the framers mean online or electronic transfer levy? It would be easier for the public to understand the levy if it had come outright as a transaction levy because many people cannot link their electronic transactions and cyber security levy. Where is the ‘cybersecurity’ in transferring legitimate money? The law does not resonate with many Nigerians of average means and education, and they cannot link their everyday transactions to cybersecurity.

Granted, the legislation enacted by the National Assembly is not perfect. It sometimes has some flaws. They are subject to review, revision, or repeal. Because of this, the law is a living thing that changes with the seasons and the passage of time. Remember, errors are not uncommon when enacting laws. Had Magaji Tambuwal, the then-Clerk of the Nigerian Assembly, been successful in getting President Bola Tinubu to sign a version of the “Real Estate Regulatory Council of Nigeria 2023”—which is regarded as phoney—into law, he would have been inducted into the Hall of Fame. This demonstrates that sometimes, legislation approved and accented to by the president may not always accurately reflect the framers’ intentions. Numerous things occur in between.

The fourth issue is the incongruence of the cybersecurity levy while the Taiwo Oyedele committee is working on the harmonization of multiple taxes, reducing unprogressive taxes and  the multiplicity of legislation that imposes taxes on business. Besides, the cybersecurity levy affects citizens’ living wages. We cannot stagnate household income and continuously increase all cost elements of a living wage (housing, transport, utilities, food) through more charges like cybersecurity levy and not increase poverty in the extreme or diminish consumption income in the main.

The last issue is that the burden of bank-related levies and taxes that individuals pay in Nigeria is too much on them. It will be good for researchers to do a comparative study with other developing countries like Nigeria to determine whether we are in this alone. Bank-related levies include transfer fees, card maintenance fees, card issuance charges, stamp duties, VAT on SMS, and SMS charges for the receiver and sender. This cybersecurity levy will be one too many. Imagine the implication on the cost of doing business, especially post-subsidy removal, post-increase in electricity tariff, the collapse of the Naira, hyperinflation and many charges and levies on businesses.

Existing business levies and taxes include Company Income Tax, Stamp Duties, Petroleum Profit Tax, Capital Gains Tax, Value Added Tax, Personal Income Tax, Withholding Tax, Tertiary Education Tax, one per cent of payroll contribution to NSITF, 10 per cent of Payroll Contribution to PenCom; one per cent of Payroll ITF Levy and National Information Development Levy. Others are Radio and TV Licenses; Police Special Trust Fund Tax levy; Niger Delta Development Commission levy; National Agency for Science and Engineering Infrastructure levy; Land Use Charge; Parking Fee; Consumption Tax; Road Tax; Standard Organization of Nigeria fees; Nigeria Content Development levy; NAFDAC levy; Nigeria Health Insurance Authority contribution; Signage Fees. Touts and street urchins are leveraging the multiplicity of taxes and levies to attack businesses. Businesses are getting it rough and do not need another levy straw that will break their backs.

Cybersecurity levy is peculiar to Nigeria and is not applicable in many developing and developed countries of the world. President Bola Ahmed Tinubu acted well in suspending the cybersecurity levy; many Nigerians are happy about that. There are many reasons to repeal this law or quickly review it with broad-based consultations.