Connect with us

Business

26 states lean on FAAC as wage bills outstrip IGR

Published

on

At least 26 state governments could not generate enough internal revenue to cover their personnel costs in 2025, as they continue to depend on allocations from the Federation Account despite a significant improvement in their finances.

An analysis by The PUNCH showed that only eight of the 34 states covered by a new BudgIT report generated Internally Generated Revenue higher than their personnel expenditure during the year. The eight states were Lagos, Enugu, Ogun, Delta, Kaduna, Kwara, Abia and Anambra.

The remaining 26 states generated about N1.16tn internally but spent approximately N1.91tn on personnel, leaving a gap of about N747bn between their combined IGR and wage-related expenditure.

The findings are contained in BudgIT’s 2026 report titled ‘Nigeria’s Economic Reforms: What Has Changed Across Nigeria’s States? An Analysis of State Finances in the Post-Subsidy Years’.

The report analysed actual figures contained in states’ full-year budget implementation reports for 2022 and 2025. Akwa Ibom and Rivers were excluded because of incomplete or unavailable data.

The figures do not imply that states are expected to finance salaries exclusively from IGR because statutory allocations are a legitimate source of government revenue. They, however, show the extent to which many states would struggle to meet even their personnel obligations without revenue distributed by the Federation Account Allocation Committee.

This dependence has persisted despite the sharp rise in revenues available to states following the removal of petrol subsidy, foreign exchange reforms, and higher revenues accruing to the Federation Account.

According to BudgIT, aggregate FAAC allocations increased from N3.43tn in 2022 to N11.38tn in 2025, representing a 232.06 per cent increase and a compound annual growth rate of 50.2 per cent.

IGR also increased substantially, rising from N1.57tn to N4.15tn over the same period, but its 165.01 per cent growth and 38.38 per cent CAGR lagged the expansion in FAAC receipts.

Consequently, states became more dependent on federal transfers despite generating more revenue internally. FAAC accounted for 68.7 per cent of aggregate state revenue in 2022 but increased to 73.3 per cent in 2025. Conversely, IGR’s share fell from 31.4 per cent to 26.7 per cent.

BudgIT said this showed that “despite improvements in domestic revenue mobilisation, many states remained heavily reliant on transfers from the Federation Account.”

It stressed that improving domestic revenue mobilisation would be critical to strengthening states’ long-term fiscal sustainability and reducing their dependence on federal transfers.

See also  Technology key to implementing new tax laws – Adedeji

The report said, “Although statutory allocations accounted for a larger share of the overall increase in revenues, strengthening domestic revenue mobilisation remains essential for improving long-term fiscal sustainability and reducing dependence on federal transfers.”

A state-by-state comparison by The PUNCH showed wide disparities between personnel expenditure and internally generated revenue. Yobe generated only N15.42bn internally in 2025 but spent N76.34bn on personnel. Its personnel bill was therefore almost five times its IGR, leaving a shortfall of about N60.91bn.

Taraba generated N17.89bn against personnel expenditure of N55.60bn, meaning its personnel costs were more than three times its IGR. Sokoto recorded IGR of N20.58bn but personnel expenditure of N58.65bn, while Adamawa generated N24.14bn internally against a N65.73bn personnel bill.

Jigawa’s personnel expenditure stood at N92.66bn compared with IGR of N35.27bn, while Benue spent N73.94bn on personnel after generating N29.38bn internally.

Similarly, Kogi generated N36.50bn but recorded personnel expenditure of N89.20bn, while Kebbi’s N18.41bn IGR was less than half of its N44.82bn personnel expenditure.

Other states with personnel costs exceeding IGR included Bauchi, Bayelsa, Borno, Cross River, Ebonyi, Edo, Ekiti, Gombe, Imo, Kano, Katsina, Nasarawa, Niger, Ondo, Osun, Oyo, Plateau and Zamfara.

In absolute terms, Oyo recorded the largest gap among the 26 states. The state generated N102.52bn internally but spent N170.04bn on personnel, creating a difference of about N67.51bn.

Yobe followed with a gap of about N60.91bn, while Jigawa recorded N57.39bn. Ondo’s personnel expenditure of N99.58bn exceeded its N45.63bn IGR by N53.94bn, while Kogi recorded a gap of N52.70bn. Bayelsa generated N52.15bn against N98.75bn in personnel expenditure, leaving a difference of N46.60bn.

Some states were much closer to financing their personnel costs internally. Edo generated N98.45bn and spent N99.27bn on personnel, leaving a gap of less than N1bn. Gombe generated N36.36bn compared with personnel expenditure of N53.95bn, while Osun recorded N58.80bn in IGR against N87.46bn in personnel costs.

The data showed that the situation improved slightly compared with 2022, when 28 of the 34 states had personnel expenditure above their IGR. Abia, Delta, Enugu and Kwara moved from having IGR below personnel expenditure in 2022 to generating enough internally to cover their wage-related costs by 2025. However, Ebonyi and Jigawa moved in the opposite direction.

The PUNCH further observed that the weakness in state-level fiscal independence is partly obscured by the enormous size of Lagos’ revenue base. Lagos generated N1.85tn in IGR in 2025, up from N656.35bn in 2022. Its IGR alone accounted for about 44 per cent of the N4.15tn generated by the 34 states covered by the report.

See also  PDP factions open peace talks as Wike denies split

The state spent N333.67bn on personnel, meaning its IGR was more than five times its personnel expenditure. Enugu generated N406.77bn compared with personnel expenditure of N56.40bn, while Ogun generated N237.65bn against N151.27bn in personnel costs. Delta recorded N206.44bn in IGR and N197.81bn in personnel expenditure.

Other states whose IGR exceeded their personnel bills were Kaduna, which generated N86.72bn against N77.63bn; Kwara, N85.21bn against N65.22bn; Abia, N66.86bn against N62.26bn; and Anambra, N54.24bn against N39.95bn.

Lagos’ dominance also means the aggregate IGR position appears considerably stronger than that of the typical state. Excluding Lagos, the remaining 33 states generated about N2.30tn internally in 2025. Their combined personnel expenditure stood at roughly N2.56tn, meaning personnel costs exceeded IGR by about N254bn.

Enugu also recorded an exceptional increase that boosted the overall IGR figure. Its IGR jumped from N25.12bn in 2022 to N406.77bn in 2025, an increase of N381.66bn and a CAGR of 153.01 per cent, the highest among the states.

BudgIT, however, noted that the increase was largely attributable to proceeds collected by the Enugu State Housing Development Corporation from the government’s intervention in the landed property market.

The organisation expressed reservations about the classification and noted the potentially cyclical nature of the receipts. Niger recorded the second-fastest IGR growth, with collections rising from N12.11bn to N66.37bn, while Abia increased from N14.67bn to N66.86bn.

But not every state benefited from the IGR expansion. Three states recorded lower IGR in 2025 than in 2022. Jigawa suffered the biggest decline, falling from N59.40bn to N35.27bn. Sokoto’s IGR dropped from N23.60bn to N20.58bn, while Ebonyi declined marginally from N23.89bn to N23.25bn.

Jigawa’s position was particularly significant because its personnel expenditure rose from N52.37bn in 2022 to N92.66bn in 2025, while its IGR declined, substantially increasing its dependence on other revenue sources.

The Minister of Finance and Coordinating Minister of the Economy, Taiwo Oyedele, recently called for stronger fiscal federalism, improved revenue generation and economic diversification to strengthen Nigeria’s resilience to economic shocks. The minister spoke in Owerri, the Imo State capital, at the 2026 National Council on Finance and Economic Development Retreat.

See also  Nigerians cut household spending by N14tn as inflation bites hard

Speaking on the theme ‘Strengthening Fiscal Federalism for Equity, Sustainable Development and Economic Resilience in a Volatile Global Economy,’ Oyedele insisted on the retreat interrogating the current allocation and derivation principles, even as he called for greater fiscal responsibility, accountability and cooperation among Nigeria’s three tiers of government to achieve sustainable economic growth.

The minister urged state governments nationwide to strengthen their Internally Generated Revenue, attract investments and create jobs rather than rely heavily on federal allocations.

Also speaking, the Imo State Governor, Hope Uzodimma, who was represented at the event by his Deputy, Chinyere Ekomaru, said that states must be empowered to generate more revenue and efficiently manage available resources, pointing out that continued dependence on oil revenue was no longer sustainable.

An economist and former Vice-Chancellor of the University of Uyo, Prof Akpan Ekpo, recently stressed that “states have to think of new ways of increasing their IGRs.” He urged the states to increase their revenue by increasing service delivery, which will attract more revenue.

A renowned economist and Chief Executive Officer of the Centre for the Promotion of Private Enterprise, Muda Yusuf, earlier said that a majority of states were not financially sustainable and were at risk of insolvency without a boost in investment.

He said, “This issue is a fiscal sustainability problem, showing that many states are not fiscally sustainable and need to work towards it; and that the states need to do a lot more to attract more investments to their states so that their level of dependence on the Federal Allocation Accounts Committee would reduce.

He also said that the state governors should reduce their bloated staff and political appointees. “Most of these states have heavy overhead and they have very bloated bureaucracy, political appointees and they are putting a lot of pressure on their resources, so they have to do some rationalisation on their staff, many of them don’t need more than 50 per cent of their workforce but for political reasons, they put all manner of characters on their payroll including the local government,” he said.

Source: punchng.com

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Business

FG disputes World Bank’s N7.7tn interest payments, read details

Published

on

The Federal Government has faulted the World Bank’s assessment of Nigeria’s debt position, dismissing concerns that interest payments of N7.7tn in the first half of 2026 threaten the country’s debt sustainability.

The Federal Ministry of Finance described reports that interest payments amounted to 124 per cent of Federal Government revenue during the period as misleading, arguing that the calculation relied on incomplete revenue figures and included debt obligations serviced on behalf of state governments.

The ministry stated its position in a statement issued on Sunday and shared on X by the Minister of Finance and Coordinating Minister of the Economy, Taiwo Oyedele.

According to the ministry, Nigeria’s fiscal position had improved, with revenue growing faster than interest payments.

It said, “The Federal Ministry of Finance has noted recent analysis and public commentary which, citing the World Bank’s October 2026 Nigeria Development Update, claims that Federal Government interest payments reached 124 per cent of revenue in the first half of 2026. This conclusion is misleading, for three reasons.”

The response followed reports based on the World Bank’s October 2026 Nigeria Development Update, which put Federal Government revenue at N6.2tn and interest payments at N7.7tn in the first half of the year.

An analysis of the published figures by The PUNCH showed that interest payments represented approximately 124.2 per cent of revenue, exceeding revenue by N1.5tn. The ratio was calculated from the figures published by the World Bank and was not expressly stated in the report.

However, the ministry argued that the calculation compared obligations covering multiple tiers of government with revenue attributed solely to the Federal Government.

“The interest figure includes debt the Federal Government services on behalf of other tiers of government, including external loans to states. Measuring this against federal revenue alone overstates the ratio, which is only meaningful when debt and revenue cover the same level of government,” it said.

The ministry also argued that the revenue figure excluded income earned by government agencies and enterprises but not yet remitted to the Treasury.

It added that statutory payment schedules meant some taxes were collected predominantly in the second half of the year, making first-half revenue an incomplete basis for assessing annual debt obligations.

According to the ministry, the interest-to-revenue ratio stood at 156 per cent in the first half of 2025, compared with approximately 124 per cent in the corresponding period of 2026.

It said the full-year debt-service-to-revenue ratio had fallen below 60 per cent, compared with 97 per cent before the current administration’s reforms, describing the reduction as evidence of improved fiscal management.

The ministry further stated that Federal Government revenue rose by 72 per cent, from N3.6tn in the first half of 2025 to N6.2tn in the corresponding period of 2026, while interest payments increased by 38 per cent, from N5.6tn to N7.7tn.

See also  Senate bans preaching, hawking in commercial buses, okays N50,000 fine

Consequently, it said, the interest-to-revenue ratio declined by about 32 percentage points, while the gap between interest payments and revenue narrowed from N2tn to N1.5tn.

“This is the result of reforms working, not a sign of fiscal distress,” the ministry declared.

It also rejected the use of a six-month fiscal snapshot as a definitive measure of debt sustainability, arguing that full-year projections provided a more appropriate assessment.

“The same World Bank report projects Nigeria’s full-year 2026 debt service, covering both interest and principal, at 46 per cent of revenue. This is the appropriate benchmark, and a guide to avoid the invalid conclusions being drawn,” the statement read.

The ministry also defended the Federal Government’s borrowing programme, insisting that all loans obtained by the current administration were lawful and duly approved.

It maintained that every naira borrowed fell within the limits authorised by the National Assembly under the 2026 Appropriation Act and the approved borrowing plan.

According to the statement, government borrowing complied with the Fiscal Responsibility Act 2007 and the Debt Management Office (Establishment) Act 2003, while details of the country’s debt obligations were regularly published by the Debt Management Office.

However, despite challenging the World Bank’s assessment and questioning the basis of the interest-to-revenue calculation, the ministry did not provide revised revenue and interest-payment figures or an alternative ratio to substantiate its position.

W’Bank’s $1.25bn loan

Meanwhile, the Federal Government will begin repaying the principal on a $1.25bn World Bank loan in December 2031, with the final instalment on one of the facilities due in June 2060, according to financing agreements reviewed by The PUNCH.

The facility, secured under the Nigeria Actions for Investment and Jobs Acceleration Development Policy Financing programme, is intended to support reforms aimed at expanding access to credit, improving electricity supply, strengthening trade competitiveness and increasing government revenue.

The PUNCH reported in July 2026 that the World Bank had approved the $1.25bn facility amid public concerns over Nigeria’s rising debt burden and calls for the Federal Government to reduce external borrowing.

In an earlier statement, the Washington-based bank said it had approved the Nigeria Actions for Investment and Jobs Acceleration Development Policy Financing operation to support Nigeria’s transition towards a more inclusive growth model that would stimulate growth and create jobs.

The bank said the operation would support reforms to strengthen the foundations for growth and competitiveness.

“These include deepening capital markets, modernising the regulatory framework for the digital economy and e-governance, advancing power sector reforms to accelerate electrification, lowering trade barriers in line with Nigeria’s ECOWAS and AfCFTA commitments to help ease price pressures, improving access to quality agricultural seeds, and strengthening domestic revenue mobilisation,” the statement added.

The loan was the second-largest single World Bank facility secured by Nigeria under President Bola Tinubu, after the $1.5bn Reforms for Economic Stabilisation to Enable Transformation Development Policy Financing approved in June 2024.

See also  El-Rufai denies comments on 2027 presidency, describes claim as fake

Documents reviewed by The PUNCH showed that the $1.25bn financing comprises a $750m concessional credit from the International Development Association and a $500m loan from the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, both institutions of the World Bank Group.

Differing repayment periods

Principal repayments on both facilities will begin on December 15, 2031, but their maturity dates differ. The IDA credit is scheduled to be fully repaid by June 2051, while the IBRD loan runs until June 2060.

The IDA provides concessional financing to low-income countries on more favourable terms, while the IBRD lends primarily to middle-income and creditworthy lower-income countries on market-linked terms.

The agreements were signed on behalf of Nigeria by the Minister of Finance, Taiwo Oyedele, on October 6, 2026, while the World Bank’s Country Director, Mathew Verghis, signed on June 30, 2026.

According to Schedule 2 of the IDA financing agreement, Nigeria will repay 2.5 per cent of the $750m credit every six months, beginning on December 15, 2031, and ending on June 15, 2051.

This amounts to $18.75m in principal repayments every six months, or $37.5m annually during full repayment years, excluding interest and other applicable charges.

For the $500m IBRD facility, the repayment schedule provides for semi-annual principal instalments of 1.72 per cent from December 15, 2031, through December 15, 2059, followed by a final instalment of 1.96 per cent on June 15, 2060.

The regular instalments amount to approximately $8.6m every six months, while the final principal payment is about $9.8m.

Combined, the facilities will require principal repayments of approximately $27.35m every six months between December 2031 and June 2051, equivalent to $54.7m annually during full repayment years.

The repayment obligations will extend across several administrations, with the final principal payment on the IBRD facility falling due nearly 34 years after the agreements were signed.

The schedules cover principal repayments only and do not represent the total cost of borrowing, which will also include interest and applicable charges.

Under the IBRD agreement, the interest rate is determined by the reference rate plus a variable spread. The IDA credit carries an interest charge calculated using the reference rate plus a variable spread, less 250 basis points.

The IDA agreement states, “The Interest Charge is the Reference Rate plus the Variable Spread minus 250 basis points,” subject to applicable rate limits and possible conversions.

The IBRD loan also attracts a front-end fee of 0.25 per cent, equivalent to $1.25m, as well as an annual commitment charge of 0.25 per cent on the undisbursed balance.

For the IDA credit, the agreement provides for a maximum annual commitment charge of 0.5 per cent on the undisbursed financing balance.

The documents do not specify a fixed dollar amount for total interest payments over the repayment period. The eventual borrowing cost will therefore depend on the applicable rates and other contractual provisions.

See also  Nigeria’s rent crisis deepens as two-bedroom flats hit N2.5m

The $750m IDA credit is structured for disbursement in a single tranche, subject to the World Bank’s assessment of Nigeria’s economic policies and implementation of the agreed reforms.

The $500m IBRD facility is divided into two withdrawal tranches of $249.375m each, with the remaining $1.25m allocated to the front-end fee.

Release of the second tranche depends on satisfactory progress in implementing the programme, maintaining an adequate macroeconomic framework and completing agreed policy actions.

Under the IBRD agreement, if the government fails to take satisfactory corrective measures within 90 days of receiving notice from the bank, the lender may cancel part or all of the undisbursed balance.

Both agreements have a closing date of December 31, 2027.

Areas of reforms

The agreements identify two broad areas of reform: improving access to financial credit, digital services and electricity, and strengthening competitiveness through trade, taxation and agricultural reforms.

Among the measures recognised are the Investment and Securities Act 2025, the National Integrated Electricity Policy, electricity metering reforms and regulations facilitating private investment in interconnected mini-grids.

The government also committed to implementing trade reforms under the African Continental Free Trade Area, including the gradual liberalisation of 90 per cent of tariffs on goods from African countries over 10 years.

Other measures include removing import bans on specified essential food products and inputs, reducing import adjustment taxes on selected commodities by at least 25 per cent in 2026, and progressively eliminating applicable adjustment taxes between 2027 and 2036.

On taxation, the agreements recognise the introduction of mandatory electronic invoicing for Value Added Tax, a 15 per cent minimum effective tax rate for large companies and multinational enterprises, and an increase in the maximum personal income tax rate from 24 to 25 per cent.

The financing arrangements also impose reporting and accountability requirements on the government.

Nigeria is required to maintain dedicated dollar accounts for receiving the proceeds and ensure that equivalent amounts are reflected in its budget management system.

The Federal Ministry of Finance must report the amounts received, relevant account details and records of transactions to the World Bank within 30 days of each withdrawal

The agreements also require the accounts to be audited by auditors of the Central Bank of Nigeria acceptable to the World Bank. Certified audit reports must be submitted within four months of withdrawal and made publicly available.

The financing is intended to support Nigeria’s economic reform programme, with disbursement conditional on satisfactory implementation of the agreed measures and maintenance of an adequate macroeconomic policy framework.

Source: punchng.com

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

WHATSAPP CHANNEL

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

Business

Why I’m Always Afraid When Funke Akindele Calls Me For Job – Jide Kosoko

Published

on

Veteran Nollywood actor, Jide Kosoko, has spoken about the intense work ethic of actress and filmmaker, Funke Akindele.

It was reports that Kosoko made this known during an interview on the African A-List podcast.

The veteran actor explained that working with Akindele can be demanding because she pays close attention to details and is willing to repeat scenes several times until she is satisfied with the outcome.

According to Kosoko, the filmmaker can shoot a particular scene as many as 15 times, a process that requires actors to remain patient and prepared to perform repeatedly.

He described Akindele as an exceptionally hardworking person whose energy is difficult to match, even for a man.

He also mentioned that she is left-handed while discussing some of the things he has observed about her.

He said during the interview: “Funke is very hardworking, even if you are a man you can’t match her energy. She is left-handed. Whenever Funke calls me for a job I am always scared, you can shoot a scene 15 times. And She may come the following day thinking of shooting another scene, but then she will say “We have to shoot those scenes again because of the plates they brought.”

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

See also  30 kings in Kwara flee their palaces - read why
Continue Reading

Business

WHY DO WE VALUE FOREIGN PRODUCTS MORE THAN OUR OWN? THE MINDSET HOLDING AFRICA BACK

Published

on

Africa is rich in natural resources, creativity, culture, and entrepreneurial talent. Yet one uncomfortable question continues to deserve our attention: **Why do we sometimes trust products made abroad more than products made by our own people?**

Consider this scenario: a Nigerian entrepreneur produces shoes, clothing, cosmetics, food, or household products locally. Some consumers immediately question the quality. But when a similar product carries a foreign label, those same consumers may suddenly see it as more fashionable, prestigious, or desirable.

Is the foreign product necessarily better, or have we developed a mindset that automatically associates foreign with quality and local with inferiority?

## The Psychology of Foreign Products

In many African markets, foreign brands are associated with prestige, social status, and international recognition. For some consumers, owning imported products is not merely about functionality; it is also about how those products make them appear in the eyes of others.

This creates a difficult environment for local entrepreneurs. They must compete not only on price and quality but sometimes also against perceptions that are deeply rooted in consumer behaviour.

However, it would be unfair to claim that all foreign products are better or that all locally made products meet acceptable standards. Consumers have legitimate reasons to demand durability, safety, reliability, attractive packaging, and value for money.

The real challenge is to ensure that local manufacturers can compete on a fair playing field.

## How This Mindset Can Affect African Economies

When locally produced goods struggle to attract consumers, businesses may find it harder to expand, invest in modern equipment, hire workers, and develop new products.

See also  CNG investments hit $980m, says Presidency

Strong local industries can create employment, develop technical skills, support farmers and suppliers, and keep more economic activity within a country. Countries that successfully build globally competitive industries generally combine investment, innovation, infrastructure, quality control, and consumer confidence.

Africa cannot build a stronger manufacturing base through slogans alone. It requires practical action from governments, businesses, financial institutions, and consumers.

## Local Manufacturers Must Also Take Responsibility

Supporting African businesses should not mean accepting poor-quality products simply because they are locally made.

Manufacturers must take responsibility for improving their standards, customer service, packaging, product safety, and innovation. Governments must tackle barriers such as unreliable electricity, expensive financing, inadequate infrastructure, and unfair competition.

Consumers, meanwhile, should judge products by their actual quality and value rather than automatically dismissing them because of their country of origin.

**Patriotism should encourage excellence, not protect mediocrity.**

## Can Africa Change This Mindset?

The answer begins with education, investment, accountability, and a willingness to give good local products a fair chance.

African entrepreneurs need opportunities to prove themselves. Consumers need reliable products they can trust. Governments need policies that make local production more competitive.

The goal should not be to reject everything foreign. International trade brings technology, ideas, competition, and useful products. The goal should be to build African industries strong enough to compete with the best in the world.

## The Big Question for Our Readers

Why do some consumers proudly display foreign brands but hesitate to support products made in their own countries?

Is it a genuine concern about quality, a desire for social status, a lack of trust in local manufacturers, or a combination of these factors?

See also  Banks earn N225bn from ATM, e-banking charges

**Newsbreak365 wants to hear your opinion.**

Would you choose a quality Nigerian-made product over an imported alternative if both offered similar quality and value for money?

Join the discussion in the comments. Your perspective matters.

*Newsbreak365 — Real News. Real People. Real Issues.*

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

Trending