₦airaland Forum

....Describes Subsidy Removal As Pain For Nigerians, Incentive For Big Oil

Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has accused President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s administration of hypocrisy over its handling of petroleum-sector interventions, arguing that the government cannot claim to have abolished subsidy while simultaneously granting tax credits, concessions and other fiscal incentives to major operators in the oil and gas industry.

Atiku, in a statement on Sunday in Abuja by his Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu, said the administration’s celebration of subsidy removal was misleading because Nigerians had continued to bear the cost of government interventions in the petroleum sector through various forms of under-recovery and energy-security expenditure.

He said the controversy had become more pronounced following the unveiling of his Atiku Economic Recovery Plan (AERP), which proposes a targeted, capped and transparently administered intervention to cushion the effect of high energy costs on Nigerian households while accelerating domestic refining and reducing dependence on imported petroleum products.

According to Atiku, Tinubu’s administration appears to oppose government intervention only when the intended beneficiaries are ordinary Nigerians.

“Tinubu stood at Eagle Square and declared that subsidy was gone. Petrol prices exploded, transportation costs soared, food prices followed, businesses buckled and household purchasing power collapsed. Nigerians were told there was no alternative and that enduring this pain was the necessary price of economic reform.

“But when major oil investors knock on Tinubu’s door, the sermon changes. Suddenly, government intervention is good economics; tax credits are necessary; fiscal concessions are strategic; and private investment must be de-risked.

“Apparently, intervention is only unacceptable when poor Nigerians are the beneficiaries,” the statement said.

Atiku cited the government’s incentives for deep offshore oil and gas projects as an example of what he described as selective economic intervention.

He noted that qualifying petroleum developments can benefit from production tax credits and supplementary incentives under the government’s fiscal framework, arguing that such measures demonstrate that intervention is not inherently incompatible with market economics.

“So, what exactly is Tinubu’s objection: government intervention itself, or government intervention for Nigerians?” he asked.

The former Vice President also questioned the government’s description of petroleum-sector expenditure following the removal of petrol subsidy, pointing to figures contained in NNPC’s audited accounts.

He said NNPC’s 2023 accounts recorded approximately ₦4.84 trillion in energy-security expenses and related shortfalls, while its 2024 audited financial statements recorded approximately ₦7.13 trillion under energy-security expenses.

Atiku said NNPC had explained that part of the expenditure arose from the difference between the exchange rate used in determining the regulated PMS ex-coastal price and the prevailing exchange rate when import obligations were settled.

“In plain English, government was still absorbing a price differential after Tinubu had triumphantly announced that subsidy was gone,” he said.

He challenged the administration to explain the distinction between subsidy, under-recovery, shortfall and energy-security expenditure where public funds were used to bridge a gap between the economic cost of petroleum products and the price at which they were sold.

Atiku said: “Nigerians do not eat semantics. Whether government calls it subsidy, under-recovery, shortfall or energy security, public resources were being used to bridge a gap between economic cost and the price at which petrol was sold.

“You cannot abolish subsidy at the podium and resurrect it in the accounts under an alias.”

Atiku argued that the central issue was not whether government should intervene in the economy, but whether such intervention should be designed primarily to protect corporate investment or to shield ordinary Nigerians from severe economic hardship.

He said the Tinubu administration could not, on the one hand, provide fiscal incentives designed to reduce investment risks in the petroleum sector and, on the other, dismiss targeted measures aimed at reducing the burden of high energy costs on households as economically irresponsible.

“Tinubu cannot operate two economies in one country — savage capitalism for poor Nigerian families and compassionate capitalism for big oil operators.

“It is one rule for them and another rule for the rest of us,” he said.

According to him, the government’s economic policies have placed an excessive burden on workers, traders, farmers and families while offering various incentives to investors.

“The government can protect a multibillion-dollar oil investment from risk, yet it says protecting the Nigerian worker from crushing hardship is bad economics.

“It can provide fiscal cushions for petroleum investors while telling workers, traders, farmers and families to absorb every shock in the name of reform.

“That is not reform; it is an upside-down economy,” the former Vice President said.

Atiku stressed that his proposed intervention under the AERP should not be confused with the former subsidy regime, which he described as opaque and vulnerable to abuse.

He said his proposal was for a targeted, capped, transparently budgeted and independently audited intervention, with a clearly defined exit mechanism and measures to expand domestic refining, increase competition, improve mass transportation and restore household purchasing power.

“If government can legitimately de-risk investment, why is it economic heresy to de-risk survival?” he asked.

The former Vice President also called on the Federal Government to disclose the beneficiaries and financial implications of major petroleum-sector tax credits, concessions, remissions and other incentives.

“Nigerians deserve to know the beneficiaries of major petroleum tax credits, remissions and incentives, the value of revenue surrendered, the investments delivered in return and whether Nigerian investors have equal and transparent access to comparable incentives.

“These concessions belong to the Nigerian people and must never become instruments of patronage dispensed behind closed doors,” he said.

Atiku said he supports domestic and foreign investment and recognises the role of transparent, performance-based incentives in attracting capital.

Atiku said: “What we reject is the intellectual dishonesty of pretending that government intervention becomes sound economics when corporations benefit and economic ignorance when Nigerian citizens benefit.

“You cannot subsidise capital and criminalise relief for citizens. You cannot offer cushions upstairs and call suffering downstairs reform.”

He said the ultimate test of economic reform should not be how loudly a government announces the removal of subsidy, but whether Nigerians are better off, businesses are productive, jobs are being created and household incomes can meet basic living costs.

“The Atiku Economic Recovery Plan is founded on a fundamentally different philosophy: markets must work, investment must earn a fair return and public finances must be protected, but the Nigerian citizen must remain the ultimate beneficiary of economic policy.

“A government cannot preach unrestrained market forces to the poor while practising interventionist economics for powerful corporate interests. It cannot demand sacrifice from Nigerian families while extending concessions to investors and then call the resulting hardship reform.

“That is not economic reform. It is economic apartheid,” Atiku said.

https://independent.ng/tinubu-didnt-end-subsidy-he-shifted-the-burden-to-nigerians-atiku/

Nigerians are simply asking Tinubu and his band of 36 to live within their means. Is that too much to ask? Nigerians can't continue to subsidise the lifestyles of a few at their own detriment.

Buhari and Emefiele were going to phase out subsidy as we know it but their plan was hinged on Dangote's refinery coming on-stream. The plan was to enter into a naira-for-crude deal directly with Dangote that will see subsidy gone but at a less exorbitant rate for Nigerians with less shock. It is Tinubu's abrupt announcement of subsidy removal without a buffer followed by the ill-timed naira floatation that tanked the economy. He did it at a time when Nigeria was still relying on importation. Make no mistakes, it is the coming onboard of the Dangote refinery that has provided a bit of respite and stability to this government, but the damage had already been done as far as microeconomics is concerned. Atiku is proposing a return to this production-based subsidy as a way of providing some succour to the populace. There is no demerit to Atiku’s plan.

This is the absolute truth. The first time I see Atiku talking with common sense. Nigerians are using the largest part of their income to pay for fuel or transportation. It costs an average of 130k to fill ur tank to move around in a week. How much is the monthly salary? This has brought untold suffering to many households. Govs are collecting an average of 15 billion naira a month without any corresponding effect in the lives of the people in the states.

This is the truth , tinubu is a cunny man and too bad that Nigerians are the people suffering for it while himself , family and friends smile to the bank on a daily .

We must kick out this wicked government in 2027

What sought of early morning gibberish is this?

Atiku needs to fire his media team before they strip of the little respect he has left as a states man!

Did any one argue with Atiku that, that was not the sole aim of subsidy removal? Was otherwise stated?

Based on our population and demands, we needed to enact a trajectory that would improve fiscal savings, market efficiency and same time, ease the pressure on foreign exchange.

No time as anyone said it wasn’t cost passed unto consumers and I don’t know ware Atiku and his team are making up epistles about what’s not from.

That's the truth there. I keep saying this. Subsidy is the only thing masses are benefiting from government. Now since they removed it, tell me what masses are benefiting from government. They will tell u they sharing it to state government which we all know that governors will siph0n the money and enrich themselves. That's why u can see 32 governors queue at Mr president back. They using the subsidy removed to enrich themselves. Government hate competition in thi3ving. Before, individuals are eating when government are paying subsidy. Now, all governors are eating it and u expect them not to queue at Mr president back. They promised us with better health care, security, good things. But none can't show for it even with heavy taxes and removing of subsidy.

He said NNPC’s 2023 accounts recorded approximately ₦4.84 trillion in energy-security expenses and related shortfalls, while its 2024 audited financial statements recorded approximately ₦7.13 trillion under energy-security expenses.

Atiku said NNPC had explained that part of the expenditure arose from the difference between the exchange rate used in determining the regulated PMS ex-coastal price and the prevailing exchange rate when import obligations were settled.

“In plain English, government was still absorbing a price differential after Tinubu had triumphantly announced that subsidy was gone,” he said.

Yeah, it was done because tinubu wanted to be relected, which is why he spent that money.

It was a subsidy...on the product NNPC was importing to sell in the country. It did not affect the pricing of Dangote refinery product, nor did it affect the pricing of the product by other importers

The end game was to keep NNPC competitive against the dangote behemoth...because if they could not compete, their fuel would have been more expensive than dangote at that time.

Even then, it was not sustainable, and all in all, it negatively affected our economy.That is money taken from other sectors of the budget, to pay for NNPC Not to fall...

And anyway, dangote eventually got production upand running...nowadays,88 percent of the fuel used in Nigeria comes from dangote. If government is still paying that money, lol, they really deserve to be voted out.

LagosOrigin:
This is the truth , tinubu is a cunny man and too bad that Nigerians are the people suffering for it while himself , family and friends smile to the bank on a daily .

We must kick out this wicked government in 2027

Yes, we must kick tinubu out, but we must never bring back subsidy.

Subsidy removal is a decision that should have been made decades ago. The tragedy is that it took us over 3 decades to make the decison to do so.

We were warned in 1992. Remove subsidy now. Or you may see all sorts of problems down the line. We abused IMF and world bank well well. Well, here we are, a massive debt that forced the removal of subsidy anyway, and also forces us to borrow more for our needs.

And yeah, APC is still to blame partly for it.


P.S

I don't care who NIgerians vote for, let them vote out tinubu, but based on our current fiscal situation, a subsidy on fuel would worsen the economic situation, which is bad already.

America subsidies their cotton farmer heavily to keep them afloat.

China has close a dozen subsidies aimed at bringing down cost of production for industries.

In Nigeria, the elites will corrupt subsidies and in reaction, their partners in govt will remove that subsidy for the lowly but maintain it for themselves. Good example is the petrol subsidy and religious subsidy.

HacheNoire:
What some of early morning gibberish is this?

Atiku needs to fire his media team before they strip of the little respect he has left as a states man!

Did any one argue with Atiku that, that was not the sole aim of subsidy removal? Was otherwise stated?

Based on our population and demands, we nededed to enact a trajectory that would improve fiscal savings, market efficiency and same time, ease the pressure on foreign exchange.

No time as anyone said it wasn’t cost passed into consumers and I don’t know ware Atiku and his team and making up epistles about what’s not from.

Alhaji Abubakar Malu Atiku, very bitter Papa.

CodeTemplar:
Counter facts with factual arguments. Stop acting deranged.

What argument?

Was there a time when the administration of His Excellency, President Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu (GCFR) denied passing cost to consumers ?

What is there to argue about?

Any enlightened person knows subsidy removal passed all cost to consumers. So what argument are we starting here?

CodeTemplar:
Counter facts with factual arguments. Stop acting deranged.

Nonentities, your opinions are Inconsequential.

HacheNoire:
What argument?

Was there a time when the administration of His Excellency, President Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu (GCFR) denied passing cost to consumers ?

What is there to argue about?

Any enlightened person knows subsidy removal passed all cost to consumers. So what argument are we starting here?

Don’t mind that CodeTemplar.

Frustrated Obidient.

favor914:
Don’t mind that CodeTemplar.

Frustrated Obidient.

Oh! You are quite familiar with him.

I will take note and won’t respond to him again. I like discussing with brilliant people.

Atiku is sounding Daft, Frustrated and Desperate this days

Atiku didn't privatise National Assets.

He shifted ownership to himself and his cronies.

Tinubu is against the poor nigerians

Apcpalava:
Tinubu is against the poor nigerians

And you are the ambassador of poverty.

Tinubu nah scam... The name means Scam

Atiku is so shameless and I don't know why
At least Obi is just clueless, and I very much know why.

But you see Tinubu? That one is just a calamity

Sadly, the three old ancestors are the ones some foolish people are considering voting for

God abeg

Dubai resident and dollars merchant rest.

Give us a feasible blueprint and why your alternative is better and stop being fixated on the president.

If not for your desperation and miscalculation, you would have been president by now finishing your second tenure if you'd supported GEJ's 2nd term.

You are a serial loser and will retire as such greedy old desperado

At times I dey pity this nigga.

So close ... Yet so far. He's been dreaming of the throne since 1993.

Enjoyed proximity to it for 8 good years and has been dreaming for almost 20 years to finally sit on it.

If only he had pretended to OBJ. Openly support him while anticipating betrayal and having Plan B to Z.

This is what Tinubu did with Buhari and he won.

Most people would have assumed support and gone complacent thinking they had a ruling party's ticket. But Tinubu correctly anticipated Buhari's betrayal and quietly developed back up plans.

Truth it cause more pain on Nigerian. It only benefits the state Governors

Ofunaofu:
....Describes Subsidy Removal As Pain For Nigerians, Incentive For Big Oil




https://independent.ng/tinubu-didnt-end-subsidy-he-shifted-the-burden-to-nigerians-atiku/

Exactly. Atiku took the word outter my mouth.

You're correct in this one. Because he has borrowed in 3 years what no government could borrow in in years. What a mess?

Carry your own wealth go paradise now if you can nonsencity, remember all your wealth is a vanity alaini laakaye

Wickedtruths:
And you are the ambassador of poverty.

The word ' Subsidy' has been used to brainwashed Nigerian for some time now.

The Subsidy' we know is different from the Subsidy' the Government understood.

What is really Subsidy'?

Atiku if u can reverse the price of fuel back to d way it was I'll not only vote for u I'll rigg for u