Editorial
RITCS: The Way To Go
For many years, Nigeria has been combating a considerable infrastructure deficit because the economy is not generating sufficient revenues to close an infrastructure gap estimated at $3 trillion by Moodys. The African Infrastructure Development Index strongly indicates that the country ranks 23 out of 54 African economies in infrastructure development. It is an appalling performance. That is why the country has to be forward-looking.
Nigeria faces weak organic incomes and suffocating debt servicing. Between January and May 2021, the Federal Government raised N1.84 trillion but spent N1.8 trillion on debt charges. This translates into 98 per cent of total debt service revenues. The debt profile is similar to the 99 per cent of revenues used for debt servicing in Q1 2020.
To get out of the self-imposed embarrassment, the Federal Government conceived the idea of infrastructure funding by implementing a tax policy to promote infrastructure development. In January 2019, President Muhammadu Buhari signed into effect the Companies Income Tax (Road Infrastructure Development and Refurbishment Investment Tax Credit Scheme) Order 2019.
This tax system allows the participating company to recover costs incurred in the construction or rehabilitation of eligible roads as income tax credits payable by the partaking company. The tax credit can be carried forward to future years until it is fully used and redeemable. A company taking part in the scheme may sell or transfer its unused tax credit to others.
Zainab Ahmed, the Minister of Finance, said the strategy would stimulate private sector investment in Nigerian roads across critical economic corridors and industrial clusters, relieving the government of the burden of funding the initial outlays for these investments. She has a point. Indeed, if properly implemented, the programme has the potential to improve Nigeria’s road infrastructure. It may also enable the government to utilise public funds on other sectors of the economy apart from roads.
Several participating companies have already expressed an interest in the scheme and are involved in projects execution. These include MTN: 110km Enugu-Onitsha Road in Anambra State in exchange for tax credits; Transcorp Group: Oyigbo-Izuoma-Mirinwayi-Okoloma-Afam Road; Access Bank: Oniru axis of VI-Lekki Circulation Road in Lagos State.
Others are GZI Industries: Umueme Village Road, Abia State; Mainstreet Energy: Malando-Garin-Baka-Ngwaski Road; The BUA: Bode-Saadu-Lafiagi Road; Eyinkorin Road and Bridge; NLNG: Bodo-Bonny Bridges and Road and the Dangote Group: Obajana-Kabba Road, among others.
Dangote Cement Plc is the most prominent participant in this system. A tax credit certificate worth N22.3 billion was awarded to the firm to construct the Apapa-Oworonshoki-Ojota Road in Lagos and the Lokoja-Obajana-Kabba Road connecting Kogi and Kwara States.
We appreciate Buhari’s Federal Government for this innovative approach to infrastructural development in the country and expect other companies to join the fray as it promises to give the nation’s infrastructure a facelift. As a result, participating companies will control cash flows rather than make cash payments. They can also give value to society by picking the assets they seek to finance.
Critics of the model insist that it could deprive the nation of income if more companies adopt the regime. However, while we think that revenue target is important as projected by the castigators, it is not as significant as the optimisation of funds when collected. The question is: are we getting value for money? Given the present high level of corruption, this is surely the safest way to proceed.
The initiative has different attractions for various stakeholders. For the government, it is the ability to execute more development projects within a short time. For companies, they have a combination of brand edge and cash flow management. Cement manufacturers, for example, are also able to record improved sales of their products used in road construction; hence, they benefit both explicitly (financially) and implicitly (brand improvement).
However, the success of this enterprise and any other will depend greatly on the transparency of the process and the sincerity of the parties concerned. The policy itself is well established, and unless there are corrupt proclivities on the part of any party, it should function congruously.
Also, the Order setting up the contrivance, expected to last for 10 years, does not indicate the criteria for selecting eligible roads and participants that would construct or refurbish such roads. We also note that there is no dispute resolution mechanism in the Order, particularly concerning the determination of the cost of projects.
Furthermore, when compared to returns on other investments, it is doubtful whether the Monetary Policy Rate (MPR) — currently 11.5% — is sufficient return on project cost, especially for companies for which an Eligible Road would not positively improve their operations and grow their businesses. Those are critical questions the Federal Government must address for the model to succeed.
To ensure that the attractiveness of the strategy is not diminished, a constant review to deal with the grey provisions of the Order and manage any stakeholder concerns arising from the implementation of the scheme is imperative. Again, action is needed to ensure that the model is executed impartially nationwide to effectively finesse the widespread infrastructure gap throughout the country.
Nigeria’s Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC) has unveiled a gratuitous proposal to increase the salaries of political and public office holders in the country. This plan seeks to fatten the pay packets of the president, vice-president, governors, deputy governors, and members of the National and State Assemblies. At a time when the nation is struggling to steady its economy, the suggestion that political leaders should be rewarded with more money is not only misplaced but insulting to the sensibilities of the ordinary Nigerian.
What makes the proposal even more opprobrious is the dire economic condition under which citizens currently live. The cost of living crisis has worsened, inflation has eroded the purchasing power of workers, and the naira continues to tumble against foreign currencies. The majority of Nigerians are living hand to mouth, with many unable to afford basic foodstuffs, medical care, and education. Against this backdrop, political office holders, who already enjoy obscene allowances, perks, and privileges, should not even contemplate a salary increase.
It is, therefore, not surprising that the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has stepped in to challenge this development. SERAP has filed a lawsuit against the RMAFC to halt the implementation of this salary increment. This resolute move represents a voice of reason and accountability at a time when public anger against political insensitivity is palpable. The group is rightly insisting that the law must serve as a bulwark against impunity.
According to a statement issued by SERAP’s Deputy Director, Kolawole Oluwadare, the commission has been dragged before the Federal High Court in Abuja. Although a hearing date remains unconfirmed, the momentous step of seeking judicial redress reflects a determination to hold those in power accountable. SERAP has once again positioned itself as a guardian of public interest by challenging an elite-centric policy.
The case, registered as suit number FHC/ABJ/CS/1834/2025, specifically asks the court to determine “whether RMAFC’s proposed salary hike for the president, vice-president, governors and their deputies, and lawmakers in Nigeria is not unlawful, unconstitutional and inconsistent with the rule of law.” This formidable question goes to the very heart of democratic governance: can those entrusted with public resources decide their own pay rises without violating the constitution and moral order?
In its pleadings, SERAP argues that the proposed hike runs foul of both the 1999 Nigerian Constitution and the RMAFC Act. By seeking a judicial declaration that such a move is unlawful, unconstitutional, and inconsistent with the rule of law, the group has placed a spotlight on the tension between self-serving leadership and constitutionalism. To trivialise such an issue would be harum-scarum, for the constitution remains the supreme authority guiding governance.
We wholeheartedly commend SERAP for standing firm, while we roundly condemn RMAFC’s selfish proposal. Political office should never be an avenue for financial aggrandisement. Since our leaders often pontificate sacrifice to citizens, urging them to tighten their belts in the face of economic turbulence, the same leaders must embody sacrifice themselves. Anything short of this amounts to double standards and betrayal of trust.
The Nigerian economy is not buoyant enough to shoulder the additional cost of a salary increase for political leaders. Already, lawmakers and executives enjoy allowances that are grossly disproportionate to the national average income. These earnings are sufficient not only for their needs but also their unchecked greed. To even consider further increments under present circumstances is egregious, a slap in the face of ordinary workers whose minimum wage remains grossly insufficient.
Resources earmarked for such frivolities should instead be channelled towards alleviating the suffering of citizens and improving the nation’s productive capacity. According to United Nations statistics, about 62.9 per cent of Nigerians were living in multidimensional poverty in 2021, compared to 53.7 per cent in 2017. Similarly, nearly 30.9 per cent of the population lives below the international poverty line of US$2.15 per day. These figures paint a stark picture: Nigeria is a poor country by all measurable standards, and any extra naira diverted to elite pockets deepens this misery.
Besides, the timing of this proposal could not be more inappropriate. At a period when unemployment is soaring, inflation is crippling households, and insecurity continues to devastate communities, the RMAFC has chosen to pursue elite enrichment. It is widely known that Nigeria’s economy is in a parlous state, and public resources should be conserved and wisely invested. Political leaders must show prudence, not profligacy.
Another critical dimension is the national debt profile. According to the Debt Management Office, Nigeria’s total public debt as of March 2025 stood at a staggering N149.39 trillion. External debt obligations also remain heavy, with about US$43 billion outstanding by September 2024. In such a climate of debt-servicing and borrowing to fund budgets, it is irresponsible for political leaders to even table the idea of inflating their salaries further. Debt repayment, not self-reward, should occupy their minds.
This ignoble proposal is insensitive, unnecessary, and profoundly reckless. It should be discarded without further delay. Public office is a trust, not an entitlement to wealth accumulation. Nigerians deserve leaders who will share in their suffering, lead by example, and prioritise the common good over self-indulgence. Anything less represents betrayal of the social contract and undermines the fragile democracy we are striving to build.
Nigeria’s Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC) has unveiled a gratuitous proposal to increase the salaries of political and public office holders in the country. This plan seeks to fatten the pay packets of the president, vice-president, governors, deputy governors, and members of the National and State Assemblies. At a time when the nation is struggling to steady its economy, the suggestion that political leaders should be rewarded with more money is not only misplaced but insulting to the sensibilities of the ordinary Nigerian.
What makes the proposal even more opprobrious is the dire economic condition under which citizens currently live. The cost of living crisis has worsened, inflation has eroded the purchasing power of workers, and the naira continues to tumble against foreign currencies. The majority of Nigerians are living hand to mouth, with many unable to afford basic foodstuffs, medical care, and education. Against this backdrop, political office holders, who already enjoy obscene allowances, perks, and privileges, should not even contemplate a salary increase.
It is, therefore, not surprising that the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has stepped in to challenge this development. SERAP has filed a lawsuit against the RMAFC to halt the implementation of this salary increment. This resolute move represents a voice of reason and accountability at a time when public anger against political insensitivity is palpable. The group is rightly insisting that the law must serve as a bulwark against impunity.
According to a statement issued by SERAP’s Deputy Director, Kolawole Oluwadare, the commission has been dragged before the Federal High Court in Abuja. Although a hearing date remains unconfirmed, the momentous step of seeking judicial redress reflects a determination to hold those in power accountable. SERAP has once again positioned itself as a guardian of public interest by challenging an elite-centric policy.
The case, registered as suit number FHC/ABJ/CS/1834/2025, specifically asks the court to determine “whether RMAFC’s proposed salary hike for the president, vice-president, governors and their deputies, and lawmakers in Nigeria is not unlawful, unconstitutional and inconsistent with the rule of law.” This formidable question goes to the very heart of democratic governance: can those entrusted with public resources decide their own pay rises without violating the constitution and moral order?
In its pleadings, SERAP argues that the proposed hike runs foul of both the 1999 Nigerian Constitution and the RMAFC Act. By seeking a judicial declaration that such a move is unlawful, unconstitutional, and inconsistent with the rule of law, the group has placed a spotlight on the tension between self-serving leadership and constitutionalism. To trivialise such an issue would be harum-scarum, for the constitution remains the supreme authority guiding governance.
We wholeheartedly commend SERAP for standing firm, while we roundly condemn RMAFC’s selfish proposal. Political office should never be an avenue for financial aggrandisement. Since our leaders often pontificate sacrifice to citizens, urging them to tighten their belts in the face of economic turbulence, the same leaders must embody sacrifice themselves. Anything short of this amounts to double standards and betrayal of trust.
The Nigerian economy is not buoyant enough to shoulder the additional cost of a salary increase for political leaders. Already, lawmakers and executives enjoy allowances that are grossly disproportionate to the national average income. These earnings are sufficient not only for their needs but also their unchecked greed. To even consider further increments under present circumstances is egregious, a slap in the face of ordinary workers whose minimum wage remains grossly insufficient.
Resources earmarked for such frivolities should instead be channelled towards alleviating the suffering of citizens and improving the nation’s productive capacity. According to United Nations statistics, about 62.9 per cent of Nigerians were living in multidimensional poverty in 2021, compared to 53.7 per cent in 2017. Similarly, nearly 30.9 per cent of the population lives below the international poverty line of US$2.15 per day. These figures paint a stark picture: Nigeria is a poor country by all measurable standards, and any extra naira diverted to elite pockets deepens this misery.
Besides, the timing of this proposal could not be more inappropriate. At a period when unemployment is soaring, inflation is crippling households, and insecurity continues to devastate communities, the RMAFC has chosen to pursue elite enrichment. It is widely known that Nigeria’s economy is in a parlous state, and public resources should be conserved and wisely invested. Political leaders must show prudence, not profligacy.
Another critical dimension is the national debt profile. According to the Debt Management Office, Nigeria’s total public debt as of March 2025 stood at a staggering N149.39 trillion. External debt obligations also remain heavy, with about US$43 billion outstanding by September 2024. In such a climate of debt-servicing and borrowing to fund budgets, it is irresponsible for political leaders to even table the idea of inflating their salaries further. Debt repayment, not self-reward, should occupy their minds.
This ignoble proposal is insensitive, unnecessary, and profoundly reckless. It should be discarded without further delay. Public office is a trust, not an entitlement to wealth accumulation. Nigerians deserve leaders who will share in their suffering, lead by example, and prioritise the common good over self-indulgence. Anything less represents betrayal of the social contract and undermines the fragile democracy we are striving to build.
