The African Democratic Congress (ADC) has dismissed the Presidency’s claim that a fuel-price reduction plan proposed by its presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar, could cost Nigeria about N19.1 trillion every year.
The opposition party described the estimate as a projection based on assumptions made by the Presidency rather than the actual structure of Atiku’s proposal.
In a statement issued yesterday by its National Publicity Secretary, Bolaji Abdullahi, the ADC said the government was criticising a subsidy framework that it had created instead of addressing the proposal put forward by Atiku.
According to the party, the N19.1 trillion figure assumes that crude oil would trade at roughly $80 per barrel, with the government covering a $40-per-barrel gap through subsidies.
The ADC challenged the Presidency to explain the basis of the calculation, arguing that Atiku had never proposed a permanent $40-per-barrel subsidy.
Under Atiku’s suggested framework, the government would determine a benchmark crude price at the start of every budget cycle. The benchmark would be connected to a maximum target price for petroleum products in the domestic market.
Government support would only come into play when market prices rise above the agreed benchmark. The intervention would also operate within a predetermined fiscal limit.
The ADC said the approach would represent a shift from Nigeria’s previous import-driven subsidy system to a production-based model designed to encourage domestic refining.
“While the old model spends foreign exchange importing petroleum products, the Atiku model seeks to conserve foreign exchange by producing those products locally,” the party said.
The proposed system, according to the ADC, would monitor crude oil throughout the supply chain, from allocation to refineries through processing and eventual domestic distribution.
It added that the arrangement would rely on verified refining capacity, audited production figures, digital monitoring, domestic supply requirements and sanctions for any diversion.
The party also called on the Presidency to provide details about the cost and economic returns of its own interventions in the petroleum sector.
It pointed to NNPC’s audited 2024 accounts, which showed approximately N7.13 trillion recorded under “Energy Security”. It further said wider petroleum-related expenditures and receivables amounted to about N17.5 trillion, depending on the accounting classifications used.
The ADC clarified that it was not describing those amounts as conventional petrol subsidies. However, it argued that Nigerians had a right to understand what the expenditures covered, what they achieved and the economic value they generated.
The opposition party also referenced the Federal Government’s Deep Offshore Oil and Gas Projects Incentives (Tax Remission) Order 2026. The policy provides production tax credits of up to $11.50 per barrel for qualifying projects.
The ADC questioned the government’s position on domestic refining incentives, asking why upstream producers could receive production-related incentives to attract investment while similar, controlled support for local refineries was being portrayed as financially reckless.
It also cited import-duty exemptions approved by the Nigeria Customs Service, which it said were reportedly worth around ₦34 trillion. The party acknowledged that the amount represented approved exemptions and not direct government spending.
According to the ADC, the exemptions show that the government already accepts that foregoing revenue can be justified when doing so creates wider economic or social benefits.
The party further argued that the Presidency’s N19.1 trillion projection did not consider the foreign-exchange savings that could result from increased domestic refining.
It said higher local production could cut the country’s dependence on imported petroleum products, retain more economic value domestically, create opportunities for export earnings and reduce pressure on foreign exchange.
The ADC said the consequences of fuel prices should also be assessed beyond what motorists pay at filling stations.
It noted that energy costs have wider effects on transportation, food distribution, farming, manufacturing, construction, logistics and the purchasing power of households.
The opposition party therefore challenged the government to calculate not only the potential budgetary cost of Atiku’s proposal but also the economic cost of maintaining the existing system.
Such an assessment, it said, should include increased transport and food-distribution expenses, additional foreign-exchange demand and the effect of high energy costs on the competitiveness of Nigerian businesses.
The ADC insisted that Atiku’s proposal should not be confused with the former subsidy system, which it acknowledged was prone to opacity, import arbitrage and unverifiable claims.
Instead, the party said the proposed intervention would have spending limits, independent auditing and traceability. It would also be directly connected to domestic production and gradually reduced as local refineries became more competitive.
The ADC said the key issue was not simply whether the government should intervene in the petroleum industry, but what should receive support, the reason for the intervention and who would ultimately benefit.
“What Nigerians need is cheaper fuel, because Nigerians are too poor not to be subsidised. Nigerian crude should create Nigerian value for Nigerians,” it said.
The party again challenged the Presidency to explain why an upstream production incentive of up to $11.50 per barrel could be justified as sound economic policy, while a controlled incentive for domestic refining aimed at reducing fuel prices was considered unacceptable.
It argued that Nigerians deserved a clear and consistent economic policy instead of what it described as political messaging.
“If the Presidency truly believes that even such an intervention is too expensive, then it must answer the question it has so far avoided: why is cheaper energy for Nigerians less deserving of public investment than the other multi-trillion-naira expenditures that this government has made?” the ADC asked.
