Analysts fault FG’s double standards on N30trn revenue shortfall, flag contradictions in fiscal claims

ECONOMIC analysts and fiscal policy experts have criticised what they described as clear contradictions in the Federal Government’s fiscal communication, following the revelation of a huge revenue shortfall for the 2025 fiscal year—months after President Bola Tinubu publicly announced that the government had already met its revenue target.

On September 2, President Tinubu told members of the defunct Congress for Progressive Change (CPC) and The Buhari Organisation at the Presidential Villa in Abuja that the Federal Government had achieved its 2025 revenue target as early as August, largely driven by reforms in the non-oil sector.

“Today, I can stand here before you to brag: Nigeria is not borrowing. We have met our revenue target for the year and we met it in August,” the President said.

He added that the economy had stabilised and become more predictable.

The president also claimed that access to foreign exchange no longer depended on personal connections at the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), stressing that recent reforms had restored confidence and transparency in the system.

However, that positive narrative was sharply contradicted on Tuesday, December 16, when the Minister of Finance and Coordinating Minister of the Economy, Wale Edun, appeared before the House of Representatives Committees on Finance and National Planning.

Edun disclosed that the Federal Government, which projected ₦40.8 trillion in revenue for 2025, was likely to end the year with only about ₦10.7 trillion—leaving a shortfall of roughly ₦30 trillion.

“The current trajectory indicates that federal revenues for the full year will likely end at around ₦10.7 trillion compared to the ₦40.8 trillion projection,” Edun told lawmakers.

The projected revenue was meant to fund the ₦54.9 trillion 2025 “budget of restoration”, designed to stabilise the economy, secure peace and lay the foundation for long-term growth. Edun admitted, however, that weak oil and gas earnings—especially Petroleum Profit Tax and Company Income Tax from oil and gas companies—along with poor performance in other revenue lines, severely affected fiscal outcomes.

Despite raising about ₦14.1 trillion through borrowing, the minister said total inflows were still far below what was needed to fully implement the budget.

He acknowledged that the revenue gap had hurt execution, particularly capital spending, even as the government continued to pay salaries, statutory transfers and debt obligations through what he described as “skillful, imaginative and creative handling” of limited resources.

The disclosure has reignited debate over fiscal transparency and the consistency of government messaging.

Analysts argue that claims of meeting revenue targets do not align with the figures presented to lawmakers.

In an interview with Nigerian Tribune, Dr Yemisi Ayinde, a public policy analyst and researcher at Covenant University, Otta, described the situation as a “material disconnect in fiscal communication with far-reaching economic, social and legal implications.”

“Going by the initial information made available by the government that it had surpassed its revenue target, the subsequent acknowledgment of an estimated ₦30 trillion revenue shortfall reveals a material disconnect in fiscal communication,” Ayinde said.

He warned that presenting interim or agency-level revenue figures as final outcomes “projects a narrative of macro-fiscal stability that the full-year data could not sustain.”

According to him, Nigeria’s fiscal problem is worsened by overly optimistic revenue assumptions.

“A budget is supposed to be based on realistic assumptions, not wishful thinking. “When revenue targets, such as oil production of 1.75 million barrels per day, are far above historical averages, the result is predictable—revenue shortfalls, cuts to capital spending and prolonged budget implementation,” he said.

Dr. Muda Yusuf, Chief Executive Officer of the Centre for the Promotion of Private Enterprise (CPPE), said the controversy reflects a deeper problem with how revenue targets are set and communicated.

“Revenue targets are not political slogans; they are benchmarks that guide spending, borrowing and economic stability,” Yusuf said. “When government later admits a ₦30 trillion shortfall, it raises serious questions about the credibility of the earlier claim that targets had been met.”

He warned that such mixed signals weaken investor confidence and make planning difficult for businesses and subnational governments.

President of the Capital Market Academics of Nigeria (CMAN), Professor Uche Uwaleke, also blamed unrealistic assumptions, especially on oil output. He noted that Nigeria’s average oil production in recent years has been closer to 1.5 million barrels per day, excluding condensates.

“If we budget conservatively and earn more than expected, that is better,” Uwaleke said. “But when projections are too high and revenues fall short, it is capital projects that suffer.”

At the National Assembly session, the Minister of Budget and National Planning, Atiku Bagudu, admitted that revenue assumptions remain a subject of debate within the Economic Management Team. Meanwhile, Chairman of the House Committee on Finance, James Faleke, warned against “bloated budgets” that often fail at the implementation stage.

As the gap between official claims and fiscal realities widens, analysts insist that restoring trust will require realistic budgeting, transparent reporting and clear communication—rather than optimistic declarations that later collapse under scrutiny.

ALSO READ: FULL TEXT: Trump expands travel restrictions, adds Nigeria, others