Experts laud IMF over alarm on Nigeria’s derivatives financing deal

A chorus of finance and economic experts has backed the International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) sharp warning over Nigeria’s proposed $5 billion derivatives-based financing arrangement with First Abu Dhabi Bank, cautioning that the complex transaction could undermine fiscal stability, exacerbate inflationary pressures, and threaten debt sustainability.

The IMF described the move as a departure from recommendations under Nigeria’s ongoing economic reform program.

The deal, structured as a Total Return Swap (TRS), seeks to refinance expensive existing debt and channel funds into major infrastructure projects. Nigeria’s Senate had previously approved the proposal.

Under the arrangement, the country would receive dollar liquidity backed by Naira-denominated securities as collateral at a 133.3 percent coverage ratio, exposing it to potential margin calls if asset values decline due to currency volatility or interest rate changes.

Christian Ebeke, the IMF’s resident representative and mission chief for Nigeria, highlighted the risks during a briefing tied to the 2026 Article IV consultation.

“Transactions in these types of structures carry risks. Usually they are opaque so the terms are not always very transparent,” he stated, urging consideration of simpler, more transparent options like Eurobonds or concessional loans.

According to the Fund, arrangements of this nature often come wrapped in layers of complexity that can make it difficult for citizens, investors, and sometimes even policymakers to clearly understand where obligations begin, where risks end, and what surprises may be hiding between the clauses.

In diplomatic language, the IMF called for caution and transparency. In ordinary language, it is essentially saying that if a financial deal requires too many diagrams to explain, then everyone should probably ask more questions before signing.

However, experts warn the derivatives structure could widen the budget deficit, complicate naira stabilisation, and introduce hidden liabilities that pressure inflation and public finances.

READ ALSO: My reforms stabilising Nigeria’s economy — Tinubu

The IMF’s Executive Directors specifically flagged concerns over off-budget spending and complex financing instruments, calling for stronger public financial management, fiscal reporting, transparency, and risk frameworks.

Professor Uche Uwaleke, president of the Capital Markets Academics Association of Nigeria (CMAN), endorsed the IMF’s stance in recent commentary. He emphasised the relevance of addressing off-budget spending, opaque arrangements, and fiscal transparency gaps.

“Sustainable economic development requires strong institutions, transparent budgeting processes, credible fiscal reporting, and effective public financial management systems,” Uwaleke noted.

 He commended the focus on fiscal risk management to prevent vulnerabilities seen in other emerging economies.

Other economists have amplified these concerns, arguing that while the government seeks cheaper capital for development amid high debt servicing costs, sophisticated instruments risk reversing macroeconomic gains. Conventional borrowing offers clearer accountability, whereas derivatives can obscure obligations and expose taxpayers to unforeseen costs.

Nigeria’s economy presents a tale of contrasts. Official indicators show progress with rising reserves and returning investors, yet millions face persistent challenges: elevated living costs, food insecurity, and poverty. The government maintains that innovative financing is vital for infrastructure and debt management.

The IMF is not opposing borrowing or infrastructure investment outright. Instead, it stresses that when billions of dollars are involved, full transparency in repayment plans is essential to safeguard stability. As deliberations proceed, stakeholders are calling for detailed disclosure of terms to ensure the deal bolsters rather than jeopardises Nigeria’s reform momentum.

This episode underscores the tension between ambition for rapid development and the imperative of prudent fiscal management in an environment where success metrics and ground-level hardships often coexist. Greater clarity and adherence to transparent practices, analysts agree, will be key to sustaining investor trust and long-term economic resilience.