President Bola Ahmed Tinubu authorised a 15 per cent ad valorem import duty on Premium Motor Spirit and diesel in a presidential directive dated 21 October 2025.
The Federal Inland Revenue Service projects the levy will add about ₦99.72 to the landing cost of each litre of petrol and raise daily import cost burdens by close to ₦1.92bn based on current consumption estimates.
Government officials present the measure as a corrective step. It aims to protect nascent local refining capacity. The measure also seeks to align import prices with domestic cost recovery.
Critics warn the tariff will be paid by households at the pump. Transport operators will also bear the cost. It could push retail petrol above ₦1,000 per litre in many parts of the country.
This investigation unpacks the memo and the legal basis. It identifies winners and losers and likely market mechanisms. It also examines short term risks and medium term trade offs for economic stability and energy security.
The policy
After two years of market turbulence since subsidy removal, the federal government has shifted its strategy. As new refineries come on stream, they have moved from subsidy exit to active price shaping.
President Tinubu has approved a 15 per cent duty on the CIF value of petrol and diesel. There is a 30 day transition window. The directive instructs the Nigeria Customs Service, the Federal Inland Revenue Service, and the regulator NMDPRA to implement the duty. It also instructs them to prioritise locally refined products when issuing import licences.
Why this matters now
Nigeria imports a large share of its petrol despite being a major crude oil producer. Local refining capacity began to rise with the commissioning of the Dangote refinery and several modular plants. Yet the market still relies heavily on imports.
In June 2025 local refineries supplied about 30.8 per cent of petrol while the rest was imported. The policy is meant to change that calculation. Yet, it arrives at a time when pump prices are already high. Many households face acute cost pressures.
The memo and the arithmetic
The document that reached the presidency was authored by the FIRS chairman, Zacch Adedeji. It was signed off by the President’s private secretary on 21 October. The proposal argues that import parity pricing at existing CIF rates sits below the cost recovery point for local refiners.
According to the calculations published with the memo, a 15 per cent ad valorem charge on CIF would translate to roughly ₦99.72 extra per litre. This calculation is based on current landing cost levels. That is the figure officials have been quoting when explaining the policy’s consumer pulse.
Using a baseline daily consumption of about 19.26 million litres, the FIRS estimated the levy would generate about ₦1.92bn daily in additional import cost and corresponding revenue if imports continued at the same scale. The government frames the move as corrective not revenue driven.
Price trajectory and the pump impact
Marketers and depot operators warn the pass through from landing cost to pump is likely. It is highly probable. Retail prices are already in the N890–N930 range in many states. Adding about ₦100 to imported landed cost will push observed pump prices over the ₦1,000 mark in several locations. This assumes there are no offsetting subsidies or price controls.
The downstream remains deregulated, according to the regulator. Market forces will decide final prices. Still, it will also prioritise local product for licences. Which of these forces prevail will decide whether the tariff is inflationary or merely redistributive within the fuel supply chain.
Legal scaffolding — the PIA and presidential authority
The Petroleum Industry Act 2021 provides the statutory scaffolding. It supports regulatory interventions that promote national energy security. It also aids in economic development. The memo quotes Sections of the Act. These sections empower the regulator to impose public service obligations. They also allow the President to issue policy directives to the NMDPRA.
The government says it will follow PIA processes. It will task the regulator to issue regulations and gazette notices. The Implementation Committee will monitor outcomes.
The important legal question is whether the measures will be implemented transparently. Another question is whether the periodic review clauses will be enforced. The PIA provides the route but not the guarantee of fair process.
Who stands to gain and who risks losing
Winners
• Local refiners, particularly those with scale and market access, will see better economics if import parity is raised. Importers will lose their price advantage. The Dangote refinery has a single train that processes 650,000 barrels per day. It remains the principal beneficiary of policy that raises the cost of imports. Scale allows Dangote to capture volumes and to supply regional markets, a strategic gain for a capital intensive project.
• The federal treasury gains short term revenue from the levy. It potentially stabilises naira flows. This is achieved by transitioning crude transactions more towards naira denominated operations.
Losers
• Consumers will pay more at the pump. Transport operators, fishermen and farmers who depend on diesel and petrol for daily livelihoods are most directly vulnerable.
• Independent importers and marginal marketers who built businesses around import parity pricing face structural disadvantage. They may either exit or combine creating space for dominant refiners and integrated players.
• Energy security in the short run could be weaker. This is because local refineries cannot instantly move to fill the gap created by reduced imports. Critics stress that in the real world top refineries do not promptly ramp production without logistics and distribution linkages.
Competition, concentration and the Dangote question
A recurrent theme since last year has been whether policy changes will consolidate market power in the hands of a few large players. Social media and commentators have suggested the new tariff selectively advantages the Dangote group. The government rejects that, insisting the goal is to correct import distortion that threatened the viability of local refining.
Competition law and regulator vigilance will be the test. The NMDPRA will need to guarantee fair access to storage and distribution and prevent discriminatory offtake contracts.
Without such safeguards a high tariff is a blunt instrument that will accelerate concentration rather than stimulate competition.
Market practice since subsidy exit
Since the removal of the fuel subsidy in May 2023 prices have been volatile. The withdrawal of subsidy moved the market to full price discovery. It exposed the sector to FX volatility, freight variation, and cartel-like behaviour among some importers and depot owners.
The new tariff adds another layer to this market architecture. History shows that abrupt fiscal interventions without clear transitional supply guarantees often increase shortage risk and rent seeking behaviour.
The government has signalled a 30 day transition window to allow cargoes in transit to clear. That window is necessary but it is not enough to halt opportunistic price rises.
Voices in the market — association reactions and depot operators
Petroleum marketers and depot operators who spoke to journalists said the move could raise prices. They also noted that collusion in pricing remains a danger.
The Vice President of IPMAN warned of both positive and negative outcomes. He said the duty will discourage importation and spur local refining. However, it also looks like a step to monopolise supply.
The president of PETROAN said the measure will be win win if product availability and affordability are monitored closely. Depot operators cited cases where importers coordinated price adjustments after earlier market shocks.
These commercial accounts matter. Supply behaviour after the levy will decide if consumers face worse scarcity. Alternatively, they might face simply higher but available products.
Fiscal arithmetic and exchange rate logic
One of the government’s declared aims is to encourage crude transactions in local currency. It is also to relieve pressure on FX reserves caused by massive refined product imports. High import volumes need dollars and create balance of payments stress.
Higher import costs may discourage duty-free importation. Local refineries could source crudes and transact more in naira. As a result, FX demand pressure could abate. That is the theory.
In practice local refineries still require imported inputs, spare parts and logistics contracted in foreign currency. The short run effect on the naira is ambiguous.
If the tariff triggers higher inflation and a weaker naira, any FX benefit could be eroded. The government will need a tight macro stabilisation package to realise the stated benefits.
Reuters and other outlets have reported the policy. This forms part of broader fiscal reforms. The reforms intend to boost non oil revenues and support domestic refining efforts.
Comparative frame — regional pump prices
The presidency’s memo compared projected Lagos pump prices after the levy with regional peers. It included countries such as Senegal, Côte d’Ivoire, and Ghana. The memo argued Nigeria would still be cheaper.
The raw comparison is true at headline numbers but misses distributional detail. Those economies use different tax and subsidy packages and have different income and transport cost structures.
Making a case that higher Nigerian prices are acceptable because they are below regional rates overlooks the domestic welfare impact. It also ignores that Nigeria has many more low income households who are vulnerable to energy cost shocks.
The political acceptability of any price rise depends on targeted mitigation measures for the poor.
Supply risk scenarios — scarcity or stabilisation
Three plausible short to medium term scenarios show themselves
1. Stability with higher prices
Local refineries ramp production, imports reduce gradually, supply remains uninterrupted. Consumers pay more but availability is steady. This is the optimistic scenario the government emphasises.
2. Scarcity and sharp price spikes
Local refineries fail to supply enough volumes. They face technical, logistics, or crude feedstock constraints. Importers curtail shipments because of higher costs, distribution bottlenecks emerge and the market faces shortages and long queues. Prices spike beyond simple pass through.
3. Consolidation and regional arbitrage
Large refiners capture the domestic market. Smaller importers exit. Surplus flows to neighbouring countries if pricing and logistics allow. Domestic consumers lose bargaining power and face prolonged higher prices.
The path Nigeria takes depends on several factors. These include operational performance of refineries, regulator oversight, and customs and port efficiency. It also depends on the resolve of market players to keep competition.
NMDPRA has been instructed to review the tariff periodically and to enforce priority of locally refined products when issuing licences. That review clause is important but will be meaningful only if the regulator publishes prompt supply data and enforces transparency.
Historical parallels — lessons from subsidy management and tariffs
Nigeria’s record with fuel policy is long and instructive. Repeated subsidy schemes, stop start policy and ad hoc fiscal measures have over decades encouraged rent seeking and smuggling.
Tariffs can protect infant industries but only when merged with time bound performance commitments and robust regulatory checks.
If the tariff is a temporary scaffold, it allows refineries to reach scale. If the government enforces transparent reporting and competitive access to distribution, the policy has a clearer rationale.
Without that scaffolding, the tariff risks becoming a permanent transfer. Consumers fund this to support private profit without commensurate service gains.
International experience shows protection without strict conditionality and sunset clauses tends to entrench inefficiency. The memo does contain a review and sunset provision but implementation fidelity will be decisive.
Political economy and patronage risk
Petroleum is not only an economic commodity in Nigeria it is inherently political. Any policy that raises consumer costs while appearing to favour a powerful private investor will invite political backlash. Policies that seem to favor a narrow class of firms will also lead to political backlash.
Opposition voices within the ruling party and allied business leaders have already urged delay or mitigation. Businessmen like Chief Ayiri Emami publicly urged the President to suspend the tariff until relief is provided to citizens.
Social media chatter suggests real distrust that the policy will become a mechanism for market capture. The presidency must thus run a visible and data driven transparency campaign if it is to neutralise that perception.
What the regulator must do now — a checklist for NMDPRA and FIRS
• Publish daily and weekly supply dashboards. Provide clear breakdowns of local refinery output, imports, stocks at depots, and retail availability.
• Set and enforce offtake commitments for local refineries if they accept protected market access in return for price discipline. No protected market without delivery schedules.
• Open port and storage access to new entrants to prevent chokepoints and discriminatory allocation.
• Work with the Nigeria Customs Service to guarantee cargoes in transit are clearly identified. Make sure that the transition window is enforced in a way that prevents opportunistic re-labelling. This also prevents paper manipulation.
• Coordinate with the Central Bank and fiscal authorities to monitor FX flows. Implement targeted cash transfers or fuel subsidies for essential services. This is crucial where the price shocks are most damaging.
These steps are operational but politically sensitive. Their absence will increase the probability that consumers pay more for less competition.
Mitigating the social cost — short term measures that can be enacted quickly
• Temporary targeted transport subsidies or vouchers for public transport operators for a fixed period to absorb shocks.
• Waiver or rebate on haulage charges for agricultural and fishing communities to protect food supply chains.
• Fast tracked payment windows are set for compensatory measures to vulnerable groups. These measures are financed from the tariff revenue. This revenue is designated to a special energy transition account.
• Transparency on how tariff revenues are allocated and an independent audit of the transitional account.
These are politically possible but need urgency. If the government waits for market adjustment alone the social impact will be concentrated and visible.
What to watch in the next 60 days
1. Official gazette and NMDPRA regulations clarifying implementation steps and import licence priority rules. The presence or absence of these documents will signal the seriousness of the regulatory process.
2. Wholesale margins at depots and the spread between Lagos terminal prices and retail prices across states. A rapid widening of margins suggests opportunistic behaviour.
3. Daily stock levels at major depots and retail outlets. Shortages will be visible quickly in major cities and in riverine zones.
4. FX market reaction. If the naira strengthens and FX demand eases that supports the government argument. If the naira weakens because inflation expectations rise then the policy’s macro case weakens.
5. Competition authorities or the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission can take action. This occurs if price fixing or collusive behaviour is suspected.
Policy alternatives the government can deploy instead of or alongside the tariff
The tariff is one instrument. Others include time-bound import quotas tied to local sourcing. There are targeted incentives for modular refineries to scale production quickly. Another choice is subsidised logistic corridors for local product distribution. Additionally, there are mandatory offtake guarantees with performance clauses.
A mix of carrots and sticks with strict monitoring would reduce the risk of pure price pass through to consumers.
The ministry of petroleum and NMDPRA could design a temporary rebate scheme. In this scheme, the tariff proceeds finance distribution infrastructure and supply chain upgrades. This approach makes the protection productive.
Conclusions — an honest accounting
The 15 per cent ad valorem import tariff is a blunt policy instrument. It was deployed at a politically sensitive moment. It has a credible rationale. New domestic refining capacity needs market space to recover investment and to scale.
But the policy also shifts price risk to consumers. This happens at a time Nigeria is still adjusting to the removal of fuel subsidy. The country is also adapting to a floating exchange rate regime.
The balance between protecting investment and protecting people must be actively managed.
If the tariff is temporary, conditional, and paired with transparent regulatory oversight, it could accelerate a long overdue industrial correction.
Targeted mitigation for the poor and clear performance metrics for refineries are also necessary.
If implemented as a permanent, opaque revenue grab, the tariff will channel flow to a few large players with weak competition oversight. It will become a visible source of public grievance. Additionally, it will add to inflationary pressure without delivering commensurate benefits.
The coming weeks will show whether government agencies can translate good intention into credible outcomes. The public interest demands nothing less.
Follow us on our broadcast channels today!
- WhatsApp: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VawZ8TbDDmFT1a1Syg46
- Telegram: https://t.me/atlanticpostchannel
- Facebook: https://www.messenger.com/channel/atlanticpostng
