Questions Mount Over Nigeria’s Rising Debt Profile Under Tinubu
Nigeria’s Expanding Debt Burden Sparks Fresh Public Debate
NIGERIA’S rising debt profile under President Bola Tinubu’s administration has triggered renewed national debate over fiscal sustainability, transparency and the long-term impact of government borrowing on economic stability.
The discussion intensified following the circulation of a detailed political commentary questioning the rationale behind several domestic and external loans secured by the Federal Government since 2023. The commentary raised concerns over the scale of borrowing, the sectors targeted for intervention and the increasing proportion of government revenue now reportedly spent on debt servicing.
The argument reflects growing public scrutiny of the administration’s economic reforms, particularly amid persistent inflation, high living costs and concerns over the country’s widening fiscal deficit.
Billions of Dollars Secured Through Multilateral Loans
Since 2023, Nigeria has secured multiple loans from international financial institutions, particularly the World Bank, African Development Bank and other foreign lenders, to support sectors ranging from education and healthcare to agriculture, energy and infrastructure.
According to publicly available figures cited in the commentary, the World Bank alone approved approximately $9.65 billion in loans to Nigeria between 2023 and 2025.
The loans reportedly covered projects including renewable energy expansion, adolescent girls’ education, women empowerment initiatives, climate resilience, rural roads, healthcare reform, agricultural support and digital infrastructure.
Additional borrowings were also linked to economic stabilisation programmes, fuel subsidy palliatives, power sector reforms and transport infrastructure projects such as the Sokoto-Badagry Super Highway and Lagos Port rehabilitation.
Critics argue that many of the loan descriptions appear broad or vaguely defined, making it difficult for ordinary Nigerians to assess their measurable impact.
Domestic Borrowing Continues to Rise
Alongside foreign loans, Nigeria has also expanded domestic borrowing through bonds, treasury bills and Central Bank financing mechanisms.
The commentary highlighted the securitisation of over ₦22 trillion in Central Bank “Ways and Means” advances in 2023, in addition to several trillion naira borrowing plans approved annually to finance budget deficits and other government obligations.
Analysts note that while domestic borrowing helps government maintain fiscal operations, excessive reliance on debt instruments could increase inflationary pressure, crowd out private sector investment and weaken long-term economic productivity.
According to debt figures referenced in the commentary, Nigeria’s total public debt reportedly rose from about ₦87 trillion in 2023 to approximately ₦159 trillion by the end of 2025.
Debt Servicing Pressures Raise Fiscal Concerns
One of the major concerns raised in the political opinion piece centres on debt servicing costs and their impact on public spending priorities.
The commentary claimed that more than 80 per cent of government revenue is currently being spent on debt repayment obligations, leaving limited fiscal space for critical sectors such as healthcare, education and infrastructure.
Official government data has previously shown that debt servicing remains one of the largest components of Nigeria’s annual expenditure profile.
Economic experts warn that if debt accumulation continues without corresponding revenue growth and productive investments, the country could face mounting fiscal pressure in future years.
However, government officials have repeatedly defended the borrowing strategy, insisting that many of the loans are concessional and tied to long-term development goals aimed at stimulating economic growth, reducing poverty and modernising infrastructure.
Government Defends Reform Agenda
The Tinubu administration has consistently argued that borrowing became necessary after inheriting severe fiscal challenges, including fuel subsidy costs, foreign exchange distortions, declining revenues and mounting debt obligations.
Officials maintain that reforms such as subsidy removal and exchange-rate unification were intended to stabilise the economy and restore investor confidence.
Supporters of the administration also argue that investments in human capital, agriculture, digital infrastructure and energy reforms are essential for long-term national development, even if the immediate benefits are not yet fully visible.
Nonetheless, critics insist that Nigerians deserve clearer accountability regarding how borrowed funds are allocated, monitored and utilised.
Transparency and Accountability at the Centre of Debate
Beyond the figures themselves, the wider controversy reflects a deeper public concern over transparency, governance and fiscal accountability.
Economic observers note that citizens increasingly want governments to provide clearer explanations of loan agreements, implementation timelines and measurable outcomes tied to borrowed funds.
With Nigeria’s debt profile projected to rise further if additional borrowing plans are fully implemented, analysts say the pressure on government to demonstrate prudent financial management will continue to intensify.
As economic reforms reshape the country’s fiscal landscape, the debate over whether Nigeria is borrowing for sustainable development or accumulating unsustainable liabilities is likely to remain central in national discourse.
