APM Rejects FG’s ₦15.8tn Subsidy Savings Claim as Debate Over Nigeria’s Revenue Deepens
APM Rejects FG’s ₦15.8tn Subsidy Savings Claim as Debate Over Nigeria’s Revenue Deepens
By Akin Alade
Nigeria’s debate over the actual financial gains from the removal of petrol subsidy has taken another turn, with the Allied Peoples’ Movement (APM) rejecting the Federal Government’s declaration that the policy generated about ₦15.8 trillion in additional resources, as competing figures and political arguments intensify calls for greater transparency over the nation’s finances.
The controversy comes at a time when questions surrounding government revenue, subsidy savings, Federation Account allocations, borrowing and Nigeria’s improving foreign reserves have become major subjects of public debate.
According to the Federal Government, the removal of petrol subsidy mobilised approximately ₦15.8 trillion for the federation between June 2023 and December 2025. Finance Minister and Coordinating Minister of the Economy, Taiwo Oyedele, explained that the figure should not necessarily be interpreted as ₦15.8 trillion sitting in a dedicated bank account. Rather, it represents fiscal resources freed up after government stopped financing the subsidy regime.
Government figures indicate that approximately ₦5.4 trillion accrued to the Federal Government, while about ₦10.4 trillion was distributed to states and local governments through the Federation Account. Oyedele also disclosed that another ₦3.1 trillion came from incremental independent revenue, particularly improved remittances from government-owned enterprises.
The explanation, however, has failed to end the controversy.
APM Challenges ₦15.8tn Subsidy Savings Figure
The APM has disputed the Federal Government’s calculation, claiming that the actual proceeds arising from subsidy removal should have exceeded ₦27 trillion.
In a statement by its National Publicity Secretary, Abubakar Yusuf, the opposition party demanded a comprehensive account of the resources, including the amount distributed to individual states and local governments, dates of disbursement and how the money was ultimately utilised.
The party based part of its argument on an earlier figure attributed to former Finance Minister Wale Edun, who it said had estimated savings from subsidy removal at about $20 billion, or approximately ₦26.9 trillion, in November 2024.
APM consequently questioned how the government’s latest calculation could stand at ₦15.8 trillion when, according to its argument, additional savings should have accumulated after November 2024. These remain claims by the opposition party rather than independently established figures.
Atiku Adds Another Figure to Subsidy Revenue Debate
The controversy is wider than the disagreement between the Federal Government and APM.
Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has separately challenged President Bola Tinubu’s administration to account for approximately ₦30 trillion in federation revenues, deductions, savings and transfers, further widening the political argument surrounding Nigeria’s public finances.
The different figures being thrown into the public space illustrate an important distinction: subsidy savings, additional Federation Account revenue, independent government revenue, borrowing and foreign reserves are not necessarily the same pool of money and should not automatically be added together as though they represent a single government account.
That distinction is increasingly important as Nigerians seek to understand precisely what the country gained financially after the subsidy regime ended.
FG Says Subsidy Removal Created Fiscal Space, Not Cash Windfall
The Federal Government’s position is that the ₦15.8 trillion represents resources made available to the federation rather than a single cash windfall waiting to be spent.
This explanation is significant because much of the public debate has revolved around the question: “Where is the ₦15.8 trillion?”
Government’s argument is essentially that the savings appeared through improved fiscal capacity and higher resources available for distribution rather than through the creation of a special ₦15.8 trillion subsidy savings account.
The administration also maintains that the reforms have strengthened public finances and reduced the danger of a deeper economic crisis. Oyedele has argued that the economic changes introduced since 2023 helped stabilise government finances, while international investors have responded positively to some of the reforms. The policies have nevertheless imposed significant short-term costs on Nigerians through higher fuel prices and the broader cost-of-living crisis.
Nigerians Want to See the Benefits
Beyond the political dispute over whether the correct figure is ₦15.8 trillion, ₦27 trillion or another amount, perhaps the more important question for ordinary Nigerians is how increased government revenue is translating into improvements in their daily lives.
Petrol subsidy removal dramatically changed the country’s economic structure. Transportation costs increased, businesses faced higher operating expenses and households had to adjust to substantially higher prices.
Against that background, Nigerians understandably expect additional public resources to produce visible improvements in roads, electricity, healthcare, education, transportation, employment opportunities and other critical infrastructure.
The debate therefore should go beyond simply asking how much was saved.
It should also ask how much was received, who received it, when it was received and what measurable development resulted from it.
States and Local Governments Also Face Questions
Another dimension often overlooked in the subsidy debate is the role of Nigeria’s subnational governments.
If the Federal Government’s breakdown showing that approximately ₦10.4 trillion went to states and local governments is correct, accountability cannot stop at the Presidential Villa or Federal Ministry of Finance.
Governors and local government administrations must equally explain how the increased allocations reaching their jurisdictions have affected infrastructure and public services.
This could ultimately transform the subsidy debate from a purely Federal Government controversy into a broader discussion about fiscal accountability across Nigeria’s three tiers of government.
Transparency Could Settle the Argument
The disagreement provides the government with an opportunity to publish a detailed and easily understandable reconciliation of the figures.
Such disclosure could show the estimated subsidy expenditure avoided each year, additional revenues generated, amounts transferred through the Federation Account, allocations received by the Federal Government, states and local governments, and major programmes financed from the increased fiscal resources.
That would allow Nigerians to distinguish between political claims and verifiable financial records.
With the 2027 general elections approaching, subsidy removal and management of the resources arising from the reform are likely to remain central political issues.
The Federal Government insists that the difficult reforms were necessary to prevent a deeper fiscal crisis and create room for sustainable economic development. Opposition parties, meanwhile, are demanding stronger evidence showing where the additional resources went.
Ultimately, the credibility of either argument will depend less on political statements and more on transparent, independently verifiable figures.
For millions of Nigerians who have endured the immediate consequences of higher petrol prices and rising living costs, the central question is no longer merely how many trillions were saved.
It is whether those trillions—whatever the final reconciled figure—are producing measurable improvements in their lives.
