By Odiaka Olika
Let us strip away political rhetoric and confront the underlying economic reality. The case advanced by President Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s administration for re-election rests on a simple claim: that three years of difficult reforms, including fuel subsidy removal, exchange rate unification, and efforts to rebuild external reserves, have placed Nigeria on a path toward macro-economic recovery.
On narrow macro-economic grounds, the IMF’s 2026 Article IV Consultation Report does not fully reject this narrative. The Fund acknowledges that these reforms have improved stability and strengthened resilience. That finding should be stated clearly and not misrepresented.
However, the same report strips away this narrative, exposing a more troubling reality that voters must confront ahead of the 2027 elections. This has generated far less public debate than the stabilisation story, despite its greater relevance to the 230 million Nigerians who will determine the outcome of the election. On the IMF’s own assessment, macro-economic stability has not yet translated into improved living conditions for those who have borne the cost of adjustment, particularly households where a mother cannot feed her children.
The expected fiscal savings from fuel subsidy removal, which doubled fuel prices over-night, cannot be clearly identified in the 2025 budget. These are not opposition claims but conclusions drawn from the same IMF report that credits the government’s reforms.
Rather than subjecting these findings to rigorous scrutiny, much of the Nigerian media has responded with silence or selective attention. At a time when the IMF’s 2026 Article IV Consultation Report raises fundamental questions about poverty, food insecurity, fiscal transparency, debt sustainability, and reform effectiveness, public debate has remained largely anchored in official narratives rather than independent analysis.
The press has a central role in any democracy as a watchdog of accountability. Yet the limited public engagement with one of the most consequential economic assessments in recent years raises questions about whether that role is being fully discharged. As a result, many Nigerians remain unaware of findings that should define national debate. The report highlights serious concerns over poverty, fiscal management, debt pressures, and the broader impact of reform.
These issues require sustained scrutiny, not selective coverage or fleeting headlines. That gap, between an economy the IMF says is more stable and a population the IMF says is getting poorer, is the real story the 2026 Article IV Consultation tells. It deserves more sustained scrutiny than it has received, and it is worth walking through what the report actually says, page by page, before the 2027 campaign descends into slogans.
Let us break the silence that the media refuses to break by looking directly at the IMF report. The numbers do not lie, even if the politicians and the journalists who protect them do.
According to Page 4, Paragraph 2 of the report, “Poverty is estimated to have reached 63 percent… and 27 million Nigerians are estimated to have faced food insecurity in the fall of 2025.”
The government claims its bold reforms are bearing fruit, but the IMF explicitly notes a horrifying truth on Page 7, Paragraph 5: “the estimated savings of the fuel subsidy removal… do not appear to have accrued to the budget in 2025.” The administration took the pain from the people, but the promised gain for the nation has vanished into thin air. Where did that money go?
Consider the government’s vaunted social safety net. On Page 5, Paragraph 2, the IMF mocks this effort, noting that “9.2 million households have been enrolled… Those enrolled have received at most a total of 3 transfers of N25,000… since 2023. ” That is roughly 18 US dollars per payment, spread over three years. This is not a social safety net. This is an insult to the intelligence and suffering of the Nigerian people.
The fiscal recklessness of this administration is equally damning. On Page 7, Paragraph 5, the IMF highlights a mysterious “statistical discrepancy of 2.7 percent of GDP” which reflects “spending not captured” by the Accountant General, later swept under the rug through “Repeal and Reenactment Bills.” This is the language of financial opacity. Furthermore, Table 1 and Page 8 confirm that “Interest payments are estimated to have absorbed 53 percent of FGN revenues in 2025.” More than half of every Naira the government earns is thrown into a debt black hole, leaving nothing for hospitals, schools, or roads.
Even more alarming is the administration’s desperate approach to financing. On Page 14, Paragraph 16, the IMF explicitly warns against a “5 billion dollar… total return swap” that “entails collateralisation of 133 percent with domestic government securities” and “exposes the government to margin calls.” This is not prudent financial management. This is financial suicide, gambling with the nation’s sovereign wealth.
Meanwhile, the real economy is suffocating. Page 23, Paragraph 33 reveals that “banks’ holdings of government securities (22 percent of total assets)… crowd out private credit.” The government is sucking all the oxygen out of the room. As a direct result of this economic strangulation, Page 9, Paragraph 8 notes that “NPLs increased to 8 percent in the third quarter of 2025, above the prudential ceiling,” signaling that the financial system is beginning to crack.
The administration also ignores its hidden debts. Page 17, Paragraph 19 reveals that “electricity sector arrears were about three quarters of 1 percent of GDP, and are expected to increase.” This is a contingent liability the government is deliberately ignoring, kicking the can down the road while the power sector remains in ruins.
Perhaps the most damning indictment of this administration is the total loss of faith in our own currency. Annex VII, Page 64, Paragraph 2 details that “Nigeria was estimated to have around 25.9 million digital asset users,” leading to “digital dollarisation” as citizens actively flee to foreign stablecoins to escape the Naira. When nearly twelve percent of the population actively seeks to hold and transact in foreign digital currencies, it is a massive, undeniable referendum on the government’s economic failure.
Nigerians deserve better than this calculated destruction. This is why Dr. Gbenga Olawepo-Hashim’s economic vision merits serious consideration. His approach recognises that exchange rate stability is ultimately a function of productive capacity and sustained foreign exchange generation. The objective is not to impose an administratively determined exchange rate but to create the conditions under which the naira can gradually converge toward a level consistent with Nigeria’s underlying economic fundamentals.
In this context, IMF estimates of a 25 to 33 percent real exchange rate undervaluation provide an important benchmark. Addressing this imbalance requires a sustained expansion of export earnings, improved investor confidence, and stronger foreign reserve accumulation driven by productivity growth and industrial competitiveness.
Within this framework, a medium-term adjustment path is consistent with an equilibrium exchange rate in the region of N621 to the dollar, depending on the trajectory of reforms and external conditions over a multi-year horizon.
Equally important is the challenge of access to credit. Nigeria cannot industrialise while lending rates remain prohibitively as high as 30% for manufacturers, farmers, and small businesses. A future administration must work toward reducing the cost of capital through a combination of fiscal discipline, lower government borrowing from domestic markets, strengthened development finance institutions, targeted credit guarantees, and increased competition within the banking system. Capital should flow to productive enterprises rather than being trapped in government securities.
Industrialisation must also become the centerpiece of national economic policy. Nigeria’s agricultural sector contributes significantly over 20% to GDP, yet the country continues to export raw commodities while importing higher-value finished products. This model exports jobs, exports value, and exports prosperity. A new strategy must focus on agro-processing zones, manufacturing clusters, mineral beneficiation, and export-oriented industries capable of generating employment on a large scale.
His objective is straightforward: to expand Nigeria’s productive capacity and position the country to supply goods and services that are competitive in regional and global markets, particularly within the framework of the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA), where preferential market access creates significant opportunities for value-added exports. He believes that an export-oriented production strategy would depend on stronger productivity, improved infrastructure, access to affordable credit, and a coherent industrial policy that prioritises value addition over raw commodity exports.
The 2027 election therefore presents Nigerians with a fundamental choice. It should not be a contest of personalities, ethnic loyalties, religious sentiments, or political slogans. It should be a contest of economic ideas. Every presidential candidate should be required to answer a simple set of questions. How will you stabilize the currency? How will you reduce interest rates to a single digit? How will you reduce inflation? How will you create jobs? How will you finance infrastructure without mortgaging the future? How will you reduce poverty? How will you restore investor confidence?
The candidate who can provide the most credible, evidence-based, and transparent answers to these questions deserves the support of the Nigerian people. The IMF report has laid the autopsy of this administration bare. Do not reward the architects of this hardship. Do not vote for the recycled leaders who had the opportunity to improve lives or vanished our subsidy savings and gambled our sovereign wealth. The IMF has provided a sobering assessment of the state of the economy. Nigerians should read the report carefully and draw their own conclusions.
Democracy functions best when citizens are informed, engaged, and willing to hold leaders accountable. (https://doi.org/10.5089/9798229048286.002).
The future of Nigeria depends not on rhetoric, but on sound policy, competent leadership, and a commitment to building an economy that works for all Nigerians.
Source: International Monetary Fund. (2026). Nigeria: 2026 Article IV Consultation, Press Release; Staff Report; and Statement by the Executive Director for Nigeria (IMF Country Report No. 26/125). https://doi.org/10.5089/9798229048286.002
Olika is a PhD Candidate in Development Finance at the Institute of Capital Market Studies, Nasarawa State University, Keffi. He serves as Senior Adviser on Economic Policy and Strategy to Dr. Gbenga Olawepo-Hashim and holds three master’s degrees in Finance, Strategy, and Financial Engineering.
