Business

FG lifts ban on Cryptocurrency, introduces taxation

Published

3 years ago

June 8, 2023

Advocate News Nigeria

FG cracks down on illegal crypto traders

Cryptocurrencies

Spread the love

Federal government of Nigeria is making plans to tax cryptocurrencies in the new Finance Act. One of the provisions of the 2023 Finance Act is taxing proceeds from cryptos and other digital assets.

Former President Muhammadu Buhari on May 28, 2023 signed the 2023 Finance Act into law before he exited office.

The Finance Act introduced a series of tax reforms to modernize Nigeria’s fiscal framework.

One of the provisions in the Act is the introduction of a 10% tax on proceeds from the disposal of digital assets, including cryptocurrencies.

The move means Nigeria recognizes digital assets’ increasing influence and economic prospects while ensuring the tax system aligns with the changing landscape.

The 2023 Finance Act is comprehensive legislation seeking to enhance fiscal transparency, boost revenue generation, and promote economic growth.

According to report the Act seeks to rein in revenue from recognized digital assets like cryptocurrencies and bring them into the purview of taxation.

Also, the Nigerian government wants to create a level playing ground to ensure that they contribute to Nigeria’s revenue generation and development.

The move demonstrates Nigeria’s readiness to adapt to its fiscal policies, realities and accelerate technological advancements and the changing landscape of financial transactions.

The determination to impose a tax on the proceeds of digital assets shows the government’s recognition of the economic promise of cryptos. There has been remarkable growth in the global cryptocurrency industry in recent years.

By taxing proceeds from digital assets, the Nigerian government seeks to capture a part of the economic value made from these transactions, contributing to the country’s overall revenue drive.

Other Taxes In The 2023 Finance Act

The Federal government introduce a step toward broadening Nigeria’s tax base. Other taxes on the 2023 Finance Act are the personal income tax act, the Tertiary Education Fund tax, Customs, Excise Tariff, and Excise duties for the fiscal year.

TheCable reports that before the 2023 Finance Act, the Nigerian government had published the fiscal policy measures, which outline the rates of taxes and excise duties for the fiscal year.

The new measures consisted of supplementary protection measures, revised excise duty rates, and green taxes and were approved by Buhari.

The former Minister of Finance, Zainab Ahmed, had said that the Nigerian government was planning to tax cryptos and other digital assets. She said the plan aligns with the government’s policy initiatives of boosting cross-border and international taxation and growing e-commerce with emerging markets.

On May 2023, The federal government approved the national blockchain policy, allowing blockchain technology to lift the ban on cryptocurrency in Nigeria.

FG’s journey to cryptocurrency acceptance

Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies have long been a topic of debate and regulatory scrutiny worldwide, and Nigeria has been no exception.

In February 2021, the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) issued a circular to deposit money banks (DMBs), non-bank financial institutions (NBFIs), and other financial institutions (OFIs) to close accounts of persons or entities involved in cryptocurrency transactions within their systems.

The CBN further warned local financial institutions against dealing in crypto-assets or facilitating payments for crypto exchanges.

The apex bank cited concerns over money laundering, terrorism financing, cybercrime and the volatility of cryptocurrencies as reasons for the ban.

The directive received significant backlash from the Nigerian public and the cryptocurrency community, as many saw it as a hindrance to technological advancement and economic growth.

However, just two years later, the government has taken a surprising turn by introducing taxation on cryptocurrencies.

Here is a timeline of major events in the two-year period that shaped the evolution of Nigeria’s stance on cryptocurrencies.

February 5,2021: CBN directs banks to close accounts of persons or entities involved in cryptocurrency transactions within their systems.

February 9, 2021: CBN launches investigation into financial institutions offering services to cryptocurrency traders.

February 11, 2021: The senate invites the CBN, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to discuss opportunities and threats of cryptocurrency on Nigeria’s economy and security.

February 18, 2021: The International Monetary Fund (IMF) backs CBN, says cryptocurrencies may be used for illegal activities.

February 22, 2021: The SEC says there is a need to regulate cryptocurrencies.

February 26, 2021: Yemi Osinbajo, Vice President of Nigeria, calls for a regulatory framework for cryptocurrencies rather than an outright ban.

March 21, 2021: The CBN clarifies its position on the ban and states that individuals are not prohibited from buying and trading crypto, just not through any Nigerian bank or fintech.

April 15, 2021: SEC says discussion is ongoing with the CBN over the regulation of cryptocurrencies.

April 26, 2021: The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) warns Nigerians to be cautious before investing in Bitcoin.

July 22, 2021: The CBN announces plans to launch the “ eNaira”—a central bank digital currency (CBDC) — which is quite different from Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies.

October 25,2021: Nigeria becomes first African nation to launch a digital currency — the “eNaira”.

April 7, 2022: CBN hits six banks with a N1.3 billion fine over alleged non-compliance with its regulation on accounts of cryptocurrency traders.

May 15, 2022: The SEC recognises digital assets as securities and issues regulations on exchange and custody of cryptocurrencies in the country.

Government Introduces Taxation On Cryptocurrency

The federal government surprised many by announcing its decision to tax cryptocurrencies.

The government said it recognized the growing adoption and economic significance of digital assets and aimed to harness their potential for revenue generation.

By doing so, Nigeria joins the league of jurisdictions currently taxing digital assets, including the United Kingdom, the United States of America, Australia, India, Kenya and South Africa.

December 2, 2022: Zainab Ahmed, minister of finance, budget and national planning, says there is a provision to tax cryptocurrency and other digital assets in the latest finance bill.

May 28, 2023: President Muhammadu Buhari signs the 2023 finance bill into law. The law introduces a 10 percent taxation of gains on the disposal of digital assets including cryptocurrency. The law is effective as of May 1, 2023.

Source

PROMISES DELIVERED

Business

Pipeline sale controversy deepens as expert warns of investor confidence risks

Published

5 days ago

June 17, 2026

Advocate News Nigeria

Spread the love

Fresh controversy has erupted over efforts to revive the sale of a 40 per cent stake in the Amukpe–Escravos Pipeline, with a governance expert warning that any attempt to resurrect a previously terminated transaction could damage investor confidence and raise fresh questions about transparency in Nigeria’s oil and gas sector.

Speaking on Channels Television on Thursday, June 11, 2026, Managing Director of Policy Management Consult Services, Jide Olatuyi, said concerns surrounding the transaction extend beyond commercial interests and strike at the heart of governance, transparency, and the credibility of Nigeria’s investment environment.

“The contract was terminated,” Olatuyi said. “What stakeholders are saying is that there is a need for a new competitive bidding process rather than attempting to revive a failed transaction.”

The controversy has intensified amid scrutiny of the asset’s valuation. The earlier transaction involving the 40 per cent stake was priced at approximately $243 million before collapsing over unmet contractual obligations. Independent assessments conducted in 2025 reportedly valued the same stake at between $544 million and $641 million.

The significant disparity between the earlier transaction price and the more recent valuations has fuelled calls for a fresh competitive bidding exercise to ensure that the asset reflects prevailing market conditions and delivers maximum value.

Rejecting suggestions that opposition to the proposed transaction is driven by sentiment or commercial rivalry, Olatuyi insisted that the debate centres on governance standards within the petroleum industry.

“I don’t think it is about sentiment at all,” he said. “It is about governance in the oil and gas sector.”

According to him, Nigeria’s challenge is no longer limited to attracting investors but also ensuring that investors have confidence in the integrity of the country’s commercial and regulatory processes.

“If you are not committed to transparency, it becomes a problem for investors,” he said. “If you cannot build trust and confidence in the sector, capital will go elsewhere.”

Olatuyi said several stakeholders, including project lenders such as Sterling Bank and AMCON, have advocated a transparent process that reflects current market realities and updated asset valuations.

The Amukpe–Escravos Pipeline, which has a transportation capacity of about 160,000 barrels per day and has maintained uptime above 95 per cent, remains one of Nigeria’s most strategic crude evacuation assets. The pipeline plays a critical role in transporting crude from inland production fields to export terminals in the Niger Delta.

Olatuyi urged authorities to ensure that any future transaction involving the asset is conducted through an open, transparent, and competitive process capable of inspiring investor confidence and safeguarding public value.

The debate comes at a time when the Federal Government is seeking to attract substantial investment into the energy sector and expand critical oil and gas infrastructure.

The eventual outcome of the Amukpe–Escravos Pipeline transaction could serve as a major test of Nigeria’s commitment to transparency, valuation discipline, and investor protection. As global competition for energy capital intensifies, governance standards may prove just as important as resource endowment in determining where investment flows.

Officials of the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission and members of the technical committee that supervised the original transaction did not respond to requests for comment as of press time.

PROMISES DELIVERED

Business

S/East companies shutting down over rising energy costs — MAN

Published

4 weeks ago

May 27, 2026

Advocate News Nigeria

Spread the love

The Manufacturers Association of Nigeria (MAN) has raised alarm over the worsening state of manufacturing activities in the South-East, warning that rising energy costs and poor access to finance are forcing many companies in the region to shut down.

Chairman of MAN for Anambra, Enugu and Ebonyi states, Lady Ada Chukwudozie, disclosed this during the MAN South-East Stakeholders’ Industry Conversation held in Awka, Anambra State.

The forum was convened to address concerns surrounding electricity regulation, billing transparency and declining industrial productivity across the region.

Chukwudozie said the few factories still operating were doing so at less than 30 per cent of installed capacity due to soaring electricity tariffs, high energy costs and limited access to credit facilities.

According to her, the harsh operating environment informed the decision to convene the stakeholders’ roundtable, stressing that the manufacturing sector remains critical to economic growth, industrialisation and job creation.

She warned that unless urgent measures are taken to address the challenges confronting manufacturers, industrial activities in the South-East could further deteriorate, with serious implications for employment and regional economic stability.

“The manufacturing sector cannot thrive in an environment of uncertainty,” she said.

She called for reforms in the power sector to be driven by transparency, accountability and measurable performance standards, including agreed electricity supply hours, actual delivery levels and compensation mechanisms where supply consistently falls below expectations.

Chukwudozie also urged regulatory authorities to strengthen oversight of electricity providers and improve power supply to industrial clusters across the South-East.

Stakeholders at the forum expressed concern that manufacturers were increasingly struggling to cope with escalating production costs, worsened by unreliable electricity supply and the rising cost of alternative energy sources.

They noted that without affordable and stable energy, many more companies could either scale down operations or shut down completely.

In his keynote address, former Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission, NERC, Dr. Sam Amadi, urged governments in the South-East to adopt deliberate policies aimed at prioritising electricity supply to industrial clusters.

Amadi also advocated pricing frameworks that would encourage manufacturers to expand production and invest in growth.

The stakeholders’ meeting brought together manufacturers, regulators and other industry players to explore practical solutions to revive industrial output and tackle persistent power challenges affecting businesses in the region.

PROMISES DELIVERED

Business

Amukpe-Escravos pipeline and the real cost of ignoring current value, By Sufuyan Ojeifo

Published

2 months ago

April 29, 2026

Advocate News Nigeria

Spread the love

Nigeria’s oil infrastructure has a habit of telling uncomfortable truths. Not just about barrels and flow rates, but about how a country chooses to value what it cannot afford to lose, and what it risks when it gets that calculation wrong.

Take the Amukpe-Escravos Pipeline, for example. A syndicate of lenders, led by Sterling Bank, is pushing back against efforts to revive a collapsed transaction involving a 40% stake in the asset. Their argument is not complicated. It is rooted in numbers and contractual discipline.

To be clear, a deal that fell apart in 2024 is being reconsidered using a valuation from that same year. However, since then, the asset has proved its worth. Independent assessments now place that stake closer to $600 million. The earlier benchmark sits far below that. The gap is not cosmetic. It is material. And if left unaddressed, it becomes a cost.

The original $243 million offer did not collapse by accident. It was terminated in October 2024 after Conpurex Limited failed to meet payment obligations, breached key terms, and sought to shift risk back to the seller. By the time the Technical Committee closed the process, confidence had already drained out of it. That much is settled.

Ordinarily, that should have been the end. Instead, there are moves to return to a September 2025 approval linked to that same process. The lenders describe this as an administrative carryover. Their response is simple. Start again. Set aside the old approval. Bring in an independent adviser. Return the asset to the market and let current value speak.

What is striking is not just the position itself, but how unusual it sounds in the Nigerian context. In a system where strategic assets have too often travelled through corridors of convenience, an insistence on valuation and process can sound almost rebellious. It should not be so.

Because this is not entirely about one pipeline. It is about whether a terminated deal remains terminated. Whether contracts still mean what they say. Whether performance counts for anything once the paperwork has been filed away. And, crucially, who bears the cost when value is ignored.

The numbers, as always, are blunt. A 2025 independent valuation, referenced in the March 2026 edition of Africa Oil+Gas Report, places the 40% stake at a mid-case of $372 million, a high case of $544 million, and an upside of $641 million. These are not speculative figures. They reflect an asset that has quietly done its job in a difficult environment.

With a capacity of 160,000 barrels per day and uptime consistently above 95%, the Amukpe-Escravos Pipeline has become one of the more reliable evacuation routes in a system where reliability is often in short supply. While other corridors struggle with theft and disruption, this one works.

That fact matters a great deal. Because when an asset proves itself under pressure, its value does not stand still. It moves. To price it as though nothing has changed is not just a technical choice. It is a financial one. And every financial choice has consequences.

It says performance can be ignored. It says time does not count. It says administrative continuity can outrun economic reality. To be fair, the earlier process gave enough warning signs. Lenders questioned the assumptions. Coordination was weak. When Continental Oil and Gas stepped back, Conpurex entered without a clean transition and soon began to reopen settled terms, shifting obligations and introducing new conditions that unsettled the commercial balance. The eventual termination was not dramatic. It was inevitable.

What unsettles stakeholders now is the possibility that a process that ran its course may still shape the outcome. If a concluded transaction can reappear without a clear restart, the line between closure and continuity begins to blur. Once that line blurs, contractual uncertainty follows. And when certainty weakens, serious capital takes notice.

This is where the issue widens beyond the pipeline itself. Back in March, Africa Oil+Gas Report described the Amukpe-Escravos matter as no longer just a transaction story, but a test of how Nigeria governs, values, and safeguards strategic oil infrastructure. That reading feels even more relevant now.

Because what is at stake is not simply who acquires a stake in a pipeline. It is how the country signals to those willing to invest in its most critical assets. It is about whether value is recognised only in theory, or protected in practice. It is about whether losses are acknowledged, or quietly absorbed.

The lenders’ position is often described as resistance. It is better understood as discipline. Reset the process. Revisit the approval. Bring in independent oversight. Return the asset to the market through a transparent and competitive process that reflects present realities. Ensure capable counterparties. Align all stakeholders.

These are not extravagant demands. They are the basics. Nigeria has seen too many assets drift from promise to regret. Too many structures that once worked reduced to cautionary tales. When something works, when something proves resilient in a difficult system, the least that can be done is to treat it with the seriousness it has earned.

Moments like this do not announce themselves as turning points. They arrive quietly, dressed as routine decisions.

But they reveal everything. For an economy seeking disciplined capital and trying to rebuild confidence, the signal matters. Let the process be reset. Let valuation reflect reality. Let the outcome show that when Nigeria recognises value, it also knows how to protect it, and what it stands to lose when it does not.

Until then, the lenders’ position stands as a reminder that in a system where too much has been taken for granted, some lines are too important to be crossed and must be held.

● Sufuyan Ojeifo publishes THE CONCLAVE online newspaper.