FCCPC Uncovers Possible Price Manipulation in Cement Market

The Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) has said preliminary findings from an industry-wide investigation point to possible manipulation of cement prices in Nigeria.

The Commission stated that the findings were contained in a 40-page field report compiled after a three-month cross-border study by its Anticompetitive Practices Department (ACP).

The FCCPC director, Corporate Affairs, Ondaje Ijagwu, stated on Tuesday that the probe was launched following widespread complaints from the public over the high cost of cement, a major material in the construction industry.

According to the FCCPC, concerns had been raised over why cement remains comparatively expensive in Nigeria despite the country’s large limestone deposits, strong domestic production capacity and reported surplus capacity relative to local demand.

The Commission said all the major cement manufacturers in the country cooperated with the investigation by providing their records, except one. It noted that three major companies account for more than 90 percent of installed production capacity nationwide.

The ACP said its investigation also covered markets in Kenya, Tanzania, South Africa, Egypt, Morocco, Algeria and Togo, comparing factors such as limestone availability, population, production capacity and consumption.

Citing figures from Kenya, the Commission said the country’s 58.6 million population, which is 76 per cent lower than Nigeria’s, generates a domestic cement demand of about 9.3 million metric tonnes per annum, with a bag retailing for around N7,344 in Nairobi. In Tanzania, it said a bag sells for about N6,528, while in Togo, which has no limestone deposit, a bag sells for about N9,180.

By contrast, the Commission said market intelligence reviewed showed that the price of a 50kg bag of cement in Nigeria rose sharply in the first half of 2026. It said a bag that sold for between N9,300 and N9,700 in January rose to between N10,500 and N13,000 by mid-year, and further to between N13,000 and N15,000 in some parts of the country by July.

The Commission said Nigeria has an installed cement production capacity of more than 60 to 65 million metric tonnes annually, against an estimated domestic consumption of 25 to 30 million metric tonnes, adding that the country is also a net exporter of cement to neighbouring markets.

It expressed concern that this level of excess capacity had not translated into lower domestic prices, as would ordinarily be expected in a competitive market.

The FCCPC said industry players had attributed rising prices to factors including energy costs, the depreciation of the Naira and its effect on imported machinery and spare parts, as well as transportation and logistics costs. It said these explanations were being tested against verified data on costs, production, pricing and market conditions.

The Commission said the preliminary findings were strong enough to justify continuing the investigation, which would next seek to establish whether current cement prices reflect legitimate costs and market conditions, or whether there is evidence of coordinated conduct, abuse of market power, supply restriction or other anti-competitive practices under the FCCPA.

It disclosed that Notices of Commencement of Investigation and Summons to Produce had been issued to key industry players, who are required to submit information on their pricing methods, production and capacity utilisation, exports and relevant commercial relationships.

Speaking on the investigation, the executive vice chairman/chief executive officer of the FCCPC, Tunji Bello, said cement holds a strategic place in the Nigerian economy, noting that its price affects the cost of building homes, developing commercial property, delivering public infrastructure and doing business generally.

“When concerns persist about how such an important market is functioning, the Commission has a duty to look beyond assumptions and establish the facts,” Bello said.

He explained that the Commission’s scrutiny was not meant to dictate business decisions, but to determine whether the market is functioning competitively and whether consumers are enjoying the benefits of genuine competition.

“Businesses are entitled to make legitimate commercial decisions and earn returns on their investments. Competition law does not prevent that,” he said, adding that the goal was to protect the competitive process so that prices and other market outcomes are shaped by fair competition rather than unlawful restrictions.