US Report Validates Nigeria’s Fiscal Concerns, Say CISLAC, Economists

Economists, civil society organisations and former Vice President Atiku Abubakar have backed the latest assessment by the United States government on Nigeria’s fiscal transparency, saying the report has validated concerns repeatedly raised over the country’s budgetary process, borrowing and management of public resources.

Reacting to the US Department of State’s 2026 Fiscal Transparency Report on Nigeria, they insisted  that Nigerians deserve to know how public resources are earned, borrowed and spent.

The United States government’s latest fiscal transparency assessment,  assessed 139 governments and the Palestinian Authority and found Nigeria among 53 countries making no progress toward minimum standards of budgetary openness, out of 67 that fell short overall.

The US government’s Fiscal Transparency Report which assesses whether governments receiving US assistance meet minimum standards for transparency in public finances, marked Nigeria as making no progress.

The assessment considers the public availability, completeness and reliability of key budget documents, as well as transparency in government contracting and the awarding of licences for natural resource extraction.

In its 2026 Fiscal Transparency Report released on Tuesday, the department assessed 139 governments and the Palestinian Authority, with only 73 meeting the minimum standards. Of the 67 that did not, 14 made significant progress, while 53,  including Nigeria, were marked as making no progress.

Executive director of CISLAC, Auwal Musa Rafsanjani, told Leadership that the US assessment confirmed what Nigerians and civil society groups had been highlighting over the years, particularly concerns about inflated budgets, weak fiscal accountability and the failure of public spending to translate into meaningful development.

The US government’s Fiscal Transparency Report which assesses whether governments receiving US assistance meet minimum standards for transparency in public finances.

Rafsanjani said the findings were consistent with longstanding warnings from CISLAC, BudgIT and other civil society organisations that Nigeria’s budgetary system was failing to deliver the desired development outcomes.

“The US report has confirmed what Nigerians have already said over time. CISLAC and so many other civil society organisations like BudgIT have continuously drawn the attention of the Federal Republic of Nigeria about its bogus budget, and budgets that are not actually translating to financing for development and actually getting Nigerians out of the shackles of poverty, unemployment and economic stagnation,” he said.

According to him, the country’s budget has increasingly become characterised by waste, duplication and opportunities for the diversion of public resources. Rafsanjani specifically expressed concern over what he described as the existence of multiple budgets, noting that the situation was reflected in the current fiscal framework involving the 2024, 2025 and 2026 budgets.

“If you look at the current budget that we have now, which is actually three budgets, 2024, 2025 and 2026, you could see the concern that the US government is raising,” he said. He said civil society organisations had raised similar concerns before both the National Assembly and the executive arm of government, but lamented that their recommendations had not received adequate attention.

On his part, professor of Economics and Public Policy at the University of Uyo, Prof Akpan Ekpo, described the US report as fair, saying Nigeria’s fiscal challenges went beyond the issues highlighted by the assessment.

Noting that the “report is fair”, he said “we don’t even need U.S. support. Even within Nigeria, we know that there’s a problem with the fiscal side.” According to him, the country needed greater transparency in borrowing, procurement, revenue and expenditure, while urging the government and civil society to strengthen scrutiny of the budget process.

“There’s a need for a roundtable to discuss how to improve the budget process, how to avoid political interference.” He warned that running multiple budgets concurrently could weaken investor confidence, adding that the budget remained an important instrument of macroeconomic management.

Also, former Vice President and Presidential candidate of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), Atiku Abubakar, described the report as further confirmation of his longstanding concerns over the management and disclosure of public finances under the Bola Tinubu administration.

Atiku said the observations should prompt a broader conversation about how public funds are accounted for and how Nigerians are given access to information about the resources entrusted to government.

“Transparency is not a slogan. It is the foundation of good governance,” he had said in one of his several interventions on the issue. This report confirms what we have been saying that Nigerians deserve to know where every kobo is coming from and where it is being spent. They are our resources and not the resources of President Bola Tinubu and his family and friends,” Atiku said.

The former Vice President further stressed that Nigeria’s dependence on foreign investment and multilateral financing makes credible fiscal reporting particularly important. He called for more detailed and timely disclosure of government income from oil, taxation and borrowing, alongside clear information on how such resources are allocated and utilised.

According to Atiku, strengthening fiscal transparency would help rebuild public confidence at a time when Nigerians are confronting economic pressures, while also giving investors, development partners and credit-rating institutions a clearer picture of the country’s financial position.

Rafsanjani had also faulted the government’s continued reliance on borrowing, arguing that the increasing debt burden had not been matched by commensurate development outcomes. “But rather, government continues to borrow. Government continues to spend a lot of its earnings on servicing debt, because these loans that are being collected, they are supposed to pay back, they are supposed to have financed development,” he said.

He argued that much of the borrowing reflected in federal budgets was being deployed to consumption rather than productive investment capable of generating the resources required to repay the loans.

“But if you look at the federal budget, borrowed, it is more of consumption, and that is why you will never be able to repay back based on the Fiscal Responsibility legal frameworks that we have, because it is purely borrowing for waste, borrowing for unnecessary spending,” Rafsanjani said.

His comments come against the backdrop of wider concerns over gaps in Nigeria’s fiscal reporting. The International Monetary Fund, IMF, had also raised concerns in July over expenditure equivalent to about two per cent of Nigeria’s Gross Domestic Product that was not captured in official budget documents and implementation reports. The Fund said the omission created a mismatch between the reported fiscal deficit and the government’s actual financing needs.

The federal government, however, rejected suggestions that the unreported expenditure represented illegal or secret spending, with the Minister of Finance and Coordinating Minister of the Economy, Taiwo Oyedele, saying the IMF’s observation was focused on improving the comprehensiveness, timing and presentation of fiscal reporting.

Meanwhile, Special Adviser to President on Media and Public Communication, said the latest fiscal transparency report by the United States does not provide a comprehensive assessment of Nigeria’s ongoing public financial management reforms.

In the statement, Dare said the assessment should be properly contextualised, noting that the report measures countries against specific minimum requirements set by the US department of state. “The U.S. Fiscal Transparency Report is a specific assessment against the Department of State’s minimum fiscal-transparency requirements, particularly the public disclosure of national budget information, government contracts and natural-resource licenses,” he said.

He said the report “should therefore not be interpreted as a comprehensive assessment of all fiscal and public financial management reforms currently underway in Nigeria”.

According to Dare, the report itself acknowledged progress by Nigeria in making budget documents and debt obligations publicly available.

He said the areas identified by the report, including procurement disclosure, budget execution reporting and audit processes, remain issues the federal government is addressing through ongoing institutional reforms.

“Fiscal transparency, accountability and effective public financial management remain important priorities of the Federal Government, and Nigeria continues to implement reforms aimed at strengthening the management, reporting and disclosure of public resources,” Dare said.

The presidential media aide said Nigeria had established mechanisms such as the open treasury initiative, public budget documentation, and debt disclosures to promote fiscal transparency.

Dare said the government was also strengthening digital procurement and other systems to improve the accessibility, reliability, and timeliness of public financial information.

“The appropriate response, therefore, is neither to dismiss the findings nor to portray them as a complete characterization of Nigeria’s fiscal governance. Rather, the report provides an external benchmark against which existing reforms can be further strengthened.”