By Opeyemi Adelakun
The Presidency has challenged the conclusions of a United States report that placed Nigeria among 67 governments that failed to meet minimum fiscal transparency requirements, arguing that the assessment should not be treated as a complete verdict on the country’s fiscal governance.
The reaction followed the release of the 2026 Fiscal Transparency Report by the US Department of State, which assessed 140 governments over the disclosure of budget information, government contracts and natural-resource licences.
Nigeria was among the countries that failed to meet the minimum requirements during the 2025 review period.
The report identified weaknesses in Nigeria’s budget disclosure, revenue and expenditure reporting, audit independence and public procurement transparency. It also, however, recognised progress in the public availability of budget documents and information on government debt obligations.
Reacting to the findings, the Special Adviser to the President on Media and Public Communications, Sunday Dare, said the Federal Government took fiscal transparency and accountability seriously but maintained that the US assessment had a defined scope.
“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.
He explained that the report was based specifically on the US Department of State’s minimum fiscal-transparency requirements, particularly the public disclosure of national budget information, government contracts and natural-resource licences.
“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.
Dare cautioned against interpreting the findings as a comprehensive assessment of all fiscal reforms being undertaken by the Federal Government.
“It should therefore not be interpreted as a comprehensive assessment of all fiscal and public financial management reforms currently underway in Nigeria,” he said.
He added that the government’s position was not to dismiss the report but to place its findings in the proper context.
“The appropriate response, therefore, is neither to dismiss the findings nor to portray them as a complete characterization of Nigeria’s fiscal governance,” Dare said.
The US report said Nigeria had made its enacted budget and end-of-year report widely accessible to the public, including online platforms.
It faulted the country, however, for failing to publish its executive budget proposal within a reasonable period.
The assessment also found that while information on government debt obligations, including major state-owned enterprise debt, was publicly available, Nigeria’s budget documents did not provide a substantially complete picture of government revenues and expenditures.
According to the report, actual government revenues and expenditures also did not reasonably correspond with the figures contained in the enacted budget.
The US government further criticised the independence and reporting capacity of Nigeria’s Supreme Audit Institution, saying it did not meet international standards of independence or publish substantive reports, although it had access to the entire executed budget.
Of the 140 governments assessed, 73 met the minimum fiscal transparency requirements, while 67, including Nigeria, failed to meet the benchmark.
In defending the government’s record, Dare highlighted several initiatives introduced to improve public access to financial information and strengthen accountability.
He cited the Open Treasury initiative, public disclosure of budget documents and debt obligations, reforms in public procurement and the deployment of digital procurement systems.
The Presidency said the measures were designed to improve the accessibility, reliability and timeliness of information on public finances.
The US report comes amid wider scrutiny of Nigeria’s fiscal management.
In July, the International Monetary Fund raised concerns over discrepancies between Nigeria’s reported fiscal position and its actual financing requirements, saying spending equivalent to about two per cent of GDP had not been reflected in recent official budgets.
The IMF attributed part of the gap to major government projects implemented outside the conventional budget framework.
The Fund also expressed concerns over Nigeria’s proposed plan to raise up to $5bn through a derivatives-based financing arrangement with First Abu Dhabi Bank, warning that such transactions could be complex and raise questions around transparency.
The US Department of State said fiscal transparency is essential to effective public financial management, market confidence, economic sustainability and government accountability.
Leave a Reply