Nigeria Revenue Service Chairman Zacch Adedeji has claimed that Nigeria’s fuel subsidy cost could have climbed to about ₦53 trillion, with the naira potentially weakening to ₦3,500 per US dollar, if President Bola Ahmed Tinubu had not removed the subsidy in 2023, Abuja, 10 August 2026.
Adedeji made the projection during an interview on Channels Television’s Sunday Politics programme while defending the economic reforms introduced by the Tinubu administration.
Also read: Mourinho finally explains his bitter clash with Chelsea doctor
The NRS chairman described the removal of the petrol subsidy as a decisive step that prevented an even heavier strain on public finances.
“All the good results that I will reel out soon come as a result of that courageous decision,” Adedeji said.
“It is not a mistake; it is the best thing that has happened to this country.”
Adedeji argued that the subsidy regime had become unsustainable before Tinubu took office, with the government facing pressure from a weak oil sector, a narrow tax base and rising demands on public spending.
According to the NRS chairman, retaining the subsidy could have produced a far larger fiscal bill, particularly as international energy markets remained volatile.
Adedeji’s ₦53 trillion figure is a projection of what the subsidy burden could have become under the conditions he described. It is not an amount Nigeria actually spent on petrol subsidy.
The warning comes more than three years after Tinubu announced the removal of petrol subsidy during his inauguration on 29 May 2023.
“Fuel subsidy is gone,” Tinubu declared in his inaugural address, immediately setting in motion one of the most consequential economic policy changes of his administration.
The decision was followed by a steep increase in petrol prices, with the effects spreading through transport, food distribution, manufacturing and household expenses.
For many Nigerians, the immediate impact was painful. Higher transport costs and increased prices for goods and services placed considerable pressure on household budgets, particularly for low and middle-income families.
The reform has nevertheless significantly changed government finances.
With the Federal Government no longer paying the previous petrol subsidy, more revenue has become available for distribution through the Federation Account to the Federal, state and local governments.
The administration has also pursued exchange-rate reforms, including the unification of foreign exchange market rates, alongside efforts to expand domestic revenue collection.
Adedeji defended those measures, arguing that Nigerians should judge the reforms by their longer-term impact rather than by the difficulties experienced during the transition.
He also challenged politicians seeking to oppose Tinubu ahead of the 2027 presidential election to offer alternative solutions to the country’s economic problems.
“What the President deserves now is support and commendation for being a statesman and not a politician,” Adedeji said.
“Anybody who says he is coming, just ask them, ‘What will you do differently?'”
The NRS chairman specifically questioned whether opponents would reverse the fuel subsidy and exchange-rate reforms if given the opportunity to govern.
The debate reflects one of the central tensions surrounding Tinubu’s economic programme.
The government maintains that subsidy removal and exchange-rate reform were necessary to prevent deeper fiscal instability, while critics continue to point to the immediate and sustained pressure on living costs.
Nigeria’s economy has shown signs of stabilisation in several areas since the reforms, although inflation, household purchasing power and the cost of essential goods remain major concerns for millions of Nigerians.
The government has consequently faced the difficult task of balancing fiscal consolidation with measures designed to cushion the effects of reform.
Adedeji’s intervention is likely to add fresh fuel to that debate, particularly as political parties and presidential hopefuls begin positioning themselves ahead of the 2027 elections.
The broader question is no longer simply whether subsidy removal reduced the government’s direct fuel bill.
It is whether the long-term economic gains from the policy will eventually outweigh the immediate burden carried by Nigerian households.
Also read: Mourinho finally explains his bitter clash with Chelsea doctor
For the Tinubu administration, that remains the crucial test of one of its most consequential and controversial reforms.
David Okere is a journalist and contributor to Freelanews.com, covering business, governance, public affairs, and human-interest stories with a commitment to accuracy, balance, and public interest reporting.
