African Democratic Congress (ADC) has dismissed the Presidency’s claim that a petrol subsidy to support a pump price of about ₦600 per litre under Alhaji Atiku Abubakar’s proposal would cost Nigeria approximately ₦19.1 trillion annually, describing it as a “phantom figure” and “arithmetic vandalism.”
Reacting on Monday through its National Publicity Secretary, Mallam Bolaji Abdullahi, the party said the Presidency was attacking a model it created for itself rather than Atiku’s actual plan.
“We are at a loss as to how the presidency conjured up this phantom figure. But we do not agree with it.
ALSO READ: 2027: Kogi APC tensions deepen over Karimi’s Senate ambition
“In trying to discredit Atiku’s proposal as unrealistic, the president’s men fail to address its fundamental principle, which is that Nigerians cannot afford the cost of unsubsidised fuel. That is classic straw man argument, the presidency attacking the model it created by itself, and passing it off as an attack on the opponent’s position.”
‘Prove the ₦19.1 trillion claim’
The ADC said the Presidency’s own spokesman admitted the calculation was based on assumptions of $80 crude and a $40-per-barrel subsidy differential that were not independently verified.
“The ADC does not concede that implementing the AERP would cost ₦19.1 trillion annually, because it does not. And nothing they have said so far suggests they have a proof for concluding that it does. Instead, what we see is fiscal scare-mongering,” the statement said.
The party explained that the proposal of its presidential candidate Alhaji Atiku Abubakar is not a return to the old import-subsidy regime.
“[It is a] complete step-change that moves subsidy away from imported finished petroleum products toward domestic production through a controlled crude-feedstock incentive for local refineries, based on a benchmark-and-ceiling principle.
“Atiku subsidy changes the object of intervention. It proposes a subsidy for production input — domestic crude feedstock supplied to qualifying Nigerian refineries within Nigeria,” Abdullahi stated.
He contrasted the old model of importing and subsidising products with the ADC model: “Nigerian crude → Nigerian refinery → Nigerian petroleum products → Nigerian consumption → surplus regional exports.”
‘Account for your own multi-trillion spending’
The ADC challenged the government to explain petroleum-related expenditures already reported under the current administration instead of inventing figures for the opposition.
“NNPC’s audited 2024 accounts recorded approximately ₦7.13 trillion under Energy Security… bringing the broader petroleum-related exposure reported in the accounts to roughly ₦17.5 trillion,” the party noted.
“The question is: what does the government’s multi -trillion naira petroleum intervention mean and why has it the huge expenditure not subjected to any fiscal and value -for-money scrutiny?”
The ADC also cited the government’s Deep Offshore Oil and Gas Projects Incentives (Tax Remission) Order 2026, which provides production tax credits of up to $11.50 per barrel.
“If Nigeria can provide a production-linked fiscal incentive of up to $11.50 per barrel to stimulate offshore oil production, why is a carefully controlled crude-input incentive for domestic refineries dismissed as economic madness when its objective is to make fuel cheaper for Nigerians?” the statement asked.
The party further referenced the Nigeria Customs Service report of approximately ₦34 trillion in Import Duty Exemption Certificates, saying it shows government itself recognizes that foregoing revenue can be justified for national objectives.
‘Where are the FX savings and multiplier?’
Abdullahi said the Presidency’s N19.1 trillion figure ignores the foreign-exchange and industrial benefits of domestic refining.
“Every petroleum product Nigeria does not import is foreign exchange Nigeria does not need to spend on that import. Every barrel refined domestically retains more value within the Nigerian economy,” he said.
“For decades, the absurdity has been: export crude → import refined products → spend scarce foreign exchange → transmit the cost into the Nigerian economy.
The Atiku plan seeks to reverse that: produce crude → refine domestically → consume domestically → industrialise → export surplus products → earn foreign exchange.”
The ADC added that cheaper energy impacts the entire economy, from food distribution to manufacturing, and that “doing nothing is not free. It is ultimately more expensive.”
‘This is not the old subsidy’
The party said the Atiku plan proposes a capped, audited and traceable intervention with benchmark pricing, verified refinery capacity, digital tracking and domestic-supply obligations.
“The question under the old subsidy system was: ‘How many litres did you import?’ The question under the Atiku subsidy plan would be: ‘Where is the barrel, what did it produce and where did the product go?’ That is not a return to the old regime. It is a redesign of the subsidy architecture,” Abdullahi said.
The ADC said the real debate is not subsidy versus no subsidy, but priorities.
“The debate is: what should Nigeria subsidise, why, and for whom? The ADC answers: What Nigerians need is cheaper fuel, because Nigerians are too poor not to be subsidised. Nigerian crude should create Nigerian value for Nigerians,” the statement said.
“We do not propose to subsidise waste. What we propose to subsidise production that directly improves capacity. And if the Presidency truly believes that even such an intervention is too expensive, then it must answer the question it has so far avoided: Why is cheaper energy for Nigerians less deserving of public investment than the other multi -trillion naira expenditures that this government has made?”
WATCH TOP VIDEOS FROM NIGERIAN TRIBUNE TV