23 February, 2026
by Mohammed Bello Doka
Word Count: 1,979
As someone who has long navigated the turbulent waters of Nigeria’s regional debates, I stand again at the intersection of frustration, urgency, and stubborn hope. In my February 22 edition of Sarcastic Sunday on Abuja Network News, I confronted—head-on—the perennial accusation hurled at an entire region of this country: “What does Northern Nigeria actually contribute to the Federation?” I answered then with figures. I answer now with more figures, sharper context, and unavoidable questions.
That earlier piece dissected, without euphemism, the North’s undervalued role as Nigeria’s food basket, mineral base, and hydropower backbone. It resonated widely—because facts have a way of unsettling comfortable prejudices. The narrative that Northern Nigeria is a “parasite” living off others did not merely appear thin; it collapsed under evidence. Yet the fiction persists, recycled in every allocation quarrel, every political grievance, every whisper of disunion.
Ideally, this would have been Part 2 of that Sarcastic Sunday series. But Sarcastic Sunday airs once a week, exclusively on Abuja Network News, and the urgency of this debate does not grant the luxury of delay. The allegation of Northern parasitism is not harmless rhetoric; it is a corrosive myth that deepens division in a federation already strained by mistrust.
So here I am again—Bello—revisiting the core facts of what the North gives to Nigeria before confronting, with equal candour, what it receives. And I go further: proposing concrete pathways for the North to overcome structural dependence by formalizing and financing the vast productive capacity it already possesses. Because the central truth is this: the North’s predicament is not that it contributes too little—it is that it monetizes too little of what it already contributes enormously.
---
What Northern Nigeria Gives the Federation: Verified 2025 Facts
Let the record be explicit and unambiguous. Using 2025 data from the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS), Nigeria Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (NEITI), Federation Account Allocation Committee (FAAC), Nigeria Customs Service (NCS), and Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS), Northern Nigeria’s fiscal footprint remains massive.
Direct and indirect fiscal contributions: ~₦4.5–5.5 trillion
Broader economic enablement value: ~₦37 trillion
Much of this contribution is indirect—untaxed agriculture feeding the nation, minerals sustaining industry, border trade opening Sahel markets. Because these flows are not always taxed at source, they are routinely ignored in political accounting. That omission is the foundation of the parasite myth.
Direct Contributions (~₦1.3 trillion): Centrally Remitted Revenue
Solid Minerals Royalties/Fees (~₦17 billion):
Northern states host roughly 70 % of Nigeria’s mineral deposits. Kogi (limestone), Zamfara (gold), and Nasarawa (lithium) dominate extraction. Illegal mining leakage remains substantial, yet formal royalties alone still place the North as the sector’s primary geographic source.
Hydropower Concessions/Royalties (~₦60 billion):
Northern dams—Kainji, Jebba, Shiroro, Zungeru, Kashimbila—account for about 80 % of national hydro capacity. They added 110 MW to the grid and offset fossil-fuel imports worth trillions. Nigeria’s renewable backbone is overwhelmingly Northern geography.
Customs Duties from Northern Borders (~₦0.73–1.09 trillion; mid-estimate ₦0.91 trillion):
Northern commands generated roughly 10–15 % of the NCS’s ₦7.28 trillion national revenue. Grain and livestock trade across Sahel corridors underpin this stream, with reopened borders unlocking an estimated $1.3 billion in regional trade potential.
FCT (Abuja) Revenues (~₦300–400 billion):
Land, property, and VAT flows from the Federal Capital Territory accrue directly to the federal purse. FCT-IRS alone collected ₦43.8 billion in January 2025—exceeding prior annual targets. The political and administrative heart of Nigeria sits in the North-Central zone.
Indirect Contributions (~₦3.2–4.2 trillion fiscal; ~₦37 trillion economic enablement)
Agriculture Production Value (~₦33.6 trillion transfers southward):
The North produces over 75 % of Nigeria’s crops and 90 % of livestock.
2025 outputs:
Rice 9.37 MMT; Maize 11.44 MMT; Sorghum 6.5 MMT; Millet 1.55 MMT; Cowpea 4.28 MMT; Groundnut 5.24 MMT.
These flows feed southern urban markets and sustain non-oil GDP growth (96 % of national expansion driver).
Untaxed Agriculture Foregone Taxes (~₦2.53 trillion):
VAT and CIT exemptions prevent ~7.5 % taxation on farm transfers. This “loss” stabilizes national food prices, preventing 10–20 % inflation spikes. The North effectively subsidizes Nigeria’s cost of living.
VAT from Northern Consumption (~₦1.172 trillion):
North-Central ₦600.3 bn; North-West ₦370.9 bn; North-East ₦201.3 bn.
Federal share (14 %) ≈ ₦164 bn.
Corporate Taxes from Northern Firms (~₦0.45–0.8 trillion):
Manufacturing clusters across Kano, Kaduna, Plateau, and Niger contribute 15–20 % of national CIT.
Tourism (~₦20–50 billion FG taxes):
Yankari, Gashaka-Gumti, and cultural heritage sites account for 20–30 % of Nigeria’s tourism GDP footprint.
These are not abstract numbers. They represent food security, industrial inputs, electricity supply, and fiscal stability. The accusation of parasitism collapses under them.
Key Germane Questions:
If the North supplies most of Nigeria’s food, who is subsidizing whom?
If Northern dams power the grid, which region is the energy backbone?
If Northern borders generate customs revenue, where does trade sovereignty lie?
If Northern agriculture foregoes trillions in tax to keep prices low nationwide, who benefits most?
What Northern Nigeria Receives: Full Transparency
The second half of the ledger must be equally clear. Northern Nigeria receives approximately ₦14.5–15.5 trillion in combined inflows. This is not disputed. What matters is context and composition.
Direct Funds (~₦4.8 trillion)
FAAC Allocations (~₦3.1 trillion):
North-West ₦1.18 trn; North-East ₦0.81 trn; North-Central ₦0.91 trn; FCT ₦0.18 trn.
Allocation reflects population share and derivation formula.
Interventions/Bailouts (~₦0.68 trillion):
Concentrated in insecurity-affected states—Borno, Kaduna, Zamfara.
Grants/Loans (~₦0.81 trillion):
IDP recovery, nutrition, digital infrastructure, humanitarian stabilization.
CBN/BOI Agricultural Funding (~₦0.18 trillion):
Anchor Borrowers and mechanization programs.
Indirect Benefits (~₦9.7–10.7 trillion)
Federal Infrastructure (~₦8.24 trillion):
Sokoto–Badagry Highway, Abuja–Kano dualisation, Kano–Maradi rail, Zungeru–Kano power line, airport upgrades. Over half of the ₦16.48 trillion capital budget.
Subsidies and Social Support (~₦1.5 trillion):
Power subsidy, fertilizer programs, health financing.
These inflows address measurable structural deficits: poverty rates of 67–87 %, insurgency-disrupted economies, literacy gaps, and vast geographic spread. They are corrective investments, not discretionary charity.
Critical Questions That Must Be Faced:
Are allocations based on population inequitable—or constitutionally mandated?
Should regions facing insurgency and mass displacement receive equal or reduced federal support?
Can a federation remain stable if developmental asymmetry is ignored?
Does receiving infrastructure negate contributing agriculture, energy, and trade?
The Core Reality: Contribution vs Receipt
When indirect economic enablement (~₦37 trillion) is included, Northern Nigeria contributes far more than it receives.
Northern economic enablement: ~₦37 trillion
Total inflows received: ~₦14.5–15.5 trillion
The imbalance reverses the parasitism narrative entirely. The North’s problem is not excessive receipt—it is under-monetization of massive production.
Structural Predicament: Informality and Faith-Linked Finance Barriers
Northern Nigeria’s economy is dominated by agriculture, trade, and artisan work operating outside formal taxation and banking. Religious aversion to riba (interest) and gambling-linked capital further reduces financial inclusion.
The result: enormous production, minimal fiscal capture.
Proven Pathways: Islamic Finance and Informal Sector Formalization
Global precedents demonstrate viable solutions aligned with Northern Nigeria’s religious and economic structure.
Indonesia: Islamic finance assets $138 billion by 2025; inclusion rose 49 %→76 %.
Bangladesh: 45 million served by Islamic microfinance; poverty 28 %→20 %.
Turkey: Informality reduced 33 %→25 % workforce via participation banks.
Kenya: Mobile money inclusion 26 %→83 %.
Targeted Northern Nigeria Reform Blueprint
1. Scale Islamic Banking:
Expand Jaiz-type institutions nationwide; riba-free financing for farmers and traders.
2. Sharia-Compliant Fintech:
Digital wallets integrating zakat, waqf, and halal credit histories.
3. Mosque-Led Financial Literacy:
Ulama-backed education on mudarabah, musharakah, and murabaha.
4. Tax Incentives for Formalization:
Simplified registration tied to Islamic finance access.
5. Regional Participation Funds:
Northern MSME investment pools modeled on Turkey.
Formalizing even 30 % of the North’s informal sector within five years would transform internally generated revenue and reduce FAAC reliance.
The Unavoidable Conclusion
The final joker in this fiscal equation lies not in what was budgeted, but in what was actually released. The 2025 federal budget figures—on which Northern inflows of about ₦14.5–15.5 trillion were notionally based—assumed near-full capital implementation. Yet open fiscal execution reports show that only about 30 % of the 2025 capital budget was released, with roughly 70 % deferred into 2026, and several MDAs recording zero capital disbursement across 2024–2025. In effect, a large share of infrastructure and development spending statistically attributed to regions, including Northern Nigeria, did not materialise during the year.
Adjusting for that execution reality changes the balance sheet materially. With only ~30 % realised, Northern Nigeria’s effective 2025 inflow reduces from about ₦14.5–15.5 trillion on paper to roughly ₦4.4–4.7 trillion in actual benefit. By contrast, the North’s contribution and enablement footprint—about ₦37 trillion through food production, hydropower, minerals, and trade—remained fully operative regardless of federal disbursement delays. The empirical comparison is therefore stark: real Northern receipts were a fraction of its ongoing national contribution.
Stated professionally and without polemic, the claim that Northern Nigeria “receives more than it gives” relies on nominal budgets rather than executed spending, and counts direct transfers while omitting indirect national enablement. Once actual capital releases and zero-disbursement MDAs are factored in, the arithmetic reverses: in 2025 Northern Nigeria contributed multiple times what it effectively received. Any fair federation analysis must therefore compare executed expenditure with real economic contribution—because that is where the factual balance lies.
The fiction of Northern parasitism does not survive evidence. The North feeds Nigeria, powers Nigeria, supplies raw materials to Nigeria, and stabilizes Nigeria’s prices. Federal inflows respond to structural deficits created by insecurity and poverty—not idleness.
The true national question is not why the North receives, but why its vast production remains fiscally invisible.
Nigeria’s unity cannot be built on regional caricature. It must rest on economic truth. And the truth is clear: Northern Nigeria gives more than it gets—but must learn to capture more of what it gives.
If Northern Nigeria were led by governors and National Assembly members who truly understood their fiscal leverage and developmental deficits, the region would be demanding far more equitable execution and investment rather than accepting nominal allocations that never materialise.
And the empty threats of secession should give way to sober realism: Northern Nigeria’s vast productive base shows it can prosper on its own merits—yet it can do even better within a fair and fully implemented federation.
Mohammed Bello Doka is the chairman CEO Abuja Network News can be reached via [email protected]
Tags
Opinion