Tag: IMF

  • Why Nigeria Is Always Economically Behind

    Why Nigeria Is Always Economically Behind

    By Dr. Samson Abanni

    Let me tell you a story from the long ago—around 1400—when the world’s most advanced technology wasn’t smartphones or artificial intelligence, but something far simpler: turning raw wool into finished cloth. This was the quantum science of its day.

    England was the world’s largest producer of raw wool, but not a single person in all of England had mastered transforming that wool into the fine textiles that commanded premium prices across Europe. Just like modern African countries that export cocoa beans, coffee, and crude oil, England was trapped as a raw material supplier while other nations captured the lion’s share of value.

    The English king decided enough was enough. He crafted an irresistible immigration package: tax breaks, free land, guaranteed markets, and citizenship to any skilled textile worker willing to relocate and teach their craft to English apprentices.

    The strategy worked. Skilled artisans from Flanders, Italy, and other textile centers packed their tools and headed to England. Within a generation, English workshops were humming, local workers had mastered the technology, and the domestic market was flourishing.
    Phase two was even more audacious. Once local production could meet domestic demand, they banned raw wool exports and prohibited imports of finished woolen goods. European competitors, suddenly cut off from their primary raw material source, found themselves forced to import expensive finished products from England—the very country they had previously supplied. This single strategic shift helped launch England toward economic dominance.

    I shared this hoping you would ask, why can’t we copy this playbook ?

    The answer isn’t corruption—though that certainly a good part—but something far more structural and sinister.

    THE TAX COLLECTION TRAP

    Poor countries struggle desperately to collect taxes. Our tax collection system is rudimentary, our property and citizens registration system is poor. Just imagine tax collectors going door-to-door in your neighborhood—we’d have more murders than revenue! This forces African governments to rely on the easiest taxes to collect: tariffs and excise duties at ports and airports. Unless the goods you’re importing are spiritual, you can’t avoid these taxes. Last year, half of our government revenue came from excise duties—that’s too high by global standards. Even if our personal income tax is lower we will get much more revenue from there , if we can just find a way to collect it from the millions in the informal sector.

    A small increase in tariffs could substantially boost government income while encouraging local production. But here’s the catch: one of the key conditions attached to IMF and World Bank loans is that borrowing countries cannot raise tariffs.

    Let’s use the Cocoa industry as a poster child.

    Last year, Nigeria made about N2 trillion from selling raw cocoa beans. But countries that export raw cocoa capture only 10% of the final value. The remaining 90% goes to those who add value — processing, manufacturing, branding, and marketing. If we processed our own cocoa, that N2 trillion could become N20 trillion or more.
    When you export raw cocoa to Europe, it enters duty-free. But if you dare to add even the smallest bit of value—grinding those beans into powder—Europe slaps a 7% tariff on your product. Process it further into chocolate? Forget it. This isn’t accidental; it’s designed to force producer countries to only sell raw materials.

    Meanwhile, Mars chocolate alone earned $50 billion in 2024. That’s more than the GDP of many African nations, built largely on cocoa beans purchased at artificially suppressed prices from African farmers.

    THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY PRISON

    Try to make chocolate in Africa for export to Europe and you’ll discover a maze of “health and safety standards” designed more to exclude us, and the intellectual property needed for advanced manufacturing is locked away in Western patents.

    England mastered woolen goods by learning from Flemish artisans. They later “stole” printing technology from India and tea cultivation from China. The United States built its textile industry by stealing spinning tec from England. Taiwan’s semiconductor industry began with technology “acquired” from IBM.

    If we were free to tinker, a firm in Nigeria can try to modify OpeanAi models for example, and sell it here, so that the subscription I pay monthly to the US would stay here in our economy to create jobs. It’s through it that England mastered wollen goods, stole printing of colour tech from India and tea production from China.

    The US stole IP of cotton spinning tech from England. Taiwan stole ICs tech from IBM etc. In their days these were cutting edge tech. This was stopped when the World Trade Organization (WTO) was born. You cannot learn these very advanced stuffs without stealing some part, you just can’t. This is why China is still doing so today. Anybody who is anybody today stole this way, Japan inclusive.

    THE WTO PARADOX

    The WTO was supposedly created to encourage free trade and level the playing field between nations. In reality, its structure systematically favors already-developed economies. The rules only appear neutral on paper.

    Advanced goods that African countries import are priced astronomically high, allowing developed nations to exchange a few manufactured products for vast quantities of our raw materials, which are artificially priced low through market manipulation. Meanwhile, Western governments provide subsidies to their citizens, making these expensive goods affordable domestically while maintaining high export prices.

    When African governments want to borrow money to make the infrastructure investments necessary for development, IMF loans come with caps on the budget deficits countries can operate but the US can borrow as they like. This effectively prevents the kind of massive public investment that every developed nation used during their industrialization phase.

    THE GOLDEN WINDOW THAT CLOSED

    Our best chance was probably between 1960 and 1990 — a period in world history when any country with a well-intentioned government could realistically break free from underdevelopment, regardless of their starting point. Many economists argue this was because the economic competition between the United States and the Soviet Union made both superpowers generous with development aid and technical assistance as they competed for influence.

    Once the USSR collapsed and was dismantled, the world became fundamentally different. The incentive for the West to help other nations develop diminished. Countries that escaped poverty—Singapore, Taiwan, South Korea, Japan—all made their breakthroughs during this golden window.

    Meanwhile, we were exchanging military coups like playing cards, with leaders competing to see who could cart the most wealth abroad. And unfortunately, this mentality hasn’t fundamentally changed.

    THE PATH FORWARD

    The situation is more challenging now. But not impossible. It would require sacrifices and strategic thinking on a scale that we, as a people, have historically been reluctant to make.
    It would require governments willing to risk aid cuts and loan restrictions to protect domestic industries. It would require citizens willing to pay higher prices for locally-made goods during the transition period. It would require leaders who think in decades rather than election cycles.

    Most critically, it would require recognizing that the current global economic system isn’t a natural phenomenon—it’s carefully designed to perpetuate existing hierarchies.

    The question is whether we can find our own path in a much more constrained world, knowing that every step forward will be met with resistance from those who benefit from the current system.

    The technology that could transform Africa exists. The resources certainly exist. What’s missing is the collective will to pay the price of economic sovereignty—a price that, ironically, gets higher with each passing year of inaction.

    Abanni is a Medical Doctor and Member of the Board of Editors of Pacesetter Frontier Magazine.

  • [UPDATED] World Bank projects 3.2% growth in Nigeria’s Economy in 2023

    [UPDATED] World Bank projects 3.2% growth in Nigeria’s Economy in 2023

    The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has retained its growth forecast of 3.2 percent for Nigeria’s economy in 2023.

    The IMF, in its World Economic Outlook for April 2023 titled ‘A Rocky Recovery’, also forecast a three percent growth in the country’s gross domestic product (GDP) for 2024.

    Other countries highlighted in its 2023 projections were USA (1.6%), Germany (-0.1%), France (0.7%), Italy (0.7%), Spain (1.5%). Japan (1.3%), UK (-0.3%), and Canada (1.5%).

    Others are China (5.2%), India (5.9%), Russia (0.7%), Brazil (0.9%), Mexico (1.8%), Saudi Arabia (3.1%), and South Africa (0.1%).

    The projection by the Washington DC-based global lender comes days after the World Bank revealed that the naira recorded a 10.2 percent depreciation in 2022, prompted by rising food and fuel prices globally, among other stimulants.

    In its Africa Pulse report published last week, the World Bank stated that the depreciation of the exchange rate was also a major contributor to inflationary pressures in the Sub-Saharan region.

    “In Nigeria, recently released activity data show mixed results. On the one hand, real GDP growth was higher than expected in the fourth quarter of 2022. It picked up to 3.5 percent y/y, from 2.3 percent in the third quarter. Both oil and non-oil sector activity improved by late 2022,” it said.

    “After a 22.7 percent y/y contraction in the third quarter of 2022, oil GDP fell by 13.4 percent y/y in the fourth quarter as security services were making headway against oil theft.”

    (Channels TV)

  • Nigeria, others at high risk of debt distress, IMF warns

    Nigeria and 72 other countries are at high risk of debt distress or already in debt distress, according to a new report by the International Monetary Fund.

    The report, titled “Restructuring debt of poorer nations requires more efficient coordination,” noted that low-income countries face fewer debt challenges today than they did 25 years ago, thanks in particular to the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries initiative, which slashed unmanageable debt burdens across sub-Saharan Africa and other regions.

    The report noted that although debt ratios were lower than in the mid-1990s, the debts have been creeping up for the past decade and the changing composition of creditors would make restructurings more complex.

    The report read in part, “About 60 percent of DSSI countries are at high risk of debt distress or already in debt distress—when a country has started or is about to start, a debt restructuring, or when a country is accumulating arrears.”

    Spurred by low-interest rates, high investment needs, limited progress in raising additional domestic revenue, and stretched systems for managing public finances, the debt ratios of DSSI countries have increased, partly reversing a decline seen in the early 2000s.

    “Now, the economic shocks from COVID-19 and the war in Ukraine are adding to the debt challenges faced by low-income countries, even as central banks start to raise interest rates.”

    The report said that among the 41 DSSI countries at high risk of or in debt distress, Chad, Ethiopia, Somalia (under the HIPC framework), and Zambia have already requested debt treatment.

    “Around 20 others exhibit significant breaches of applicable high-risk thresholds, half of which also have low reserves, rising gross financing needs, or a combination of the two in 2022.

    “On the domestic side, difficult trade-offs will exist between the need to restructure sovereign debt owed to domestic banks, in some cases, and the impact of such restructurings on financial sector stability and the capacity of domestic banks to finance growth,” the report read further.

    According to the IMF, the situation differs significantly across countries, however.

    The report further said that China is now the largest official bilateral creditor in more than half of DSSI countries, including when counting all 22 Paris Club creditors as a single pool.

    China would therefore play a key role in most DSSI countries’ debt restructurings that would involve official bilateral creditors.

    About 60 per cent of Debt Service Suspension Initiative countries are expected to face these challenges.

  • Dollar Deposits exceed 30% threshold approved by IMF

     

    Dollar deposit by Nigerians in banks has exceeded the 30 per cent threshold approved by International Monetary Fund (IMF), a Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) report has said.

     

    The report by CBN economists said Nigerians have been accumulating foreign currencies to protect their wealth from naira volatility and surging inflation.

     

    “Higher real-exchange rate volatility is associated with an increased level of currency substitution,” they said in the report.

     

    According to them, there is a need to contain exchange rate volatility and inflation as a way of curbing the spate of currency substitution in the country.

     

     

     

     

     

    ADVERTISEMENT

    The CBN economists, including Isaiah Ajibola, Sylvanus Udoette, Rabia Muhammad and John Anigwe, said Nigerians deposit in dollars hit peak of 98.2 per cent in 2015 before declining to 83 per cent in 2018.

     

    Read Also; Nigeria, others need $245b external funding in five-years, says IMF

    They explained that a broader measure of foreign currency in banks to naira savings, demand and term deposits, stayed largely within the IMF limit over the story period from 1995 to 2018.

     

    The CBN devalued the local unit twice last year after a crash in the oil price triggered by the coronavirus pandemic hampered revenues.

     

    The report said: “While crude contributes less than 10 per cent to the country’s gross domestic product, it accounts for nearly all foreign-exchange earnings and half of government revenue in the continent’s biggest producer of the commodity. The naira has lost 66 per cent of its value since 2009 when it exchanged at N149/$.”

     

    The unit was little-changed at N409.21 per dollar at the spot market yesterday. Nigeria’s inflation quickened to the highest level in four years in March and is now more than double the nine per cent limit of the central bank’s target range.

     

    The CBN previously issued a warning to merchants to stop offering local goods in foreign currency and also banned the practice of accessing the foreign-exchange market for settling domestic transactions.

     

    “The key policy implication of currency substitution is that it reduces monetary policy effectiveness .” the researchers said.

  • IMF shows concern over the use of cryptocurrency

     

    The International Monetary Fund has called for caution in the use of cryptocurrencies, describing it as a concern.

     

    It disclosed this during a virtual briefing on the recently published 2020 Article IV IMF Staff Report for Nigeria.

     

    The Resident Representative of IMF for Nigeria, Ari Aisen, said the concern on the use of cryptocurrencies was why many central banks were cautious about the development.

     

     

    He said, “The issue with some of the cryptocurrencies is that perhaps some care should be taken about their activities. The use of cryptocurrencies is a concern.

     

    “That is why some central banks, not only in Nigeria, have these concerns about what kind of activities these cryptocurrencies are put and how best to monitor those activities.”

     

    Aisen noted that some of the activities might be illegal or related to money laundering and drug peddling.

     

    This, he said, was why many monetary authorities had been concerned about how best to supervise and increase their oversight regarding the use of cryptocurrencies.

     

     

    Aisen further canvassed the unification of foreign exchange rates in Nigeria so as to make the management of forex more transparent across the country.

     

     

    Source: www.punchng.com