Discount at the pump and the bill behind it

The announcement reaches the filling station before the explanation does. A motorist hears that petrol will be cheaper for thirty days and, quite reasonably, thinks first of tomorrow’s journey and the fare home. He is not standing beside the pump to debate fiscal policy. He wants to know how much the litre costs today and what it will cost when the thirty days are over.

That is where the public conversation should begin. A discount is welcome, but it does not appear by magic. The petrol still has to be bought, moved and sold. If its price to the customer is reduced, someone along that chain must give something up. The pump attendant may announce the new price; the pump cannot tell us who is carrying the difference.

The Government says NNPC Limited will sell petrol “at cost,” with priority for public transporters. But the Government has not explained where the fuel for this arrangement will come from, what price NNPC will pay for it, or whether any supplier has agreed to sell at a discount. If NNPC buys petrol from Dangote Refinery at the full commercial price, Dangote would ordinarily receive the agreed price. The discount would then have to be absorbed by NNPC, reimbursed by Government, or funded in some other way. If Dangote or another supplier is being asked to reduce its price, that concession should also be disclosed. The announcement does not tell us which arrangement applies, or how large the discount will be.

“Selling at cost” does not make the question go away. If NNPC waives a margin it would otherwise have earned, the customer gets a benefit while the company gives up income. That is a subsidy in economic effect, even if no cheque is written from the Treasury. And because NNPC is a publicly owned company, the sacrifice can reduce its profit, retained earnings and future dividends. The cost may be less visible than a direct budget payment, but it is still a cost.

There is a wider public interest here. NNPC’s shares are held on behalf of the Federation. The Petroleum Industry Act requires the company to operate commercially and profitably, while the Constitution includes dividends from the Federal Government’s shares among the revenues payable into the Federation Account. That account serves the Federal, State and Local Governments. If a government policy predictably reduces NNPC’s earnings, all three tiers may have reason to ask what income has been surrendered, who authorised it and what the effect will be. That does not, on its own, settle whether the arrangement is unconstitutional; the answer depends on the actual funding, authority and financial impact. But it makes transparent accounting essential.

Then comes the question of day thirty-one. The phrase “in the first instance” hints that the arrangement might continue, but gives no rule for deciding. Will the discount end? Will it be renewed? If so, who pays for the next thirty days? A temporary measure needs more than a starting date. It needs a clear end point and a public account of the cost before it is extended.

The proposed ₦1,350 ceiling on petrol’s ex-gantry or landing cost is a separate measure. It is not a promise that petrol will sell for ₦1,350 at the pump. Under the reported proposal, refiners and importers would initially carry costs above the ceiling and recover them later when market conditions improve. That may smooth price movements, but a cost carried forward still has to be financed and repaid. If the recovery never happens, someone will bear the loss; if it does, consumers may eventually pay for it through later prices.

There may be a good case for short-term relief, particularly if transport operators receive the benefit and pass it on through lower fares. But the Government should explain how those operators will be identified, how the discounted fuel will reach them, and how it will check that commuters actually benefit. Otherwise, the discount may reach the vehicle’s tank while the fare stays comfortably where it is.

And the timing cannot be ignored. The presidential election is scheduled for 16 January 2027, only months after this announcement. That does not prove the measure is intended to win votes. But it does mean Government should expect people to ask whether relief at the pump is also politics at the pump. Clear rules, a fixed time limit and published accounts would help answer that question better than a denial of electoral motive.

So let the Government publish the price NNPC pays for the fuel, the discount per litre, the party absorbing the difference, the effect on NNPC’s earnings and the rules for public transporters. Let it also say plainly what happens after thirty days.

Until then, Nigerians have been told that petrol will be cheaper, but not who is paying to make it so. The Government can call it a discount, a margin waiver or a price adjustment. The bill will still arrive. The public should be told whose name is on it.

Ndanusa, PhD, OON, is an economist, lawyer, strategic studies scholar, and public policy thinker and practitioner with extensive experience in financial markets, regulation, governance, national Security and development.

Discount at the pump and the bill behind it

Comments

🔥 Trending