The Federal Government has directed ministries, departments, and agencies (MDAs) to roll over 70 percent of their 2025 capital budget into the 2026 fiscal year, a major shift revealed in the 2026 Abridged Budget Call Circular issued by the Ministry of Budget and Economic Planning. The circular, which immediately triggered conversations across Nigeria’s policy and economic circles, bans MDAs from proposing any new capital projects in the 2026 budget except those granted special presidential approval. Instead, agencies must upload only ongoing projects specifically 70 percent of the capital allocations they received for 2025 into their 2026 submissions.
Government officials justify this directive as a necessary response to tight revenue conditions, mounting fiscal pressure, and the urgent need to avoid the proliferation of abandoned projects nationwide. The federal government insists the decision is part of an attempt to reintroduce discipline into Nigeria’s budgeting process, which for years has been characterized by delays, duplication of projects, and lack of implementation.
At the core of the directive is the government’s argument that Nigeria currently cannot sustain the habit of initiating new capital projects every year while failing to complete thousands of ongoing ones scattered across different sectors. By rolling over 70 percent of the 2025 capital budget, the Tinubu administration aims to ensure continuity and reduce waste, emphasizing that ongoing infrastructure works, health upgrades, and educational projects must take priority over the creation of fresh ones. The circular explains that new capital projects require funding that the government cannot guarantee in 2026 due to revenue shortfalls and competing national priorities. Officials argue that limiting the 2026 capital space will help Nigeria focus on current obligations, reduce implementation delays, and align future budgets with the administration’s mid-term economic goals.
The circular further highlights that Nigeria’s top government priorities remain firmly aligned with the Renewed Hope policy direction. In the 2026 cycle, national security sits at the top of the list of essential commitments requiring sustained funding, given the rising fiscal demand for counterterrorism operations, policing reforms, and the fight against kidnapping and banditry. Education follows closely, with government emphasizing the need to expand access, improve learning outcomes, and upgrade school infrastructure.
The health sector is also listed as a priority, with calls for continued investment in primary healthcare, immunization, and public health surveillance systems. The circular reinforces that the economy including job creation, industrialization, and private sector competitiveness remains central to policy decisions, alongside critical sectors such as power and energy, agriculture, infrastructure renewal, social safety nets, and expanded opportunities for women and youth.
Beyond these priorities, the government stresses that its decision is anchored on fiscal realities that cannot be ignored. According to the circular, capital ceilings for MDAs are set at 70 percent of their 2025 allocations, meaning agencies cannot exceed this cap in their 2026 submissions. Notably, the circular reveals that only 30 percent of the 2025 capital budget will be released this year, a point that has drawn substantial criticism.
Officials argue that the combination of weak revenue performance and rising expenditure obligations has forced the government to limit capital disbursements to avoid increasing borrowing. Nigeria’s revenue projections for 2026, as outlined, reflect declining oil receipts, volatile exchange rate conditions, and limited growth in non-oil sectors—even as debt servicing continues to consume a significant portion of available resources.
The broader framework shows a worrying fiscal landscape. The 2026 projected expenditure reveals both recurrent and capital components rising, driven largely by obligations such as salaries, pensions, debt servicing, and statutory transfers. The fiscal deficit is also expected to increase from 2025 to 2026, a trend the government attributes to global economic uncertainties, domestic security spending, and recovery-linked interventions.
These figures are framed within the assumptions of the Medium-Term Expenditure Framework and Fiscal Strategy Paper (MTEF/FSP), which emphasize the administration’s commitment to stabilizing government finances, meeting revenue targets, and reducing fiscal leakages. The call circular reminds MDAs that the renewed budgeting approach aims to correct long-standing implementation failures and gradually move Nigeria back to a predictable budget cycle.
However, the directive has generated strong reactions from economic experts who view the rollover not as a sign of discipline, but as evidence of deep structural weaknesses. Professor Sheriffdeen Tella, a renowned economist, criticized the timing and structure of the budget process, warning that Nigeria risks running multiple budgets simultaneously. According to him, the inability to release more than 30 percent of the 2025 capital budget shows that the government is struggling with liquidity and has poorly managed its fiscal responsibilities. He described the rollover as a technical admission of failure and argued that pushing projects into a new fiscal year creates confusion, weakens accountability, and allows inefficiencies to persist within MDAs.
Similarly, public policy expert Dr. Aliyu Ilias condemned the rollover directive, saying it reflects fiscal indiscipline rather than strategic planning. He noted that delaying capital projects contributes to worsening infrastructure gaps, increases the cost of construction due to inflation, and prolongs economic hardship for citizens who depend on government capital spending for jobs and services. Dr. Ilias also warned that rollovers create opportunities for corruption, as MDAs may inflate the cost of ongoing projects, manipulate reporting timelines, or fail to meet procurement standards. He added that the National Assembly must bear some responsibility for the recurring issues, pointing out that legislative oversight has long been weak, reactive, and vulnerable to political influences.
Critics further argue that capital rollovers have become normalized because government ministries fail to complete procurement processes early enough in the year. Instead of addressing delays caused by bureaucratic bottlenecks, capacity limitations, and political interference, the government is shifting the problem into the future. Some analysts note that rolling over 70 percent of the budget risks creating structural distortions, where MDAs operate from backlogs rather than fresh allocations, ultimately undermining long-term developmental planning. The fear is that ongoing projects could be abandoned again if revenue projections for 2026 fall short, triggering another cycle of rollovers in subsequent years.
Yet, despite the growing criticism, other experts have expressed support for the government’s decision, arguing that the rollover is practical and necessary under the circumstances. Dr. Muda Yusuf, Director of the Centre for the Promotion of Private Enterprise, defended the 70 percent rollover as a method of “cleaning up the system” and reducing the clutter of abandoned projects. He explained that Nigeria has historically carried too many capital projects in a single year, many of which remain unfunded or poorly executed, leading to waste and inefficiency. According to him, limiting new projects in 2026 is an opportunity to strengthen the budget cycle, restore credibility to capital implementation, and prevent the practice of spreading resources thinly across hundreds of politically motivated projects.
Dr. Yusuf further argued that the directive aligns with global best practices, where governments prioritize project completion over project proliferation. He stated that the rollover could improve transparency because MDAs would be forced to justify ongoing projects and account for their progress. In his view, the rollover helps Nigeria gradually synchronize its budget calendar with the January–December timeline and reduces the persistent spillovers that complicate annual planning. He emphasized that what Nigeria needs is consistency, not constant changes that disrupt long-term economic goals.
The government has also defended the directive vigorously. Budget Minister Senator Abubakar Bagudu reiterated that the 2026 budget remains aligned with President Tinubu’s target of building a $1 trillion economy in the near future. He stated that focusing on ongoing projects will help strengthen productivity, reduce waste, and ensure that capital spending delivers tangible results. Bagudu also said that the budget would promote ward-based development, a strategy meant to ensure that every ward in Nigeria receives targeted investments for basic infrastructure, social welfare, and empowerment programs. According to him, the 70 percent cap allows the government to concentrate resources on essential sectors without compromising national priorities.
Bagudu added that fiscal discipline is fundamental to the Renewed Hope Agenda, stressing that Nigeria cannot continue attempting to fund an unrealistic number of projects each year. By rolling over 70 percent of the capital budget, the government hopes to optimize limited resources, attract private-sector financing, and support critical reforms in electricity, transport infrastructure, agriculture, and public health. He maintained that the directive is not a sign of weakness, but a deliberate step toward strengthening public financial management and ensuring that Nigeria focuses on projects with the highest impact.
The process for the new 2026 budget submission is also clearly outlined in the circular. MDAs are required to submit their budget proposals strictly through the Government Integrated Financial Management Information System (GIFMIS), ensuring accountability and limiting manual errors. For government-owned enterprises (GOEs), submissions must be made through the Budget Information Management and Monitoring System (BIMMS), a platform designed to improve reporting accuracy and enhance monitoring. The government notes that strict digital submission requirements are critical to closing loopholes and preventing unauthorized alterations to budget documents.
The circular issued a strong warning to budget officers across MDAs, stating that they must not upload submissions on behalf of their agencies without formal authorization. This is to prevent manipulation of budget entries, unauthorized insertions of new projects, or misrepresentation of financial data. Any breach of this rule, the circular warns, will attract sanctions. It also emphasizes that all submissions must align with the 70 percent rollover rule, and any attempt to include new capital projects without approval will result in automatic rejection.
The government also provided a strict deadline: December 9, 2025. All MDAs and GOEs must complete their uploads before this date, as late submissions will not be entertained. By imposing a tight deadline, the government hopes to accelerate the budget preparation process and ensure that the 2026 appropriation bill is submitted to the National Assembly on time. This is part of the larger effort to maintain the January–December budget cycle, which has faced challenges in recent years due to delayed revenue forecasts, procurement problems, and late passage of key fiscal documents.
Beyond process, the circular underscores that Nigeria’s fiscal planning is under strain, with rising debt servicing obligations consuming a large share of government revenue. Analysts note that the administration inherited significant arrears in salaries, pensions, and contractor debts—pressures that have limited the fiscal space available for fresh capital spending. As interest rates rise globally and borrowing becomes costlier, the government aims to limit domestic and foreign borrowing to essential projects only. The rollover, therefore, serves both as a cost-containment measure and as a signal to investors that Nigeria is trying to manage its finances responsibly.
Still, critics insist that the hands-off approach to capital releases in 2025 is already affecting real economic activity. Contractors in sectors such as construction, water resources, and health infrastructure have expressed fears that the slow release of funds may force them to lay off workers, suspend works, or adjust contract terms. Some economists argue that capital spending is crucial for stimulating job creation and supporting growth, and delaying it could contribute to slower economic recovery. They warn that if 2026 also experiences revenue shortfalls, the backlog of uncompleted projects could further expand, undermining the very goals the government claims to be pursuing.
Another layer of concern is public trust. Nigerians have witnessed years of project rollovers, abandoned bridges and hospitals, re-awarded contracts, and inflated budgets. As such, many citizens view the new directive with skepticism, arguing that it may simply formalize a pattern of non-performance. There is also concern that the lack of new capital projects could be interpreted politically, particularly in constituencies expecting federal presence or campaign-promised infrastructure. Some communities fear that critical needs may be sidelined because ongoing projects in other regions absorb most of the available capital.
Nevertheless, supporters of the reform insist that the directive is a step forward rather than a setback. They argue that in a country where thousands of capital projects remain incomplete, prioritizing ongoing ones is the only rational choice. They point out that the real test will be whether the government enforces strict monitoring, releases funds as promised in 2026, and ensures that all MDAs strictly adhere to the new rules. If properly implemented, the rollover could help Nigeria build a more efficient and credible public finance system.
Another argument in support of the directive is that focusing on ongoing projects helps reduce political interference. In previous years, budgets were packed with new projects inserted at the last minute—either by MDAs or legislators—often without feasibility studies, costing estimates, or any link to national priorities. By blocking new capital projects, the government effectively shuts the door against such insertions, thereby reducing the risk of corruption and pork-barrel spending.
Some analysts also highlight that restricting capital projects may allow for better coordination with state governments, development partners, and the private sector. With fewer new federal projects competing for funding, policymakers hope that states and private investors can complement federal efforts in agriculture, power, transport, and health. This integrated approach is expected to improve efficiency and reduce duplication of efforts between tiers of government.
Yet, there remains a lingering concern about how the government intends to fund the massive backlog of ongoing projects if revenues continue to underperform. While the rollover may prevent new commitments, it does not guarantee the completion of ongoing works. Observers warn that unless the government improves revenue collection, expands the tax net, and reduces leakages, the 2026 budget may also struggle to fund capital projects beyond the rollover allocations. The circular itself admits that the fiscal space remains fragile, echoing the concerns of international financial institutions about Nigeria’s narrowing revenue base.
In the end, Nigeria’s new budget directive reflects a country attempting to reconcile ambitious development goals with harsh fiscal realities. The decision to roll over 70 percent of the 2025 capital budget into 2026 is an attempt to force discipline where the public finance system has long lacked it. Whether this will deliver the desired results depends on consistent implementation, political will, and improved revenue performance. For now, public opinion remains sharply divided: while some welcome the directive as overdue housekeeping, others view it as a troubling signal of fiscal distress.