Introduction: Nigeria’s Rising Debt Profile.
Nigeria’s rising public debt has become one of the most significant fiscal challenges confronting the country. On September 25, 2026, the Debt Management Office (DMO) reported that Nigeria’s total public debt had reached ?166.79 trillion as of June 30, 2026. The figure represents a substantial increase from the ?49.85 trillion debt stock recorded when the current administration assumed office in May 2023. In nominal terms, Nigeria’s public debt has therefore more than tripled in just over three years. The latest figures also indicate that public debt increased by ?7.44 trillion, or approximately 4.7 percent, between March and June 2026, rising from ?159.35 trillion to ?166.79 trillion. Compared with June 2025, when the debt stock stood at ?152.40 trillion, the increase is approximately ?14.39 trillion, representing a year-on-year rise of 9.4 percent.
Nigeria’s Total Public Debt Profile as of June 30, 2026. Source: Debt Management Office (DMO) Release, September 25, 2026. Domestic: N91.59tn (54.9%), External: N75.20tn (45.1%), Total: N166.79tn ($120.93bn at N1,379.18/$1).
Measured in United States dollars, Nigeria’s total public debt stood at approximately $120.93 billion as of June 2026, compared with $99.66 billion a year earlier. The rapid growth of public debt raises questions that extend beyond the size of the debt itself. The more important questions concern how the debt is being accumulated, the cost of servicing it, the productive capacity created through borrowing, and whether future generations will inherit sufficient economic capacity to support the obligations being created today.
Anatomy of the ?166.79 Trillion Debt
The composition of Nigeria’s public debt provides an important starting point for understanding the country’s fiscal position. According to the DMO, domestic debt accounted for ?91.59 trillion, representing approximately 54.91 percent of the total debt stock. External debt stood at ?75.20 trillion, representing approximately 45.09 percent. Domestic debt has also been growing faster than external debt. Year-on-year, domestic debt increased by approximately 13.7 percent, compared with an external debt increase of about 4.6 percent.
Figure 2: Nigeria’s Debt Service Burden 2022-2026
Source: Budget Office of the Federation and DMO Q2 2026 Report. Debt service to revenue ratio peaked at 80% in 2023 and remains at 69% in 2026. Rising Debt Implications. What this chart proves:
– Left side: Federal revenue is growing, but debt service is growing faster
– Right side: Nigeria is spending 69% of revenue on debt repayment in 2026, far above World Bank safe threshold of 40%.
The implication of this is that, for every N100 earned, N69 goes to creditors, putting debt service burden at 69% of all revenue generated, leaving almost nothing for growth and running the country.
The Federal Government accounts for the overwhelming majority of the debt burden. Its obligations stood at approximately ?152.77 trillion, consisting of ?86.99 trillion in domestic debt and ?65.77 trillion in external debt.
The States and Federal Capital Territory collectively accounted for approximately ?14.01 trillion. These figures demonstrate that Nigeria’s debt challenge is predominantly a federal fiscal issue, although its consequences extend to state governments, businesses, households and the wider economy.
Why Is Nigeria’s Debt Rising?
Several interconnected factors explain the continued expansion of Nigeria’s public debt.
Exchange Rate Revaluation: One important factor is the naira value of Nigeria’s external debt. External obligations denominated in foreign currencies must be converted into naira when calculating the country’s total debt stock. At an exchange rate of approximately ?1,379.18 to the US dollar, depreciation of the naira significantly increases the naira value of existing foreign-currency obligations, even where no new borrowing has occurred. This creates an important distinction between borrowing and debt accumulation. A government can record an increase in the naira value of its debt partly because of exchange-rate movements rather than because it has borrowed an equivalent amount of new money. Nevertheless, the economic consequence remains significant because the government ultimately requires more naira revenue to meet foreign-currency obligations. This chart explains why debt jumped without new borrowing. Blue line = External debt in USD (stable $43.7bn to $54.5bn). Red line = Same debt in Naira (explosive N20.1tn to N75.2tn). From May 2023 (N460/$1) to Dec 2024 (N1,535/$1), Naira devalued ~200%. Result: ~70% of the N49.4tn Naira increase (May 2023-Dec 2024) is pure revaluation, not new borrowing. June 2023 alone added N13.5tn without borrowing a single dollar after FX float. Source: DMO, CBN.
‘While Nigeria’s external debt in USD terms rose modestly from $43.7bn (May 2023) to $54.5bn (June 2026), a 24.7% increase, the Naira equivalent quadrupled from N20.1tn to N75.2tn, a 274% increase. The difference of N35tn is the phantom debt – debt that appears because the Naira collapsed from N460/$1 to N1,535/$1 after the June 2023 FX reform. This revaluation accounts for ~70% of the Naira increase, meaning Nigeria appears more indebted in Naira but did not actually borrow that money.’
2. Persistent Fiscal Deficits: Nigeria has continued to operate with substantial fiscal deficits. When government expenditure exceeds revenue, the gap must be financed through borrowing or other forms of deficit financing. Borrowing can be economically justified when it finances infrastructure, productive capacity and investments capable of generating future economic returns. The concern arises when borrowing increasingly supports recurrent expenditure without generating sufficient productive assets or additional revenue capacity. A debt-financed economy therefore becomes sustainable only when borrowed resources contribute meaningfully to economic expansion and the government’s future ability to repay.
This chart explains why Nigeria’s debt reached N166.79tn. It also shows Nigeria has not had a balanced budget in over a decade – every year since 2016, government spends almost double what it earns. The gap must be borrowed, which explains why debt tripled from N49.85tn in 2023 to N166.79tn in 2026. Green = Revenue, Red = Expenditure, Blue line = Deficit (negative). Revenue grew from N2.9tn (2016) to N14.2tn (2026), but expenditure grew faster from N5.8tn to N39.8tn. Deficit widened by 783% from -N2.9tn to -N25.6tn. Every deficit is financed by borrowing, directly driving the N166.79tn debt stock (DMO, 2026). Source: Budget Office of the Federation.
3. Rising Debt-Service Costs: The cost of servicing existing debt is perhaps more concerning than the headline debt figure itself. Domestic debt service alone reached approximately ?2.14 trillion in the second quarter of 2026. High domestic interest rates mean that new borrowing can become increasingly expensive, particularly when a significant portion of government financing comes from the domestic capital market. This creates a potentially damaging cycle: government borrows to finance deficits, debt service consumes a larger share of government revenue, fewer resources remain available for investment, and the government may then require additional borrowing to finance its obligations.
The Debt-Service Trap
The greatest danger facing Nigeria is not necessarily that the country has reached a point of immediate insolvency. Rather, it is the possibility of entering a prolonged debt-service trap. When an increasingly large proportion of government revenue is committed to servicing debt, fiscal flexibility becomes severely restricted. Nigeria already faces significant pressure in this regard, with debt-service obligations consuming more than 60 percent of retained government revenue according to recent assessments. This has serious consequences for public investment. Every naira directed towards debt service is a naira that cannot simultaneously be directed towards roads, electricity, education, healthcare, security, research, industrial development or other productive investments.
This chart shows why Nigeria can’t develop. Blue line = Debt service as % of revenue. Dotted orange = World Bank 40% threshold. Dotted red = IMF 60% danger zone. Nigeria breached 40% since 2016, breached 60% since 2020. Peak crisis 2022-2023: 79%-89% of all revenue went to debt service alone. 2026 projected: 69% still in trap. Bottom left: For every N100 revenue in 2026, N69 goes to creditors, only N31 left for schools, hospitals, roads – less than N10 for capital spending. Source: Federal Budget. Here is your debt service trap picture.
This chart proves Nigeria is in a classic debt service trap – revenue growth from N2.9tn to N14.2tn is overwhelmed by debt service growth from N1.2tn to N9.8tn. The country remains 29 percentage points above World Bank sustainable threshold and 9 points above IMF danger zone even in 2026. The issue is therefore not simply whether Nigeria can borrow more. The more important question is whether the country can continue borrowing while maintaining sufficient fiscal capacity to invest in the foundations of future economic growth.
The Intergenerational Cost
Public borrowing transfers financial obligations into the future. Debt itself is not necessarily harmful. Most successful economies borrow at different stages of their development. The critical distinction is between productive and unproductive borrowing. Borrowing to construct infrastructure, expand energy capacity, strengthen transportation systems, develop human capital or establish industries can create assets that generate economic value for decades. Borrowing primarily to finance consumption, recurrent expenditure or persistent budget shortfalls presents a different challenge. When future generations inherit large financial obligations without corresponding productive assets, the result is an intergenerational transfer of economic burden. Nigeria must therefore move beyond asking how much it can borrow and begin asking what each borrowed naira produces.
2026 snapshot: N166.79tn total debt = N743,000 per Nigerian (223m population), N9.8tn annual debt service. Interest at 10% = N16.6tn per year forever unless repaid. Debt clock ticks N31,000 per second. Timeline: Child born 2026 will still pay until 2060 – domestic debt matures ~8 years (2034), external ~15 years (2041), Eurobonds 25-34 years (2051-2060).
Opportunity cost: N9.8tn service could build 2,000 health centres, 5,000 schools, 2,000km roads instead. As the quote says: ‘We are borrowing from our children who cannot yet vote.’ Source: DMO, CBN, illustrative based on 2026 figures.
This shows the Future Cost of Debt. The true cost is not N166.79tn today, but the N16.6tn annual interest future generations must pay until 2060. A child born in Lagos today will be 34 years old, working and paying taxes, still servicing debt borrowed before they could speak.
Exchange-Rate Vulnerability.
Nigeria’s external debt also exposes the country to exchange-rate risk. When the naira depreciates, the domestic cost of servicing foreign-currency obligations increases. This creates an additional pressure on government finances at precisely the moment when currency depreciation may already be increasing inflation, production costs and household hardship. A country with substantial foreign-currency obligations therefore needs sufficient foreign-exchange earnings and reserves to manage these liabilities. Nigeria’s dependence on oil revenues makes this challenge more complicated. Although crude oil remains an important source of foreign exchange, fluctuations in global oil prices, production levels and international energy markets can directly affect the government’s capacity to meet its obligations. Diversifying the productive economy and expanding non-oil exports are therefore not merely development objectives. They are also components of responsible debt management.
6. The Risk to States and the Wider Economy.
Although the Federal Government accounts for the majority of Nigeria’s public debt, sub-national governments cannot be isolated from the consequences. States depend heavily on allocations and internally generated revenue to finance their obligations. Rising national debt service can reduce the resources available for transfers and development expenditure. At the same time, high domestic interest rates affect businesses and households.
Lagos N1.20tn highest (red), Jigawa N1.04bn lowest (dark green). Total States Debt N4.59tn. Source: DMO June 30, 2026. Lagos, FCT, Rivers hold 43.27% of all state debt (Economic Confidential, 2026).
When government borrowing absorbs a significant portion of available domestic capital, private-sector borrowers may face higher financing costs. This can discourage investment, constrain business expansion and limit job creation. The relationship between public debt and private-sector growth therefore deserves greater attention. A fiscal strategy that stabilises government finances at the expense of productive private investment may ultimately weaken the very economic base required to sustain public revenue
– Total States + FCT domestic debt: N4.59 trillion
– 4 states hold ~50%: Lagos (N1.20tn), Delta (N369.30bn), FCT (N358.79bn), Rivers (N354.64bn) account for 49.5% of all state debt
– Top 10 debtors: Lagos N1.20tn, Delta N369.30bn, FCT N358.79bn, Rivers N354.64bn, Edo N214.93bn, Ogun N189.05bn, Bauchi N157.35bn, Niger N140bn, Cross River N130.01bn, Benue N112.32bn
– Least indebted: Jigawa N1.04bn (lowest), Ondo N6.16bn, Anambra N9.62bn, Ebonyi N11.38bn, Katsina N13.78bn
7. What Nigeria Must Do
Nigeria’s debt challenge requires a comprehensive fiscal response rather than a single solution.
First, government revenue must increase sustainably. This requires improving tax administration, reducing leakages, expanding the formal economy and creating conditions under which businesses can grow and generate taxable income.
Second, borrowing must become more closely tied to productive investment. Every major borrowing program should be evaluated according to its expected economic return, employment impact, revenue potential and contribution to national productivity.
Third, Nigeria should prioritise concessional and longer-term financing where appropriate. Lower-cost financing with longer maturities can reduce immediate pressure on government finances.
Fourth, the country requires stronger fiscal rules and greater transparency around borrowing. Citizens should be able to clearly understand how much is being borrowed, why it is being borrowed, what the funds will finance and what measurable economic outcomes are expected.
Finally, Nigeria must expand its productive capacity. Sustainable debt management ultimately depends on economic growth. A larger, more productive economy creates a broader revenue base and makes existing debt obligations easier to manage.
– Lagos State alone with N1.20 trillion domestic debt owes 1,153 times more than Jigawa State with N1.04 billion, yet Jigawa has one of the lowest IGRs in Nigeria. This shows debt concentration is not about development need but about market access. Lagos can borrow because banks trust its IGR of N1.67 trillion in H1 2026, while Jigawa cannot.
Conclusion
Nigeria is not yet insolvent, but the trajectory of its public debt demands serious attention. The ?166.79 trillion debt stock is not simply a large number. It represents a growing set of financial obligations that must ultimately be supported by the productive capacity of the Nigerian economy.
The central issue is therefore not whether Nigeria should borrow at all. Borrowing can be an essential instrument of development when it finances investments that generate economic value greater than their cost.
The real danger lies in borrowing without sufficient productive transformation. Nigeria cannot borrow its way permanently out of structural fiscal weakness. The country must increase revenue, reduce waste, strengthen institutions, improve productivity, diversify its economy and ensure that borrowed resources create measurable economic value. The debt mountain can still be managed. But doing so will require fiscal discipline, transparency and a clear national commitment to transforming borrowed capital into productive capacity. The responsibility is not only to manage today’s obligations, but to ensure that the next generation inherits an economy capable of carrying them.