Nigeria has failed the U.S. fiscal transparency test for the second consecutive year, with Washington reporting no significant improvement in the country’s management and disclosure of public finances in 2025.
The finding was contained in the 2026 Fiscal Transparency Report released by the U.S. Department of State on Tuesday. The assessment covered 139 governments and the Palestinian Authority. Only 73 met the minimum fiscal transparency requirements, while 67 failed to meet the standards.
Of those that failed, 14 recorded significant progress, while 53 countries, including Nigeria, were judged to have made no significant progress. The report was based on information gathered between January 1 and December 31, 2025, including information from the U.S. Embassy in Abuja, government agencies, international organisations and civil society groups.
A major concern raised by the U.S. was the quality and completeness of Nigeria’s budget information. The report said Nigeria’s budget documents did not provide a sufficiently complete picture of government revenue and expenditure.
It also questioned whether actual government spending and revenue reasonably corresponded with what was approved in the enacted budget. The assessment represents a deterioration from the previous year, when the U.S. described Nigeria’s budget documents as substantially complete and generally reliable.
Washington also faulted the government for failing to publish its executive budget proposal within the required timeframe. Under the U.S. standard, such proposals should be made public at least one month before the beginning of the fiscal year and before legislative approval.
The report also raised concerns about the independence of Nigeria’s Office of the Auditor-General of the Federation.
According to the U.S. assessment, the country’s supreme audit institution did not meet international standards of independence and had failed to publish substantive audit reports. The department stressed that independent auditing was necessary to enable lawmakers and citizens to properly scrutinise government spending.
Nigeria’s public procurement system also came under scrutiny. The U.S. said accessible information on government contracts was not sufficiently available to the public.
It similarly noted that although Nigeria had legal procedures governing natural-resource concessions, important details about awarded licences were not consistently disclosed after decisions were made. The 2026 assessment also introduced a tougher requirement concerning sovereign borrowing, requiring governments to make information about loan terms, liabilities and collateralised assets publicly accessible.
The Presidency said it had taken note of the report but maintained that fiscal transparency and accountability remained priorities of the Federal Government.
Special Adviser to the President on Media and Public Communication, Sunday Dare, said the government was implementing reforms aimed at improving the management, reporting and disclosure of public resources. Dare argued that the U.S. assessment should be viewed within its specific scope rather than as a complete assessment of Nigeria’s fiscal governance.
He pointed to initiatives including the Open Treasury programme, public budget documentation, debt disclosures and reforms in public procurement. He added that the government remained committed to strengthening audit institutions, improving procurement transparency and giving citizens greater access to fiscal information.
However, BudgIT said the concerns raised by Washington were consistent with weaknesses it had observed in Nigeria’s budget implementation process. Country Director of BudgIT, Vahyala Kwaga, said the federal budget itself was generally clear regarding revenue and expenditure, but argued that reporting on actual implementation remained problematic.
He also questioned the independence of the Auditor-General’s office and criticised the lack of publicly available procurement information. Kwaga further said debt information was available but that important debt sustainability analyses had not been published since 2023.
Despite the criticisms, the U.S. report acknowledged some areas where Nigeria met its requirements. The country was credited with making its enacted budget and end-of-year report publicly accessible, including online. Nigeria was also recognised for making information about debt obligations, including major state-owned enterprise debt, available to the public.
The report further noted that Nigeria’s sovereign wealth fund had an appropriate legal framework and disclosed its funding source and general withdrawal policy. However, the U.S. said these achievements were insufficient to bring Nigeria above the minimum transparency threshold.
Washington urged Nigeria to publish its executive budget proposal on time and provide detailed information on revenue and expenditure. It also recommended that the government explain major differences between approved and actual spending, strengthen the independence of the Auditor-General and publish audit reports.
The U.S. further called for greater public access to procurement contract information. The report warned that poor fiscal transparency does not automatically establish corruption but could create conditions that enable corruption, financial crimes and unfair practices.
Nigeria was among 53 governments that failed to meet the minimum requirements without making significant progress. Other countries in the same broad category included Algeria, Angola, Uganda, Tanzania, The Gambia, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Mali, Sierra Leone and Togo.
Meanwhile, countries including Cameroon, Chad, Liberia, Libya, Niger, Senegal and Ethiopia were among those that failed but recorded significant progress.
With Nigeria approaching another budget cycle, the latest Nigeria fiscal transparency assessment puts renewed pressure on the Federal Government to improve public financial disclosure, budget execution reporting, procurement transparency and institutional oversight.
The report ultimately places the focus beyond whether government has published financial documents to whether Nigerians can clearly see how public money is raised, allocated, spent and audited.
