Before the April 1st meeting of OPEC members, the consensus was that OPEC+ would roll over cuts. This was clearly because last month’s rollover was the right decision, as Saudi Arabia said the group’s cautious approach had brought dividends.
When the market corrected last month, limited supply gave prices the support it needed. In an event where production cuts were eased last month, oil prices would have declined further than what we witnessed.
However, the group decided to increase output albeit gradually. The increase in output is an optimistic decision that there will be an increase in demand. The demand recovery will begin this summer as vaccines would have been rolled out and accelerated. More people will travel as economies begin to open, hence a return to jet fuel. The decision is clearly a U-turn on their cautious strategy in recent months.
Oil prices follow an “up the stairs,” “down like an elevator” movement. Understandably, OPEC+ understands the sensitivity of the oil markets, so it prepares accordingly. The JMMC technical meetings that precede OPEC policy meetings highlights how much the decision-making process entails. This month, there were no policy recommendations — the first joker card played.
So on Thursday, the 1st of April, when discussions on easing cuts were debated, it appeared as a surprise. The demand for more oil was much lower than it had been before the March meeting.
Nigeria supported a rollover of the cuts. However, there have been question marks on the country’s conformity and honouring its compensation plan, just like Iraq and Kazakhstan—both oil-producing nations who have also submitted their compensation cuts.
The importance of conformity and compensation plans cannot be overstressed, especially as OPEC+’s excess oil production rose to 3 million bpd as reported last week. The extension of the compensation plan till the end of September, which was recommended by JMMC, is to protect the interests of the group.
In addition, the oil ministers of Angola and Oman supported a rollover. The rollover discussed was for the month of May. During the meetings, traders were curious about updates on Saudi’s 1 million voluntary cut and if Russia would ask for another exemption.
During the meeting, Algeria’s minister suggested a two-month rollover which was different from the one-month rollover, plus gradual easing of cuts that the United Arab Emirates supported. Bahrain and Brunei supported a rollover. Kuwait as well. At that point, Saudi Arabia noted the oil ministers who were in agreement with either a one-month rollover or two-month rollover.
Notably, Saudi Arabia’s minister pointed out that as summer approached, there was avenue for domestic demand to rise and the need to gradually increase output in the second half of the year. It was on this premise that sources revealed that Saudi Arabia might ease their voluntary one million cut by May.
According to sources, Saudi proposed: May 350k OPEC+ ease and 250k KSA, June 350k OPEC+ ease and 250k KSA, and July the remainder to reach 5.6m barrels.
Russia agreed with Saudi’s proposal (a very cordial relationship developing between both nations). At this point, it appeared that the group was in support of a gradual increase in output.
Saudi Arabia emphasised the compliance aspect again, as it appeared that some countries were taking advantage of other countries’ cuts.
The group finally reached a consensus on a gradual increase for a 3-month period—the last joker that gave oil traders the poker face.
The easing would be May 350k, June 350k, and July 450k for OPEC+. For Saudi Arabia, it would be May 250K, June 350K, July 400k.
Prior to the meeting, the U.S energy secretary had emphasized that affordable and reliable means of energy should be the priority of Saudi Arabia and its counterparts. However, the Saudi energy minister denied its role in their decision. Perhaps this might have prompted the decision of the group. Debates on Joe Biden’s energy policy ensued afterwards. Analysts claim Joe Biden cared about clean energy and cheaper gasoline, and not the profitability of Shale.
Unity appears to be guiding OPEC’s recent decisions and prices have been stable, unlike last year’s tumultuous crash after the group’s division.
How EFCC’s proposed lifestyle audit will affect your finances
While enforcing lifestyle audit, the relevant agencies must take note of the fact that social media influencing has become a serious business in Nigeria.
On Wednesday, the 24th of March 2021, Lauretta Onochie, a presidential aide, took to Twitter, to announce the legality of lifestyle audit in Nigeria, with a view to tackling corruption. She also mentioned that those who flaunt lifestyles they cannot afford can now be investigated by any of the antigraft agencies such as the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and Independent Corrupt Practices Commission (ICPC) to give information about their source of wealth.
Some Nigerians have already expressed delight in the government’s action, hailing it as a great move, while others have heavily criticized it, adding that such lifestyle audit should be for those in public offices and those holding political positions in Nigeria.
The implication of lifestyle auditing
Lifestyle audit basically involves an inquiry into the lifestyle of individuals for the purposes of revealing unreported cases of unjust self-enrichment and suspicious affluence that may suggest that such individual perpetrates fraud or is involved in corrupt activities. In carrying out such an audit, there is a comparison of the living standards of the said individual with his known source of income.
There is also an inquiry into the consumer index of such an individual, which includes the income of his or her spouse, the monthly expenses of the family, the declared assets of the family and related personal expenditure of such individual. It is considered a major tool in fighting corruption.
Whether such audit is conducted in the public sector, i.e. on those in public offices or employees of government, or whether it is carried out in the private sector, the major goal of a lifestyle audit is to consider whether or not an individual is living beyond his or her legal means, and whether there is a possibility that such lifestyle is funded by corruption or fraud.
If during the course of the audit, the individual is unable to prove the source of funds or income, such funds may be taxed as undisclosed income, and if it is discovered during such investigations that the individual is involved in fraud or any criminal related activity, such individual may be prosecuted.
Is Nigeria the first to legalise lifestyle audit?
Countries like Kenya and South Africa have been carrying out lifestyle audits. Kenya for instance has embraced lifestyle audit as a means to reduce corruption in both the private and public sectors. Government institutions in Kenya audit their staff by comparing the lifestyle of such staff with their income, in order to reveal any inconsistencies.
In the private sector, lifestyle audits are also carried out on employees who declare their wealth, allowing for an investigation into the existence of any questionable source of income or revenue.
The Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission of Kenya in 2008 took a financial controller who was earning Sh306, 000 a month to Court. But the EACC said he owned seven houses or plots, four vehicles, six bank accounts (one in London) and had Sh4 million in cash in his house. What the EACC wanted was for the court to agree he had “unexplained assets” and that the assets should be seized. The lower court rejected the EACC’s case on a variety of grounds based on the Constitution. However, the Court of Appeal held that the Financial Controller had not shown how he had acquired some of the assets.
In 2018, the Kenyan Government intensified the war on graft by announcing that all public servants will undergo a compulsory lifestyle audit to account for their sources of wealth. In an article published by the Katiba Institute, Kenya, on 27 June 2018, it was reported that various corruption scandals have been exposed and over 40 persons have been arrested as a result of corruption scandals resulting from lifestyle audit in Kenya.
In South Africa, the government has carried out lifestyle audit for the public sector in order to curb corruption and fraud. However, lifestyle audit in South Africa is not limited to the public sector as the South African Revenue Service (SARS) since 2007 has been carrying out lifestyle audit on private individuals and using it for several criminal investigations. The SARS encourages members of the public to report people living a lifestyle beyond their known means of income. The SARS would usually ask the individual to fill a questionnaire to aid them in their inquiry.
Business Insider South Africa has stated in an article published recently, that SARS has been using lifestyle audits on private individuals since 2007 and they have used it to conduct thousands of criminal investigations.
Possible challenges Nigeria may face
While enforcing lifestyle audit in Nigeria, the relevant agencies may need to take note of the fact that social media influencing has become a serious business in Nigeria today. What usually happens is that these influencers present a lifestyle to the public which they may not be able to afford or which cannot be said to be at par with their income.
The reason for such presentation is to get more followers on social media and attract brands and businesses that would usually enter into an agreement with them to influence the public to patronize the products of such brands in return for a fee. The question now arises, what becomes the fate of such influencers in the face of the legalizing of lifestyle audit in Nigeria? What effect would it have on their businesses since they are not considered illegal?
In an interview with Elsie Godwin, a YouTube content creator, Lekan Bamidele, the Managing Partner of Lekan Bamidele & Co stated that there is a huge possibility that lifestyle audit may lead to an invasion of the privacy of the audited individuals which is an infringement of their fundamental human rights as guaranteed by the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended). This is because, in carrying out such audits, the private properties of such individuals such as their phones, bank statements etc. may be looked into even without their consent.
He also added that lifestyle audit may result in abuse by the authorities, as the Nigerian Police having no right to conduct lifestyle audit on Nigerians may want to usurp the powers of the relevant agencies; and that lifestyle audit should generally be restricted to public officials.
However, based on the provisions of the Nigerian constitution the right to privacy is not absolute and an invasion of privacy would not be considered as an infringement where it is for the purpose of public morality, public order, etc. The actions of the agencies carrying out such audit may be considered as falling under this exception and would not be illegal.
Moreover, since Nigeria still battles with issues such as police brutality and sometimes, unwarranted profiling which led to the recent #EndSars protest, lifestyle auditing may give unscrupulous officials the leverage to treat citizens with indignity and may also lead to the abuse of the entire auditing process. It, therefore, opens a lot of Nigerians to the risk of harassment and unnecessary profiling.
Additionally, it is a notorious fact that one of the major problems facing Nigeria is corruption. Corruption is a phenomenon that has eaten deep into the systems and permeated every level of governance in the country and even the agencies of government. It may, therefore, pose a major threat to the smooth running and enforcement of lifestyle audit in Nigeria.
Conclusively, the relevant body or agencies should take these and more into consideration, and a formal structure should be put in place, and legislation enacted, in order to effectively carry out lifestyle audit in Nigeria. Also, there should be no overlapping of duties in the enforcement. That is, only agencies that are vested with such powers should exercise them. This would ensure that Nigerians are not faced with a situation where just any person would claim the right to investigate the source of their income.
Written by Nwankwo Tochukwu
State governments must devise innovative means to improve their IGR
States need to create an enabling business environment to attract Foreign Direct Investments.
Based on the Q4 and full-year 2020 IGR data published by the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS), the Internally Generated Revenue (IGR) of the 36 states of the federation, including the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), declined by 2% y/y to N1.31trn in 2020 from N1.33trn in 2019.
This performance reflects the effect of the Covid-19 pandemic, which caused significant macroeconomic headwinds especially in the first half (H1) of the year. To put it in context, the total IGR as of H1 2020 declined by 9% to N632.26bn from N693.91bn in H1 2019. The poor H1 performance outweighed the positive growth of 6% y/y to N673.82bn recorded in H2 2020 from N637.82bn in H2 2019, thus resulting in negative growth of 2% y/y for FY 2020.
Further analysis of the data revealed that save for Pay As You Earn (PAYE) Taxes which showed moderate growth (+5% y/y), other components of the IGR declined in 2020; Direct Assessment (-22.2% y/y), Road Taxes (-6% y/y), Other Taxes (-24% y/y) and MDAs Revenue (-1% y/y).
We think the decline in Direct Assessment reflects the low-income level of self-employed individuals and informal businesses arising from reduced work activities and tough business conditions. Similarly, restricted vehicular movements both within and out of states, closure of markets, malls, recreational centres and limited running of revenue-generating MDAs especially during the second quarter (Q2) contributed to the fall recorded across the remaining key constituents of the total IGR of all states including the FCT.
Despite the complete shutdown of Lagos, Ogun, and Abuja in Q2 2020, Lagos State remained the leader in revenue generation with an IGR of N418.99bn (equivalent to 32.1% of total IGR), followed by Rivers with N117.19bn (9.0%), FCT with N92.06bn (7.1%) and Delta with N59.73bn (4.6%). On the other hand, Taraba with N8.14bn (1.9%), Adamawa with N8.33bn (0.6%) and Yobe State with N7.78bn (0.6%) recorded the least IGR.
Worth noting is that while most states have continued to rely heavily on FAAC allocation to meet budgetary commitments, Lagos (78%) and Ogun (57%) states including the FCT (57%) had the most healthy composition of IGR revenue to its respective total revenue in 2020. The vast economic activities in Lagos and Ogun states, an offshoot of their positioning as a good spot for import and export of materials and finished products, enable a good flow of commercial activities.
Many states continue to rely solely on FAAC allocations from the Federal Government which are totally dependent on dwindling oil revenues. State governments need to come up with innovative ideas to improve IGR and also create an enabling business environment to attract Foreign Direct Investments (FDI) to avoid the current situation where many states cannot as much pay salaries when oil receipts begin to fall.
CSL Stockbrokers Limited, Lagos (CSLS) is a wholly-owned subsidiary of FCMB Group Plc and is regulated by the Securities and Exchange Commission, Nigeria. CSLS is a member of the Nigerian Stock Exchange.
Nairametrics | Company Earnings
Access our Live Feed portal for the latest company earnings as they drop.
- 2020 FY Results: Guinea Insurance Plc reports a loss of N227.7 million.
- 2020 FY Results: Unity Bank Plc posts profit after tax of N2.09 billion.
- Guinea Insurance Plc reports a loss of N142.13 million in 9M 2020.
- Unilever Nigeria Plc set to hold Annual General Meeting on 6th of May.
- UBA Plc posts profit after tax of N38.16 billion in Q1 2021.