The Federal Government and former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar’s political camp have committed about $10.2 million to lobbying firms in the United States, expenditure that has triggered questions over the domestic economic value of the funds amid Nigeria’s cost-of-living pressures.
The combined contracts are worth approximately N14.28 billion at an exchange rate of N1,400 to the dollar, based on publicly disclosed filings under the United States Foreign Agents Registration Act.
The spending involves separate engagements with different objectives.
The Federal Government retained Washington-based DCI Group to engage US policymakers on issues including Nigeria’s security situation, protection of Christian communities and continued American support for counter-terrorism efforts.
Atiku, meanwhile, engaged Von Batten-Montague-York, L.C. for political and policy advocacy in Washington.
The government’s DCI contract, which began in December 2025, carried a monthly retainer of $750,000. The first six months were valued at $4.5 million, with an automatic renewal capable of taking the contract to $9 million. Nigeria paid $4.5 million upfront for the initial period.
Atiku’s 12-month agreement with Von Batten-Montague-York was valued at $1.2 million.
US Justice Department filings said the firm would help strengthen Atiku’s engagement with members of Congress and executive-branch officials, provide strategic policy advice and counter narratives associated with the Nigerian government.
Reports in July also indicated that the firm circulated more than 60 pages of historical US Justice Department records relating to a 1993 drug-trafficking asset-forfeiture case linked to President Bola Tinubu among members of the Trump administration, Congress and senior congressional staff.
The scale of the expenditure has prompted comparisons with the financing needs of Nigerian businesses and students.
At N250,000 per intervention, N14 billion could theoretically provide financing for about 56,000 microenterprises. At N500,000, the same amount would cover 28,000 interventions, while N1 million allocations would reach about 14,000 businesses.
The figures do not mean that the money would automatically create 56,000 viable businesses, as the outcome would depend on the financing structure, sectors involved, administration costs and business survival rates.
The comparison is nevertheless significant in an economy where access to finance remains a major constraint for small businesses.
The World Bank said in December 2025 that MSMEs account for most businesses in Nigeria, nearly half of GDP and a large share of employment, while fewer than one in 20 have access to bank credit. The bank subsequently approved a $500 million financing package to expand access to finance for Nigerian MSMEs.
Education provides another illustration of the potential reach of the funds.
Based on cited tuition figures, N14 billion could cover the annual fees of more than 155,000 regular students at Lagos State University at N90,000 per session, or about 73,600 students at N190,000.
The same amount could also fund N20,000 monthly allowances for 700,000 students for one month under the Nigerian Education Loan Fund framework.
At Olabisi Onabanjo University, where cited fees range from N190,000 to N350,000, the amount could cover tuition for roughly 73,600 students at the lower rate or 40,000 at the higher rate.
Executive Director of the Rule of Law and Accountability Advocacy Centre, Okechukwu Nwanguma, said the central concern was the opportunity cost of public expenditure.
“In a country where millions are struggling with unemployment, inadequate healthcare, deteriorating schools, insecurity and collapsing infrastructure, every billion naira of public money spent on lobbying abroad must be justified against what that money could have achieved at home,” Nwanguma said.
He, however, distinguished between Atiku’s expenditure and government spending, arguing that the use of private funds by a politician primarily raises questions of disclosure and legal compliance, while taxpayer-funded lobbying requires stronger justification.
Nwanguma called for disclosure of the beneficiaries, amounts paid, purpose of the expenditure, procurement process and measurable results expected from government-funded lobbying.
“You cannot repeatedly tell Nigerians that there is no money while billions are available for expenditures whose public value has not been convincingly demonstrated,” he said.
An economic expert who spoke anonymously also questioned the scale of the spending, particularly while communities continue to face infrastructure and basic-service deficits.
The expert further criticised the externalisation of domestic political disputes, arguing that political contests should not unnecessarily be taken to foreign governments and institutions.
The spending, however, cannot be assessed solely by comparing the contracts with hypothetical business or education interventions.
For the Federal Government, the stated purpose of the DCI engagement is to influence policy discussions in Washington on matters considered important to Nigeria’s security and diplomatic interests.
Atiku’s contract serves a different political and reputational purpose, including access to US policymakers and efforts to influence perceptions of the former vice-president.
The broader question is therefore whether the measurable benefits of the engagements justify their financial cost.
Financial Derivatives Company Managing Director Bismarck Rewane has identified productivity, investment and the operating environment for businesses as key to improving Nigeria’s economic prospects.
Rewane has also pointed to power, agriculture, manufacturing, fintech and telecommunications as important areas for productivity, while highlighting the burden unreliable electricity and high operating costs place on small businesses.
Against that backdrop, the $10.2 million lobbying bill has become a question of priorities: how much value Nigeria and its political actors derive from influence in Washington, and whether comparable resources could generate a more immediate economic impact at home.
Lobbying: Tinubu, Atiku camps spend $10.2m in US as N14bn opportunity cost sparks debate
