Yemisi Izuora
The Center for the Promotion of Private Enterprise (CPPE) has warned of consequences of placing ban on importation of textile materials by Nigeria.
The CPPE while reacting to Senate’s resolution calling for a ban on textile fabric imports, urges the legislature to engage in competitiveness reforms over import restrictions.
The Centre said the proposed measure is unlikely to achieve its intended objectives and could have significant adverse consequences for the Nigerian economy.
According to the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Center, Dr. Muda Yusuf, While the objective of reviving Nigeria’s textile industry is legitimate and commendable, an outright import prohibition is unlikely to achieve that objective. Rather than revitalising the textile industry, the proposed ban could impose substantial collateral costs on downstream industries, disrupt critical supply chains and jeopardise millions of jobs and livelihoods.
The proposal in his opinion reflects a narrow view of the textile industry’s challenges and overlooks the extensive linkages within Nigeria’s textile, garment, fashion, furniture and creative economy value chains. Effective industrial policy should address the underlying constraints to competitiveness rather than merely restrict imports.
Making further analysis of the industry, Yusuf, said, Nigeria’s fashion, garment-making and tailoring industry is substantially larger than the textile manufacturing segment. Conservatively valued at about ₦10 trillion, the industry provides livelihoods for an estimated ten million Nigerians and is one of the country’s most vibrant creative economy sectors.
Textile fabrics are critical intermediate inputs for this ecosystem. Restricting imports would disrupt production, increase costs, reduce consumer choice and threaten thousands of micro, small and medium enterprises engaged in fashion, tailoring and garment manufacturing.
The garment industry also generates substantial domestic value addition through design, tailoring, branding, embroidery, merchandising and retailing. In many cases, the local value added exceeds the value of the textile inputs. Public policy should therefore protect this broader value chain.
Textile fabrics are equally important inputs for Nigeria’s rapidly growing furniture and interior design industry, where they are extensively used in upholstered furniture, office furniture, hotel furnishings and mattresses. The industry is valued at an estimated N7 trillion. A supply disruption would increase production costs and weaken the competitiveness of the sector.
He noted that the decline of Nigeria’s textile industry is primarily the consequence of longstanding structural constraints rather than import competition. These include high energy costs, expensive credit, poor infrastructure, logistics bottlenecks, obsolete technology, smuggling, weak access to long-term finance and policy inconsistency.
Textile manufacturing is one of the most energy-intensive industries globally. Operating within a high-cost production environment has severely undermined the competitiveness of local manufacturers.
“It is noteworthy that imported textile fabrics already attract combined Import Duty and Import Adjustment Tax (IAT) of between 35 and 45 percent. Yet these tariff protections have not restored the industry’s competitiveness because the core problem lies in production economics rather than import penetration.
An import ban proposition addresses the symptom while leaving the underlying causes unresolved. Sustainable industry revival requires lower production costs, improved productivity and stronger enforcement of the existing tariff regime.” he stressed.
Yusuf, further noted that the domestic textile manufacturers currently lack the capacity to meet the quantity, quality and diversity of fabrics required by Nigeria’s fashion, garment, interior design, and furniture industries. Even at the peak of the textile industry’s performance, local mills did not supply the full range of fabrics demanded by the market.
An outright import ban would therefore create supply shortages, increase production costs and weaken downstream industries that generate significantly more employment than textile manufacturing itself.
“Reviving the textile industry requires a comprehensive value-chain approach rather than restrictive trade measures.
Priority should be given to restoring domestic cotton production, which historically supplied the industry’s raw materials. Insecurity in farming communities, weak productivity, inadequate extension services and poor incentives have severely undermined cotton cultivation.
“Textile manufacturers also require access to affordable long-term finance, modern technology, reliable energy and a more competitive operating environment.” Yusuf noted.
In place of Senate’s current thought, the CPPE recommends strategic government procurement which requires military, paramilitary agencies, schools and other public institutions to prioritise locally produced textiles and garments for their uniforms.
Government should channel part of textile-related import tax revenues into a dedicated fund providing single-digit financing for technology upgrading and industry modernisation.
He called on Government to support cotton farmers through improved seedlings, mechanisation, extension services, security and guaranteed off-take arrangements, combat smuggling to improve the effectiveness of existing tariff protection and reduce energy costs, improve infrastructure, lower financing costs and create a more conducive manufacturing environment.
The Center warned that the proposed textile import ban risks undermining a vibrant garment and fashion ecosystem that supports millions of Nigerians while generating substantial domestic value addition. It could also adversely affect the furniture industry, encourage smuggling and reduce customs revenue.
The challenge confronting Nigeria’s textile industry is fundamentally one of competitiveness rather than import penetration. Sustainable revival will require structural reforms that improve productivity, reduce production costs, revive cotton production, expand access to affordable finance and leverage government procurement to stimulate domestic demand.