The Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) says it has issued a summons to major cement manufacturers in the country as part of probes in the industry to determine why the retail price of the product is way higher than what obtains in other Africans countries.
Three companies account for more than 90 per cent of Nigeria’s cement production. They are: Dangote Cement Plc, HMB Nigeria Plc, formerly known as Lafarge Africa Plc. and BUA Cement Plc.
The FCCPC said the probe followed an extensive industry-wide investigation that suggested possible manipulation of product prices in the Nigerian market.
The FCCPC stated that findings from a three-month cross-border study by its Anti-competitive Practices Department (ACP), undertaken in response to widespread public complaints over the high cost of cement, provided reasonable ground for probe of the cement manufacturers.
According to the commission, subsequent to the findings, it has issued “Notices of Commencement of Investigation and Summons to Producer” to the key players in the sector.
With the summon, the companies are required to provide information and records relating to, among other matters, their pricing methodologies, production and capacity utilisation, exports and relevant commercial relationships.
FCCPC stated that its actions were sequel to concerns raised over the comparatively high retail price of cement in the local market compared with other markets, despite the country’s substantial limestone deposits, significant domestic production capacity and reported surplus installed capacity relative to domestic consumption.
The commission explained that, beyond Nigeria, its investigations extended to markets in sub-Saharan Africa like Kenya, Tanzania and South Africa as well as Egypt, Morocco and Algeria, using metrics such as availability of limestone, the basic raw material for cement production, as well as other variables such as population, production capacity and consumption.
The FCCPC statement reads: “Of particular concern to the Commission is that this level of production capacity has not resulted in the downward pressure on domestic prices that might ordinarily be expected in a competitive market with substantial excess capacity.”
Executive Vice Chairman and Chief Executive Officer (EVC\CEO) of the commission Mr. Tunji Bello said: “Cement occupies a strategic place in the Nigerian economy. Its price affects the cost of building a home, developing commercial property, delivering public infrastructure and, ultimately, the cost of doing business. When concerns persist about how such an important market is functioning, the Commission has a duty to look beyond assumptions and establish the facts.”
The FCCPC spokesman provided additional details on the findings from the ACP investigation.
He said: “For instance, Kenya with 58.6 million population, 76 per cent lower than Nigeria’s population, had domestic cement demand of approximately 9.3m metric tonne per annum (MTPA) in 2025. Retail price in Nairobi is $5.40 or N7,344. Kenya is endowed with limestone.
“Tanzania, with population of 66.3 million, 72 per cent lower than Nigeria’s population, had domestic cement demand of 9.3m MTPA by 2025 with a bag of cement selling for $4.80 or N6,528.
“In Togo, which does not have limestone deposit, a bag of cement sells for $6.75 or N9,180.
“However, in Nigeria, with its huge limestone deposit and installed capacity, market intelligence reviewed by the commission showed that the retail price of a 50kg bag of cement rose significantly during the first half of 2026.
“A cement bag selling for between N9,300 and N9,700 in January was selling for between N10,500 and N13,000 by mid-year and by July, prices had risen to between N13,000 and N15,000 in some parts of the country.”
According to him, “Next is to determine whether prevailing cement prices can be explained by legitimate costs and market conditions, or whether there is evidence of coordinated conduct, abuse of market power, restriction of domestic supply, anti-competitive distribution practices or other conduct contrary to the provisions of the FCCPA.”
(Ripples)