….Says Competitiveness, Not Restrictions, Will Revive Industry
The Centre for the Promotion of Private Enterprise (CPPE) has said Nigeria’s textile industry cannot be revived through import prohibition, calling instead for a value-chain strategy focused on cotton production, affordable finance, and cheaper energy.
In its reaction to the Senate’s resolution, the CEO of CPPE, Dr Muda Yusuf noted that textile manufacturing is energy-intensive and that existing tariffs have failed to restore competitiveness because of high production costs.
He recommended strategic government procurement of local uniforms, a textile competitiveness fund, revived cotton farming, and stronger border enforcement to tackle smuggling as better alternatives to protect jobs across the N17tn fashion and furniture value chain.
Yusuf pointed out that “Nigeria’s fashion, garment-making and tailoring industry is substantially larger than the textile manufacturing segment. Conservatively valued at about N10 trillion, the industry provides livelihoods for an estimated ten million Nigerians and is one of the country’s most vibrant creative economy sectors.”
He added that “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 stated 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.”
Yusuf emphasised that “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.”
He insisted that reviving the textile industry requires a comprehensive value-chain approach rather than restrictive trade measures.
