Dangote Explains Why His Cement Sells Cheaper Abroad Than in Nigeria, Sparks Debate on Taxes and Economic Policy

Africa’s richest man and President of Dangote Group, Aliko Dangote, has finally addressed a long-standing question that has frustrated many Nigerians: why cement produced in Nigeria by his company is often cheaper in foreign markets than within the country itself. Speaking during a recent press briefing with journalists, Dangote attributed the price disparity squarely to Nigeria’s heavy tax regime and regulatory burdens on local production and domestic sales.

According to Dangote, exporting cement allows his company to avoid a wide range of taxes and statutory levies that significantly increase the cost of cement sold inside Nigeria. He explained that while Nigerians often assume producers deliberately inflate prices at home, the reality is that domestic prices are weighed down by cumulative taxes imposed at different levels of government.

“When you look at my invoice, the cement I export is cheaper than the one I’m selling domestically, because that’s how exports work,” Dangote said. “In export, I’m saving a lot of money. I’m not paying 30 percent company income tax, I’m not paying education tax, I’m not paying health levy, I’m not paying 7.5 percent VAT, and I’m not paying 10 percent withholding tax.”

By his calculation, once these charges are removed, Dangote Cement can compete effectively in the international market against producers from countries such as Turkey, Russia, and China. Export incentives, including tax waivers and simplified regulatory processes, make it cheaper for Nigerian manufacturers to sell abroad than to serve their local market—an outcome that highlights deeper structural flaws in Nigeria’s fiscal and economic framework.

Dangote stressed that the situation is not unique to cement alone but reflects a broader problem in Nigeria’s industrial policy. In many cases, locally produced goods end up more expensive at home than abroad, despite being manufactured with domestic raw materials. This paradox, he argued, undermines the very idea of local production as a solution to high prices and import dependence.

“So when you reduce all these taxes, I can afford to go and compete with the international market,” he said. “But when I sell locally, all those taxes come back, and the consumer ultimately pays for them.”

The implication of Dangote’s explanation is that Nigerian consumers are indirectly bearing the cost of multiple layers of taxation. While government revenue generation is important, critics argue that the current system places a disproportionate burden on domestic consumption. As a result, essential building materials like cement become unaffordable for ordinary citizens, contributing to the rising cost of housing and infrastructure projects across the country.

Dangote’s remarks have reignited public debate, with many Nigerians questioning why a country still struggling with housing deficits and infrastructure gaps would adopt policies that make basic construction materials expensive for its own people. Some critics accuse Dangote of benefiting from a protected market and monopoly advantages while shifting blame to government policies. Others, however, believe his explanation exposes a harsh truth about how Nigeria’s tax structure discourages local affordability and encourages export-focused production.

Economists note that Nigeria’s fiscal framework creates a perverse incentive: manufacturers are rewarded for exporting goods rather than selling domestically. This runs contrary to the developmental needs of a country that requires affordable cement for roads, schools, hospitals, and housing. When domestic buyers face higher prices than foreign customers, national development suffers.

The issue also raises concerns about the future, especially with discussions around new tax reforms expected to take effect in 2026. Many Nigerians fear that additional taxes or levies could further drive up the prices of locally produced goods, worsening inflation and eroding purchasing power.

In essence, Dangote’s explanation shifts the conversation from individual business decisions to systemic policy failures. While private companies operate to maximize profit, it is government policy that shapes market outcomes. Until Nigeria reforms its tax regime to balance revenue generation with domestic affordability, the paradox of “made-in-Nigeria but cheaper abroad” may persist.

For many Nigerians, the controversy underscores a painful reality: local consumers are paying a premium not because production is impossible or inefficient, but because policy choices make it so.