Cement price manipulation is under investigation by the FCCPC after a three-month study found Nigerian prices were high despite surplus capacity

The Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) said in Abuja on Tuesday, August 18, 2026, that a three-month investigation had uncovered possible cement price manipulation in Nigeria, prompting the competition regulator to deepen its inquiry into the industry’s pricing practices.

Also read: NANS Opens Promising Business Grant for Students=

The commission’s preliminary findings are contained in a 40-page field report produced by its Anticompetitive Practices Department following complaints over the rising cost of cement.

The investigation examined Nigeria alongside cement markets in Kenya, Tanzania, South Africa, Egypt, Morocco, Algeria and Togo.

The FCCPC said the study considered factors including limestone availability, population, production capacity, domestic consumption and retail prices.

Its findings showed a striking price gap between Nigeria and several of the markets examined.

In Nairobi, Kenya, where the population is about 58.6 million and domestic cement demand was estimated at 9.3 million metric tonnes in 2025, a 50kg bag sold for about $5.40, equivalent to N7,344 based on the commission’s conversion.

In Tanzania, a market with an estimated population of 66.3 million and similar annual demand, the same quantity sold for about $4.80, or N6,528.

Even in Togo, which the FCCPC noted has no limestone deposits, a 50kg bag sold for approximately $6.75, equivalent to N9,180.

By comparison, Nigerian market intelligence reviewed by the commission showed that cement prices climbed sharply during the first seven months of 2026.

A 50kg bag reportedly sold for between N9,300 and N9,700 in January. By mid-year, the price had risen to between N10,500 and N13,000, while prices reached between N13,000 and N15,000 in some areas by July.

The commission said the price increases were difficult to reconcile with Nigeria’s substantial production capacity.

According to the FCCPC, Nigeria has installed cement production capacity of more than 60 million to 65 million metric tonnes annually, against estimated domestic consumption of about 25 million to 30 million tonnes.

Nigeria is also a net exporter of cement to neighbouring countries.

The commission said the apparent surplus capacity should ordinarily create greater competitive pressure on domestic prices, making the disparity a significant issue for further investigation.

“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,” the FCCPC said.

The commission stressed that the findings do not yet establish that cement manufacturers have manipulated prices.

Instead, the investigation will determine whether the prices can be explained by legitimate production and distribution costs or whether unlawful conduct may have influenced the market.

Industry participants have pointed to energy costs, the depreciation of the naira, higher costs for imported machinery and spare parts, as well as transportation and logistics expenses.

The FCCPC said it was testing those explanations against verified information on production costs, pricing, capacity utilisation and wider market conditions.

The investigation will examine possible coordinated conduct, abuse of market power, restrictions on domestic supply and anti-competitive distribution practices.

The commission has consequently issued Notices of Commencement of Investigation and Summons to Produce to key companies in the sector.

The affected companies have been asked to provide records covering their pricing methodologies, production levels, capacity utilisation, exports and relevant commercial relationships.

The FCCPC said most of the major cement manufacturers had cooperated with the investigation by providing records, although one major company had yet to do so.

Publicly available estimates cited by the commission indicate that three major companies account for more than 90 per cent of Nigeria’s installed cement production capacity.

That concentration makes the regulator’s investigation particularly significant, given the importance of cement to housing, infrastructure and construction costs.

FCCPC Executive Vice Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Tunji Bello, said the regulator had a responsibility to establish the facts rather than rely on assumptions about the causes of high prices.

“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,” Bello said.

“When concerns persist about how such an important market is functioning, the Commission has a duty to look beyond assumptions and establish the facts.”

Bello also sought to reassure businesses that the investigation was not intended to interfere with legitimate commercial decisions or prevent companies from making profits.

“Businesses are entitled to make legitimate commercial decisions and earn returns on their investments,” he said.

“Competition law does not prevent that. Its purpose is to protect the competitive process, so that prices, output and other market outcomes are determined by genuine competition rather than conduct that unlawfully restricts it.”

The FCCPC’s intervention comes as expensive building materials continue to place pressure on construction activity and the cost of housing in Nigeria.

The commission’s cross-border comparison provides a powerful basis for examining whether domestic prices reflect the country’s operating costs or whether structural problems within the market are contributing to the burden on consumers.

Also read: NANS Opens Promising Business Grant for Students

The investigation remains ongoing, and the FCCPC has not announced any finding of wrongdoing against a particular cement manufacturer. Its next stage will focus on the records supplied by industry players and whether the evidence supports enforcement action under Nigeria’s competition law.