To
start to understand how Aliko Dangote, Africa’s richest man, came to have such
influence over the Nigerian government, it is useful to go back in time to
2003. Before then, he was a Nigerian billionaire just like any other.
But
in the run up to the 2003 election campaign, president Olusegun Obasanjo had a
famous falling out with his vice president, Atiku Abubakar, over the latter’s
attempt to succeed him as president after only one term. Obasanjo had also been
operating on the understanding that Atiku, as the People Democratic Party’s
(PDP) money man, would fund his re-election campaign.
But
Atiku told him that all the money had been spent during Obasanjo’s turbulent
first term, notably on lobbying the national assembly not to
impeach him on two different occasions. Without access to the
party’s old fundraising machine, Obasanjo was left with no choice but to find
his own new donors.
In
his 2013 book, The Accidental Public Servant, the current governor of
Kaduna state and former minister under Obasanjo, Nasir El-Rufai, describes how
this episode presented Dangote with an opportunity he has maximized to his
great benefit. He writes:
Obasanjo
had to resort to raising money from other sources and that was how Aliko
Dangote came into prominence in the government. From 1999 to 2003, nobody had
heard of Dangote having anything to do with the federal government in any
significant way. – El-Rufai, Nasir. The Accidental Public Servant (p. 170)
Dangote Stays Winning
By
the time president Goodluck Jonathan came to office, the PDP-led government had
become very closely and publicly aligned with Dangote. During a presidential
media chat in 2011, the president told his interlocutors that Nigeria was to
begin exporting cement that year because “Dangote himself, because he is the
number one producer, told me” [pdf, page 64].
This
Dangote promise of cement exports is repeated nearly every year, Nigeria is
desperate to be seen to be diversifying exports beyond oil. Most recently at
this week’s FT Africa Summit where Dangote announced—to vice president Yemi
Osinbajo’s hearing—that the date for cement exports from Nigeria will now be
2018.
A
few people have raised concerns about the relationship between Dangote and the
government and its impact on policy decisions. But if they thought things would
change under president Buhari’s new All Progressive Congress (APC) government,
which came into office in May 2015, they were mistaken. Barely three months
after being sworn in, the vice president was leading a government delegation to
Zambia to commission a
Dangote Cement plant.
Since
then, the vice president, with several ministers in tow, have also visited the
Dangote refinery for an “inspection” even though it was mainly
sand filling of the site going at the time. Early last year, in a separate
visit to the Dangote refinery construction site, the Central Bank governor,
Godwin Emefiele, said “more Nigerians need to think like
Dangote” and pledged to support him as much as possible.
Perhaps
unsurprising then that a Reuters investigation in June last year found
Dangote’s companies had been receiving preferential
foreign currency allocations from the Central Bank at a time
when the Nigerian economy had been almost crippled by a dollar shortage.
Cementing his status
While
Dangote is involved in many industries, his wealth—over 90% of his net
worth—has come from his cement business. Dangote Cement’s 65% share of
the Nigerian market means that it also sets the prices for the
commodity in the country. And it has used this advantage to generate large
profits—the gross margin on its cement was as high as 70% a few years ago and
has slowly come down to just under
50% in 2016. A Bloomberg Intelligence report showed
average global cement profit (EBITDA) margins were 17.2% in 2015, but Dangote
Cement reported a margin of 42.3% in the same year.
In
2013, an analysis of the world’s top 15 cement producers revealed that while
Dangote Cement’s revenues of $2.4 billion represented 2% of the cohort, its
profits of $1.2 billion represented 13% of all net profits in the group. In
that year, its net profit margin was 52% with the next most profitable
producer—China’s Anhui Conch—managing a 17.8% margin.
Dangote
has used the sentiment of “national pride” very cleverly to his advantage. The
government and indeed many Nigerians have almost come to accept that paying
over the odds for cement is a sacrifice worth making in the name of having
cement produced in the country.
The Nigerian
press also helps to propagate the story of Nigeria’s cement
“self-sufficiency”. This self-sufficiency argument is never challenged with the
simple point that it is easy to make that claim when the product is priced
beyond the reach of the vast majority of Nigerians. If prices came down to
global averages, would Dangote Cement be able to meet demand with its current
production levels?
Dangote
also regularly inundates Nigerians with stories of how he has put all his eggs
in the Nigerian basket and how he is always betting on the country by investing
more than any other foreign investor. Every now and again, he announces large
investments in an industry (usually one favored by the government of the day)
sometimes running into billions of
dollars. The stories and announcements (which may, or may not, come
to fruition) help to reinforce the narrative Dangote is always investing in
Nigeria even when no one else is doing so.
The cost to Nigerians
The
nature of cement as a product that is too heavy and costly to transport and too
tricky to smuggle has allowed the Nigerian market to be a captive one for
Dangote.
In
June 2016, the World Bank
published a report examining the impact and costs of lack of
competition in a number of industries in Africa. They found that African cement
prices averaged $9.57 per 50kg bag compared with $3.25 globally. Put another
way, Africans paid 183% more than people around the world for the same product.
The
report also highlights how the Nigerian government had been phasing out import
licenses for cement beginning in 2012 when Dangote ramped up cement production
in Nigeria as well as the Central Bank of Nigeria banning the use of foreign
exchange for cement imports. The World Bank report [page 54]
also showed how Dangote had exclusive mining licenses for limestone and other
additive materials for cement estimated to last for 90 years even though its
cement plants have an estimated life of 50 years.
If
Dangote’s relationship with the government allows it to make healthy profits at
the expense of Nigerians, perhaps this can be mitigated by the taxes it pays to
the government?
No
chance.
Between
2010 and 2015 when Dangote cement earned around 1 trillion naira ($6 billion)
in profits, it paid only 12 billion naira ($72 million) in taxes—a tax rate of
just over 1%. It has done this through a particularly aggressive interpretation
of a Nigerian investment incentive known as ‘Pioneer Status’.
The
idea behind the pioneer status was to encourage investment in industries which
the Nigerian government deemed in need of support. In return for investments in
those industries, companies were exempt from paying taxes on profits from those
investments for a maximum of five years.
However,
the law was described as “most abused
in certain quarters“, by Deloitte. No one has taken greater
advantage than Dangote Cement. It has claimed pioneer status multiple times on
the same plants by applying for a new exemption each time it extends the plant.
The illustration below, taken from a recent
presentation by the company [pdf, page 27] shows how it has
done this.
Dangote
Cement has claimed the pioneer status ten times across three plants by
carefully scheduling a new one to start as an old one is ending. This puts
Dangote’s interests at cross purposes with that of the country—Nigeria wants
investments as quickly as possible but Dangote’s incentives are to spread out
its investments as much as possible to avoid paying
any taxes.
Recently,
the government announced some “reforms” to
the pioneer status law ostensibly to plug the gaps that had left it open to
abuse. It changed the definition of pioneer industries from new ones to
“immature” ones. It also announced that cement i.e. Dangote would be ‘phased
out’ of the scheme.
But
if any Nigerian thinks that this means Dangote will soon start paying taxes in
the country, they ought to think again. Most recently, the government announced the
extension of an order that allows companies to offset the full
costs, plus an additional 30%, of the cost of providing infrastructure to the
public. This original order was signed by President
Jonathan in 2012 to run until April 2017. Given that this
exemption comes with a built-in profit element, if the past is any guide to the
future, Dangote will take advantage of it and not pay any taxes at least for
the next five years.
The
question as to why a businessman who has benefitted immensely from
Nigeria—making him the world’s richest black man in the bargain—continues to
expend so much time and effort to avoid paying taxes remains an interesting
one.
The most damning of all
A
monopoly or market dominant firm might be tolerable if it is “contestable”.
That is, the monopolist’s position is made possible by low prices. In many
areas, this is the case with Amazon—anyone is free to compete with them but it
is quite difficult to match them on low prices as Amazon’s wafer-thin profit
margins show it prioritizes gaining market share over profits. This was the
case with many of America’s so called “robber barons”—as they expanded their
market share, they consistently cut prices and improved services, none more so
than John D. Rockefeller and his Standard Oil.
This
is the most damning case against Dangote. For all the effective license to
print money that Dangote Cement has become, the company’s track record for
innovation is practically non-existent. Its 2016 report does not mention any
specific research the company is funding to bring down the cost of its products
or even housing in general. It simply sells cement in the same form as it has
been made since the time of the Romans who invented the stuff and
demands the highest possible price for it.
An episode in
2014 illustrates this point. I spent some time investigating
and writing about the issue at the time and the World Bank also highlighted it
in its report quoted above. In a brazen move, Dangote Cement and the Standards
Organization of Nigeria (SON) tried to eliminate the 32.5 grade of cement from
the Nigerian market to replace it with 42.5 grade, produced by Dangote cement.
This
campaign was supposedly led by concerned members of the public but when I
investigated, I found it was a
faceless organization fronted by a non-existent person. The
plan nearly succeeded but for the other cement producers lobbying hard and taking SON to
court. The Nigerian Society of Engineers also came out strongly against the
proposed ban arguing, correctly, that cement grades were not about
inferiority but usage.
The
42.5 Grade cement Dangote Cement claimed it was introducing into the market was
supposedly a better product than what previously existed in the market. Yet it
did not try to introduce the product with a publicity campaign or aggressive
pricing. Instead it sought to first eliminate the competition before
undoubtedly introducing the more expensive product.
Has
Nigeria as a whole benefitted from Dangote Cement? This is a surprisingly
difficult question to answer in the affirmative.
There
is no obvious infrastructure boom, it has not collected any taxes. When it
comes to jobs, the company reported 16,272 employees across the 10 African
countries in which it operates for 2016. Around 10,000 of those are in
Nigeria—a tiny drop in the ocean for a country of 190 million with a major
employment problem.
Nigerian Exceptionalism
The
nature of the cement business across the world is that it tends towards
oligopolies and uncompetitive practices. It is expensive to start a new cement
plant and as previously stated, it is difficult and expensive to transport
across long distances which means most cement is consumed close to where it is
produced. Yet it is a vital product for construction and infrastructure
development. As such, regulators across the world tend to watch over the
industry very closely.
In
2014, the UK Competition Commission forced existing firms to sell some
of their plants to create a new market entrant as a way of boosting
competition. Last year in India, the Competition Commission, fined ten
cement manufacturers a total of $1 billion for forming a
cartel. In January 2016, South Korea’s Fair Trade Commission fined 6
cement producers a total of $168 million for price fixing.
Spain’s National Commission for Markets and Competition handed down
€29 million in fines to 23 cement companies in September 2016
after finding that they had been involved in a cartel where they shared price
information via WhatsApp.
It
is worth noting that in all the examples above, the countries in question have
far more competitive cement markets and markedly lower profit margins than
Nigeria and Dangote Cement. Yet the work of keeping these firms who produce a
vital commodity on the straight and narrow never stops.
Nigeria
is the complete opposite. The government is the chief enabler of Dangote Cement
and ensures it can extract fat profits from the Nigerian market by subsidizing
its operations with tax breaks and preferential foreign exchange allocations.
The
government has bet everything on Dangote and looks set to do so again with the
650,000 barrels per day Dangote Refinery scheduled to come on stream in 2019.
Its hopes of ending importation of petroleum products rest entirely on Dangote
as several
government officials and the oil minister have said publicly. Yet
the economics of the refining business suggests the Nigerian government will
once again pull out all stops to ensure Dangote’s refinery is profitable and
this may even be at the expense of ordinary Nigerians. Such has been the
corrosive relationship between the Nigerian state and the continent’s richest
man.
It
is not exactly surprising when companies collude to get customers to pay more
than they should. “People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for
merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the
public, or in some contrivance to raise prices” said Adam Smith more than two
centuries ago.
But
to watch a government align so closely with a businessman with the attendant
effect of denying its own citizens the many benefits of an important commodity
is particularly painful to watch.
Original piece via Quartz Africa
No comments: