The Centre for the Promotion of Private Enterprise (CPPE) has criticised the Senate’s approval of the Sugary Beverage (SSB) Tax Bill, warning that the measure could hurt investment, put jobs at risk, and slow production in Nigeria’s manufacturing sector.

The Lagos Chamber of Commerce and Industry (LCCI) has also backed the CPPE, voicing opposition to the proposed Sugar-Sweetened Beverage (SSB) tax framework. They warn that an uneven rollout could hurt jobs, weaken supply chains, and create unintended strain on key productive sectors.

In a statement issued by its Chief Executive Officer, Muda Yusuf, the CPPE described the bill as ill-timed and inconsistent with the Federal Government’s efforts to improve the business environment and support industrial growth.

According to the economic policy advocacy group, manufacturers are already facing significant challenges, including high energy costs, elevated interest rates, foreign exchange pressures, logistics bottlenecks, weak consumer purchasing power, and multiple taxes and levies. The introduction of an additional tax burden on non-alcoholic beverage producers, it argued, would further increase production costs and reduce competitiveness.

The CPPE noted that the food and beverage industry remains one of the largest contributors to Nigeria’s manufacturing output and employment, with strong linkages to agriculture, packaging, transportation, retail, hospitality, and distribution. It warned that imposing further taxes on the sector could trigger higher consumer prices, lower demand, reduced capacity utilisation, and job losses throughout the value chain.

The organisation also expressed concerns about policy inconsistency, noting that the 2026 fiscal framework already provides for an excise duty of ₦10 per litre on non-alcoholic beverages. Introducing additional taxation through new legislation, it said, could create uncertainty for investors and weaken confidence in Nigeria’s business environment.

While acknowledging the need to address the growing incidence of diabetes and other non-communicable diseases, the CPPE argued that sugar taxes alone are unlikely to deliver meaningful public health outcomes. It maintained that factors such as poor dietary habits, sedentary lifestyles, inadequate health awareness, and genetic predisposition play a more significant role in driving such conditions.

Instead of additional taxation, the group called for greater investment in public health education, nutrition awareness campaigns, preventive healthcare, and infrastructure that encourages physical activity. These measures, it said, would be more effective in improving health outcomes without harming economic activity.

The CPPE urged the House of Representatives to reject the bill when it comes up for concurrence, describing the proposal as anti-growth and detrimental to manufacturing sustainability, employment preservation, and investment promotion.

“The economy needs relief, not additional taxation; support for production, not policies that weaken enterprise; and reforms that create jobs, not measures that put them at risk,” the statement said.

The organization concluded that Nigeria can simultaneously pursue public health objectives and economic growth through policies that encourage healthier lifestyles while safeguarding investment, employment, and industrial development.

LCCI Director-General, Chinyere Almona in opposing the tax, emphasised that manufacturers should be allowed a structured transition period that enables product reformulation rather than immediate price adjustments that could negatively impact consumers and demand dynamics.

The LCCI noted that a reformulation-led tax design would be more effective in achieving public health objectives compared to a purely revenue-driven approach. According to the Chamber, incentivising lower sugar content across beverage products can deliver health benefits while preserving industrial output, protecting jobs, and sustaining value chain stability.

It further stressed that policymakers must conduct a comprehensive assessment of the broader economic implications before implementing the policy. This includes potential impacts on agriculture, manufacturing, logistics, and distribution networks, particularly in sectors that support large-scale employment and interconnected supply chains.

The Chamber urged the Federal Government and the National Assembly to initiate a structured redesign process for the tax framework through deeper technical engagement with manufacturers, health professionals, organised private sector groups, consumer associations, and other relevant stakeholders.

According to LCCI, such an inclusive approach would help develop a balanced policy that encourages product reformulation, safeguards employment, and maintains business continuity while still advancing public health priorities.

 Almona reiterated that Nigeria can achieve its health objectives without undermining economic competitiveness. She noted that a well-calibrated policy environment would ensure sustainable industrial development, protect jobs, and strengthen supply chain resilience across the economy.

The Chamber concluded that a coordinated stakeholder-driven framework remains essential to achieving a tax system that balances fiscal policy, public health goals, and long-term economic stability.