Cite this article as: Apalowowa, O. D., Omosebi, A., Owoseni, G. D. E., & Afuye, B. P. (2025). Fiscal Deficits and Economic Growth in Nigeria: An Empirical Analysis of Policy Implications and Macroeconomic Stability. Zamfara International Journal of Humanities, 4(1), 138-153. www.doi.org/10.36349/zamijoh.2025.v04i01.014.
FISCAL
DEFICITS AND ECONOMIC GROWTH IN NIGERIA: AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF POLICY
IMPLICATIONS AND MACROECONOMIC STABILITY
APALOWOWA,
Olusola Daniel
Department
of Accounting
Federal Usniversity Oye Ekiti, Ekiti State, Nigeria
And
OMOSEBI,
Adeoye
Department
of Accounting
Adekunle Ajasin University Akungba-Akoko, Ondo State, Nigeria
And
OWOSENI,
Gbenga David, E
Department
of Business Administration
Adekunle Ajasin University Akungba-Akoko, Ondo
State, Nigeria
And
AFUYE,
Babajide Patrick
Department
of Economics
Ekiti State University, Ado Ekiti, Ekiti State, Nigeria
Abstract:
The sustained decline in government expenditures in social services and
infrastructure, and in investment in other vital sectors, has further
consolidated Nigeria's reliance on borrowing, which poses a major danger to
long-run economic sustainability. This study discusses the impact of fiscal
deficits and economic growth in Nigeria: An Empirical Analysis of policy
implications and macroeconomic stability. The study employed an ex-post facto
research design, the study relied on secondary data as data were derived from
the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) Statistical Bulletin (June, 2025), and the
World Bank for the period 1990 to 2024. Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) estimation
technique was used in the analysis of the effect of fiscal deficits and
economic growth in Nigeria. The results of the research showed that the revenue
from tax (TAXREV) and budget deficit (BD) had a significant effect on economic
growth in Nigeria. The inflation (INF) was also seen to have a high positive
correlation with RGDP to complement economic growth without having any
immediate adverse effects. However, the exchange rate (EXR) lacked statistical
significance on economic growth in Nigeria. The study determined that Nigeria's
economic performance is largely based on the honor of its fiscal and budgetary
policy. The study advised strategic deficit financing in infrastructure and
public service provision, improved tax administration to enhance revenue
mobilization, enhanced coordination between fiscal and monetary authorities,
and economy diversification to reduce vulnerability to external shocks. These
policy actions are required for long-term macroeconomic stability and
broad-based growth.
Keywords:
Fiscal policy, budget deficit, economic growth, inflation, rate of exchange and
tax revenue.
Introduction
Globally,
promoting healthy economic growth remains a prime policy agenda as nations aim
for inclusive development, fiscal sustainability, and sustainable investment.
For most nations, structural reforms, innovation, and macro-stability are the
priority issues to drive long-term growth. Nigeria is no different as it
struggles with persistent challenges of inflation, unemployment, and
infrastructure deficit (Amade & Oyigebe, 2024). Budget deficits should be
sealed through improved revenue mobilization, expenditure efficiency, and
fiscal transparency. Defeating fiscal imbalances will enhance investor
confidence and macroeconomic stability, therefore a better economic trajectory.
Hence, Nigeria's ability to effectively manage its budget deficits greatly
determines its path of sustainable and inclusive economic growth (Johnson,
2024). The pace of economic growth is the rise in the amount of goods and
services a country produces over time. Government fiscal policies are the ways
that the government uses taxes and spending to affect economic activity
(Makhanets, 2025).
Macroeconomic
stability is keeping inflation, unemployment, and budget deficits in check.
Sustainable economic development means growth that meets current requirements
without using up resources that will be needed in the future (Yuan & Zhang, 2024). Fighting budget deficits
helps keep the economy stable, boosts investor confidence, and improves the
fiscal balance (Danboyi & Kyari, 2025). All of these things help Nigeria's
economy grow in a healthy way. Nigeria is currently dealing with persistent
fiscal deficits, which hurt its growth potential. At the same time, Deposit
Money Banks (DMBs) are dealing with rising credit risk, limited public sector
lending, and unstable macroeconomic signals. This makes fiscal discipline a key
factor for better credit performance and long-term economic health.
Statement of the Problem
The
Nigeria the persistent and episodic budget deficit on the process of economic
growth slowdown of government spending on social services and infrastructure,
and reduced investment in priority sectors which resulted in increased recourse
to borrowing which is tantamount to long-run risk to economic stability. These
budgetary deficits not only prevent the government from undertaking change
policies at a macro level but also drain capacity in pursuit of stable and
inclusive economic growth (Aladejana et al., 2024). In addition to all these
budget challenges, Nigeria further experiences serious development issues such
as persistent poverty, extensive infrastructure degradation, and persistent
inflation and unemployment. Furthermore, the effect of the budget deficits
permeates the monetary arena, bleeding into investor confidence, employment
opportunity generation, and the nation's global competitiveness (Amade & Oyigebe, 2024). As Nigeria navigates the
intricate nexus between budget dynamics and economic growth, this statement of
the problem embodies the quality of the requirements in examining such effects.
The following research questions were addressed as follows: What is the
relationship between budget deficits and economic growth in Nigeria? How
effective are government fiscal policies in reducing budget deficits in
Nigeria? And in what ways does budget deficits contribute to macroeconomic
stability and healthy economic growth in Nigeria? The
broad objective of the study was to examine the impact of combating budget
deficits on the promotion of healthy economic growth in Nigeria. The study
specific objectives were to:
i.
Examine the
relationship between budget deficits and rate of economic growth in Nigeria.
ii.
Assess the
impact of government fiscal policies on reduction of budget deficits in
Nigeria.
iii.
Evaluate how
combating budget deficits influences macroeconomic stability and sustainable
economic development in Nigeria.
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Conceptual
Review
2.1.1 Healthy
Economic Growth
Healthy
economic growth is defined as “the sustainable and stable expansion of the
country productive capacity that results in rising living standards, increased
employment, and even growth in income distribution while avoiding distortions
in the economy (Amade & Oyigebe, 2024). A healthy economy was
defined by Elmendorf et al. (2025) as one that
exhibits continuous growth while achieving macroeconomic stability, social
inclusion and environmental sustainability. Okoruwa
and Imoke (2025) posit that a salient healthy economic growth translates to
long term national development of an economy that expands not just in numbers
but also in an inclusive, shock resistant, and structural transforming way.
Healthy economic growth is characterised as the sustained and stable
augmentation of a nation's productive potential, leading to improved living
standards, heightened employment, and equitable income distribution, while
circumventing economic inefficiencies (Muhammad, 2025; Chijuka & Izekor,
2025). Robust economic growth leads to sustained national development
characterised by numerical expansion as well as inclusivity, resilience to
shocks, and structural transformation (Alomani et al., 2025). Effective
policies must be executed in the domains of education, infrastructure, and
government, among others.
2.1.2 Combating
Budget Deficits
Anti-deficit
fighting is a fiscal policy of reducing the discrepancy between government
spending and income. Continuing budget deficitsresult in untenable debt loads,
inflation, and lack of confidence in the markets, ending these deficits through
structural change and fiscal responsibility, thus becomes a requirement for
macroeconomic stability, and for sound economic growth (Makhanets,
2025). Anti-deficit battling is a way for the government to spend less
money than it makes (Alomani et al., 2025). To achieve macroeconomic stability
and healthy economic growth, it is now necessary to end these deficits through
structural transformation and fiscal discipline. Yusuff and Abolaji (2020)
opine that anti-deficit battling is a fiscal policy aimed at diminishing the
gap between government expenditure and revenue. Implement taxation, reduce
expenditures, and use fiscal discipline to re-establish budgetary control.
Persistent budget deficits lead to unsustainable debt burdens, inflation, and
diminished market confidence. Addressing these imbalances through structural
reform and fiscal prudence is essential for macroeconomic stability and
sustainable economic growth (Ali et al., 2018).
2.1.3 Rate of
Economic Growth
Economic growth
is defined as the annual growth rate of a country’s goods and services or gross
domestic product (GDP). Economic growth, generally defined as a high or
increasing level of economic activity, is one important determinant of how well
an economy is performing (Elmendorf et al., 2025). High growth rate is
associated with more economic activity, growth in employment opportunities, and
increased income; whereas low or negative growth rate would reflect stagnation
or a recession (Okoruwa & Imoke, 2025). Chijuka and
Izekor (2025) postulate that economic growth, typically characterised by
elevated or rising levels of economic activity, is a significant indicator of
an economy's performance which is influenced by investment, productivity, and
government policy.
2.1.4 Inflation
Generally
speaking, inflation is the overall increase in the prices of goods and services
over time, which causes a reduction in purchasing power (Ufomadu & Ettah,
2025). Inflation means that currency is worth less, and depending on levels and
causes of inflation that are detrimental to an economy. Moderate inflation is
the response of healthy demand and economic activity while high and unstable
inflation distorts investment, discourages saving and hits the poor hardest
(Umaru et al., 2021). Inflation control is an important thing to get right for
any economy. Inflation is when the overall prices of goods and services rise
over a period of time, causing purchasing power to be reduced (Ferreira et al.,
2025). Moderate inflation reflects strong demand and revenues connected with
healthy economic behaviour, whereas high and unstable inflation distorts
investment decisions, discourages savings, and hits the poor hardest but
controlling inflation is a necessary condition for a stable economy (Alomani et
al., 2025).
2.1.5 Tax
Revenue
The term
taxation could be defined as government revenue collected from individuals and
businesses to support public services and infrastructure. Isenmila et al.
(2021) articulate that taxation is both a source of public funds and a means of
economic regulation and wealth redistribution. Tax revenue is income that is
obtained by the government in form of application of taxes on individuals,
businesses and any other entity that consists of direct taxes which include the
personal income tax, the corporate tax, and the property tax, the indirect
taxes are the value-added tax (VAT), excise duties and customs duties (Anyanwu
& Chukwu, 2025). Tax revenue forms a very important aspect of the public
finance since it gives the government the revenue that it requires to fund the
government activities such as financing of government services, financing of
infrastructure development, financing the social programs and the
administrative sector (Chijuka & Izekor (2025). Tax revenue may become an
input parameter applied in measuring fiscal capacity and efficiency in
economical analysis. With proper application, an increase in tax revenue foster
economic activity and improve equality and sustainable development has taxation
form an essential part for fiscal sustainability and supports public
investments but there must be a balance because taxation could impede
productivity and compliance (Osunkwo, 2024). In facing budget deificits,
maximize tax collection is one of the most important measures to enhance
development in a sustainable manner because taxation is the primary source of
public revenue and a means of economic regulation and wealth redistribution. In
terms of fighting budget deficits “an efficient tax collection process is of
crucial importance in promoting sustainable development”.
2.2 Theoretical Underpinning
2.2.1
Endogenous Growth Theory
Endogenous
Growth Theory emerged in the 1980’s as an alternative to the neoclassical
growth model by economists including Paul Romer (1986) and Robert Lucas (1988).
Endogenous Growth Theory focuses on the internal processes of an economy as
major contributors to economic growth rather than depending solely on external
forces and diminishing returns to capital. The post-Keynesian economics
emphasizes aggregate demand, uncertainty, and historical time in explaining
economic outcomes because endogenous Growth of fiscal theory emphasizes on the
importance of counter-cyclical fiscal policy, full employment, and public
investment for stabilizing economies and sustainable growth (Yusuff &
Abolaji, 2020). The theory assumes that R&D, education and technology
investments have positive spillovers and increasing returns which allows for
sustained economic long run growth rather than being constrained by diminishing
marginal productivity (Danboyi & Kyari, 2025). The theory has been
criticized for having little empirical clarity; exaggerating the
link/correlation between government, policy, and growth by not sufficiently
explaining external shocks, trade, or natural resources particularly in the
case of developing countries (Yuan & Zhang, 2024). The strength of the
theory is that it emphasizes root-causes of growth in the long run, such as
innovation or development of human capital that are crucial both for
development but also for policies (Hans, 2023). A clear weakness is the lack of
applicability in contexts of low institutional capacity, where things like
corruption, political instability and poor infrastructure do not allow for
these internal mechanisms to work and generate growth (Osunkwo, 2024). The
theory is relevant to Nigeria because it emphasizes the need for a sensible
investment in education, technology and institutions that are capable of
generating self-sustaining healthy economic growth while avoiding dependent
growth based on external financing or resources.
2.2.2 Fiscal
Sustainability Theory
The idea of
Fiscal Sustainability was developed and formalized in the 1990’s by economists
such as Blanchard, Chouraqui, Hagemann and Sartor (1990) within the OECD
framework. This theory was subsequently expanded into the literature for
purposes of projecting the long-term finances (Marín-Rodríguez et al., 2023).
In short, according to Fiscal Sustainability Theory taxing, spending and
borrowing should be undertaken so that the government can meet its current and
future debt obligations without having to make economically disruptive
corrections that changes the prove to be unsustainable (Eguchi & Hatano,
2023). The theory assumes that governments desire intertemporal budget
constraints, according to the hypothesis. In other words, avoid a fiscal crisis
the present value of the public debt must equal the present value of the future
primary budget surpluses (Okoruwa & Imoke, 2025). Critics of the theory
but, say its practice is inflexible and does not account for the needs of
social development of impoverished nations (Makhanets 2025). Perhaps it is also
ignoring the short-run advantages of fiscal stimulus especially when the
economy is in recession, and it often takes for granted the perfection of the
political and institutional set up. The theory is strength by encourages fiscal
discipline and planning, and eschews debt overhang, which are the foundations
for macroeconomic stability and confidence by investors (Ali et al., 2018). The
big problem is that fiscal sustainability theory discourages people from heavily
investing in public expenditure and social expenditure during times of fiscal
restraint (Igbal et al., 2017). Fiscal sustainability theory affects and
promotes economic growth that is non-inclusive as is the case with a developing
country like Nigeria (Amade & Oyigebe, 2024). The significance of fiscal
sustainability theory to Nigeria stems from the fact that chronic budget
deficits and rising public debt destabilize the economy.
2.3 Empirical
Review
Makhanets
(2025) formulates the prediction of the budget deficit in Ukraine with the help
of exponential advection and acceleration analysis techniques. The State
Statistics Service of Ukraine and the Ministry of Finance of Ukraine provide
statistics that should be used. His investigation indicated that this may be
fatal to international economic activity as Ukraine is being overtaken with a
budget deficit having acted in the wrong ways based on erroneous and
unsystematic processes.
In a study done
by OKoruwa and Imoke (2025), on the effects of budget reforms and budget
deficits on economic growth in Nigeria over the period of 1981-2023.The study
employs Vector error correction model as the method to analyze time series
data. Findings from their Vector error correction model analysis revealed that
budget deficit, budget reform has a significant impact on the economic growth
of Nigeria.
Anyanwu and
Chukwu (2025) examined how the Nigerian economy expanded between 1995 and 2022
in dealing with the effect of some relevant aspects of tax revenue on growth.
The information used was obtained through Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN)
statistical bulletin, the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS) as well as the
National Bureau of Statistics. In their research they have used the Auto
Regressive Distributed Lag (ARDL) method in order to estimate their model. As
their key discoveries of the study stipulate the value-added tax (VAT), and
company income tax (CIT) have a considerable and positive effect on the rate of
growth of the Nigerian economy (GDPGr) in the long run and short run
respectively, whereas petroleum profit tax (PPT) made a positive and significant
impact only in the long run. On the other hand, the capital gains discussing
(CGT) positively influenced the GDPGr both in the short run and the long run
respectively but the effect was not significant.
Muhammad (2025)
investigated the dependency of the revenue components and growth of the economy
in Nigeria using the annual data of 1994-2022. It examines how major factors
like oil prices (OILP), inflation (INF), petroleum profit tax (PPT),
value-added tax (VAT), other taxes (OTH) and total tax revenue (TTX) influence
the growth of GDP, using an Autoregressive Distributed Lag (ARDL) model to
study the short and the long-term effects. The results obtained indicate that
there is a high positive correlation between the two variables after breaming
oil prices and economic growth and its value is 0.110. Conversely, the
coefficient on a total tax revenue (TTX) is -0.001 with a negative long-run
impact on an increase of GDP.
Chijuka and
Izekor (2025) analyzes the role played by tax revenue drivers Petroleum Profit
Tax (PPT), Customs and Excise Duties (CED) and a composite value-added tax and
Corporate Income Tax (CIT) in consideration of the economic growth in Nigeria
between the years of 2015 and 2023. Secondary data were utilized using
regression measures to investigate the correlation between the tax revenue and
the Real GDP Growth using a quantitative research design. The outcomes indicate
that each of the analyzed components of taxation has a positive and significant
effect on economic growth, although the contribution that PPT made is the
highest, then CED, and the VAT, CIT composite index.
Osunkwo (2025)
analysis examined the influence of industrialization on Teconomic in Nigeria in
the context of the contribution of industrial sector, foreign direct investment
(FDI) as well as interest rates (INTR). The study used secondary data of central
bank of Nigeria (CBN) and national bureau of statistics collected between 1981
to 2024 to analyze relationship between three key variables Real Gross Domestic
Product (RGDP) with OLS model as econometric model to determine whether
industrial output (INDS), FDI and INTR moderately stated to influence the
economic growth.
Nwandu and
Ubochi-Nwankwo (2024) investigated whether or not causal relationship exists
between budget deficit and economic growth in Nigeria by adopting the ADF unit
root test and ARDL model, Granger Causality test and the short-run diagnostics
and stability using annual time series data covering 37 years from 1981 to
2022.Their findings admits that, budget deficit have positive and significant
impact on economic growth in Nigeria. Therefore, the government budget deficit
has no crowding out effect on investment. The study also discloses that budget
deficit has negative and insignificant impact on private investment in Nigeria.
Aladejana et
al. (2024) analyze the effects of budget deficits on sustainable economic
growth on Nigeria. The analysis applied by using the Ordinary Least Squares
(OLS) method of estimation, and the Johansen co-integration test based on the
data between 1990 and 2022 retrieved in the World Bank Development indicators
and Central Bank Nigeria Statistical bulletin to establish the findings that
there is a long-term relationship between the variables at the significance
level of 5 percent. They identified their findings to indicate that the growth
of the economy is greatly inhibited by the increase in budget deficits.
Furthermore, the exchange rate and RGDP are negatively correlated, and the
relationship between inflation and RGDP is positive and significant enough
leading to the conclusion that the highest inflation rates and higher rates of
economic performance are linked.
Umaru, et al.
(2021) studied the connection between the economy and budget deficit of Nigeria
on the annual data in the period of 1981-2019 using linear and nonlinear
methods. The results of the ARDL analysis indicated that budget deficit is a
positive factor stimulating the output growth. The non-linear TAR model agreed
with this and it expressed that the deficit will encourage growth as long as it
does not exceed 2.02 percent of GDP.
Yusuff and
Abolaji (2020) evaluated the economic growth in Nigeria throughout 1981-2016
and discovered that there exists a long-run cointegrating relationship among
the budget deficit, the interest rates, and the home savings with the budget
deficit and the home savings being positive short-run growth contributions.
Ali et al. (2018) examined the impact of
deficit financing on Nigeria's economic growth using annual data from 1981 to
2016. Their ARDL analysis found that domestic deficit financing significantly
negatively affects national output (real GDP). Similarly, Iqbal et al. (2017)
analyzed data from 1972 to 2014 to assess the relationship between fiscal
deficit and economic growth in Pakistan using the ARDL/bound testing approach.
They found a significant negative impact of fiscal deficits on output, linking
it to a deficit-to-GDP ratio above the 5.57% threshold. They recommended
keeping the ratio below this level. However, their analysis lacked
post-estimation tests to confirm model robustness.
3.0 METHODOLOGY
The study
employed an ex-post facto research design, which was to be the most
appropriate due to its non-interventionist characteristic which allowed the
researcher to analyze past data retrospectively without interfering with any of
the independent variables because it is particularly well-suited design for
macroeconomic research using secondary data, such as fiscal and monetary
aggregates which cannot be experimentally controlled. However, one limitation
of the ex-post facto design is that it can never establish causal relationships
because confounding variables and cannot be fully accounted for despite
statistical controls. Theoretical and empirical literature were applied to
guide model specification, particularly drawing on the formulation set out by Aladejana
et al. (2024), which defined economic growth as a function of budget deficit
(BD), inflation (INF), and exchange rate (EXR). In line with macroeconomic
theory, the current research added tax revenue (TAXREV) as another explanatory
variable to extend the model. Rationale for the incorporation of tax revenue is
due to the fact that fiscal mobilization is the central impetus in allocating
government capacity for productive investment, debt sustainability, and budget
deficit management. Including TAXREV expands the model's explanatory power and
provides a more detailed picture of how deficit financing and tax revenues
combine to influence real economic activity. This is mathematically written as:
RGDP =
f (BD, EXR,
INF) ....................... (i)
where;
RGDP = real gross domestic product;
BD=budget deficit;
EXR=exchange rate; INF=inflation
rate.
The explicit
estimable econometric, equation
(i) is written as:
RGDPt=β0+β1BDt+ β2EXRt+β3INFt+ 𝜇t ..........
(ii)
However, this
study incorporated tax revenue as an important variable and curbed budget
deficit own to captured as a better variable to save government from
overspending. The model was remodified thus:
RGDP=
f (BD,
REX, INF, .......................
(iii)
Where:
BD = Budget Deficit;
REX= Rate of
Exchange
INF= Inflation
Rate.
TAXREV = Tax
Revenue
The explicit
estimable econometric, equation
(i) is written as:
RGDPt = β0+β1BDt+ β2REXt+β3INFt+ β4 TAXREVt + 𝜇t .............. (iv)
𝜇 = error term. Other variables remained
as earlier defined.
β0 is the is the intercept.
β1-β4
are coefficients to be estimated.
The
a priori expectations are: It’s
expected that β1>0: and β2<0, β3<0, β4<0.
Table 1:
Measurement of Variables
|
Variables |
Mnemonic |
Type
of Variable |
Description |
Measurement |
Source |
|
Real
Gross Domestic Product |
RGDP |
Dependent |
Real
GDP measures the total value of all goods and services produced within a
country, adjusted for inflation. It reflects the true growth of an economy
over time |
GDP Deflator
divided by Nominal GDP×100 |
Saleh
(2025); Aladejana et al. (2024). |
|
Budget
Deficits |
BD |
Independent |
A budget deficit occurs when a government's total expenditures exceed
its total revenue (excluding borrowings) within a fiscal year. |
Total
Government Expenditure minus total government income. |
Okoruwa
and Imoke (2025); Umaru et al. (2021). |
|
Rate
of Exchange |
REX |
The rate of exchange, the value at which one currency can be exllchanged
for another. |
Domestic
Currency over Foreign currency |
Yusuff
and Abolaji (2020). |
|
|
Inflation |
INF |
Inflation
is the rate at which the general level of prices for goods and services
rises, leading to a decrease in purchasing power. |
CPIcurrent
minus CPIprevous divided by CPIprevious |
Alomani
et al. (2025); Ferreira et al. (2025). |
|
|
Tax
Revenue |
TAXREV |
Taxation
refers to the compulsory financial charge or levy imposed by a government on
individuals, businesses, or goods to fund public services and infrastructure |
Tax
Rate x Tax Base |
Isenmila
et al. (2021); Yusuff and Abolaji. (2020). |
Source:
Authors Computation (2025).
While Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) estimation is a
standard technique in econometrics, its use may be doubtful when variables have
different orders of integration, particularly where there are some variables
that are I(1) (non-stationary) and some are I(0) (stationary). Under such
circumstances, OLS may provide spurious regression results. To this end, the
study applied the Autoregressive Distributed Lag (ARDL) bounds testing
approach, which is more suitable when dealing with a mixture of I(0) and I(1) series
and does not strictly require variables to be at the same stationarity level.
Moreover, ARDL accounts for both short-run and long-run dynamics, as well as
offers a more realistic perspective on the temporal relationship between budget
variables and economic growth. selecting 1990 to 2024 as the time period
ensures both longitudinal depth and contemporaneity. Provisional 2024 data were
appended where available, taken from reliable sources (CBN and World Bank), to
ensure the analysis has access to the most up-to-date fiscal trends. A
flowchart and schematic diagram of methodology is recommended in future
presentations of the study to enhance conceptual clarity and adhere to the
order of logic of the model from theoretical framework to data sourcing, model
estimation, and results interpretation.
4.0 DATA ANALYSIS
4.1Descriptive Statistics
Table 1 represents the descriptive statistics. The
mean and the standard deviation of Real GDP (RGDP) are 4326.44/billion and
20029.24/billion, respectively: thus, quite variable growth in the level of
economic activity. BD indicates a negative mean value of -5,217.69 billion and
is negatively skewed (1.3431), which indicates constant fiscal imbalances and
high deficit cases. High skewness levels (1.8242 and 1.3351 respectively) of
Exchange Rate (EXR) and Inflation (INF) suggests skewed (right curve) distribution,
which has extreme values every now and then. Tax Revenue (TAXREV) is also
skewed positively and levels of variability are moderate (std. dev. = 29.40).
The result of the Jarque-Bera test shows that on the basis of the based on
p-value except RGDP (p = 0.0630), all the other variables are significantly not
normally distributed (p < 0.05). The non-normality can lead to issues of
non-normality on regressions. In general, the values point to a high level of
dispersion and asymmetry, which requires the application of powerful
econometric methods in the further investigation.
Table 1: Descriptive Statistics
|
Statistics |
RGDP |
BD |
EXR |
INF |
TAXREV |
|
|
|
Mean |
4326.44 |
-5217.69 |
109.31 |
105.24 |
86.32 |
|
|
|
Median |
41703.51 |
-813.82 |
100.50 |
66.44 |
76.46 |
|
|
|
Maximum |
84452.47 |
13646.71 |
273.01 |
430.09 |
360.31 |
|
|
|
Minimum |
24361.65 |
-7404.65 |
49.78 |
3.41 |
3.521 |
|
|
|
Std.Dev. |
20029.24 |
5244.65 |
48.82 |
109.02 |
29.40 |
|
|
|
Skewness |
0.1420 |
1.3431 |
1.8242 |
1.3351 |
1.4613 |
|
|
|
Kurtosis |
1.4398 |
4.3256 |
6.3362 |
3.9854 |
4.5232 |
|
|
|
Jarque-Bera |
30.7453 |
12.6325 |
33.4906 |
11.0321 |
35.1579 |
|
|
|
Prob |
0.0630 |
0.0000 |
0.0000 |
0.0021 |
0.0043 |
|
|
|
Sum |
1351125. |
-12364.52 |
3607.37 |
3465.53 |
4614.32 |
|
|
|
Sum Sq. Dev |
1.364 |
6.512 |
6421.80 |
37051.20 |
4851.14 |
|
|
|
Obs |
35 |
35 |
35 |
35 |
35 |
|
Source: Authors’ Computation (2025)
4.2 Combating budget deficits and promoting healthy economic
growth in Nigeria
Table
2 provides regression results of determining the effects of the identified
macroeconomic factors on the Real Gross Domestic Product (RGDP) in Nigeria. The
R-squared value is 0.96, which implies that those independent variables
explained 96 percent of the variability in RGDP. Budget Deficit (BD) is
significantly and positively related by coefficient of 1.6930 (p = 0.00)
indicating that more deficit spending could boost economic growth, perhaps
because the government has more to invest in. Another notable positive value is
inflation (INF) with 0.8326 (p = 0.00) indicate that the moderately high
inflation is a part of an economic process. There is a positive and substantial
connection between TAXREV and RGDP (1.7562, p = 0.00), indicating that fiscal
mobilization plays an imperative part in stimulating growth. On the other hand,
exchange rate fluctuation, which is denoted by EXR, is not statistically
significant due to (p-value= 0.20), which means that there is no relationship
between jumps in the exchange rates and the growth of a nation in the short
period. According to the Durbin-Watson Critical Statistic (1.2421) indicated
that the residuals have slight positive autocorrelation surveillance and the
results corroborate to this effect that the budgetary and fiscal measures are
very critical in terms of propelling healthy economic growth within the Nigeria
economy.
Table 2: Regression Analysis on combating budget
deficits and promoting healthy economic growth in Nigeria
Dependent Variable:
Real Gross Domestic
Product (RGDP)
Variable Coefficient Std. Error Prob.**
C 2.4604
1.4241 0.00
BD 1.6930
0.1324 0.00**
EXR 0.6842
1.3715 0.20
INF 0.8326
2.2521 0.00**
TAXREV
1.7562 0.5421 0.00
R-squared:0.96
Durbin-Watson stat: 1.2421 Significant at 5% (**) levels.
Source: Authors’ Compilation (2025)
4.3
Co-Integration Test
In the table 3 below, the result indicates that there are 1 or more
co-integrating equations (with RGDP first (Trace= 84.34 > 47.86, p = 0.00))
hence significant long-term relationship. There is also high likelihood of
co-integration of BD (Trace = 37.88, p = 0.00) implies the permanency regarding
fiscal imbalances effects on economic performance. In the same manner, when
comparing the communities of the selected cities and the overall average, EXR,
INF, and TAXREV are statistically significant at 5 parameter level, having
their values of Trace surpassing the critical values and values of p-values
being less than 0.05. The implication of these findings is that the variables
move in the same direction of one another even though they are susceptible to
short-run variations and this is why, there must be consistency and
co-ordination of macroeconomic policies. The co-integration confirms additional
modeling that involves error correction modeling in an attempt to portray the
short-term dynamics and the long-term stability.
Table 3: Johansen Co-Integration Test Result
|
Variables |
Trace Statistic |
0.05 Critical
Value |
Hypothesized No of CE(S) |
Prob* |
|
RGDP |
84.34 |
47.86 |
None * |
0.00 |
|
BD |
37.88 |
29.79 |
At most
1 ** |
0.00 |
|
EXR |
20.08 |
15.49 |
At most
2 ** |
0.01 |
|
INF |
8.58 |
3.84 |
At most
3 ** |
0.00 |
|
TAXREV |
9.62 |
4.39 |
At most
4 ** |
0.00 |
** indicates statistically significant at 0.05 level of significance
Source: Authors’ Computation (2025)
4.4 Unit Root Test
Table 4 provides the outcome of the unit root test
verification to obtain the stationarity of the variables of the study. The test
was performed at level and first difference and it read 5 % critical value. In
the case of Real GDP (RGDP), the variable is non-stationary at level (Test stat
= 0.06 < -2.95) but turns out to be stationary after first difference (Test
stat = -2.92), making it be integrated of order one, I(1). Budget Deficit (BD)
and Exchange Rate (EXR) exhibited a similar trend as well, since they are
non-stationary in level but stationary in the first normal difference, which
means that they are I(1) processes. Inflation (INF) is however found to be
stationary at level (Test stat = -4.45 < -2.96) or I(0) which implies the
same, but the results are contradicting in the case of Tax Revenue (TAX). At
level, TAXREV, though having a positive test statistic (0. 91) which is above
the critical value, the notion of a reporting error is seen to hold. In sum,
the combination of both I(0) and I(1) variables makes it reasonable to apply
Johansen co-integration model and error correction to the study of the long-run
and short-run relationship between the variables.
Table 4: Results of Unit Root Test at level and 1st and 2Nd deference
|
Variable |
Test Statistic |
5% critical Value |
Remark |
S/N |
Test Statistic |
5% critical value |
Remark |
S/N |
|
RGDP |
0.06 |
-2.95 |
I(0) |
NS |
-2.92 |
-2.32 |
I(1) |
S |
|
BD |
0.82 |
-2.96 |
I(0) |
NS |
-5.15 |
-2.96 |
I(1) |
S |
|
EXR |
-2.58 |
-2.94 |
I(0) |
NS |
-5.33 |
-2.96 |
I(1) |
S |
|
INF |
-4.45 |
-2.96 |
I(0) |
NS |
1.50 |
2.94 |
I(0) |
S |
|
TAX |
0.91 |
-2.95 |
I(0) |
S |
1.49 |
2.96 |
I(0) |
NS |
Source: Authors’ Computation (2025)
4.5 Correlation Analysis
The coefficients of correlation between the
four chosen macroeconomic variables are shown in Table 5. The Inflation (INF)
and Tax Revenue (TAXREV) show a strong positive correlation with Real GDP
(RGDP) at 0.89 and 0.75 respectively and thus economic growth is perceived to
rise with increasing inflation and mobilization through taxes. Budget Deficit
(BD) has a little bit of correlation (0.46) with RGDP and (0.67) with INF,
which means that there is some fiscal impact on the growth and prices. The
relationship between Exchange Rate (EXR) and RGDP fluor is weak (0.09) and is
not associated to each other. There are also moderate positive correlations
between TAXREV and BD (0.53) as well as EXR (0.45) suggesting that there are
fiscal and external sector interactions. On the whole, the outcomes demonstrate
interdependence of the variables in general and among RGDP, INF, and TAXREV in
particular.
Table 5: Correlation Analysis
|
|
RGDP |
BD |
EXR |
INF |
TAXREV |
|
RGDP |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
BD |
0.46 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
EXR |
0.09 |
0.25 |
1 |
|
|
|
INF |
0.89 |
0.67 |
0.20 |
1 |
|
|
TAXREV |
0.75 |
0.53 |
0.45 |
0.53 |
1 |
Source: Authors’ Compilation (2025)
4.6
Normality test for Residual
Figure 1 displays the histogram that was used to examine the normality of residuals of regression model. The histogram shape, combined with the normal distribution superimposed curve, gives a visual impression of how normal the distribution of residuals is. The residuals, in the given case, seem to be symmetrically distributed about the mean, and a bell-shaped curve can be formed that indicates that the assumption of normality can be considered satisfied reasonably well. It also means that the regression model that has been specified is good and the likelihood of the estimation being efficient and unbiased is high. The result is a normal distribution of residuals that increases the confidence of hypothesis tests and confidence intervals found in the model.
Discussion of Findings
The result of the regression analysis indicates that
budgetary and fiscal policies also play a bigger role in shaping economic
growth of Nigeria. Budget deficit has significant effect on real GDP and it is
significant which implies that when government spends more the economy may open
up at least through infrastructure creation and State investments. It is also
shown that there is a significant positive correlation between inflation and
economic development and this perhaps is an indication of the causality of
low-level inflation as a by-product of an output with good economic growth.
Also, tax revenue is a powerful, important driver of growth, and hence there is
a need to an effective fiscal mobilization and use. Nevertheless, there is no
significant change in the exchange rate which implies that the change of
exchange rates might not affect the domestic output as such in the period under
consideration. This study findings concur with the findings made in study of
OKoruwa and Imoke (2025) on the relationship between budget reforms, budget
deficit and economic growth in the context of Nigeria, their study showed that
budget deficit, budget reform influences the economic growth of Nigeria
bigtime. The study done by Chijuka and Izekor (2025) discusses how Petroleum
Profit Tax (PPT), Customs and Excise Duties (CED), and Value Added Tax (VAT)
and Corporate Income Tax (CIT) composite indexes affect economic growth in
Nigeria, their study findings have a positive and significant effect on
economic growth, where the greatest effect is observed in the case of the PPT.
Furthermore, the study by Osunkwo (2025) examined the role of industrialization
on Teconomic growth in Nigeria, and their findings are as follows; industrial
output has a major positive effect on economic growth, the coefficient is found
to be 8.33, which implies that Teconomic growth increases by every single
increase in industrial output. And differed with the findings made in the study
of Nwandu and Ubochi-Nwankwo (2024) investigated whether or not causal
relationship exists between budget deficit and economic growth in Nigeria,
their findings admit that government budget deficit has no crowding out effect
on investment. Their study also discloses that budget deficit has negative and
insignificant impact on private investment in Nigeria. The rationale of the
results of the study is based on the economic and policy environment prevailing
in Nigeria over the period involved and also on the theoretical and empirical
insight of the interaction of fiscal and monetary variables with the economic
growth.
The evidence of this study is that while budget
deficits stimulate growth through public expenditure and infrastructure along
the lines of Nigeria's 2020 COVID-19 stimulus indeed, inflation positively
correlated with growth, perhaps indicating demand-led growth, although
inflation rising too high is always a risk such deficits must be applied within
a sustainable debt framework to incur long-term fiscal strains. Good tax
collection performance highlights the requirement for domestic resource
mobilization. However, the negligible pass-through of changes in exchange rate
suggests that there is limited transmission to real output in the study period,
possibly because of structural rigidities in Nigeria's economy.
Conclusion
The study comes to the conclusion that the budgetary
and fiscal policies are significant in determining the economic growth of
Nigeria. In particular, the real GDP level is greatly enhanced by more
government spending via budget deficits, which makes the concept of enhancing
the economic activity via federal investment a feasible one. Moderate inflation
has positive implications on the growth of the economy implying that it is
linked with the growth of output. Moreover, tax income becomes an essential and
a powerful mechanism to increase the growth implying the priority of good
mobilization fiscal strategies. Nonetheless, the effect of change in exchange
rate on the real GDP seems ineffective implying that exchange rate changes may
have no direct connection to the domestic economy output during the time frame
under consideration.
Recommendations
The government is advised to sustain a strategic and well focus deficit financing whereby the borrowed funds could be put in productive investments like infrastructural sector, health sector and education so as to facilitate sustainable economic growth; There should be an improvement of tax administration that will help in boosting the generation of tax and proper utilization of collected taxes in developmental activities; The government should ensure proper coordination of fiscal and monetary policies so as to create consistency in attainment of macroeconomic stability and growth objectives; and the government should move towards diversification of the Nigeria economy and stop over dependence on imported items because this would enhancing the effectiveness of exchange rate policies in influencing domestic output.
References
Aladejana, S. A., Alabi, J. A.,
Olaosebikan, O. I., & Joseph, F. A. (2024). Addressing budget deficits to
promote sustainable economic growth in Nigeria. International Journal of
Innovative Research in Accounting and Sustainability, 9(4), 15-26.
Ali, A. A., Shina, O. S. & Tunde, A. (2018). The
nexus between budget deficit and inflation in the Nigerian economy. Research
Journal of Finance and Accounting, 3(10),78-92.
Alomani, G., Kayid, M., & Abd
El-Aal, M. F. (2025). Global inflation forecasting and Uncertainty Assessment:
Comparing ARIMA with advanced machine learning. Journal of Radiation
Research and Applied Sciences, 18(2), 101402.
Amade, M. A., & Oyigebe, P. L. (2024). Budget
deficit and economic growth in Nigeria: an empirical analysis. International
Journal of Health Economics and Policy, 9(1), 1-18.
Anyanwu, U. N., &
Chukwu, O. (2025). Impact of selected tax revenue components on the growth rate of the
Nigerian economy (1995-2022): An ARDL Analysis. African Journal of
Management and Business Research, 19(1), 312-333.
Blanchard, O., Chouraqui, J. C., Hagemann, R. P.,
& Sartor, N. (1990). The sustainability of fiscal policy: New answers to
an old question. OECD Economic Studies, 15, 7-36.
Chijuka, I. M., & Izekor, A. O. (2025). Tax
revenue and economic growth in Nigeria (2015-2023): An empirical
analysis. Global Journal of Accounting, 11(1), 36-48.
Danboyi, E. E., & Kyari,
G. V. (2025).
An empirical study of the endogenous determinants of economic growth in Nigeria
(1986–2022). Journal of Arid Zone Economy, 5(6), 65-76.
Eguchi, M., & Hatano, T.
(2023).
What is fiscal sustainability? Transversality condition, Domar condition, the
fiscal theory of the price level. Public Policy Review, 19(3),
1-29.
Elmendorf, D. W., Hubbard, R. G., & Liscow, Z.
(2025). Policies to Reduce Federal Budget Deficits by Increasing
Economic Growth (No. w33834). National Bureau of Economic Research.
Ferreira, V., Abreu, A., & Louçã,
F. (2025). The rise and fall of inflation in the Euro Area (2021-2024): A
heterodox perspective. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 72,
103-110.
Hans, V. (2023). Investigating Endogenous
Factors in Economics. Investigating Endogenous Factors in Economics
(November 6, 2023).
Iqbal, N., Din, M. & Ghani, E. (2017). The fiscal
deficit and economic growth in Pakistan: New evidence. The Lahore Journal of
Economics, 22, 53-72.
Isenmila, P. A., Adegbayibi, A.
T., & Apalowowa, O. D. (2021). Tax regulations and tax compliance in Ondo
State, Nigeria. Global Journal of
Accounting, 7(2), 125-136.
Johnson, C. L. (2025). Advancing the federal budget
debate: The debt, deficits, budgeting rules and practices. Public
Budgeting & Finance, 45(1), https://doi.org/10.1111/pbaf.12396
Lucas, R. E. (1988). On the mechanics of economic
development. Journal of Monetary Economics, 22(1), 3-42.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3932(88)90168-7
Makhanets, L. (2025). Forecasting the budget
deficit as a method of ensuring the financial security of the State. European
Journal of Sustainable Development, 14(2), 193-193.
Marín-Rodríguez, N. J., Gonzalez-Ruiz, J.
D., & Botero, S. (2023). Assessing fiscal sustainability in the landscape
of economics research. Economies, 11(12), 1-19; https://doi.org/10.3390/economies11120300.
Muhammad, I. S. (2025). Role of revenue
contributions to economic growth in Nigeria: 1994-2022. Journal of
Management Science and Career Development, 7(7), 115-132. DOI: https://doi.org/10.70382/sjmscd.v7i7.018
Nwandu, R., & Ubochi-Nwankwo, C. T. (2024).
Macroeconomic effects of budget deficit on Nigeria’s economic growth. Madonna
University journal of Social Sciences, 1(1), 16-16.
Okoruwa, D. E., & Imoke, I. D. (2025). Budget
deficit, budget reform and economic growth in Nigeria. Asian Journal o
Economics, Finance and Management, 7(1), 36-48.
Osunkwo, F. O. C. (2024). Transforming Nigeria:
Impact of Industrialization on Economic Growth (1981-2024).
Romer, P. M. (1986). Increasing returns and long-run
growth. Journal of Political Economy, 94(5), 1002-1037. https://doi.org/10.1086/261420
Saleh, G. (2025). New computational table
of physical parameters for the moments of beginning, inflation, present, and
end of the universe 2025. Saleh Theory, 29.
Ufomadu, H. A. C., & Ettah, B. E. (2025).
Assessment of economic drivers of population growth in Nigeria. African
Journal of Commercial Studies, 6(3), 81-89.
Umaru, A. D., Aliero, H. M. & Abubakar, M. (2021)
Budget deficit and economic growth in Nigeria, CBN Economic and Financial
Review (EFR), 59(2), 23-41
Yuan, F., & Zhang, P. (2024). Are natural
resources, sustainable growth and entrepreneurship matter endogenous growth
theory? The strategic role of technical progress. Resources Policy, 96,
105189.
Yusuff, S.A. & Abolaji, A. (2020). The impact of budget deficit on
economic growth in an emerging market: An application of the ARDL technique. Asian
Development Policy Review, 8(4), 351-361.

0 Comments