EFCC Questions Insurance Commissioner Over Alleged ₦30bn Recapitalisation Fees

• EFCC invites NAICOM Commissioner for Insurance Olusegun Ayo Omosehin over allegations concerning fees charged during the insurance recapitalisation exercise.

• NICON Insurance and Nigeria Re allege that operators faced several charges, including a one per cent fee on fresh capital and ₦180 million verification charges.

• The inquiry comes after 43 insurance companies scaled the recapitalisation process, putting fresh focus on the transparency and administration of the exercise.

August 12, () — The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has invited the Commissioner for Insurance, Olusegun Ayo Omosehin, for questioning over allegations surrounding fees collected from insurance companies during the sector’s recapitalisation exercise.

The invitation followed a petition by NICON Insurance Plc and the Nigeria Reinsurance Corporation to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, raising concerns over the implementation of the recapitalisation programme by the National Insurance Commission (NAICOM).

Sources familiar with the development said the EFCC is expected to seek clarification on the legal basis for the disputed charges, approvals obtained for their collection and the utilisation of funds allegedly collected from insurance operators.

The development comes shortly after NAICOM’s recapitalisation exercise, which saw 43 insurance companies scale the capital verification process.

Insurers Challenge Recapitalisation Fees

In an open letter dated August 5, 2026, subsequently published in national newspapers, NICON Insurance and Nigeria Re alleged that insurance companies were subjected to several payments during the recapitalisation process.

The companies cited a one per cent charge on fresh capital raised, verification charges and additional registration fees, which they estimated could amount to more than ₦30 billion across the industry.

NICON and Nigeria Re specifically alleged that NAICOM demanded one per cent of the new capital being raised by insurance operators. In their case, they put the amount involved at about ₦500 million.

They described the demand as “illegal and unconstitutional”, arguing that the funds constituted shareholders’ capital and should not be transferred to the regulator.

The companies also alleged that they were required to pay ₦180 million as a recapitalisation verification fee.

According to the petitioners, they were informed that the payment would be used to engage consultants to verify their recapitalisation, although they questioned whether consultants had been engaged for that purpose.

The allegations remain claims by the petitioners and have not been established by the EFCC investigation.

Why the Inquiry Matters

NICON Insurance and Nigeria Re maintained that they had already demonstrated compliance with the recapitalisation requirements through capital injections and statutory deposits.

They said NICON Insurance had deposited ₦2.5 billion as its statutory deposit with the Central Bank of Nigeria, while Nigeria Re had a statutory deposit balance of ₦3.5 billion.

They further disclosed that ₦20 billion and ₦30 billion had been injected into NICON Insurance and Nigeria Re, respectively, through deposits for shares.

The companies consequently questioned the rationale for additional financial demands after providing capital to meet the new requirements.

The petitioners urged the Federal Government to investigate the charges and called for the refund of monies allegedly paid as recapitalisation fees, where found to have been improperly collected.

For the insurance industry, the significance of the EFCC inquiry extends beyond the two companies involved. The recapitalisation exercise was designed to strengthen insurers’ financial capacity and improve confidence in the sector.

With the process now largely concluded for the companies that met the requirements, the investigation could shift attention to how the exercise was administered, the legal basis for fees imposed on operators and the accountability surrounding funds collected during the process.

Until the EFCC completes its inquiry, however, the allegations against NAICOM and its officials remain unproven.