The FCCPC has given traders and market stakeholders a one-month deadline to reduce inflated prices. The directive follows widespread complaints about exploitative pricing practices. Market stakeholders cite high transportation costs, multiple taxes, and other factors as challenges. The public remains skeptical about the government's ability to enforce the mandate.
The Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) has issued a one-month ultimatum to traders and market stakeholders to reduce the prices of goods that have been inflated through exploitative practices. Mr. Tunji Bello, the newly appointed Executive Vice Chairman of the FCCPC, announced this directive during a stakeholders' meeting in Abuja, aimed at addressing the issue of unreasonable pricing and unethical market practices.
Bello highlighted a glaring example where a Ninja blender, sold for $89 (N140,000) in Texas, was priced at N944,999 in a supermarket on Victoria Island, Lagos. He emphasized that such practices threaten economic stability and warned that the FCCPC would begin enforcing penalties, including fines and imprisonment, after the moratorium ends. Bello urged stakeholders to act in good faith and rectify their pricing strategies before the commission's enforcement actions begin in October.
Market stakeholders responded by pointing out several challenges contributing to high prices, such as increased transportation costs, multiple taxation, high import duties, and exorbitant interest rates. Many called for a broader approach, urging the government to address these underlying issues to facilitate a reduction in prices.
On social media, reactions were mixed, with many criticizing the government's directive. Users questioned how prices could be reduced when fundamental issues like fuel costs and exchange rates remain unaddressed. Some argued that the government should focus on reducing fuel prices and import duties first, as these directly impact transportation costs and, consequently, the prices of goods. Others expressed skepticism, viewing the FCCPC's directive as another empty threat without real enforcement power. The general sentiment reflected frustration with the government's handling of economic issues, with many doubting the feasibility of the FCCPC's ultimatum.
