On 28 October 2025, the House of Representatives passed the Nigerian Fintech Regulatory Commission Bill for a second reading. If it becomes law, the Fintech Regulatory Commission Bill would reshape how Nigeria licenses and supervises fintech companies. It points towards one central regulator rather than many.
Two new bodies
The Bill would create the Nigerian Fintech Regulatory Commission (NFRC) as the sole regulator for the sector. The NFRC would licence, regulate and supervise the financial technologies used to deliver financial services through digital devices. Its remit would also cover billing accuracy, service quality standards, technical specifications for imported fintech equipment, and consumer complaints.
The Bill would also set up a National Fintech Management Council. The Minister of Finance would chair it. Members would come from federal agencies and private sector bodies, including the CBN, the SEC, NITDA, the NDPC and the Fintech Association of Nigeria. The Council would advise the Minister on international policy for the sector. Notably, the Minister must respect the regulatory independence of the NFRC.
A single licence route
The Bill proposes two licence types: an Individual Licence and a Class Licence. The NFRC would decide which services fall into each category, and which are exempt. It would also set eligibility criteria and publish the process, which may involve auctions, tenders or competitive bidding.
Running a fintech system or offering a fintech service without a valid licence would carry a fine, imprisonment, or both. Equipment used for an unlicensed service would be forfeited on conviction.
The definition of fintech in the Bill is broad. Consequently, more entities may need their own licence. Operators that relied on a partner’s licence would likely have to apply in their own right. The NFRC would keep a public register of licences, conditions, variations, suspensions and transfers.
Pricing, contracts and competition
The Bill reaches into commercial terms as well. Individual Licensees would need the NFRC’s consent before setting or changing tariff rates, and they would have to publish approved tariffs. Pricing must follow principles of fairness, non-discrimination and cost orientation. Where the public interest demands it, the NFRC could set rates directly for non-competitive services.
Industry agreements would also require registration with the NFRC. That gives the regulator sight of market arrangements. On the other hand, it may slow contracting and delay transactions.
The NFRC would take on competition matters in the fintech market. In practice, it would likely need to work with the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission. Otherwise the two mandates could overlap, particularly around digital lending.
The open questions
The Bill leaves gaps worth watching. It does not explain how the NFRC would absorb the specialist mandates of the CBN and the SEC. Those bodies underpin financial stability and market integrity. We therefore expect continued collaboration between them and the NFRC, which could reintroduce the very multi-regulator oversight the Bill sets out to remove.
The Bill also says little about the ministries that oversee the digital infrastructure fintech runs on. That absence may create practical gaps at implementation.
Overall, a single licensing and supervision route could cut cost, time and duplication for operators. Much will depend on how the transition is handled.
Our Technology, Innovation and Fintech Practice reviews the Bill provision by provision and sets out what stakeholders should prepare for. To read the full newsletter, download it using the button below.
