China supplied Nigeria’s traders, now it’s coming for their customers

For decades, the China-Nigeria trading relationship rested on a simple division of labour.

Chinese manufacturers made the goods. Nigerian traders travelled to China, negotiated with suppliers, shipped containers home and distributed the products through markets across the country.

That model created thousands of businesses around importing, wholesaling and retailing Chinese-made goods.

But the division is becoming less clear.

Protesting traders at the Lagos International Trade Fair Complex this week have exposed a growing concern among Nigerian merchants: Chinese businesses that once supplied them are moving closer to the final consumer.

Traders alleged that some Chinese businesses had rented shops, established warehouses and were selling directly to consumers, sometimes at prices Nigerian retailers could not match.

The allegations have not been independently verified, and Chinese representatives have not responded to the claims.

But the dispute is bigger than one market. It points to a shift in the economics of one of Nigeria’s most important trading relationships.

BusinessDay reported in March that traders at Ariaria International Market in Aba opposed plans to introduce Chinese retailers into a reconstructed shopping plaza. They feared direct retailing of imported finished goods would undermine businesses built around importing and distributing those products.

A follow-up report showed the Chinese retailers were not given spaces in the plaza as of September.

The Lagos protest therefore looks less like an isolated dispute and more like an emerging fault line.

China’s growing weight in Nigeria’s import economy provides the backdrop. Chinese exports to Nigeria reached a record $24.9 billion in 2025, up from $18.9 billion in 2024, according to BusinessDay.

A Nigerian importer absorbs shipping, customs, financing, warehousing, and inventory costs, as well as exchange-rate risk, before selling to another trader or consumer.

A foreign business that sources directly from manufacturers, imports in bulk and operates its own warehouses and retail outlets can potentially remove several of those layers.

That is the structural advantage Nigerian traders fear.

Read also: Food, transport, housing drive inflation despite slower price growth

Kenya has already lived this fight

Nigeria is not the first African market to confront this Chinese puzzle.

Kenya provides a useful case study.

In February 2023, more than 1,000 Kenyan traders protested in Nairobi after China Square, a Chinese-owned retail outlet, attracted customers with prices traders said were roughly 50 per cent below what they could offer. Reuters reported that everyday goods, such as curtains, were selling at about half the price of comparable products offered by local traders.

The traders captured their objection on a protest placard: “The Chinese cannot be importers, retailers, wholesalers and hawkers.”

The question behind the slogan was simple: if the same foreign business can manufacture, import, distribute, wholesale and retail, what part of the supply chain remains for the local trader?

William Ruto, Kenya’s president, made that distinction on September 2, 2026, ordering enforcement against foreigners operating in small-scale businesses. He said foreign investment should create jobs and expand production rather than compete with Kenyans in small retail businesses, amid concerns about Chinese traders.

There are competing interests at play.

Retail markets should be handed by nationals- CPPE

Muda Yusuf, chief executive officer of the Centre for the Promotion of Private Enterprise, argued that the retail end of the economy, particularly in the open markets, should be left exclusively for the nationals of the country.

“Foreigners coming into our marketplaces, taking stores, and competing with our retailers, should not be acceptable. That is an unfair competition because our retailers and distributors are actually distributors to many of these Chinese manufacturers, and in the value chain, there has to be division of labor.

“We have to define the roles of those who are foreigners and those who are nationals. Just like our multinationals, they don’t produce and at the same time go to the open markets to open retail stores. That is not fair. That is completely emasculating those who are indigenous people in the distributive trade sector. And the distributive trade sector is one of the largest employers of labor. I think second only to agriculture. It is also a major contributor to our GDP.

“So this is not a sector that we should allow foreigners to take over or foreigners to go and be competing with those that they have already even appointed as their distributors. That is selfishness and we should not allow that. They should be content with being producers.”

Consumers benefit when businesses compete on price. China Square’s popularity demonstrated that clearly: shoppers went where they could find cheaper goods and greater variety.

But price competition is not necessarily neutral when one side controls much more of the supply chain.

A small Nigerian retailer buying from a Chinese wholesaler competes with a business that may have direct manufacturer relationships, greater purchasing power, local warehousing and direct access to consumers.

The Nigerian trader is effectively competing with a supplier.

That makes the issue an economic-policy question rather than simply a nationalist one.

There is a meaningful difference between a Chinese company establishing a factory in Nigeria and employing Nigerians, and a Chinese wholesaler importing finished goods and competing directly with thousands of Nigerian retailers.

The first can deepen local production. The second can reduce local distribution.

That distinction matters because Nigerian traders do more than sell goods. They provide financing, warehousing, transport and access to consumers across a fragmented market.

Removing them does not automatically make the economy more efficient. It may simply transfer the margin and control from Nigerian businesses to foreign-owned businesses.

The margin is the real battle

Nigeria’s expanding trade with China makes it more urgent.

With Chinese exports to Nigeria reaching a record $24.9 billion in 2025, even a relatively small shift in who controls the distribution of those goods could affect thousands of Nigerian businesses.

The old model allowed Nigerian traders to capture value between the factory and the consumer.

The emerging model threatens to remove that layer.

That is the real story behind the Lagos protest.

The traders are not simply fighting over shops at the Trade Fair Complex. They are fighting over their place in a supply chain that has historically depended on them.

Kenya shows what can happen next. A Chinese retailer can face protests, close temporarily and still return with a larger footprint because consumers respond to lower prices and a model built around direct sourcing.

Nigeria therefore faces a choice about the architecture of its retail economy.

It can leave competition to determine which businesses survive, regardless of who owns the supply chain. Or it can establish clearer boundaries around small-scale retail while encouraging foreign investors to move further upstream into manufacturing, local production, technology and logistics.

Either way, the China-Nigeria commercial relationship is changing.

China is no longer simply the factory at the beginning of Nigeria’s supply chain.

Chinese businesses are seeking a position closer to the customer.