NAMA, NCAA Clash Over Ticket Levy Sharing Formula as Industry Watches
A quiet but deepening dispute between the Nigerian Airspace Management Agency (NAMA) and the Nigeria Civil Aviation Authority (NCAA) over the sharing of the statutory five per cent Ticket Sales Charge (TSC) is threatening to destabilise the fragile consensus that has long underpinned Nigeria’s aviation sector.
The flashpoint is a legislative proposal now before the National Assembly that seeks to increase NAMA’s share of the TSC, currently pegged at roughly 23 per cent, while reducing the NCAA’s allocation, which stands at approximately 56 per cent. Though the bill has yet to pass, it has already drawn sharp opposition from NCAA labour unions, who argue that slashing the regulator’s funding would compromise safety oversight.
Yet a growing number of aviation professionals and industry observers insist the current formula is fundamentally outdated, failing to reflect the immense operational and financial burden borne daily by NAMA, the country’s sole air navigation service provider.
The core question is deceptively simple: Does the existing revenue-sharing model accurately map the responsibilities and financial demands of each agency? Many experts say it does not.
Unlike the NCAA, which is primarily a certification, inspection, and compliance body, NAMA operates Nigeria’s air traffic infrastructure 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. Every aircraft that enters, exits, or traverses Nigerian airspace depends on NAMA’s systems, from flight-plan filing to final landing. Its work is largely invisible to passengers, but without it, commercial aviation would cease.
Modern air traffic management has evolved far beyond simple radio communication. Today, it relies on an intricate network of Communication, Navigation, and Surveillance (CNS) technologies; including Instrument Landing Systems, Doppler VOR, Distance Measuring Equipment, radar, Automatic Dependent Surveillance–Broadcast (ADS-B), VHF stations, and digital automation systems. Many of these are located in remote areas with poor public infrastructure, requiring constant maintenance, calibration, software upgrades, and imported spare parts, all in compliance with International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) standards.
Moreover, NAMA must power these installations, often with diesel generators where grid electricity is unavailable, and deploy technical staff across difficult terrain to ensure uninterrupted service.
Proponents of the legislative review argue that the aviation landscape has shifted dramatically since the current formula was devised. Satellite navigation, cybersecurity, performance-based navigation, and integrated automation have fundamentally transformed global air traffic management. Keeping pace demands capital investments running into billions of naira. Every delay in replacing obsolete systems widens the technological gap between Nigeria and its international peers—and, more critically, threatens the safety and reliability of domestic operations.
Unlike office-based regulators, NAMA cannot suspend operations due to funding shortfalls. Air traffic controllers, engineers, and communication specialists provide round-the-clock coverage, regardless of traffic volume. Since aircraft cannot operate without these services, advocates contend that NAMA’s continuous operational imperative alone justifies a funding reassessment.
Retired pilot and aviation stakeholder Mohammed Badamosi stressed that the debate must start with a realistic appraisal of each agency’s role. He noted that NAMA employs a far larger workforce, deployed across nearly every airport in the country, while the NCAA maintains relatively modest regional offices. Beyond personnel costs, NAMA is responsible for acquiring, installing, calibrating, and maintaining costly navigational equipment nationwide, all while adhering to ICAO mandates.
“NAMA trains air traffic controllers, engineers, and other technical staff because technology never stands still,” Badamosi said. “If Nigeria fails to keep up, we risk isolation from the global aviation community.”
He questioned the rationale behind a formula that gives the NCAA 56 per cent of the TSC while NAMA receives only 23 per cent, noting: “The revenue is largely generated from activities that NAMA’s operational environment makes possible. What objective criteria produced that split?”
The Joint Action Committee of the NCAA, opposing any reduction in its share, has proposed an alternative: commercialisation or partial privatisation of NAMA. Such a model, they argue, would allow the agency to attract private investment, international financing, bonds, and capital-market funding for major upgrades, reducing its dependence on statutory allocations and annual budgets.
Supporters of this approach point out that greater financial independence would accelerate deployment of next-generation surveillance systems, strengthen backup infrastructure, and circumvent budget-cycle delays. However, proponents of the National Assembly bill maintain that commercialisation is a long-term project. Until such structural reforms are realised, they insist, NAMA still needs stronger statutory support to meet its current obligations.
NAMA currently generates income from en-route charges, overflight charges, non-navigational services, and its statutory TSC share. Additional streams include charter flight services, air traffic services at state-owned airports, calibration services, obstacle evaluation, aeronautical information publications, and specialised pilgrimage operations. Yet many stakeholders agree these revenues fall short of the massive infrastructure renewal required. For them, increasing NAMA’s TSC share is not about favouring one agency, it is about preventing the slow degradation of the nation’s air navigation backbone.
The NCAA unions’ safety concerns are not without merit. The regulator’s certification, surveillance, and enforcement roles are indispensable. But analysts stress that the debate should not be framed as a zero-sum contest between the two agencies.
Retired Group Captain John Ojikutu, former commandant of Murtala Muhammed International Airport, urged a rational, data-driven review. He noted that while the Nigerian Meteorological Agency (NiMet) and the Nigerian Safety Investigation Bureau (NSIB) serve broader transportation sectors, the NCAA and the Nigerian College of Aviation Technology (NCAT) also generate revenues from their statutory mandates.
“We must be rational when sharing the TSC, Cargo Sales Charge, and Cargo Freight Charge,” Ojikutu said. “Consider personnel numbers, equipment spread, periodic maintenance, and mandatory calibrations. NCAA service charges are regulated by Nigerian Civil Aviation Regulations, while NAMA’s charges are guided by ICAO standards. Those distinctions matter.”
He also urged policymakers to prioritise industry growth over political expediency, recalling a 2013 IATA assignment in Rwanda, where he was astonished to learn that the country’s aviation security personnel had been trained by Nigeria’s Federal Airports Authority (FAAN). “That showed our potential,” he said. “We still have a lot to do. Political interference must be reduced. Let agencies have properly constituted management boards, so professionalism, not politics, drives decisions.”
Ojikutu expressed concern that Nigeria’s aviation industry has not progressed meaningfully over the past two decades. Despite an increase in airport numbers, passenger and cargo traffic have not matched projections, and airlines have struggled with short life spans.
“Having 13 ministers supervising aviation over 26 years is not a sign of sustainable growth,” he said. “The industry needs continuity, institutional stability, and long-term planning, not political turnover.”
As the National Assembly weighs the proposed legislation, the outcome will likely shape not just the financial fortunes of NAMA and the NCAA, but the broader trajectory of Nigeria’s aviation safety, infrastructure, and global competitiveness. The debate, at its core, is about whether Nigeria’s aviation funding model is fit for purpose, or whether it is time for a fundamental reset.