This study examines perceptions of fuel subsidy removal and its implications for road infrastructural development in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja. Fuel subsidy removal has remained a contentious public policy in Nigeria, often justified on the grounds of freeing fiscal resources for development, particularly infrastructure. The study aims to assess public and stakeholder perceptions of subsidy removal and evaluate whether such perceptions align with observed outcomes in road infrastructure development within the FCT. The study is anchored on Resource Allocation Theory (RAT). This theory illustrates how limited resources such as money, labor, and capital are spread across different sectors to enhance utility and efficiency. A mixed-methods approach was adopted, combining a structured questionnaire administered to residents, transport operators, construction professionals and fuel retailers with key informant interviews of relevant government officials. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics, while qualitative data were subjected to thematic analysis. Findings indicate that while a majority of respondents acknowledge the theoretical potential of subsidy removal to improve road infrastructure through increased government revenue, there is widespread skepticism regarding transparency, accountability, and equitable utilization of savings. Perceptions of marginal improvements in road networks exist, but these are often considered inadequate relative to the economic hardship induced by higher fuel prices. The study concludes that negative public perceptions are largely driven by governance and implementation deficits rather than the policy itself. It recommends enhanced fiscal transparency, earmarking of subsidy savings for visible road projects, and sustained public engagement to rebuild trust and improve policy acceptance.