Economist Dr Bannor has strongly criticised the Bank of Ghana (BoG) over reported losses amounting to US$214 million linked to GoldBod operations, describing the situation as a national setback that demands full public accountability.
According to Dr Bannor, the funds allegedly lost could have been better utilised to address pressing social needs, including the employment of over 150,000 trained health workers currently unemployed and the payment of one-year salary arrears owed to teachers.
Reacting to a statement issued by the Bank of Ghana dismissing reports of losses as speculative, Dr Bannor questioned the credibility of the central bank’s position.
“Whoever issued that statement on behalf of the BoG should bow his head in shame,” he said. “Is the Bank of Ghana saying it was not aware of the IMF Fifth Review Report and its contents? Why did the BoG not raise objections during its final engagements with the IMF?”
He further demanded that both the Bank of Ghana and GoldBod provide clear explanations to Ghanaians over the reported losses.
“The BoG and GoldBod owe the country an explanation as to why Ghana has lost a whopping US$214 million. This money could have been used productively to employ health workers and pay teachers’ salaries,” he added.
The controversy follows the International Monetary Fund’s Fifth Review of Ghana’s IMF-supported programme, which flagged the reported losses as a potential downside risk to the country’s macroeconomic stabilisation efforts. The IMF attributed the issue to transactions involving artisanal and small-scale mining (ASM) dore gold, as well as so-called “GoldBod off-taker fees.”
In response, the Bank of Ghana clarified that reports suggesting it incurred losses from GoldBod operations are speculative. The central bank noted that Ghana successfully completed the Fifth Review on December 17, 2025, with the IMF commending the country for strong corrective measures following policy reform setbacks in 2024.
The BoG stated that the IMF report acknowledged significant improvements in Ghana’s macroeconomic environment, including higher-than-expected GDP growth, faster-than-projected inflation decline into the target range, and steady expansion of international reserves.
According to tentative BoG data as of mid-December 2025, Ghana’s international reserves could exceed US$13 billion by the end of 2025, boosting confidence in the economy.
Addressing concerns about the Domestic Gold Purchase Programme (DGPP), the Bank of Ghana said while the IMF flagged financial risks associated with the programme, these should be viewed within the context of its broader macroeconomic benefits. The DGPP, the BoG explained, has helped strengthen international reserves, stabilise the currency, and provide foreign exchange inflows without adding to public debt.
The BoG also highlighted the operational role of GoldBod as an aggregator, noting that it has been instrumental in channelling gold from the small-scale mining sector into the official market, in line with public policy objectives.
The central bank further pointed to reforms under its new foreign exchange operations framework, which the IMF identified as a critical step toward improving transparency, clarifying intervention triggers, and strengthening confidence in the foreign exchange market.
Acknowledging both the benefits and fiscal costs of the DGPP, the BoG disclosed that its Board has approved reforms aimed at improving pricing and operational efficiency. These reforms, scheduled to begin in January 2026, will focus on reducing intermediation fees, improving cost-efficiency, and ensuring competitive but sustainable gold buying prices.
Finally, the Bank of Ghana stressed that it is currently undergoing its annual external audit, cautioning that figures related to gold operation losses for 2025 remain unverified.
“All audited financial statements, including relevant disclosures, will be published next year in accordance with statutory requirements,” the BoG said.
The debate has intensified public calls for transparency and accountability in Ghana’s gold purchase and reserve management programmes, as stakeholders weigh their economic benefits against reported fiscal risks.
