Ghana is fast approaching the end of its International Monetary Fund (IMF) programme in mid-2026, and finance expert Professor Godfred Alufar Bokpin is warning that the country could be walking a fiscal tightrope.
Speaking at the Deloitte Economic Dialogue, Prof. Bokpin cautioned that the 2026 National Budget offers no clear plan for maintaining discipline once IMF oversight ends. “We know how Ghana behaves under the IMF programme and when we exit,” he said, recalling the country’s historical tendency to overspend and print money after external supervision is lifted.
The budget, he noted, doesn’t detail structural measures or domestic safeguards that could prevent fiscal slippage. He suggested solutions like a technical extension of IMF oversight, similar to other African nations, or robust domestic mechanisms to keep the economy on track.
Spending inefficiencies compound the risk. Only 55% of the GH¢33 billion CAPEX allocation in 2025 was executed, causing delays in infrastructure and slowing growth, as reported by Business & Financial Times (B&FT).
Prof. Bokpin’s caution isn’t new. In April 2025, at a Canada-Ghana Chamber of Commerce event, he warned that any exit from the IMF programme could be disastrous. “I find it difficult to see how Ghana will survive after the programme,” he said, noting that repayment of IMF loans starting in 2026 could put severe pressure on public finances.
He also linked recent sharp utility tariff hikes to IMF conditions, which were necessary for approval of the $360 million balance of payment support.
Beyond immediate fiscal concerns, Prof. Bokpin reflected on Ghana’s long-standing growth challenges. “Since 1992, every budget has talked about macroeconomic stability, which is a means to an end. Ghana’s economy is yet to take off, though it once outperformed Malaysia and Singapore,” he said.
He highlighted that while Malaysia never sought an IMF bailout, Ghana has turned to the IMF 17 times, spending as much as those countries but lagging far behind in growth.
For Prof. Bokpin, fiscal discipline is only meaningful if it lasts beyond the IMF programme. Without safeguards, the country risks falling back into historical patterns of overspending, losing the chance to turn stability into real growth, jobs, and long-term resilience.
