The Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) has pushed back against claims that the Ghana Gold Board (GoldBod) incurred a GH¢1.7 billion loss, describing the figure as largely a bookkeeping entry rather than an actual depletion of state resources.
Professor Alexander Bilson Darku, Director of Research at the IEA, said the reported amount is a misinterpretation of standard accounting procedures arising from the Bank of Ghana’s (BoG) Domestic Gold Purchase Programme (DGPP). He made the remarks at the IEA’s assessment of the 2026 mid-year budget review under the theme: “From Stabilisation to Transformation: An Assessment of Ghana’s 2026 Mid-Year Budget Review” .
Revenue Mischaracterised as Loss
According to Prof. Darku, the GH¢1.7 billion figure is composed of three elements: service fees, assaying fees, and foreign-exchange valuation differences. He explained that the fees were payments made by the BoG to GoldBod for services rendered on behalf of the central bank and therefore constituted revenue to the state gold trader .
“I don’t understand why somebody would call revenue a loss,” Prof. Darku stated, challenging the narrative that has dominated public discourse .
The largest component, accounting for about 90 per cent of the reported figure, is primarily an exchange-rate valuation issue. GoldBod purchased gold on behalf of the BoG, with the proceeds converted from US dollars into cedis using the central bank’s reference exchange rate. Differences between the rate at purchase and the rate used to value proceeds can appear as a loss in the BoG’s books, but this does not necessarily represent a depletion of national wealth .
“It is merely a book accounting issue, and not a significant loss to the nation,” he said .
A Zero-Sum Balance Sheet at Government Level
Prof. Darku noted that transactions between the two public institutions should be viewed from a broader government perspective, since a cost recorded by one institution could simultaneously constitute revenue for another .
“To the Government, its monetary authority, which is the Central Bank, has made that loss. To the Government, its Gold Board has made that gain,” he explained, adding that the amounts could effectively wash out at the broader government level .
Critics Demand Accountability
The IEA’s clarification comes amid intense public debate over the DGPP’s financial performance. The Minority in Parliament, led by Alexander Afenyo-Markin, has insisted that the US$1.7 billion (approximately GH¢22 billion) loss reported by the IMF represents a real financial loss to the Republic regardless of which balance sheet it sits on .
The People’s Alliance for Governance and Accountability (PAGA) has also demanded full disclosure, arguing that the debate over which institution’s balance sheet carries the loss is a distraction. “Whether it appears in the accounts of GoldBod, the Bank of Ghana or another state institution, it remains a loss to Ghana,” the group stated .
GoldBod’s Transition to Independent Funding
The controversy comes as GoldBod transitions from being a buying agent for the BoG to an independent trader mobilising its own financing. The institution ceased receiving funds from the central bank for gold purchases in March 2026 and has since assumed responsibility for raising working capital required for its trading operations .
GoldBod Chief Executive Officer Sammy Gyamfi has disclosed that the institution has raised more than US$450 million from commercial banks and gold offtakers since March, without relying on BoG funding . Fifteen commercial banks have reportedly expressed interest in financing GoldBod’s gold purchases .
The new financing model, if properly managed, could deepen Ghana’s capital markets, Prof. Darku said, but requires transparency, sound financial management, and strong oversight .
Gold’s Role in Economic Stabilisation
Despite the accounting controversy, Prof. Darku acknowledged GoldBod’s contribution to the economy, particularly through increased gold exports, foreign-exchange inflows, and reserve accumulation, which he said had supported cedi appreciation and stability. The resulting exchange-rate stability could help reduce import costs, inflation, and interest rates while improving Ghana’s debt-to-GDP position .
However, he cautioned against excessive reliance on gold for exchange-rate stability and reserve accumulation, urging the Government to pursue broader export promotion, import substitution, and increased local ownership of natural resources .
A Call for Transformation
Prof. Darku commended the Government for achieving significant macroeconomic stabilisation but urged it to convert those gains into sustainable growth, employment, and economic transformation .
“The IEA thinks that the Government has done well to achieve some reasonable macroeconomic stability, and most of the macro-indicators have moved in the right direction within a relatively short period of time,” he said. “The question is whether we have the courage to consolidate those gains into lasting economic transformation that includes the lives of every Ghanaian” .
He called for stronger agricultural investment, employment-led growth, increased local processing of natural resources, reforms to the natural-resource regime, and the transformation of GoldBod from a gold trader into a strategic asset manager .
