Economic analyst Dr Frank Bannor has called for renewed scrutiny of losses linked to Ghana’s gold-purchasing programme after examining a 45-page report by the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
The report, he said, raises fresh questions about the financial structure of GoldBod’s operations and the costs paid under the programme.
Dr Bannor’s concerns centre on paragraph 14 on page 10 of the IMF document, which states that GoldBod substantially reduced its assay fees, service fees and other transaction costs during the first quarter of 2026.
According to Dr Bannor, that reduction lowered the reported level of losses from approximately 14.5% to 11.4% within the first quarter alone.
He said the change prompted a fundamental question about why the costs had initially been so high if they could be reduced so significantly over such a short period.
“If the costs could be reduced so substantially within such a short period, why were they so high in the first place?” he asked.
Dr Bannor argued that the figures could add weight to calls for GoldBod and the Bank of Ghana (BoG) to publish detailed explanations of the costs incurred through the gold-purchasing programme.
He said it was necessary to establish whether the earlier charges were unavoidable expenses or whether the design of the purchasing arrangements had contributed unnecessarily to the losses.
“From the foregoing, the loss seems to be an ‘engineered one’, rather than a genuine one,” he argued, while emphasising that the circumstances required further examination.
The economist said GoldBod and the BoG should set out the basis for the earlier assay fees, service charges and other transaction costs. He also called for an explanation of the factors that led to those charges being reduced later.
The issue, he maintained, should be considered as a matter of public financial management rather than being dismissed as a partisan political dispute.
Dr Bannor said Ghana’s gold resources carried significant national importance, making transparency and accountability essential in any system used to purchase and manage the country’s gold.
He called for the IMF report to be examined in greater detail alongside the transactions underlying the figures. That review, he said, should determine whether Ghana could have avoided a substantial part of the losses reported under the programme.
His comments follow the disclosure that cost reductions were made during the early months of 2026, a development he believes warrants closer attention from both policymakers and the institutions responsible for the programme.
Dr Bannor said the key issue was not only the size of the losses but also how they were generated, recorded and subsequently reduced. In his view, a clear account of the fees and charges would help establish whether the reported financial outcome reflected genuine operating costs.
He therefore urged GoldBod and the BoG to provide a full explanation of the transactions and the changes to the fee structure, arguing that the IMF report had raised questions that should not be left unanswered.
