Ghana’s parliamentary Minority has challenged GoldBod to take full responsibility for a reported GHS 22 billion loss under the Domestic Gold Purchase Programme (DGPP). The Minority stated that GoldBod cannot claim economic gains from the programme while distancing itself from its significant financial costs. This direct confrontation highlights growing concerns over public funds and accountability within state-backed initiatives.
The Minority’s statement, issued on Wednesday, August 19, 2026, directly addressed GoldBod’s position. GoldBod had previously taken public credit for a 41 percent cedi appreciation and a rise in national reserves from US$8.9 billion to US$13 billion. It also claimed authorship for a fall in inflation, attributing these positive outcomes to the scaling up of the DGPP. The Minority argues that an institution claiming such benefits cannot then present itself as a passive agent when the programme incurs substantial costs.
This dispute fits into a broader narrative of economic oversight and fiscal prudence in Ghana. The country has been navigating complex economic challenges, including high inflation and currency depreciation, making the management of public funds critical. The reported GHS 22 billion loss, equivalent to US$1.7 billion, was cited from the International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) Sixth Country Report, No. 26/213, released in August 2026. Such a significant figure raises questions about the effectiveness and transparency of large-scale government programmes designed to bolster the economy.
The Minority’s concerns arose after a statement from GoldBod’s Chief Executive. The CEO did not dispute the IMF’s finding of the US$1.7 billion loss for 2025 but instead shifted blame regarding its cause. The Minority firmly reiterated that the issue involves public funds, regardless of which state balance sheet records the loss. This underscores the need for clear accountability when state-owned enterprises manage national assets and programmes.
Further scrutiny from the Minority focused on GoldBod’s reported operational surplus of GHS 907 million. The Caucus compared this surplus to the fees GoldBod earned from the DGPP. According to the GoldBod CEO, the institution accounted for approximately GHS 133 billion in advances in 2025. GoldBod received an assay fee of 0.258 percent and a service fee of 0.5 percent for its role. These figures suggest GoldBod earned around GHS 1 billion in fees from the programme. The Minority argued that the reported GHS 907 million operational surplus is therefore smaller than the fee income collected from a programme that resulted in a GHS 22 billion loss to the state. The Caucus concluded that without these agency fees, there would be no operational surplus to report, a key point the GoldBod CEO had not addressed.
The Minority also raised questions about the funding structure of the Ghana Accelerated National Reserves Accumulation Programme (GANRAP). Based on the GoldBod CEO’s account, responsibility for GANRAP implementation costs shifted from the Bank of Ghana to the Ministry of Finance in July 2026. From August 2026, GoldBod began seeking to raise funds independently. The Minority described these as “three funding arrangements in six months,” questioning the stability and sustainability of such a rapidly changing funding model. This instability could impact the programme's long-term viability and financial integrity. The Caucus maintains that the GHS 22 billion loss represents a direct financial loss to the Republic and requires full accounting. This ongoing debate will likely prompt further parliamentary discussions and public demand for transparency regarding the DGPP's financial performance.