International Monetary Fund (IMF)President John Dramani Mahama has pledged that Ghana’s current bailout programme with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) will be the country’s last, expressing determination to break a cycle of repeated emergency support requests. Speaking at the University of Ghana’s 77th Annual New Year School and Conference, he said Ghana is on course to exit the IMF’s Extended Credit Facility around mid 2026.
“We’ll emerge from the extended credit facility with the IMF towards the middle of this year,” the President stated before academics, policymakers, and students. He emphasized his administration’s commitment to ensuring Ghana does not return to the Fund for emergency assistance again.
“It is my hope that this will be the very last time we will ever go for a bailout from that international monetary institution,” Mahama said, adding, “It must be the 17th and the last time that Ghana goes for a bailout from the IMF.” His reference to 17 previous programmes underscores Ghana’s long history of seeking IMF support during economic crises.
While ruling out future bailouts, the President clarified that Ghana would maintain a working relationship with the IMF through standard oversight mechanisms. “We’ll continue our collaboration with the IMF under Article 4 and other instruments,” he explained, referring to the Fund’s regular economic surveillance activities for member countries.
“But it will definitely be the last time we go on our knees to beg for a bailout,” Mahama stated. The language reflected frustration with Ghana’s recurring need for emergency financial support and suggested intentions to pursue economic policies that prevent future crises requiring IMF intervention.
The President used the platform to argue that Ghana’s long term economic stability must rest on structural change rather than repeated emergency interventions. According to him, sustainable economic strength cannot be built through fiscal restraint alone.
“Enduring economic strength cannot be achieved through austerity alone, but through production, inclusion and shared prosperity,” he stressed. This statement signals potential policy emphasis on economic transformation and productive capacity building rather than focusing primarily on deficit reduction and spending cuts.
Ghana entered its current IMF programme in 2022 amid severe economic distress including high inflation, currency depreciation, and unsustainable debt levels. The three billion US dollar Extended Credit Facility provided emergency financing while requiring structural reforms and fiscal consolidation measures.
Whether Ghana can avoid future IMF programmes depends on sustaining macroeconomic stability, building adequate foreign exchange reserves, maintaining fiscal discipline, and diversifying the economy beyond commodity exports. Previous administrations have made similar pledges about breaking the IMF cycle, though economic shocks have repeatedly forced returns to emergency support.
Article 4 consultations involve regular IMF assessments of member countries’ economic policies and performance. Maintaining this relationship without requiring bailout programmes would represent normal engagement practiced by countries with stable macroeconomic frameworks, as opposed to crisis driven emergency financing arrangements.
The pledge reflects recognition that repeated IMF programmes signal economic management failures and erode investor confidence. Breaking this pattern requires institutional reforms that ensure fiscal discipline persists across electoral cycles and economic planning extends beyond short term political considerations.
Critics may question whether structural changes needed to prevent future crises can be implemented within typical four year political cycles, particularly given pressures governments face to increase spending approaching elections. Success depends partly on building consensus across political parties about sustainable economic management.
Ghana’s experience mirrors challenges facing numerous African countries that oscillate between IMF programmes during crises and periods of relative stability. Breaking this cycle requires not just immediate reforms but fundamental changes in how governments manage resources, generate revenue, and respond to external shocks.
The President’s emphasis on production, inclusion, and shared prosperity suggests belief that previous IMF programmes focused excessively on austerity without sufficient attention to growth and equity. How his administration balances fiscal discipline with development spending will be closely monitored by both domestic stakeholders and international observers.