In a recent opinion piece titled “A Strong Cedi No One Feels”, IMANI Ghana argues that the Ghana cedi’s current appreciation is artificial, unsupported by real fundamentals, and largely irrelevant to the lived experience of importers and traders. The paper claims that the Bank of Ghana (BoG) is manipulating the interbank FX rate to manufacture stability, while businesses continue to face dollar shortages, punitive customs duties, and informal forex premiums.
But this narrative not only misrepresents the facts, but it also ignores the deeper institutional progress, market behaviour, and macroeconomic data that explain Ghana’s FX performance. The evidence shows that the cedi’s appreciation is real, the fundamentals are stronger than in years past, and recent forex pressures reflect psychological market responses and structural transition issues, not policy distortion.
A Measurable Recovery
As of June 2025, the cedi has appreciated by 42.6% year-to-date, a dramatic reversal of the 19.2% depreciation recorded in 2024. This gain is not cosmetic; it coincides with a solid macroeconomic turnaround. Ghana posted a trade surplus of US$5.6 billion in the first half of 2025, up from US$1.4 billion in H1 2024, with exports rising by 55.1% (largely from gold and cocoa) against a 9.3% rise in imports. The current account improved to US$3.4 billion, and gross reserves climbed to US$11.1 billion, covering 4.8 months of imports. These outcomes are structural and real, not fiscal or FX sleights of hand.
Importantly, these gains have translated into declining inflation, from 23.8% in December 2024 to 13.7% in June 2025, and a rebound in business and consumer confidence. The Composite Index of Economic Activity (CIEA) grew 4.4% year-on-year in May 2025. GDP expanded by 5.3% in Q1 2025, led by agriculture and services. These improvements confirm that the FX market is reacting to credible fiscal and monetary signals, not fabricated optics.
Why Then the Perception of Scarcity?
IMANI is correct that some traders still struggle to access dollars at the official window. However, this challenge is not due to manipulation or dollar shortages at the central bank. Instead, it reflects behavioural dynamics, structural inefficiencies in the banking system, and informal market practices.
One of the key insights from recent engagements between the BoG and the Ghana Union of Traders Association (GUTA) is that many traders are now frontloading their dollar demand. During the cedi’s decline to nearly GHS17/USD in late 2023, several projects stalled due to uncertainty and cost escalations. Now that the cedi has appreciated and converged around GHS10.3/USD, traders and contractors, fearing a relapse, are rushing to complete projects and, in doing so, are stockpiling FX they may not immediately need. This panic-induced behaviour is placing artificial pressure on the FX market, despite there being sufficient supply.
In fact, in recent weeks, the total amount of dollars made available by the BoG through FX auctions to commercial banks has not even been fully taken up. This contradicts the claim of a structurally broken market. The demand-supply mismatch is more temporal and psychological than institutional.
Informality and Documentation
Another driver of perceived scarcity is the structural informality in trade finance. As confirmed during the GUTA-BoG meeting, traders who lack proper documentation for their imports often bypass the formal banking system and resort to parallel market operators or informal RMB transfers through unlicensed channels. In Kumasi and other major markets, this is widespread. Moreover, some traders have hit their Advance Payment thresholds and have not submitted documentation for past shipments, leading banks to reject new FX requests.
These are not consequences of BoG suppression of market rates; they are the result of legitimate banking compliance and Know Your Customer (KYC) obligations. Indeed, BoG has clarified that banks can apply for waivers where clients demonstrate a clean record and documented transactions. The FX framework is accommodating and responsible.
The Customs Duty Disconnect: Clarified by BoG’s New Shipping Guidelines
IMANI Ghana raises a common concern among importers, that Customs duties are calculated using exchange rates higher than the official interbank rate, effectively denying businesses the full benefit of the cedi’s recent appreciation. While this is a valid frustration, it has been misattributed to the Bank of Ghana (BoG). In reality, customs valuation rates are determined by the Ghana Revenue Authority (GRA), which typically relies on a backwards-looking average of exchange rates and may include buffers to protect revenue projections. This is a fiscal calibration mechanism, not a monetary policy tool.
However, in response to widespread complaints about opaque FX charges and billing practices by shipping lines, the BoG has taken proactive steps to enhance transparency and enforce alignment with official FX benchmarks. In July 2025, the Bank issued a set of mandatory guidelines to all shipping lines and logistics service providers, requiring:
• Public disclosure of applicable exchange rates on websites or at customer service points.
• Use of FX rates benchmarked to the interbank market, as published by the BoG.
• Full disclosure of applied exchange rates and related amounts in invoices.
• Mechanisms for dispute resolution through the Ghana Shippers Authority.
• Sanctions for non-compliance under the Foreign Exchange Act, 2006 (Act 723).
This intervention ensures that traders and importers are no longer subjected to hidden FX markups by shipping and logistics companies. It also reinforces the principle that currency appreciation should reflect in actual trade costs, particularly for port-related services.
To be clear, BoG does not set customs duty rates. Those remain under the jurisdiction of the GRA. But BoG’s new regulatory action ensures that FX-related charges at the point of cargo invoicing are accurate, transparent, and market-reflective, thereby narrowing the perception gap between official FX rates and the real cost of doing business at the ports.
In sum, while correcting the Customs valuation methodology still requires broader fiscal coordination and tax system reform, BoG has acted decisively within its mandate to stabilise the currency, enforce transparency, and protect traders from pricing distortions. The distinction between monetary responsibility and fiscal discretion remains important, but it is equally important to recognise that the BoG is not sitting idle. It is actively aligning market practices with macroeconomic realities.
Structural Reform Is Happening
IMANI rightly calls for structural reforms to enhance competitiveness and reduce Ghana’s reliance on unprocessed commodity exports. But the notion that the cedi’s current strength lacks foundation is contradicted by the latest macro data. The economy is growing, inflation is falling, investor inflows are increasing, and the central bank is accumulating reserves through legitimate trade channels, not by suppressing demand.
Moreover, BoG is not avoiding reform. It has transitioned to competitive FX auctions, publishes auction results, and is developing a formal FX intervention policy framework. FX governance is becoming more rules-based and transparent, not less. Ghana’s FX market is not distorted; it is maturing through a structured and phased evolution.
Real Strength Comes From Credibility and Confidence
The Bank of Ghana’s FX policy today reflects a blend of discipline, responsiveness, and market engagement. It does not chase artificial pegs or suppress price signals. It manages volatility, anchors expectations, and creates a conducive environment for macroeconomic stabilisation and private sector recovery.
Rather than dismissing the cedi’s strength as an illusion, it is more accurate to understand it as a recovery supported by economic fundamentals, improved investor sentiment, responsible liquidity management, and better export performance.
If anything, the current FX pressures come not from shortage, but from the confidence-induced behaviour of market actors eager to lock in gains. This is not the symptom of a broken system. It is the mark of a market rediscovering stability.
Conclusion
Yes, challenges remain. Informality, tax inefficiencies, and customs misalignments must be addressed. But to argue that the cedi’s strength is “not felt” ignores the improved inflation outlook, the return of investment flows, the easing of project delays, and the restoration of macroeconomic confidence.
The cedi is not being propped up, it is being rebuilt.
And for the first time in years, Ghanaians are completing the projects they once paused, not because they were forced to, but because they believe the economy is finding its feet again. That, too, is a signal worth feeling.
