A new technical report prepared for the Ghana Gold Board (GoldBod) has found that the programme has delivered substantial macroeconomic benefits to Ghana far exceeding the reported trading losses of the Bank of Ghana (BoG) by drastically reducing gold smuggling, boosting non-debt foreign exchange inflows, and strengthening overall macroeconomic stability.
The report, titled “Evaluating the Macroeconomic Effects of the Ghana Gold Board (GoldBod)”, was authored by Prof. Festus Ebo Turkson and Peter Junior Dotse of the Department of Economics, University of Ghana, and Prof. Agyapomaa Gyeke-Dako of the University of Ghana Business School. It was dated 4 January 2026 and presented to GoldBod.
According to the authors, the study was conducted using “conservative assumptions and verifiable data” and compared the quantifiable benefits of GoldBod, particularly reduced smuggling and non-debt FX inflows with the reported trading losses of the Bank of Ghana.
One of the report’s most striking findings is the scale of gold smuggling that has been curtailed since the introduction of GoldBod.
The authors note that recorded artisanal and small-scale mining (ASM) gold exports rose sharply from 63.6 tonnes in 2024 to 103.0 tonnes in 2025, an increase of 39.4 tonnes.
“The incremental 39.4 tonnes is plausibly gold previously lost to smuggling that has now been formalised,” the report stated.
Using a conservative valuation of US$96.5 million per tonne, the researchers estimate that this translated into US$3.8 billion in additional foreign exchange entering Ghana’s formal system in just one year.
The report directly challenges public narratives around the Bank of Ghana’s reported trading losses.
It references the International Monetary Fund’s report of a US$214 million BoG trading loss (approximately GHS 2.4 billion) and compares it with the foreign exchange gains from GoldBod.
“A direct comparison shows a Benefit–Cost Ratio of approximately 18:1,” the report revealed.
“Formalising just 2.2 tonnes of gold would offset the reported loss. Complete formalisation is about 18 times this threshold.”
Major savings from non-debt FX inflows
Beyond smuggling reduction, the report highlights the importance of non-debt foreign exchange inflows, describing them as one of GoldBod’s most valuable contributions.
GoldBod-enabled ASM exports in 2025 alone amounted to US$10.8 billion. The report argues that if Ghana had borrowed externally to mobilise an equivalent amount of foreign exchange, the country would have incurred annual interest costs of between US$756 million and US$1.08 billion, assuming borrowing rates of 7–10 per cent.
Even when focusing only on the reduction in smuggling, the report estimates:
“Avoided annual interest costs are between US$266 million and US$380 million.”
Crucially, the authors stress that “these are recurring annual benefits, not one-off gains.”
The report credits GoldBod-supported FX inflows with contributing to several positive macroeconomic outcomes, including:
- Higher international reserves of approximately US$11–12 billion,
- Exchange-rate stabilisation and appreciation relative to IMF budget assumptions,
- Lower domestic cost of external debt service estimated at about GHS 6.2 billion,
- A reduced import bill valuation of roughly GHS 50.6 billion (January–October 2025), and
- Disinflation, driven by reduced exchange-rate pass-through.
Why the BoG ‘loss’ is misunderstood
The authors argue strongly that the BoG’s reported trading loss has been widely misinterpreted. “Most of the reported BoG loss reflects accounting translation effects, not cash losses,” the report clarified.
It explained that while gold is purchased at near-retail exchange rates to discourage smuggling, the resulting FX inflows must be booked at the lower interbank rate, creating what appears to be a loss on paper.
The report estimates that the true economic cost, covering fees, purity losses, and offtake discounts is around 2.5 per cent of gold value, which is “far lower than headline loss figures.”
GoldBod as a stabilisation tool, not a profit venture
Looking ahead, the authors make a strong case for how GoldBod should be viewed by policymakers and the public.
“GoldBod should be regarded not as a profit-driven trading entity, but as a tool for macroeconomic stabilisation and formalisation,” the report stated.
Based on the evidence reviewed, the researchers conclude: “GoldBod has delivered substantial, measurable macroeconomic benefits that exceed its narrow accounting costs. The programme converts illicit gold flows into formal FX, strengthens Ghana’s external position, reduces reliance on costly borrowing, and supports macroeconomic stability.”
They recommend sustaining price competitiveness to prevent a return of smuggling, improving transparency in BoG reporting, strengthening governance and oversight, and treating GoldBod’s policy costs as a quasi-fiscal expense funded through the national budget.
Overall, the report describes GoldBod as “a high-return policy intervention for Ghana’s economy,” underscoring its central role in stabilising the cedi, easing inflationary pressures, and reinforcing confidence in the country’s external sector.
