By Collins Sarkodieh 
Kojo Oppong Nkrumah has criticized Sammy Gyamfi’s interpretation of the Bank of Ghana’s (BoG) financial losses, arguing that the central bank’s net equity actually declined by GH¢34.9 billion. The Ofoase Ayirebi MP maintains that attempting to separate “operating loss” from “total comprehensive loss” is a misleading tactic that obscures the true impact on Ghanaian taxpayers.
According to Oppong Nkrumah, the Bank of Ghana’s own balance sheet confirms the larger figure, settling the debate on page 16 of its financial statements. He contends that focusing on a smaller GH¢15 billion figure ignores the full reality of the bank’s declining financial position. This disagreement highlights a deep divide in how political leaders interpret the fiscal health of the nation’s primary financial regulator.
The lawmaker also pointed out that changes in accounting treatments under the current administration have made year-on-year comparisons difficult. By shifting certain gains and losses between different reporting sections, the transparency of the bank’s performance has become a point of contention. This has led to calls for a more holistic view of the accounts rather than cherry-picking isolated data points.
Why is the GH¢34.9 billion equity decline significant?
The GH¢34.9 billion decline in net equity represents the actual total loss absorbed by the Bank of Ghana’s balance sheet, impacting its overall financial strength. Kojo Oppong Nkrumah argues that this figure, rather than the GH¢15 billion mentioned by Sammy Gyamfi, is the only one that truly reflects the central bank’s current fiscal standing.
When a central bank’s equity drops significantly, it affects its ability to manage monetary policy and support the national currency effectively. Oppong Nkrumah asserts that the bank itself combines these figures in its reporting, meaning the debate over which number to use should already be settled. He believes that downplaying the scale of the loss does a disservice to public transparency and economic accountability.
By looking at the “total comprehensive loss,” analysts can see the full picture of the bank’s health, including exchange rate fluctuations and asset revaluations. Focusing only on “operating losses” can be like looking at a car’s engine while ignoring the fact that the wheels have fallen off. Both matter if you actually want to get somewhere.
How do accounting standards affect the Bank of Ghana’s reporting?
The Bank of Ghana’s recent accounts appear to have been prepared using internal accounting standards rather than a full application of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). Oppong Nkrumah referenced observations by audit firm KPMG to suggest that these reporting choices make the central bank’s true financial position harder for the public to decipher.
Accounting treatments can sometimes be used to move “bad news” from the main profit and loss statement into “other comprehensive income.” While this is technically allowed under certain frameworks, it can make a company or bank look healthier than it actually is on the surface. Oppong Nkrumah argues that a proper assessment requires looking at both sections together to avoid being misled by accounting gymnastics.
The shift in how gains and losses are categorized has made it nearly impossible for the average citizen to compare last year’s performance with this year’s. This complexity often fuels political “he-said, she-said” debates because both sides can find a specific number that supports their narrative, even if it doesn’t represent the whole truth.
Is a parliamentary investigation into the BoG losses necessary?
Kojo Oppong Nkrumah has openly challenged Sammy Gyamfi to support a parliamentary investigation into the Bank of Ghana’s financial health to settle the matter once and for all. He believes that a formal inquiry would provide the scrutiny needed to verify the reporting practices and the true extent of the GH¢34.9 billion equity decline.
A parliamentary probe would involve cross-examining the bank’s leadership and the auditors who signed off on the accounts. This process would aim to clarify why internal standards were used over IFRS and how the GH¢34.9 billion loss occurred. For the MP, this is about moving beyond Facebook posts and into a space of institutional accountability.
Investigations of this nature are common when state institutions record massive losses that could affect national stability. If the bank’s balance sheet is as settled as Oppong Nkrumah claims, a transparent investigation should serve to reassure investors and the public. If not, it will at least provide a roadmap for fixing the reporting discrepancies.
Factual Insights into Central Bank Losses and Reporting:
- Total Comprehensive Loss: This metric includes all changes in equity during a period except those resulting from investments by owners and distributions to owners.
- Net Equity Position: The value of an entity’s total assets minus its total liabilities; a negative or sharply declining position can signal financial distress.
- IFRS vs. Internal Standards: International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) provide a global language for business affairs so that company accounts are understandable and comparable across international boundaries.
- KPMG Role: As a major global audit firm, KPMG’s observations on accounting standards carry significant weight in financial and regulatory circles.
- BoG Mandate: The primary objective of the Bank of Ghana is to maintain stability in the general level of prices and support the general economic policy of the Government.
- GH¢34.9 Billion: This figure represents a massive portion of Ghana’s GDP, making the debate over its reporting a matter of high national importance.
What is the difference between Operating Loss and Comprehensive Loss?
Operating loss refers strictly to the deficit incurred from a bank’s day-to-day activities, such as interest expenses and administrative costs, while comprehensive loss includes everything else. Comprehensive loss captures “hidden” factors like the changing value of gold reserves or foreign currency holdings that don’t always show up in the daily “operating” tally.
The confusion arises because a bank might have a manageable operating loss but a catastrophic comprehensive loss due to a currency crash. Sammy Gyamfi’s focus on the GH¢15 billion figure likely targets the operating side, while Oppong Nkrumah insists that the comprehensive GH¢34.9 billion is the figure that actually hits the taxpayer’s pocket.
Understanding this distinction is vital for anyone following Ghanaian politics or economics. If you only look at one side of the ledger, you’re only getting half the story. The central bank’s balance sheet must eventually account for every pesewa, regardless of which accounting bucket it was temporarily placed in.
Seeking Transparency in Ghana’s Financial Heart
The dispute between Kojo Oppong Nkrumah and Sammy Gyamfi is more than just political bickering; it is a battle over the transparency of Ghana’s most important financial institution. Whether the loss is GH¢15 billion or GH¢34.9 billion, the scale of the central bank’s difficulties requires clear, honest communication with the public.
By calling for a parliamentary investigation and highlighting the nuances of accounting standards, Oppong Nkrumah is pushing for a higher level of financial literacy in political discourse. As the debate continues, the focus must remain on the long-term health of the Bank of Ghana and its ability to protect the Ghanaian Cedi and the savings of every citizen.
Also Read: BoG Board Member Responds to Critics Over 2025 Financials | Point of View