The International Monetary Fund kept Tunisia on its list of countries more than 18 months late in completing Article IV consultations, in an update through June 30, 2026. The country was 49 months late for its next scheduled consultation by mid-2026, according to an analysis by a professor of economics at the University of Carthage and a former adviser to Tunisian and UN bodies.
Consultations delayed since 2021
Tunisia held its last consultation with the Fund on February 17, 2021, and the next consultation was supposed to be completed no later than May 17, 2022. More than 5 years and 4 months had therefore passed without a new institutional assessment of the Tunisian economy by mid-2026, while the delay calculated from the consultation deadline had reached 49 months.
The policy of listing countries with delayed consultations dates back to 2012. The mechanism is based on a 12-month consultation cycle, followed by a 3-month grace period and then an additional delay of 18 months before a country is listed, bringing the cumulative delay to 33 months from the last consultation.
The analysis noted that Yemen left the list after resuming consultations in March 2026, despite being classified as a fragile country, while Venezuela resumed relations after 21 years and Syria after 16 years. The list also includes countries such as Russia, Belarus, Iran, Sudan, Afghanistan and Myanmar, amid conflicts, sanctions or complex political conditions.
Declining external financing and rising costs
The analysis linked the continued impasse in relations with the Fund to shrinking sources of external financing and a shift toward more costly alternatives. Algeria’s contribution to budget financing was limited to 1.5 billion dinars in 2022, while other financing programmed from Arab countries and African institutions did not materialize in subsequent finance laws.
In 2024, the state raised only 3.5 billion dinars out of a programmed total of 16.5 billion dinars. This included 328 million dinars in budget support, compared with 14.5 billion dinars originally programmed for that purpose, according to figures cited in the analysis.
Tunisia also turned to financing from institutions including the African Export-Import Bank, at an interest rate of about 6% and with a repayment period of no more than 7 years, including only 2 years of grace. The analysis said these terms raise debt-servicing costs and increase pressure on public finances.
Domestic borrowing and central-bank financing
Domestic borrowing more than tripled, rising from 6.8 billion dinars in 2021 to 23.2 billion dinars in 2024. Proceeds from 52-week Treasury bills increased from 194 million dinars in 2021 to 6179 million dinars in 2023, while the national bond loan raised 5100 million dinars in 2024.
Financing also came from the Central Bank of Tunisia, which provided 7 billion dinars in 2024 and the same amount in 2025, with 11 billion dinars programmed to cover the 2026 budget deficit. The author of the analysis said the state’s increased borrowing from banks and the central bank reduces liquidity available to finance private investment and adds to monetary pressures.
These developments coincided with shortages of essential goods, including sugar, coffee, several medicines and gasoline, as well as electricity and water outages. The analysis attributed the disruptions to a shortage of foreign currency needed to finance imports, alongside prioritizing external debt service and relying on tourism revenues and remittances from Tunisians abroad.
Wage and subsidy cuts
The wage bill’s share of gross domestic product fell from 15.1% in 2022 to 13.4% in 2024, while subsidy spending declined from 6.8% to 5.9% between 2024 and 2025. The analysis said Tunisia had thereby implemented contractionary measures similar to the fiscal adjustment policies the IMF had demanded, without receiving its concessional financing.
The analysis concluded that declining external financing and expanded domestic financing contributed to increased price pressures, higher production costs and greater sovereign risks, while weakening the state’s ability to finance investment and ensure regular supplies of imported goods.
