By Daniel Bampoe
A coalition of trade and business associations has rejected a new directive from the Ministry of Finance that will require all marine cargo imported into Ghana to be compulsorily insured with local insurance companies, warning that the policy will raise business costs and amount to excessive regulatory interference in private commercial transactions.
The directive, which is expected to take effect from February 1, 2026, is aimed at enforcing Section 222 of the Insurance Act, 2021 (Act 1061), which provides for the localisation of marine cargo insurance.
However, the Coalition of Concerned Exporters, Importers, Traders and Freight Forwarders, together with the Food and Beverages Association of Ghana (FABAG) and the Traders Advocacy Group Ghana (TAGG), insist that the measure will impose unnecessary financial pressure on importers and exporters at a time when businesses are already grappling with high operational costs.
In a statement signed by the Convener of the coalition, Michael Obiri-Adjei, the groups argued that marine cargo insurance is fundamentally a private commercial arrangement negotiated between buyers, sellers, and financiers, rather than a matter requiring compulsory state regulation.
They stressed that unlike motor third-party insurance or insurance policies tied to public commercial facilities, marine cargo insurance does not create direct public or third-party risk that would justify mandatory enforcement.
The coalition warned that the directive could create a de facto monopoly for local insurers, describing the move as anti-competitive and contrary to free-market principles.
According to the groups, forcing traders to insure cargo locally—even when foreign insurers may offer more competitive premiums and broader coverage—will increase the cost of doing business, with the burden ultimately transferred to consumers through higher prices of imported goods.
They also raised concerns about the practical realities of international shipping, explaining that most global trade transactions are carried out under Cost, Insurance and Freight (CIF) terms, where suppliers abroad already procure insurance as part of the shipping agreement.
Under such circumstances, the coalition argued, the government’s directive would lead to double insurance requirements, increasing costs without delivering any additional value or protection.
The statement further pointed out that in many credit-based trade arrangements, suppliers often retain ownership interests in goods until payment is completed, making it impractical for Ghanaian traders to dictate insurance terms independently.
While the coalition acknowledged recent fiscal measures by government that have helped stabilise the cedi and ease some economic pressures, they cautioned that introducing a mandatory marine insurance policy could reverse these gains by adding fresh costs to import processes.
The associations have therefore called on the Ministry of Finance to withdraw the directive ahead of its implementation and instead engage industry stakeholders in developing a more workable marine insurance framework that supports competitiveness, reduces business costs, and aligns with international trade practices.
