By Benadeta Mwaura - Reporter
Kenya, December 10 2025 -The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has scheduled a staff visit to Kenya in January as discussions continue over a possible new funded programme to support Nairobi’s efforts to stabilise public finances and shore up external payments. The announcement follows a recent meeting between President William Ruto and IMF Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva in Washington, D.C., and comes amid fresh negotiations over how Kenya counts securitised revenue in its public liabilities figures.
Central Bank of Kenya Governor Dr Kamau Thugge confirmed the timing at a recent press briefing, saying: “We continue to have discussions with the IMF on getting a new funded programme. The President met with the Managing Director of the fund last week and we do expect a staff visit from the fund sometime in January to continue the discussions.”
His comments underline Nairobi’s push for a successor arrangement after the $3.6 billion facility expired earlier in 2025. An IMF staff team, led by mission chief Haimanot Teferra, previously visited Nairobi from September 25 to October 9 to begin talks and “assess the economic situation”, a formal opening salvo that set out the issues to be resolved before any finance instrument could be agreed upon.
The IMF said the visit took stock of macroeconomic developments and discussed reforms that could form the basis of a new programme. A central sticking point remains the treatment of securitised arrears, collections that were sold to special-purpose vehicles and used to pay road contractors and other creditors.
The IMF regards such securitisations as sovereign liabilities; the Treasury argues that once the rights are sold to an SPV they are not direct sovereign liabilities. Treasury Cabinet Secretary John Mbadi has previously defended the government’s position: “Our position as the government is that once you sell a right to a special purpose vehicle (SPV), then there is no risk to the government at all.”
The difference is material because it affects Kenya’s reported liabilities outstanding and hence the size of any IMF programme the country might qualify for. Kenya’s capacity to tap fresh IMF financing is also limited by the fund’s internal rules: as at end- June 2025 Nairobi could only access about Sh64.8 billion ($501.4m) under “normal access” limits, and its cumulative headroom under the standard cap was running thin after prior drawdowns.
More from Kenya
CBK and Treasury officials have said the country may have to make paydowns or pursue liability-management to create room for new resources. Not everyone in Nairobi is agreed on whether a new IMF programme is necessary. Dr David Ndii, chairperson of the Presidential Council of Economic Advisors, has publicly questioned the consensus inside government, saying there is no meeting of minds on why Kenya needs a fresh IMF deal and arguing the country should consider deeper engagement with capital markets as it seeks to graduate to upper-middle income status.
The debate reflects competing views over conditionality, policy ownership and the balance between multilateral support and market financing. Economists say a new IMF arrangement, if it includes lending, would do two things: unlock immediate financing to help meet external obligations and impose a structured policy framework aimed at fiscal consolidation and fiscal sustainability
But the details matter: Nairobi will need to reconcile IMF definitions around repayment burden and demonstrate credible revenue mobilisation measures to satisfy conditionality, analysts say. IMF commentary on the earlier staff visit noted the same core conditionality themes: fiscal reforms, governance improvements and safeguarding fiscal sustainability. As Nairobi prepares to host IMF staff in January, all sides appear to be signalling willingness to keep the process alive.
For the government, a successful negotiation could deliver breathing room for servicing obligations; for the IMF, any programme will hinge on verifiable policy commitments and clear accounting for liabilities. The January mission will therefore be watched closely by markets, local stakeholders, and international creditors for signals on whether agreement is achievable and how large any new funding package might be.
