The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has intensified its oversight of Pakistan’s economy, imposing 11 new structural conditions on its ongoing $7 billion bailout program.
These fresh directives, revealed in the Fund’s staff-level report, push the total number of compliance requirements to a staggering 64 over an 18-month span.
The new measures target long-standing governance flaws, entrenched corruption risks, and chronic losses in critical sectors, signalling the IMF’s determination to enforce deep, systemic changes before further tranches of the Extended Fund Facility (EFF) are released.
This stringent oversight places immense pressure on Islamabad to accelerate reforms in politically sensitive areas, especially transparency and accountability.
Escalation of Conditions and Oversight
The addition of 11 new conditions, known as Structural Benchmarks, indicates the IMF’s assessment that Pakistan’s previous reform progress was insufficient, particularly regarding institutional integrity.
This massive total of 64 conditions, covering everything from fiscal policy and energy tariffs to tax administration and corruption, has turned the bailout into a comprehensive blueprint for structural overhaul.
The latest measures directly stem from the IMF’s recent Governance and Corruption Diagnostic Assessment (GCDA). Compliance with this extensive and accelerated reform agenda will severely test the government’s administrative capacity and political will to manage resistance from powerful interest groups across the country.
Direct Targets on Corruption
The most significant new directives centre on enhancing transparency and combating high-level corruption within the state apparatus. A key requirement is the mandatory public disclosure of asset declarations for high-level federal civil servants, which must be published on an official government website by December 2026.
This disclosure aims to help identify discrepancies between declared income and actual assets. Furthermore, by October 2026, Islamabad is required to publish a time-bound action plan aimed at mitigating corruption risks in 10 high-risk departments identified through institutional assessments, with the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) overseeing coordination.
Federal Board of Revenue and Tax Policy
Persistent underperformance by the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) has triggered a demanding set of new requirements focused on tax reform. To enhance the FBR’s effectiveness, the government must finalise a detailed reform roadmap by December 2025.
This plan must specify staffing, define key performance indicators (KPIs), and outline implementation timelines. Based on this roadmap, Pakistan is mandated to fully implement all necessary actions across at least three priority reform areas by March 2026.
Looking ahead, the authorities must also publish a comprehensive medium-term tax reform strategy by December 2026. The IMF has also warned that a mini-budget may be required if revenue targets are missed.
Structural Reforms in Key Economic Sectors
Beyond governance and tax, the new conditions target long-standing structural inefficiencies in major economic sectors. To address elite capture, federal and provincial administrations must agree on a national sugar market liberalisation policy by June 2026.
In the power sector, Pakistan must finalise conditions for private-sector participation in two major distribution companies, HESCO and SEPCO, by December 2025, to reduce chronic losses.
Additionally, a comprehensive assessment of the costs of foreign remittances and structural barriers affecting cross-border payments is due by May 2026 to boost foreign exchange inflows. The intense focus across every facet of the economy underscores the IMF’s demand for decisive structural change.
The Logical Indian’s Perspective
The IMF’s decision to impose an increasing number of conditions, particularly those targeting transparency and anti-corruption measures, is a painful but necessary prescription for Pakistan’s long-term economic health.
While the bailout funds provide immediate relief, the sheer volume of structural reforms demanded underscores the depth of governance challenges rooted in elite capture and systemic corruption.
