THE International Monetary Fund (IMF) has delivered a verdict that Guyanese families have long benefited from at the market stall and the electricity meter. The government’s strategy is shielding them from rising costs.

In its 2026 Article IV report, the fund recognised that subsidies, tax relief, and supply-side measures have kept inflation contained at 3.3 per cent in 2025. The global picture over that period was far from calm.

That result was not an accident. Around the world, households have been squeezed by dearer food and fuel, and many economies passed those costs straight to consumers. Guyana did not. The IMF observed that the pass-through of international price increases to local shoppers was lower here than in comparable economies. It credited VAT exemptions, subsidies, and a determined push to expand domestic production. Its own estimate is that the VAT exemptions alone have saved the equivalent of about four per cent in annual inflation. For a family stretching a monthly wage, that is a real difference.

The same logic runs through the government’s other support initiatives. The G$100,000 cash grant, introduced in 2025 and renewed in the 2026 Budget, puts money directly into households’ hands.

Pensioners, children, students, and vulnerable households have received assistance, and the fund noted that transfers since 2021 have significantly improved real incomes for selected groups.

Rice farmers have received direct per-acre subsidies. It has also been reported that the net property tax on individuals has been abolished, and that 12-month inflation eased to 4.0 per cent in June, down from 4.2 per cent a year earlier. These are the marks of a government that has set out to protect people rather than simply watch the numbers.

Electricity is another case in point. By allocating G$25.6 billion  in the 2026 Budget to hold GPL tariffs steady, the government has shielded households and businesses from the worst of the fuel-price surge. Stable power costs help the shopkeeper, the manufacturer, and the pensioner alike, and they are an investment in competitiveness as much as relief.

The IMF did add a note of caution. It reminded policymakers that broad subsidies carry fiscal costs and urged gradual improvements in targeting. That is sensible advice, and a government this attentive to evidence should welcome it.

Better targeting can sharpen what is already working and make it more sustainable. It is not an argument for abandoning relief. Nor can it overshadow the central finding that Guyana’s approach has contained prices while the economy keeps growing.

That growth is extraordinary. The fund projects expansion of 22.3 per cent in 2026, driven by oil production and by strong non-oil activity. The IMF’s counsel on prudent fiscal and monetary management should be taken seriously, but Guyana is in a position few developing nations ever reach. It has the resources to cushion its people today, while building the schools, hospitals, roads, and housing that secure tomorrow.

The lesson is plain. Protecting living standards and pursuing development are not rival goals, and this government has shown that they can advance together.

Sound management has cushioned the shocks, and the national wealth is reaching ordinary households as promised. The task now is to keep that discipline, refine the tools, and make sure the benefits of the boom continue to be felt in every community.