KARACHI: Remittances sent home by overseas Pakistanis rose by 14.96 per cent to $7,306.65 million in the first 10 months (July-April) of the current fiscal year 2009-10, the State Bank of Pakistan (SBP) announced on Tuesday.
This reflected an increase in remittances of $951.07 million compared to the corresponding period of the last fiscal year. The amount of $7,306.65 million includes $1.02 million received through encashment and profit earned on Foreign Exchange Bearer Certificates (FEBCs) and Foreign Currency Bearer Certificates (FCBCs).
In April 2010, $755.77 million was sent home by overseas Pakistanis, up 8.35 per cent or $58.25 million compared to $697.52 million received in the same month last year. Pakistan has shown one of the highest growths in remittances despite the recent global financial crisis, said the International Fund for Agriculture Development (IFAD), a specialised United Nations agency, in its quarterly ‘Financing Facility for Remittances’ newsletter recently.
It said Pakistan is followed by Bangladesh, Mauritius, Swaziland, Guinea-Bissau and the Philippines which also showed a strong growth in remittances. In July-April 2010, remittances from the UAE amounted to $1,663.22 million, Saudi Arabia $1,525.90 million, the US $1,461.80 million, Gulf Cooperation Council countries (including Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar and Oman) $1,033 million, the UK $734.59 million and European Union states $210.22 million.
In the same period last year, remittances from the UAE were $1,366.79 million, Saudi Arabia $1,264.07 million, the US $1,435.65 million, GCC countries $996.02 million, the UK $467.98 million and EU states $196.53 million. The SBP, the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Overseas Pakistanis have undertaken a joint initiative called the ‘Pakistan Remittance Initiative’ to facilitate the flow of remittances through formal channels which have shown considerable growth.
Published in the Express Tribune, May 12th, 2010.
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ