Foreign exchange: SBP’s reserves slide to $17.59b, decrease 4.3%  

More than two month ago, the central bank had made payments of $60 million


Our Correspondent February 02, 2017
First quarterly report says agricultural sector recovers with improved output of major crops. PHOTO: EXPRESS

KARACHI: Foreign exchange reserves held by the State Bank of Pakistan (SBP) decreased 4.29% on a weekly basis on January 27, according to data released by the central bank on Thursday.

The SBP’s liquid foreign exchange reserves decreased by $789.7 million to $17,593.8 million compared to $18,383.5 million in the previous week. Total liquid foreign reserves held by the country, including net reserves held by banks other than the SBP, stood at $22,434.9 million. Net reserves held by banks amounted to $4,841.1 million. The decrease is mainly attributed to external debt servicing, including $500 million loan repayment to State Administration of Foreign Exchange (SAFE), China.

More than two month ago, the central bank had made payments of $60 million. Over three months ago, the SBP-held reserves had gone up 7.8% on a weekly basis after the bank received $1,340 million from multilateral, bilateral and other official sources.

Published in The Express Tribune, February 3rd, 2017.

Like Business on Facebook, follow @TribuneBiz on Twitter to stay informed and join in the conversation.

E-Publications

Most Read

COMMENTS (1)

Sameer | 4 years ago | Reply The strategy all along is to ensure the borrowing can last till the next elections. Pakistan is deeply screwed since their exports are at a 3 year low. This coupled with huge borrowing and the inadvertent rise inflation will contribute further slim in the treasury. Once the government makes it to next elections and probably win with all the excessive hardwork their doing in illegal channels...another round of borrowing will start. I can hope that will be the last cycle one way or the other.
Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ