The US$55 Billion Cost-Recovery Milestone: Bank Of Guyana Missing Details

News Americas, NY, NY, Sun. Oct. 3, 2026: If you have a large mortgage, you know how much it can shape every major financial decision. Do you replace a refrigerator that is on its last legs or a noisy washing machine? Do you keep the car for one more year to avoid straining the monthly budget? A large mortgage constrains financial flexibility. When it is finally paid off, the change is significant: a major obligation disappears, making it easier to plan future spending. Guyana is in a similar position with oil.

The Mid-Year Report vaguely explains how the cost bank affects Guyana’s revenue. Section 3.63 (p. 21) states: “However, it must be emphasized that clearing the historical cost bank balance does not by itself deliver a 50 percent share of gross revenue to Government. The Stabroek Block partners will continue to recover current costs, lower than 75 percent of gross revenue, and Government will receive more than 12.5 percent of gross revenue in profit oil. As additional projects are approved, and their development costs enter the cost bank, the profit-oil ratio will move again.”

On August 18th, 2026, President Ali said, “Stabroek Block oil has increased from 12.5% to 39.8%.” However, the BoG report published 10 days later, dated August 28th, 2026, does not mention that Guyana’s profit share of the Stabroek Block has increased from 12.5% to 39.8%. Nor does the BoG report mention the overall take has moved from 14.5% to 41.8% of oil revenues. Instead, the BoG report states that the Government will receive more than 12.5% of gross revenue in profit oil while the Stabroek partners continue to recover current costs. That is astounding given that, at current production of 900,000 barrels per day and US$100 a barrel, the monthly amounts are about US$392 million (14.5%) and US$1.129 billion (41.8%), a difference of US$737 million.

In President Ali’s address (9:53), he further states with respect to the 39.8%, “This has occurred as I said because the cost bank has been recovered two years earlier than originally expected.” Without the underlying cost-bank figures and assumptions, readers cannot readily reconcile the President’s claim with what is stated in the BoG report.

The mortgage analogy is useful because paying down a large obligation improves forecasting. Once a household mortgage is substantially reduced or paid off, the family can estimate more accurately when it can afford major purchases. The same principle applies here: if US$55 billion in costs have been recovered, then the size and composition of the remaining cost bank are central to understanding how much oil profit Guyana may receive in the years ahead.

In the Bank of Guyana’s 119-page 2026 Half-Year Report, rice and sugar combined are mentioned almost as many times as oil. Yet, as the pie chart above shows, rice and sugar together accounted for just 2% of Guyana’s exports in 2025, compared with oil’s 90% share. The BoG is obviously misguided in its focus and priorities, but why?

This raises a straightforward transparency question: why does the 2026 Mid-Year Report not provide the US$55 billion figure, the projects to which it relates, the remaining cost bank, and the expected additions from future projects? Without those details, readers cannot independently assess how the cost bank feeds into the Government’s petroleum-revenue projections.

EDITOR’S NOTE:  Darsh Khusial is an executive of the Oil and Gas Governance Network (OGGN) a 501(c)(3). See more here