The National Chamber of Importers in Sudan has strongly criticized the government’s recent decision to ban various import goods, holding the policy responsible for the subsequent severe inflation and the sharp depreciation of the local currency, the Sudanese pound. The chamber stated that the decree, which was implemented last April, has led to a major economic crisis and urged the government to take responsibility for the fallout.
The Sudanese cabinet had prohibited the import of over 40 luxury and non-essential goods in late April in an attempt to curb speculation in parallel foreign exchange markets, boost domestic manufacturing, and support the overall economy. However, this government intervention failed to achieve its intended goals, as the Sudanese pound collapsed to a record low last Wednesday, with the U.S. dollar trading at around 4,700 pounds. This rapid depreciation is driven by the ongoing war in the country, a significant drop in exports, and a steadily growing import bill.
In response to the worsening crisis, the importers’ chamber urged the government to immediately reverse the ban, arguing that the policy had failed to stabilize the exchange rate, driven up market prices, and significantly reduced state revenues. Al-Sadiq Jalal Al-Din Salih, head of the National Chamber of Importers, told reporters on Wednesday that all compiled data proved the decision was completely ineffective. He noted that the chamber had previously submitted a memorandum to the prime minister warning of these exact economic consequences before the decree was passed.
Salih stated that the decree ignored the core drivers of the pound’s decline—which he identified as market speculation and a surging demand for foreign currency—and argued that the government treated the symptoms rather than the root causes of the crisis. He added that banning 46 items would not lower foreign currency demand or stabilize the pound, but would instead create monopolies as importers are forced to leave the market, ultimately leading to severe supply shortages and higher prices for consumers.
From a revenue perspective, Salih explained that while the banned commodities accounted for only about 11% of total imports in 2025, they contributed over 38% of the customs and tax revenues collected at ports, meaning the drop in these revenues would heavily widen the national fiscal deficit. Furthermore, he warned that these strict restrictions would drive informal trade and smuggling along Sudan’s porous borders to meet market demand, benefiting only a small group of smugglers making profits at the expense of consumers and the public treasury.
Citing data compiled by specialized market divisions on May 24, Salih pointed out that prices had surged dramatically since the ban took effect, with domestic cement rising by 22%, Egyptian ceramics by 42%, rice by 98%, and Egyptian instant noodles by 54%. He attributed these immediate price hikes to a psychological reaction as traders and consumers stockpile goods in anticipation of shortages, warning that even steeper price increases are likely as supply scarcity worsens and market competition decreases.
Salih noted that the exchange rate weakened from about 4,100 pounds per dollar when the decree was issued to around 4,770 pounds on Wednesday, citing this as clear evidence that the ban had failed to stabilize the foreign exchange market.
He renewed his call for the government to review the policy and adopt measures that target structural economic imbalances rather than restricting trade, affirming that the chamber would continue to oppose Decree No. 174 of 2026—which had banned items like packaged milk, processed foods, sweets, juices, and ceramics—to protect market stability and state revenue. This policy friction comes amid a stark economic backdrop, as the Central Bank of Sudan’s 2025 summary showed exports at $2.64 billion against $6.49 billion in imports, leaving the country with a massive $3.86 billion trade deficit.
