Contents
If your business imports from China, you almost certainly pay in dollars. Your supplier does not price in dollars at home, and you do not earn in dollars. The money crosses two exchange rates to get from your account to theirs, and you pay for both.
In the past two months that has begun to change in a handful of African markets. A bank in Rwanda became a direct participant in China’s renminbi settlement network. The Governor of the Bank of Ghana told a press conference that a Ghanaian importer can now walk into a commercial bank with cedis and pay for Chinese goods. A Ugandan bank switched on the same route in August.
The change is narrower than the de-dollarisation headlines suggest. But it makes one question worth answering: what is the dollar leg actually costing us? Most importers cannot say — and that, not the currency, is the problem to fix.
What is happening?
African banks are connecting directly to CIPS, the renminbi settlement system the People’s Bank of China launched in 2015. A direct participant settles without routing through a correspondent bank in a third country — which is where the second conversion and most of the delay live (Zawya / Reuters, 1 October 2026).
On 8 September 2026 Bank of Kigali signed the CIPS Direct Participation Agreement in Xiamen, the first bank headquartered in East or Central Africa to do so (Khusoko, 23 September 2026). On 24 September, at the Bank of Ghana’s 132nd Monetary Policy Committee press briefing, Governor Dr Johnson Pandit Asiama said that “if you want to buy anything from China, just go to Stanbic Bank with your cedis”, and that Ghana Commercial Bank was building something similar (MyJoyOnline, 24 September 2026; Citi Newsroom, 25 September 2026). Stanbic Bank Ghana announced that capability on 4 August 2026 after Bank of Ghana approval, saying eligible renminbi payments settle from existing cedi accounts (Graphic Online, 4 August 2026; Ghana News Agency, 14 August 2026). Stanbic Uganda connected the same month (Zawya / Reuters).
The infrastructure is largely Standard Bank Group’s. It went live on CIPS on 20 November 2025, the first African bank to participate directly, and on 26 June 2026 the People’s Bank of China jointly authorised it and ICBC as the Renminbi Clearing Bank of Africa, able to clear renminbi in 19 African countries (Standard Bank, 26 June 2026). On 31 August 2026 its chief executive of business and commercial banking, Bill Blackie, wrote that the group was live in ten African markets through CIPS, that payments can settle “in minutes rather than days”, and that “the majority of Africa-China trade remains invoiced in US dollars, despite neither trading partner operating in dollars domestically” (FAnews).
Three things are unsettled. Those ten markets have not been published as a list, so availability must be checked bank by bank. Blackie’s statement that clearing opens to other financial institutions from April 2027 — letting a bank in Nairobi, Lusaka or Lagos offer renminbi accounts without its own China relationships — is the bank’s timeline, not a central bank schedule. And the volume figures are the bank’s own: RMB 3.39bn, about $500m, in the four months to February 2026.
Why it matters economically
The first saving is arithmetic. Paying a dollar invoice from a local-currency account means two conversions: local currency to dollars, dollars to renminbi. Each carries a dealing spread and a fee, the spread being the larger and the one businesses never see. Settling directly removes one leg. On an illustrative $200,000 order, removing a conversion costing 0.6% all-in saves about $1,200 — real, but not transformative. Faster settlement also shortens the gap between paying and getting a shipment released.
The second saving is larger, and it is a negotiation rather than a mechanism. Rand Merchant Bank’s guidance to South African importers — written in February 2022, the clearest published statement of the argument we could find — is that Chinese exporters have historically built a currency buffer of “at least 2%-3%, and sometimes as much as 5%” into dollar prices, and that suppliers asked to invoice in renminbi have given discounts “of 2% or even more” (Rand Merchant Bank, 14 February 2022). That is advisory experience, not a measured rate; you find out by asking. The same piece argued forward cover was cheaper in renminbi because Chinese interest rates were then above American ones; our view is not to assume that leg still holds, because the differential has moved since 2022 and forward points follow it.
The scale is not trivial. China–Africa trade reached $348.05bn in 2025 on China’s own customs data (Ecofin Agency, 23 January 2026), and in Ghana China was the largest single source of imports that year at GH¢57.6bn of GH¢253.2bn, roughly 23% (Ghana Statistical Service, via Citi Newsroom, July 2026).
The honest limit: this is a supplier corridor, not a currency strategy. Freight, fuel, software and any hard-currency debt are still priced in dollars, and the renminbi remains a low single-digit share of global payments. As an Ecofin Agency analysis put it, swapping part of your trade settlement into renminbi does not change the currency of your borrowing (Ecofin Agency, 24 August 2025).
What it means for African businesses
It matters most to businesses buying physical goods from China repeatedly: distributors, retailers restocking, equipment buyers, contractors and manufacturers importing inputs.
Availability is uneven, and worth being precise about. In Ghana the route is live at Stanbic and under construction at GCB; in Rwanda, Bank of Kigali is now a direct participant; in Uganda, Stanbic connected in August. Ecobank said in April 2026 it was in advanced talks with Bank of China to settle directly by the end of 2026 — a stated intention, not yet a service (Ecofin Agency, 22 April 2026). In most African markets no local bank offers this, and until clearing opens to other banks none will. This is not a continental shift: check your own bank.
Where dollars are rationed or slow to source, the binding constraint on import planning is the wait, not the price, and a route that does not queue for dollars has value at an identical rate. That condition differs by country — see our market-by-market view. Exporters to China face the reverse question: being paid in renminbi creates a receivable to convert.
Technology and AI implications
The decision needs three numbers most importers cannot produce: the all-in cost of each supplier payment including the spread, not just the bank fee; landed cost by supplier and by shipment; and the gap between the exchange rate assumed on the purchase order and the rate actually paid at settlement.
Those are ordinary records problems. A purchase order has to store the transaction currency and the rate used, not a converted local figure — converting at entry destroys the evidence you need later. Supplier records have to hold invoice currency and terms, and payments have to match to invoices so the realised rate is visible per shipment. Landed cost then becomes a calculation rather than an afternoon’s work, which is the normal state of this data in a business system built around how purchasing actually runs. It is the discipline mobile money demands of businesses collecting payments, running the other way.
What technology does not do: no system gets you a CIPS-connected bank, a narrower spread or a supplier willing to re-price. Those are conversations, not features.
AI is close to irrelevant here, and it is worth saying so. The task is arithmetic on your own history, not prediction, and exchange-rate forecasting is not a problem a language model solves. The one defensible use is reading proforma invoices into structured fields, with a person checking currency and totals — a wrong currency field is a mispriced order, not a typo.
Practical business implications
Five steps, in order.
Ask your bank in writing. Can I settle a renminbi invoice from my local-currency account? Are you a direct CIPS participant or routed through a correspondent? What is the all-in cost — spread plus fees — on a renminbi payment versus a dollar payment of the same size? What is the settlement time and the documentation?
Price one real shipment both ways. Same invoice, same day, same size. A quoted comparison is a sales document; a priced one is evidence.
Ask the supplier for a renminbi price, not a converted one. The question is “what is your price in renminbi”, not “convert your dollar price at today’s rate”. The first invites the buffer discussion; the second does not.
Check what breaks before switching. Your accounting system’s multi-currency handling, the currency on your customs declaration, your import documentation and whoever reconciles payments. Never change the invoice currency on an order already in transit.
Set a threshold. Illustratively, a distributor spending $600,000 a year with Chinese suppliers who saves 1% all-in saves $6,000 — worth a morning’s work; a business spending $30,000 should not restructure anything. If no bank in your market offers this yet, start recording the data now, so the comparison is ready when one does.
RevenueStack perspective
The headline is currency. The money is in the records.
Connecting to a settlement rail is a one-off bank decision, and the spread saving on it is small and fixed. The repeatable gain is the renegotiation — and you cannot negotiate a buffer out of a supplier’s price without evidence of what you buy, how often, and what each shipment costs landed. In our experience that evidence sits in bank statements, a messaging thread and one spreadsheet per shipment, so the business negotiates from memory against a counterparty working from a system.
Blackie’s observation — that Africa–China trade is invoiced in dollars although neither side operates in dollars at home — is an argument about friction, not politics, and friction between parties who each know their own numbers is what a business system removes. Our view: treat these announcements as a prompt to instrument purchasing, not as a currency play, and leave the de-dollarisation framing alone. That is a sovereign debate; your balance sheet still owes dollars. It is the lesson of West Africa’s instant payment rail: the rail is the easy part. The same records serve pricing and stock decisions in trade and distribution.
Conclusion
In a small but growing number of African markets, an importer can now pay a Chinese supplier in one conversion instead of two, and sometimes in minutes instead of days. Whether that is worth anything depends on numbers inside your own records that most importers cannot produce. So the work this quarter is not switching currency; it is being able to say, shipment by shipment, what the dollar leg has cost you. The day a bank in your market switches this on, that number is the whole argument.
Sources
- The upside of Yuan invoicing for Chinese imports — Rand Merchant Bank / BusinessLIVE (Internet Archive), 2022-02-14
- Africa's Renminbi Experiment Needs Clear Eyes, Not Rose-Tinted Glasses — Ecofin Agency, 2025-08-24
- Africa's trade deficit with China hits $102bn in 2025, up 64.5% YoY — Ecofin Agency, 2026-01-23
- Ecobank in Talks with Bank of China for Direct Yuan Settlement by 2026 — Ecofin Agency, 2026-04-22
- Standard Bank becomes the first bank on the continent authorised to clear Renminbi transactions — Standard Bank Corporate & Investment Banking, 2026-06-26
- Ghana records GH¢148.3bn trade surplus in 2025 — GSS — Citi Newsroom / Ghana Statistical Service, 2026-07
- Stanbic Bank becomes first bank in Ghana to offer direct Chinese Yuan settlement via CIPS — Graphic Online, 2026-08-04
- Stanbic customers to benefit from direct Chinese Yuan settlement service — Ghana News Agency, 2026-08-14
- China's zero-tariff policy opens new export diversification opportunities for African businesses — FAnews (by Bill Blackie, Standard Bank Group), 2026-08-31
- Bank of Kigali Becomes First East and Central African Lender to Join China's CIPS Network — Khusoko, 2026-09-23
- BoG backs cedi payments for Ghana-China trade — MyJoyOnline, 2026-09-24
- BoG pilots direct cedi payments for Ghana-China trade — Citi Newsroom, 2026-09-25
- Why East African banks are joining yuan payment system — Zawya / Reuters, 2026-10-01