G-24 Advances Quota Reform Agenda as Previous IMF Review Awaits Full Implementation
The Group of 24 developing countries is pressing for changes to the International Monetary Fund’s quota system as discussions turn to the 17th review, while the previous round remains short of the approvals required for its implementation. Iyabo Masha, director of the G-24 Secretariat, said the IMF’s 16th quota review had yet to take full […]
The Group of 24 developing countries is pressing for changes to the International Monetary Fund’s quota system as discussions turn to the 17th review, while the previous round remains short of the approvals required for its implementation.

Iyabo Masha, director of the G-24 Secretariat, said the IMF’s 16th quota review had yet to take full effect, with some member countries still falling short of their financial commitments. The delay comes as attention shifts to the 17th review, which developing countries hope will bring the Fund’s quota allocations closer to the realities of today’s global economy and give emerging economies a greater voice in its decision-making.
“The last quota reform was the 16th one, which is already completed, except that some countries are yet to meet their financial obligations,” Masha said at a press briefing during the IMF–World Bank Annual Meetings in Bangkok on Tuesday.
The 16th review, approved in December 2023, authorised a 50 percent increase in IMF quotas, raising the Fund’s permanent quota resources without changing the distribution of individual members’ quota shares. The increase requires members to provide consent and fulfil the relevant payment requirements before it can take effect.
As of April 2026, some 149 members representing 76.66 percent of total quotas had consented to the increment, below the required 85 percent threshold. The IMF extended the deadline for consent to November 15, 2026.
Quota reviews assess whether the Fund has sufficient resources to meet members’ financing needs and whether the distribution of quotas reflects changes in the world economy. Any change to quotas requires approval by 85 percent of total voting power, and an individual member’s quota cannot be changed without its consent.
Quotas are central to the IMF’s financial and governance structure. They determine members’ financial contributions, help establish their voting power and influence access to financing under normal lending arrangements. They also determine members’ shares in allocations of the Fund’s reserve asset, special drawing rights.
The G-24 argues that quota allocations have not kept pace with changes in the relative size of national economies. Masha said several of the group’s members ranked among the world’s largest economies, but their economic weight was not adequately reflected in their quota shares.
“Now, what do we want? We’re looking for a quota system that better reflects the economic realities of today,” Masha said.
The 16th review increased total quotas without changing their distribution among members. The 17th review, by contrast, has become a focus of discussions about whether the allocation system should better reflect current economic realities and address gaps in representation.
The existing quota formula, agreed in 2008, incorporates GDP, economic openness, economic variability and international reserves. IMF members have been discussing how future quota and governance reforms should account for shifts in the global economy, but the principles guiding the next review have not established a new formula or determined how individual countries’ shares would change.
Masha said the G-24 wanted emerging economies to have a greater voice in the Fund, while protecting smaller and poorer members whose limited economic size translates into relatively low quota shares.
“Because it’s based on the size of the economy, some of our members, many African countries, small economies, their share is very low,” she said. “But we’re calling for the protection of the quota of the smallest and the poorest member.”
The group is also seeking changes to the IMF’s governance arrangements to ensure that reforms serve all members. Its position reflects the challenge of reconciling demands for greater influence from emerging economies with safeguards for smaller, lower-income countries.
“We hope that with that new kind of quota framework, we will have a different kind of governance, a governance that works for all countries,” she told reporters.