When countries hit a financial crisis, they often turn to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for help. For projects like building roads or improving water systems, they look to the World Bank. Both of these organizations are vital to the global financial system, but U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has raised concerns that they have strayed from their original goals.
Earlier this year, Bessent pointed out that the IMF and World Bank have been spending time and resources on issues like climate change and social matters, which he believes distracts from their core missions. Recently, he called for a renewed focus on their primary objectives, especially as nations tighten their budgets.
Bessent criticized the rising salaries and administrative costs within these institutions. He emphasized that taxpayer money should be used wisely and that resources should not be diverted from their main purposes. His comments came just before the annual meetings of the IMF and World Bank, where he urged both organizations to practice financial discipline.
Part of Bessent’s message included a reassessment of how the IMF and World Bank work with China. Recently, China announced new export controls that could impact many countries. Bessent echoed concerns from former President Donald Trump about these policies and suggested that the IMF should focus on China’s economic practices rather than on climate or gender issues.
Bessent also addressed the World Bank, advocating for a policy that would help countries become self-sufficient. He specifically mentioned that China should no longer receive World Bank support, arguing that the bank should concentrate its efforts on poorer nations that need it most.
Bessent’s perspective is significant. The U.S. is the largest financial contributor to both the IMF and World Bank, giving it substantial influence over their policies. This marks a shift from the approach of his predecessor, Janet Yellen, who highlighted the importance of climate finance and supported increasing IMF funding.
As the annual meetings approach, the debate over the direction of these institutions is likely to continue, reflecting broader discussions about global priorities and financial responsibility.
