Lebanon and the IMF are still discussing a potential financing program, but there is no new staff-level agreement yet.
Finance Minister Yassine Jaber said the meetings in Washington were “good” and that Lebanon wants to start with a staff-level agreement before moving to a full program.
The war has slowed progress and, according to Jaber, caused an estimated $7 billion in damage.
Reuters reported that Lebanon and the IMF were also discussing rapid financing in the $800 million to $1 billion range for budget and humanitarian support. Reuters said it could not independently verify the Bloomberg report.
Key reform files still include amendments to the bank resolution law, work on deposit recovery and financial stability legislation, and a medium-term fiscal framework. The reform priorities broadly match issues the IMF has flagged in recent missions.
Lebanon and the IMF are still talking, but Washington did not deliver a breakthrough
Lebanon’s latest round of talks with the International Monetary Fund in Washington produced a familiar result: public signs of engagement, but no final breakthrough. Lebanese officials described the meetings as constructive, while the IMF said talks on a potential financing program are progressing. Still, the discussions stopped short of a new staff-level agreement, which remains the next major milestone if Lebanon wants to unlock a broader program.
Finance Minister Yassine Jaber gave the clearest official summary after the meetings. He told Reuters that Lebanon had “good” meetings with the IMF and remained committed to securing a lending program. He added that the government’s aim is to reach an IMF agreement, starting with a staff-level agreement and then moving to a program.
“Our aim as a government is to reach an agreement with the IMF on a program. We will start with an SLA and then progress to a program.”
War damage has pushed reforms into a harder phase
The biggest complication is the war. Jaber said current events had delayed the process, and he put the damage to Lebanon at about $7 billion. He also said Lebanon is working with the World Bank on a rapid damage assessment, though he noted that attacks would need to stop before a fuller assessment could move ahead.
That wartime backdrop shaped the tone of the Washington meetings. The IMF’s Middle East leadership said the region is facing an exceptionally difficult moment and described the war that began on February 28 as a severe shock to energy, trade routes, and business confidence. Lebanon’s negotiations with the Fund are therefore taking place at a moment when crisis management and reconstruction planning are colliding with an already unresolved financial collapse.
The same reform bottlenecks are still in the way
The policy agenda has not changed much, even if the context has worsened. L’Orient Today reported that the Washington talks centered on three core files: amendments requested to the bank resolution law, the draft law on financial stability and deposit recovery, and the medium-term fiscal framework prepared by the Finance Ministry.
Those issues align closely with the IMF’s own reform language over the past year. In February 2026, the Fund said discussions with Lebanon focused on amendments to the Bank Resolution Law to ensure an independent, transparent, and effective bank resolution process. In June 2025, IMF staff said more work was needed on a bank restructuring and deposit recovery strategy, even after legislative progress.
The broader pattern is clear. Lebanon has moved on some IMF-linked legislation, including bank secrecy reform in 2025, but the Fund and outside observers have continued to press for stronger banking restructuring rules, a credible treatment of losses and deposits, and a more coherent fiscal path.
Rapid financing remains part of the discussion
Alongside the longer reform track, Lebanon has also been exploring faster financial support. Reuters reported on April 14 that the IMF and Lebanon were discussing options for rapid assistance of $800 million to $1 billion, based on a Bloomberg report citing people familiar with the matter. Reuters said the funds would be intended for budget support and humanitarian response, and added that it could not independently verify the report.
That matters because it shows Lebanon is not only seeking a conventional IMF-backed reform program. It is also trying to secure near-term support to absorb the economic shock of the war. Even so, the IMF’s public language remains cautious. The Fund has confirmed close engagement with Lebanese authorities on crisis management and on a reform program that could be backed by an IMF arrangement, but it has not announced a fresh agreement.
What the Washington meetings actually showed
The most honest reading of the Washington meetings is that they preserved momentum without resolving the main obstacles. Lebanon avoided a breakdown in talks. It also kept the IMF engaged at a time of war, fiscal stress, and institutional weakness. But the country still needs to convert discussions into legislation, a coherent loss-allocation framework, and a fiscal plan the Fund can treat as credible.
For now, the signal is mixed but not negative. The IMF is still talking. Lebanese officials are still pushing for a program. The gap lies in execution, not in declared intent.
Key points to watch next
Whether Lebanon secures a new staff-level agreement with the IMF.
Whether parliament and the government advance bank resolution and deposit recovery reforms in line with IMF demands.
Whether discussions on rapid financing produce a concrete facility.
Whether war damage and reconstruction needs force a reshaping of Lebanon’s fiscal path.
