- Ecobank Joins China’s CIPS As Africa Seeks Cheaper Route for Yuan Trade Payments
Ecobank is set to join China’s Cross-Border Interbank Payment System, positioning the pan-African lender to offer more direct yuan settlement as trade between Africa and China expands and businesses seek alternatives to routing transactions through the US dollar.
Jeremy Awori, Ecobank Group’s chief executive, said the bank would sign an agreement in China to connect to CIPS, the payment infrastructure used to clear and settle international transactions denominated in renminbi.
“CIPS is an important part of the infrastructure supporting international RMB payments,” Mr Awori said.
“This cooperation really strengthens the link between the Chinese RMB payment infrastructure and our African banking platform and payment infrastructure, which is obviously critical.”
Ecobank operates in 34 African countries, giving the agreement potentially wider significance than a single-country settlement arrangement.
If implemented across its network, the platform could allow companies importing machinery, electronics, vehicles, pharmaceuticals and other goods from China to settle transactions more directly in yuan.
For Ghanaian businesses, the commercial attraction is straightforward. A company purchasing goods from China often converts cedis into dollars before the payment is converted again into yuan.
Each stage can create foreign-exchange spreads, correspondent banking fees and settlement delays. It also exposes the importer to fluctuations in two exchange rates: the cedi against the dollar and the dollar against the yuan.
A direct cedi-to-yuan product could remove one currency from the transaction chain, potentially reducing conversion costs and improving payment certainty.
Ecobank is separately in discussions with Bank of China to develop yuan-settlement services and expects to announce further details. The partnership would complement its participation in CIPS and other payment arrangements supporting Africa-China commerce.
CIPS was launched by the People’s Bank of China in 2015 to support the clearing and settlement of cross-border yuan transactions.
The network connects more than 5,000 banks in over 100 countries and territories, according to Ecobank.
It allows participating institutions to process yuan transactions more directly through China’s financial infrastructure instead of relying exclusively on offshore clearing arrangements.
CIPS is frequently presented as China’s alternative to the Western-dominated global financial system. However, it should not be treated as a direct substitute for the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication.
SWIFT primarily provides secure financial messaging, while CIPS combines messaging with clearing and settlement functions for renminbi transactions. Banks can use CIPS while still relying on SWIFT messaging in parts of the transaction process.
Ecobank’s decision therefore does not amount to abandoning the dollar or withdrawing from existing international payment networks.
It adds another settlement channel.
The distinction is important because the US dollar remains dominant in global trade, reserves and financial markets. African importers will continue to require dollars for oil, machinery, debt service and transactions with suppliers outside China.
The emerging system is better understood as currency diversification rather than immediate de-dollarisation.
The strategic case for Ecobank is supported by the rapid expansion of trade between Africa and China.
China-Africa trade increased by almost 18 per cent in 2025, according to Chinese customs data. Beijing also removed tariffs on imports from 53 African countries from May 1, potentially encouraging additional African exports to the Chinese market.
China now accounts for about 20 per cent of Africa’s external trade, up from approximately 5 per cent two decades ago, according to the African Export-Import Bank.
This growth has created demand for payment infrastructure that reflects the actual currency of trade.
Many African small and medium-sized enterprises source inventory and equipment from China. For these firms, foreign-exchange costs can materially reduce already narrow profit margins.
“You need the right tools and payment mechanisms to be able to do that. We’re investing in those,” Mr Awori said earlier this year when Ecobank confirmed negotiations with Bank of China.
Direct yuan settlement could also improve transaction speed, provide clearer pricing and reduce dependence on correspondent banks in the US and Europe.
For Chinese suppliers, receiving yuan eliminates the need to convert incoming dollars and may make them more willing to offer favourable prices or credit terms.
Ecobank’s Ghanaian subsidiary could become an important channel for businesses trading with China, particularly if customers can pay in cedis and have the bank complete the conversion into yuan.
Such a service could support importers and Ghanaian exporters seeking access to the Chinese market.
Its effectiveness will depend on whether Ecobank can maintain sufficient yuan liquidity and quote competitive exchange rates.
Removing the dollar from the transaction chain does not remove foreign-exchange risk. It changes the currency pair against which that risk is managed.
The cedi could weaken against the yuan even when it is relatively stable against the dollar. Importers would still need hedging products, forward contracts and transparent pricing to manage settlement risk between placing an order and completing payment.
The bank must also determine how it will source yuan. Possible routes include customer deposits, interbank transactions, trade flows, swap arrangements or liquidity provided through Chinese partner banks.
If African demand for yuan to pay for imports substantially exceeds yuan earned through exports, banks may still have to purchase the Chinese currency using dollars or other reserve currencies.
The true cost advantage will therefore depend on transaction volumes, liquidity depth and the spread Ecobank charges customers.
Direct settlement is most efficient when currency flows operate in both directions.
African importers generate demand for yuan, while African exporters selling goods to China generate yuan receipts that banks can recycle into import payments.
But many African countries run substantial trade deficits with China. They import manufactured goods while exporting a narrower range of commodities and agricultural products.
If Ecobank receives large volumes of local currency from importers but insufficient yuan from exporters, the bank will still need to obtain renminbi externally.
That does not make the initiative ineffective, but it means payment infrastructure cannot solve the underlying trade imbalance.
African countries will benefit more if China’s tariff removals produce a sustained increase in exports of processed food, minerals, manufactured goods and other value-added products.
Otherwise, yuan settlement may make imports more efficient without significantly improving Africa’s position in the trade relationship.
Ecobank will not be the first African lender to join the Chinese platform.
South Africa’s Standard Bank connected to CIPS in November 2025 and subsequently received authorisation, together with the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China, to clear yuan transactions across Africa.
Rwanda’s Bank of Kigali has also joined the network, while Angola’s Banco de Fomento Angola is preparing to participate.
Afreximbank has signed an agreement to connect to CIPS as part of efforts to support African trade with China.
The growing number of participants indicates that yuan settlement is moving from a niche service towards a competitive banking product.
Ecobank’s advantage lies in the reach of its African network. It can potentially connect businesses across West, Central, East and Southern Africa to a common settlement arrangement.
The platform could also deepen Ecobank’s trade-finance offering through yuan-denominated letters of credit, guarantees, supplier payments and working-capital facilities.
For Ecobank Transnational Incorporated, which is listed on the Ghana Stock Exchange, the initiative could generate fee income, deepen corporate relationships and strengthen its position in cross-border banking.
However, commercial success will depend on execution. The bank has not yet publicly detailed when customer services will begin, which African markets will be included first or how its pricing will compare with existing dollar-based payment routes.
The expansion of yuan settlement is part of China’s broader effort to internationalise its currency and reduce the dominance of the dollar.
For African governments and companies, additional currency options can improve bargaining power and reduce exposure to disruptions in dollar liquidity.
But greater reliance on Chinese financial infrastructure also introduces new dependencies.
Banks must manage Chinese regulatory requirements, renminbi convertibility restrictions, sanctions exposure, cybersecurity risks and the possibility of geopolitical tension affecting payment channels.
African institutions should therefore pursue interoperability rather than exchange one form of dependence for another.
CIPS can complement existing dollar, euro and intra-African payment systems. It should not prevent Ecobank from strengthening links with the Pan-African Payment and Settlement System, regional central banks and other platforms intended to make African cross-border trade more efficient.
The most resilient model is one in which businesses can choose the settlement currency best aligned with the underlying transaction.
Ecobank’s CIPS agreement represents a potentially important change in Africa-China financial infrastructure, but joining the platform is only the first step.
The commercial test will be whether a Ghanaian or African business can complete a yuan transaction more quickly, at a lower total cost and with less exchange-rate uncertainty than under the existing dollar route.
That will require Ecobank to publish competitive pricing, build adequate yuan liquidity and provide products that help customers manage currency risk.
If it succeeds, the bank could turn its pan-African footprint into an important bridge between African enterprises and the Chinese market.
If direct settlement remains expensive or difficult to access, CIPS participation may carry greater symbolic than practical value.
For now, the agreement signals that the financial infrastructure supporting Africa-China trade is beginning to catch up with the scale of the commercial relationship—and that African banks intend to play a central role in that transition.
