MOSTEFA ZEROUALI, BANKING AND FINANCE EXPERT AT HORIZONS “A predictable decision for objective reasons”

In this interview, banking and finance expert Mostefa Zerouali discusses the new note from the Bank of Algeria. He sees it as a return to a more realistic approach and to the spirit of the national anti-money laundering system, targeting abuses linked to the widespread use of cash rather than cash itself. In his view, financial inclusion must be driven primarily by accessible, tailored, and inexpensive solutions that are capable of winning people over through their benefits.

Interview by Lyes Mechti

Does this note, which replaces the one dated December 22, 2025, reflect a simple technical adjustment or a change in the direction of the cash reduction policy, and what lessons does it reveal about the realistic speed of the economy's “de-cashification”?

This note, which cancels the one dated December 22, is in some ways a return to normal that was predictable from the outset for objective reasons and is very easy to understand given the current state of the national economy and the technical parameters of financial inclusion (accessibility, use, and related costs). Furthermore, it should be remembered that it is not cash itself that is the real problem.

These are the scourges brought about by the widespread and systematic use of cash in financial transactions: money laundering, corruption, tax evasion, security risks, and fueling the underground economy. Moving toward a cashless economy is absolutely not on the agenda in an economy like ours. Therefore, this decision must lead to a radical change in approach to combat all these scourges without giving users the impression that they are losing control of their financial resources.

How does linking account deposits to business volume allow for more “realistic” management of banking operations, better aligned with the functioning of the real economy?

Linking the volume of cash deposited into accounts to business volume helps prevent atypical transactions and embezzlement via fictitious accounts and shell companies, whose purpose is precisely to fuel one of the aforementioned scourges.

However, in my opinion, this will not change the practices and operational issues of the real economy, which remains far removed from the volumes of business generated by the parallel economy. Linking cash payments to actual declared turnover and balance sheets was already standard practice in banking systems, as it was already provided for in the measures to combat money laundering and the financing of terrorism.

What immediate benefits can this note bring to merchants and SMEs, particularly in terms of cash flow and business continuity, while maintaining an appropriate compliance framework?

To say that this note brings particular improvements or benefits to merchants, businesses, and individuals seems exaggerated to me and does not reflect the reality of banking and payment practices before the December 22 note. However, it is a clear reminder and a frank return to orthodoxy and the spirit of the national anti-money laundering system. What about other financial inclusion objectives? This is where this new note should challenge all institutions and stakeholders involved in national finance and monetary mechanisms.

In your opinion, how can this measure help bring more flows into the banking system, and what practical conditions would promote this outcome?

Personally, I don't believe that legal opinions and decisions can improve financial inclusion in the country. The most effective and well-developed notes and decisions are those that come after the fact to organize and protect the actual mechanisms of the economy and that support accessible, tailored, inexpensive alternative solutions that allow users to participate voluntarily because they see a clear benefit.

Furthermore, I'm sure we need to change tack and find pragmatic, progressive, relevant solutions that are tailored to different user segments. Do we have a clear, open data finance banking strategy? Are we equipped with an ad hoc framework directly linked to the highest authorities, responsible for ensuring the consistency, relevance, and realism of decisions and notes taken by certain institutions, but which impact dozens of others?

Do we have ambitions and plans to develop public-private partnerships to integrate private agility into public infrastructure? Do we have inspiring models that can be implemented without major friction in our society and economy?

In my opinion, these are the real challenges that these notes should address.