Lebanon’s banking sector is raising concerns over a proposal by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to appoint managers or supervisors to some banks, Annahar newspaper revealed.

The proposal emerged as the IMF delegation concluded its visit to Beirut, alongside the visit of French President Emmanuel Macron’s special economic envoy, Jacques de Lajugie. While the two missions differed on some aspects of the financial losses file, their visits have kept pressure on Lebanese authorities to narrow their differences and accelerate the passage of a financial regularization law.

The idea of appointing supervisors to banks is particularly sensitive for the sector, with some banks viewing it as potentially dealing another severe blow to confidence in a system already struggling to rebuild itself and restore ties with international financial markets.

In a country seeking to revive its banking sector, the identity of the proposed supervisors, the powers they would receive and who would appoint them could have implications extending well beyond conventional regulatory oversight.

A new layer of oversight

Lebanon's central bank already has broad supervisory powers and can appoint a temporary administrator to a bank it considers to be in financial difficulty. Three banks have previously had temporary administrators appointed to them.

The regulatory framework has also been tightened in recent months as authorities seek to revive banking activity and strengthen monitoring and compliance. In September 2026, the central bank issued a new circular setting out exceptional measures aimed at reviving banks’ operations.

But the proposal for supervisors has raised a broader question about the role such officials could play in monitoring financial flows, particularly those potentially linked to Hezbollah.

The question comes as Washington has intensified its financial campaign against Hezbollah networks this year, targeting companies, individuals and networks that the U.S. Treasury Department says raise and transfer funds or help circumvent sanctions.

In August, the Treasury said networks were moving hundreds of millions of dollars in cash between Lebanon, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates and Iran outside the formal financial system.

Against that backdrop, some banking and financial observers believe that placing supervisors inside Lebanese banks could provide an additional layer of scrutiny over transfers, accounts and unusual transactions.

Such oversight could also help reassure international authorities that Lebanon’s banking system is not being used as a channel for financing networks subject to sanctions.

Banks concerned over powers

The proposal could nevertheless have significant repercussions if it is introduced without a broader package of measures under banking reform legislation.

The central concern is that supervisors could move beyond monitoring compliance and acquire practical authority over day-to-day banking operations, including the ability to block transactions or require approval for transfers and other decisions normally left to bank management.

That could turn oversight intended to protect banks into a factor that slows their operations and increases their legal exposure.

The question of who would serve as supervisors is therefore also significant.

They could be drawn from the central bank or the Banking Control Commission, or could be independent specialists in auditing, compliance and anti-money-laundering. Another possibility would be to bring in international banking experts whose involvement could reassure foreign authorities concerned about financial transactions taking place outside the formal financial system.

Banking sources said bank owners would resist such a move and would not accept appointments that conflict with their interests.

But if the proposal moves forward, the sources said, banks could ultimately choose to accommodate the supervisors and treat them as part of a new regulatory reality, particularly if their presence helps demonstrate compliance with international standards.

The key issue, they said, would not necessarily be who the supervisors are or which institution they come from, but the limits of their powers.

Who controls the decisions?

If the purpose of the supervisors is to protect banks from money laundering, terrorist financing and sanctions risks, their role would constitute a conventional and understandable form of regulatory oversight.

But if supervisors were given an effective say over every movement of funds, the proposal could raise a much more fundamental question: Would this still amount to the central bank supervising banks, or would it effectively redefine who holds decision-making power inside Lebanese banks?

Several issues would therefore need to be settled before any such system is introduced: Who appoints the supervisors? Who oversees them? Who holds them accountable? And what transactions or decisions would they have the authority to stop or approve?

Banking sources said they do not expect the proposal to become a serious step given the concerns surrounding it, unless it is ultimately implemented with the agreement of the banks themselves.