FUEL service stations are refusing to accept the Zimbabwe Gold (ZiG) currency.
And, truth be told, this was always on the cards.
The pushback is neither random nor emotional — it is calculated.
Businesses, particularly in the fuel sector, have lived through multiple currency transitions and policy shifts over the years.
They have learnt costly lessons, and this time, they are choosing caution over compliance.
At the core of their resistance is a simple economic reality.
Keep Reading
- We’re still issuing non-biometric passports: RG
- SA immigration officer fights Zim travellers
- So, is it a currency?
- Zim, Botswana to scrap passports
Fuel is imported and paid for in US dollars.
When dealers are required to sell in ZiG, they are exposed to a currency mismatch that threatens their operations.
Converting ZiG revenues into US dollars is not seamless, especially when the official foreign currency allocation systems are slow and often unreliable.
The exchange rate disparity only deepens the problem.
While the official rate may be set around 1:26, the parallel market tells a different story, hovering around 1:33.
For a business operating on tight margins, that gap is not theoretical—it translates directly into losses.
Selling in ZiG under such conditions becomes a gamble few are willing to take.
In this context, fuel dealers are not being defiant; they are being pragmatic.
They are safeguarding their ability to restock and remain viable in a volatile economic environment.
However, their stance highlights a broader and more critical issue: confidence.
Introducing a new currency is one thing; convincing the market to trust it is another.
Confidence cannot be legislated or enforced — it must be built over time through consistent and credible policy actions.
Without trust, any currency, regardless of its design or backing, will struggle to function effectively.
This is where the government faces its biggest test.
If authorities are serious about entrenching ZiG in the economy, they must lead from the front.
The adoption of the currency cannot be selective or symbolic; it must be practical and visible in everyday transactions — starting with government services.
Take the case of passports.
Zimbabweans are required to pay for this essential document in US dollars.
The government justifies this by arguing that the materials and consumables used in passport production are sourced in foreign currency.
But that is precisely the argument fuel dealers are making.
Both are dealing with inputs priced in US dollars.
Both are concerned about preserving value and avoiding losses.
Yet one is expected to accept ZiG, while the other continues to charge in foreign currency.
This inconsistency sends a conflicting message to the market.
You cannot compel private businesses to embrace a currency that the State itself is hesitant to fully adopt.
For ZiG to gain traction, the government must demonstrate unwavering commitment.
This means pricing key public services in ZiG, streamlining foreign exchange access and ensuring that the official exchange rate reflects market realities.
It also means addressing structural inefficiencies that undermine confidence, such as delays in currency allocation and policy uncertainty.
More importantly, authorities must communicate clearly and consistently.
Mixed signals erode trust, and in an already fragile economic environment, perception can quickly become reality.
The success of ZiG will ultimately depend on whether people believe in it — not just in theory, but in practice.
That belief is shaped by what they see government institutions doing.
If citizens can pay for passports, licences and other services in ZiG without friction, confidence will begin to build.
Businesses will follow where trust leads.
Until then, resistance from sectors like fuel retail is not just predictable — it is rational.
Zimbabwe has an opportunity to stabilise its currency framework, but that journey must begin with leadership by example.
If ZiG is to work, it must start at the top and filter through the system.
Anything less risks repeating the mistakes of the past.