Lawmakers in Suriname’s National Assembly (DNA) have called for a full, data-driven reassessment of the proposed SRD 50,000 maximum deposit guarantee for savers in the event of a bank failure, arguing that the current proposed threshold relies heavily on outdated 2021 metrics that no longer reflect the country’s current economic reality. The debate unfolded on Tuesday during deliberations over the draft Deposit Protection System Supervision Act, which is being reviewed in tandem with the Financial Inclusion Act. Sylvana Afonsoewa, chair of the rapporteurs’ committee, noted that initial calculations based on older data showed 89.9% of depositors would be fully covered under the SRD 50,000 cap, a figure that falls just below the global recommended benchmark of 90% to 95% full depositor coverage. Afonsoewa, a member of the ruling National Democratic Party (NDP), confirmed that updated banking sector datasets running through April 2026 are now available, but the recalculation of coverage rates has not yet been completed. She has demanded the government provide formal confirmation before the bill’s passage that the SRD 50,000 threshold is sufficient to deliver meaningful saver protection, and proposed enshrining a legal requirement that the guarantee amount be reviewed at minimum every two years and adjusted as needed to account for shifting economic conditions. Multiple fellow legislators raised additional critical concerns about the proposed framework. Asis Gajadien of the Progressive Reform Party (VHP) pointed out that at current exchange rates, SRD 50,000 translates to only a modest sum in U.S. dollars, and argued that a one-size-fits-all fixed cap fails to account for the diversity of depositor account types and holdings. National Party of Suriname (NPS) representative Jerrel Pawiroredjo emphasized that policymakers must not fixate solely on the percentage of fully covered depositors: other core factors including the deposit protection fund’s long-term financial solvency, broader banking sector stability, and the risk of public panic during a potential bank collapse must be weighted equally, and he requested full updated calculations from the Central Bank of Suriname before any final votes on the legislation. VHP lawmaker Ameerani Jarbandhan put forward a more aggressive amendment, calling for revisions to Article 7 of the bill to mandate automatic annual indexation of the guaranteed sum every July 1 tied to official inflation data, with provisions for semi-annual adjustments if annual inflation exceeds 25%. Jarbandhan highlighted that the purchasing power of SRD 50,000 has dropped dramatically since 2021, warning that a static guarantee would deliver steadily diminishing real protection for savers over time. Two additional NDP legislators, Ingrid Bouterse-Waldring and Tashana Lösche, also flagged the urgent need to protect the real value of the deposit guarantee against exchange rate fluctuations. Under the current draft text, the SRD 50,000 cap applies per individual per participating bank, regardless of how many separate accounts a saver holds at that institution, with separate coverage extended to depositors holding accounts across multiple different banks. The scheme is also set to cover U.S. dollar and euro denominated deposits, though a proposed amendment requires all payouts to be made in Surinamese dollars at the official exchange rate in effect on the day of disbursement, a clause several legislators have demanded the government clarify in full, including a formal breakdown of associated risks and the exact calculation methodology for conversion. The national government has not yet issued an official response to the raft of proposed amendments, and parliamentary deliberations on the two linked financial bills are scheduled to resume on Thursday.