The independent Cuban economist Pedro Monreal published a thread of five tweets this Saturday on his X account in which he questioned one of the conceptual pillars of the package of 176 economic measures approved by the regime: the announced transition to a "financial planning model".
In the first message, Monreal stated that "the conceptual vagueness is one of the central traits of the 176 measures, which do not constitute a design for reform." In his view, the reference to financial planning "serves as political rhetoric and conceals what is not intended to be changed".
However, the economist stressed that this formulation does not represent a paradigm shift and reminded that the document 'Conceptualization of the Cuban economic and social model', updated in 2021, explicitly defines centralized planning as "the guiding category, defining the management system."
According to Monreal, the essential feature of the model is not whether planning utilizes material or financial mechanisms, but rather that the State maintains centralized control over the entire economy.
From there, he developed the core of his argument and asserted that discussing a transition towards financial planning merely involves a change in the emphasis on the instruments used by the State, rather than a transformation of the model.
In this regard, he recalled that the very Conceptualization document already included the use of direct and indirect instruments of economic regulation without abandoning the conscious direction of the economy by the state apparatus.
Monreal elaborated on this idea by indicating that an increased use of monetary, fiscal, financial, and profitability indicators does not imply a withdrawal of the State, but rather a different way of exercising control. Planning continues to exist, but through financial levers instead of the physical allocation of resources.
With a certain dose of irony, Monreal inverted the classic concept of Adam Smith regarding "the invisible hand of the market" to discuss "the invisible hand of the State": under the guise of greater utilization of market signals, he argued, political power would continue to decide the allocation of resources through financial mechanisms whose logic remains subordinate to central planning.
The economist concluded by questioning the lack of clarity in the new concept. In his view, the government did not clarify whether the so-called financial planning constitutes a stable model or if it represents a step towards a mixed market economy. This ambiguity, he asserted, reveals a hasty pragmatism that leaves the main questions about the country's economic direction unanswered.
The criticism is part of a sustained sequence of analysis by the economist regarding the package approved on June 18 and 19, 2026, during an extraordinary session of the National Assembly of People's Power, presented by Prime Minister Manuel Marrero Cruz as "the largest structural reform since the Special Period of the 1990s."
From the very beginning, Monreal warned that the 176 measures are a "monster" or "deformed hybrid" that introduces market elements without substantively acknowledging private property or ensuring an independent rule of law.
In previous analyses, the economist described the ninth measure as "anti-worker" for linking state salaries to the "financial capacity" of companies, and warned about the uncertainties of the package regarding exchange rates, pointing out that measures 99 and 100 do not specify the exchange regime or the reference for a potential devaluation of the Cuban peso.
He also warned that the combination of measures 117 and 118 could increase the cost of the basic basket and referred to the newly created National Institute of State Business Assets (INAEES) as the "grave digger of public enterprises" for centralizing economic power instead of decentralizing it.
The analysis this Saturday arrives in a context of growing citizen skepticism about the regime's real capacity to implement structural changes, amidst widespread blackouts, shortages of food and fuel, a massive exodus of the population, and a GDP that the government itself projects will grow by just 1% in 2026.
Monreal has repeatedly pointed out that the Cuban economic model remains anchored in Soviet-style planning approaches from the 1960s that have already failed in the USSR, and that Cuba has attempted similar reforms multiple times—during the Special Period of the 90s, and the Guidelines of Raúl Castro from 2011 to 2016—without ever abandoning centralized control.
«The numbers don’t add up, and the government wants to make it appear that it’s not a matter of mathematics, but of will,» summarized the economist in June.
Related videos:
Filed under: