The Rial Cannot Collapse to Zero

Iran's rial is not collapsing to zero. It is undergoing functional decomposition. When a currency operates across multiple exchange tiers with spreads exceeding thirty times, it ceases to serve as a coherent unit of account. The current crisis reflects not a discrete break but a progressive loss of monetary coherence driven by fiscal dominance, multi-tier arbitrage, and expectation feedback loops. The planned redenomination, removing four zeros from the nominal rate, addresses accounting inconvenience without altering the underlying mechanics. What the market perceives as terminal decline is better understood as the gradual transition from a managed currency regime to an informal dollarization equilibrium where the rial persists in form but not in substance.

Iran's currency regime exists under conditions of sustained fiscal stress, constrained external earnings, and institutional subordination of monetary policy to state finance. The rial traded at approximately seventy per dollar in 1979. By January 2026, the open market rate reached 1.47 million. The regime has operated with chronic budget deficits exceeding thirty percent of expenditures since 2018, when renewed sanctions severed access to international financial infrastructure and compressed oil export revenues. Government debt to the Central Bank increased seventy-two percent year-over-year through mid-2024, illustrating the direct monetization of fiscal shortfalls. The central bank functions as an extension of state fiscal needs, setting interest rates and reserve requirements based on political priorities rather than inflation targets. This subordination removes the institutional buffer that typically constrains monetary expansion in response to fiscal pressure.

Oil export revenues projected for the fiscal year beginning March 2026 amount to roughly two billion dollars at official exchange rates, insufficient to cover import requirements for essential goods. Tax revenues, despite a projected sixty-three percent increase, originate from a narrow base in an economy where state-linked entities controlling over half of GDP operate outside conventional fiscal oversight. The mismatch between revenue constraints and spending obligations creates persistent demand for central bank financing, embedding inflation into the monetary base regardless of exchange rate policy.

Iran operates a multi-tier exchange system with three principal rates serving distinct transaction channels. The official rate, fixed at 42,000 rials per dollar, applies to a shrinking category of essential imports. The NIMA rate, a managed interbank mechanism, trades closer to commercial realities but remains administratively allocated. The open market rate, determined by parallel channels including regional curb markets and offshore trading in Dubai and Europe, reflects unfiltered supply and demand dynamics. As of January 2026, the gap between the official and open market rates exceeds thirty-five times. This differential creates a permanent arbitrage opportunity where access to subsidized foreign exchange translates directly into rents.

The structure incentivizes three reinforcing behaviors. Importers with access to official or NIMA rates can purchase subsidized dollars and either sell them at market rates or import goods priced at the subsidized rate and sell domestically at prices reflecting open market costs. Exporters required to surrender hard currency earnings at below-market rates face reduced incentives to maximize export revenues, encouraging underinvoicing and offshore retention. Households and small businesses excluded from preferential access treat the open market rate as the only relevant price signal, driving defensive conversion of rial-denominated savings into dollars, gold, or physical inventory as soon as income is received. The combined effect drains liquidity from the rial while expanding the monetary base through fiscal financing, accelerating depreciation.

In December 2025, the government eliminated subsidized foreign exchange for several import categories, forcing transactions to the open market rate. The immediate market response saw the rial weaken from approximately 1.2 million to 1.47 million per dollar within weeks. The move represents not policy error but recognition of a binding constraint. Allocating eighteen billion dollars annually at subsidized rates became fiscally infeasible when oil revenues contracted. The elimination of subsidies transfers inflation from the fiscal account to the exchange rate, making the cost visible in nominal depreciation rather than hidden in fiscal deficits.

The structure also embeds institutional corruption as a design feature. The Debsh Tea Company case, involving 3.37 billion dollars in subsidized currency allocated for tea and machinery imports, illustrates the scale. Officials received foreign exchange at NIMA rates, sold a portion at open market rates, failed to import contracted equipment, and imported substandard tea misrepresented as premium grade. Such cases emerge from a system where the spread between official and market rates creates profit pools exceeding those available through legitimate commerce.

The market narrative frames the rial's trajectory as a collapse toward zero, a binary endpoint where the currency loses all value. This framing misreads the mechanics. A currency cannot trade at zero while the state issuing it continues to operate and demand payment of taxes, fees, and domestic obligations in that unit. The rial's nominal exchange rate can add zeros indefinitely without reaching zero in the mathematical sense. What is occurring instead is a loss of monetary function across three dimensions. As a unit of account, the rial becomes unreliable when the same transaction price varies by a factor of thirty-five depending on access to exchange channels. As a medium of exchange, the rial remains legally required for domestic transactions but loses credibility for deferred settlement or long-term contracts. As a store of value, it fails completely. Inflation at forty-two percent annually guarantees purchasing power erosion faster than most savings instruments can compensate.

The redenomination plan approved in October 2025 proposes removing four zeros from the rial over a five-year transition period. If implemented, a rate of 1.47 million would display as approximately 147 new units per dollar. This cosmetic adjustment does not alter purchasing power, inflation dynamics, or fiscal constraints. Historical precedents from Venezuela and Zimbabwe demonstrate that redenomination without addressing underlying fiscal dominance merely resets the count before renewed depreciation adds zeros again.

The resignation of Central Bank Governor Mohammad Reza Farzin in December 2025 was interpreted as accountability for currency weakness. Yet during his tenure from December 2022, the rial depreciated from 430,000 to over 1.4 million per dollar. This outcome reflects not personal failure but institutional impossibility. No governor can stabilize a currency when fiscal deficits require continuous monetary expansion, oil revenues remain under sanction-driven constraints, and the exchange system fragments price signals into incompatible tiers.

The progressive loss of currency function accelerates informalization of economic activity. When the rial cannot reliably store value between earning and spending, households compress time horizons. Wages received in rials convert immediately to dollars, gold, or inventory. Small businesses cannot maintain intergenerational continuity when inventory costs fluctuate with exchange swings and savings lack stable value.

Import dependence intensifies fragility. Iran sources substantial volumes of wheat, cooking oil, animal feed, and pharmaceutical ingredients from external markets. When the currency weakens, import costs rise mechanically. The government faces an insoluble trilemma. Subsidizing imports at preferential exchange rates drains foreign reserves and creates arbitrage rents. Allowing imports at market rates transfers inflation directly to food and medicine prices, triggering social unrest. Restricting imports to conserve foreign exchange creates shortages and rationing. Each option imposes costs the government lacks resources to absorb.

Energy sector dysfunction compounds these pressures. Rolling blackouts lasting three to four hours daily since February 2025 reflect chronic underinvestment in generation capacity. Roughly half of Iran's industrial base operates intermittently due to power constraints, lowering productivity and weakening the competitive position of non-oil exports. The energy crisis operates as both cause and consequence of currency weakness, creating a self-reinforcing cycle where depreciation limits investment in infrastructure while infrastructure deficits limit the productive capacity needed to stabilize the currency.

The December 2025 protests originating in Tehran's Grand Bazaar signal a shift from economic grievance to regime-legitimacy risk. Historically, bazaar mobilization preceded major political transitions, including the 1979 overthrow of the monarchy. When merchants close shops in coordinated protest, it indicates that the commercial core of society no longer finds the economic system navigable.

Several factors could arrest or reverse the rial's functional deterioration, though none appear imminent. A credible fiscal consolidation program would require reducing budget deficits below levels financeable through monetary expansion. This necessitates either substantial revenue increases from sources beyond oil exports or expenditure cuts affecting military commitments, subsidy programs, and state sector employment. Security institutions and religious foundations controlling significant economic resources operate with tax exemptions and regulatory immunity, placing their activities outside conventional fiscal tools.

Sanctions relief would restore access to oil export markets and international financial infrastructure, expanding foreign exchange earnings and reducing pressure on the currency. Nuclear negotiations offer a potential pathway, but recent history suggests limited durability. Even successful negotiations would likely produce phased sanctions relief conditional on verification, creating implementation risk and delaying material economic impact.

Exchange rate unification could eliminate arbitrage opportunities and restore price signal coherence, but the 2022 attempt to unify rates triggered a temporary inflation surge and public backlash severe enough to force partial reversal. A genuine unification would immediately increase prices for goods currently subsidized at preferential rates, requiring fiscal resources the government lacks to compensate vulnerable households.

Central bank independence would require legal and institutional reforms that separate monetary authority from fiscal demands. Turkey's successful redenomination in 2005 occurred only after such reforms were implemented under IMF oversight, driving inflation to single digits before removing zeros. Iran faces no comparable external pressure or institutional framework to support similar transformation.

The rial's trajectory represents not currency collapse but currency decomposition. The distinction matters. Collapse implies a discrete endpoint where the currency ceases to exist. Decomposition describes the progressive loss of monetary functions while the currency continues circulating. Iran's multi-tier exchange system has fragmented the rial into several parallel instruments with exchange rates varying by factors of thirty-five. In this environment, the rial persists as legal tender but increasingly fails to serve as a reliable unit of account, medium of exchange, or store of value.

The mechanics driving decomposition are structural rather than cyclical. Fiscal deficits financed through central bank monetization expand the money supply faster than productive capacity. Sanctions constrain oil revenues while limiting access to international finance, leaving monetary expansion as the residual financing mechanism. The multi-tier exchange system creates arbitrage rents that benefit politically connected networks while draining foreign reserves. Each element reinforces the others, creating a self-sustaining cycle where currency weakness accelerates the conditions producing further weakness.

The redenomination will not alter these dynamics. Removing four zeros converts 1.47 million rials per dollar to approximately 147 new units per dollar, making transactions numerically simpler without changing purchasing power or inflation rates. Without credible institutional reforms to support the new currency, market participants will anticipate resumed depreciation and behave accordingly.

The path forward involves not a discrete crisis requiring immediate resolution but a gradual adaptation to currency dysfunction. Informal dollarization will likely deepen as more commerce occurs in hard currency or cryptocurrency while rial transactions increasingly function as nominal settlement mechanisms for obligations denominated elsewhere. The rial will not collapse to zero. It will continue adding zeros while serving fewer monetary functions, until the gap between nominal form and economic substance becomes too wide to ignore, forcing either structural reform or explicit currency substitution. Neither outcome appears imminent, leaving Iran in an equilibrium defined by progressive loss rather than discrete break.

—

This analysis is for educational purposes. It does not constitute investment advice or a recommendation to buy or sell any security. Investors should conduct their own due diligence and consult financial advisors.

Sources: