Connect with us
//pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

China

US–China trade war : will there be a winner ?

The U.S. and China are hours away from a new round of tariffs on each other’s goods, with no improvement in relations between the two rivals in sight. Will there be a winner, or only two big losers ?

Published

on

The U.S. and China are hours away from a new round of tariffs on each other’s goods, with no improvement in relations between the two rivals in sight.

 

In a significant escalation, $200 billion of Chinese products will be subject to increased tariffs from 12:00 p.m. Beijing time on Monday, on top of the $50 billion in goods already charged higher duties earlier in the year. The combined $250 billion in products facing levies is almost half the value of imports from China last year.

Meanwhile, $60 billion of goods from the U.S. will become subject to Chinese higher tariffs around the same time, adding to the $50 billion already levied. That’ll mean about 70 percent of the value of goods China bought from America in 2017 face tariffs.

There are three major explanations for why the United States began its recent trade war with China

United States wants to reduce its trade deficit

The first is that the United States wants to reduce its trade deficits. US President Donald Trump tweeted on 4 April 2018 that ‘[the United States has] a Trade Deficit of $500 Billion a year, with Intellectual Property Theft of another $300 Billion. We cannot let this continue!’. Many US commentators think that the gargantuan imbalance translates into an incremental increase in US indebtedness to China, which they consider to be a huge vulnerability for the United States.

The United States wants to slow China’s progress toward being a high-tech superpower

The second is that the United States wants to slow China’s progress toward being a high-tech superpower. The main sectors in China getting hit are machinery, electronics and IT technology. This is tantamount to the United States’ directly targeting Made in China 2025.

The final explanation is that ‘Trump favours highly transactional exchanges’ and wants an increased stock of bargaining chips. Trump may well have begun a trade war with China now so that he can relinquish it later in exchange for cooperation over perplexing political and security issues.

Whatever the cause, China has been bashed by the trade war. Over the last five months, the Shanghai Composite Index — a barometer of the Chinese stock market — has plummeted by approximately 18 per cent and the Chinese renminbi has depreciated nearly 8 per cent. Because China is still export dependent, the trade war will make Chinese export firms lose approximately US$22 billion and will cause unemployment, especially in China’s east coast.

China faces daunting domestic challenges

Even without the trade war, China faces daunting domestic challenges.

After years of work, China’s economic structural change is slowly progressing. China’s private consumption as percentage of GDP has been increasing since 2010, but it has not yet breached 40 per cent (compared to a US average of 68 per cent). China’s gross savings rate is more than 46 per cent of GNP against the United States’ 17.3 per cent.

Continued high national savings for a long time fully financed Chinese investment and sustained it at a very high level. Even today, China’s investment accounts for 44.4 per cent of GDP. This prolonged investment on a massive scale has created significant overcapacity in a range of sectors and has engendered much debt — part of which has become non-performing loans.

The trade war will only drive the renminbi to further depreciate

Amid China’s internal issues, the trade war will only drive the renminbi to further depreciate. In recent months, Beijing has taken a series of monetary and fiscal initiatives to boost lending and restructure debt.

These initiatives may ameliorate the situation in the short term, but solving the problems completely and successfully will take much longer than expected. If the trade war lingers on until the end of 2018 or even till 2019, market sell-off pressure on the renminbi will likely increase. In addition, US economic indicators look sublime and the almost-inevitable interest rate raise will facilitate further renminbi depreciation.

The worst case scenario would be a persistent trade war coupled with US interest rate increases. This would elicit very negative sentiment and might cause large-scale capital flight from China.

But can the United States achieve the objectives it seeks from the trade war?

The United States cannot drive down or stop trade deficits for the foreseeable future. Anyone who understands balance of payments accounting knows that the sum of the current account and the capital account must equal zero. The United States has very flexible and liquid capital markets with highly credible governance, which lures countries with trade surpluses to export a large part of their excess savings to the United States.

In 2017, US net financial inflows stood at more than US$375 billion, and the capital account surplus exceeded US$400 billion. Further, in today’s trade regime, the capital account drives the savings account. Unless the United States can flip around its capital account surplus, overall trade deficits will remain huge.

Similarly, the United States will struggle to blight China’s Made in China 2025 initiative.

Technology innovation and investment are being promoted by the Chinese government.

There are now 1775 Chinese venture capital firms. China is determined to narrow the income gap between itself and the advanced countries. So a trade war aiming to refrain China from technological enhancement will ‘only strengthen Chinese leaders’ resolve to boost innovation and achieve technological supremacy, as they realise that they can’t rely on others’, as Joseph Stiglitz notes.

Finally, if Trump plans on using a trade war as a bargaining chip, he should know that China will not likely compromise, at least in the short term. Popular anger and national sentiment may well surge about the trade war, which would leave the Chinese government with little choice but to stand firm. China could use ‘strong sales of US brands’ as its own bargaining chip, but if the trade war lasts for more months and China’s economy continues to worsen, the US bargaining chips might increase in potency. Yet still, China could hardly give in to any conditions that violate its national interests.

The trade war will accomplish neither country’s objectives.

China and the United States need to install an effective communications channel, dispatch high-echelon officials who deeply understand each other, come to negotiations, and as Harvard economist Dani Rodrik suggests, ‘do not impose on other countries constraints that you would not accept if faced with their circumstances’.

Yuhan Zhang is an economist and independent researcher.

Who will be the winner of the US–China trade war? | East Asia Forum

Continue Reading

China

Wang Yi, China’s Foreign Minister, will visit Australia to discuss trade and technology.

Published

on

China’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Wang Yi, will visit New Zealand and Australia from March 17 to March 21, 2024, following invitations from both countries. The visit will include discussions on various bilateral and regional issues, including trade relations and scientific cooperation.


UPDATE (March 15, 2024): China’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Wang Yi, is set to embark on a key diplomatic mission to New Zealand and Australia from March 17 to March 21, 2024. This visit comes following invitations from New Zealand’s Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister, Peters, and Australian Foreign Minister Marise Payne. A pivotal aspect of Wang Yi’s agenda will be his attendance at the seventh round of China-Australia Diplomatic and Strategic Dialogue (hereinafter, “the Dialogue”), scheduled during his stay in Australia. The Dialogue is anticipated to tackle various bilateral and regional issues.

As reported by SCMP on February 29, 2024, Australia has extended an official invitation to China’s foreign minister, Wang Yi, marking a significant development in the ongoing dialogue between the two nations.

Against this backdrop, the invitation reflects a concerted effort to address a range of contentious issues that have strained diplomatic ties in recent years.

The upcoming discussions between China and Australia will center around critical issues that have the potential to shape the trajectory of their bilateral relations. The negotiation dynamics between these two countries are marked by a nuanced interplay of interests, priorities, and strategic imperatives.

Australia’s Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) is actively advocating for the lifting of sanctions on Australian wine and lobsters, which have strained trade relations between the two countries. Seeking sanctions relief underscores Australia’s efforts to alleviate economic pressures and facilitate bilateral trade and investment.

Concurrently, China is pressing Australia to commit to a new Science and Technology Agreement, aiming to foster collaborative efforts in areas of mutual interest. Despite challenges posed by the broader geopolitical context, China’s emphasis on scientific and technological cooperation reflects its acknowledgment of the benefits of engagement and partnership in addressing global challenges and promoting sustainable development.

This article is republished from China Briefing. Read the rest of the original article.

China Briefing is written and produced by Dezan Shira & Associates. The practice assists foreign investors into China and has done since 1992 through offices in Beijing, Tianjin, Dalian, Qingdao, Shanghai, Hangzhou, Ningbo, Suzhou, Guangzhou, Dongguan, Zhongshan, Shenzhen, and Hong Kong. Please contact the firm for assistance in China at china@dezshira.com.

Continue Reading

China

China props up state-owned developer Vanke as property crisis deepens

Published

on

China has asked 12 banks to provide financing to the beleaguered state-owned real estate firm, Vanke Group, just days after the housing and urban-rural development ministry vowed to let insolvent property developers go bankrupt.

The Chinese government’s support bucks its recent trend of letting indebted developers take their own downward course, which has compounded a spiraling crisis in the sector, once a major economic growth driver. 

Privately-held Evergrande Group and Country Garden Holdings were left to their own devices as their debts soared, leaving their creditors and homebuyers high and dry in trying to recover investments. The Hong Kong High Court issued a liquidation order for Evergrande in January. A similar fate looms for Country Garden which received a liquidation petition from one of its creditors in Hong Kong. Both companies are listed in Hong Kong.

In contrast, rescue efforts for Vanke, part-owned by the Shenzhen government, are being coordinated by the State Council, China’s cabinet amid Chinese President Xi Jinping’s policy of advancing state enterprises and a retreat of the private sector. 

The State Council has requested financial institutions to make swift progress and called on creditors to consider private debt maturity extension, according to a Reuters report on Monday, citing unnamed sources. 

Separately, the state-owned Cailian Press reported that the 12 institutions are expected to raise as much as 80 billion yuan (US$11.1 billion) for Vanke. But the report cited sources saying that the attitude maintained by each bank was conservative.

Shaky ground

Nonetheless, Vanke is likely to stay on shaky ground among investors after rating agency Moody’s lowered its credit rating to “junk.” 

“The rating actions reflect Moody’s expectation that China Vanke’s credit metrics, financial flexibility and liquidity buffer will weaken over the next 12-18 months because of its declining contracted sales and the rising uncertainties over its access to funding amid the prolonged property market downturn in China,” said Kaven Tsang, a Moody’s senior vice president in a statement this week.

The rating agency said it has placed all the ratings on review for downgrade, as it saw the company’s ability to recover sales, improve funding access, and maintain an adequate liquidity buffer to be worrying.

The government’s bid to save Vanke has aroused discussion online. Some netizens questioned the discrepancy between saving Vanke and abandoning Evergrande, while others worried that saving Vanke would reduce national resources at a time when the economy is growing at its slowest pace since 1990. There are also many posts rationalizing the government’s efforts to support Vanke.

A Vanke sign is seen above workers working at the construction site of a residential building in Dalian, Liaoning province, China September 16, 2019. (Stringer/File Photo/Reuters)

The blogger “Wuxinxinshuofang” believes that propping up Vanke is to ensure that the “hunt” for foreign capital won’t be disrupted by a Vanke-triggered real estate crisis. 

“The collapse of Vanke will bring about the debt crisis and liquidity crisis of all real estate companies. Efforts so far to prop up the market have only begun to show effects. Vanke can fail next year, but not this,” the blogger wrote.

Zombie developers to zombie banks?

Frank Xie, a professor at the University of South Carolina Aiken Business School, attributed Beijing’s support to Vanke’s state-owned background.

“The Chinese Communist Party cannot let Vanke fail, because the CCP [Communist Party of China] treats its own people and outsiders differently,” Xie pointed out. 

The failure of any state-owned assets would be “tantamount to the bankruptcy of national capital, questioning the Communist Party’s ability to run enterprises.”

Xie said that Chinese banks have accumulated a large backlog of mortgage loans involving real estate, and even assisting Vanke will only delay the explosion.

“As for other private companies facing the same problems as Evergrande, the CCP cannot save them, nor does it want to save them,” he added.

Beijing has also established a “white list” of approved property projects by distressed developers that banks and financial institutions should support in a stop-gap measure. Those deemed beyond rescue should go bankrupt.

2024-03-12T053841Z_1854898123_RC24K6AOK1VU_RTRMADP_3_CHINA-PROPERTY-DEBT-VANKE.JPG
A person walks past by a gate with a sign of Vanke at a construction site in Shanghai, China, March 21, 2017. Picture taken March 21, 2017. (Aly Song/File Photo/Reuters)

Chen Songxing, director of the New Economic Policy Research Center at National Donghua University in Taiwan, said that the Chinese official statement of “bankruptcy should be bankrupt” is merely to show the outside world Beijing is unable to save real estate developers. 

Chen said the amount of rescue for Vanke this time was insufficient to solve the problem, given how intertwined the real estate and banking industries are. He warned this was only a delay tactic which could lead to a bigger crisis.

“China’s current financial situation actually does not have the ability to save the real estate industry, as this is just transferring the debts of real estate developers and local governments to banks. 

“If you continue to save these zombie real estate developers this year, it is very likely that banks will also become zombies in the future. It is very detrimental to China’s economic development,” Chen said.

Edited by Taejun Kang and Mike Firn. 

Read the rest of this article here >>> China props up state-owned developer Vanke as property crisis deepens

Continue Reading

China

China to update M&A Regulations in 2024: Changes to Filing Thresholds

Published

on

China’s State Council has implemented revised Provisions on Declaration Standards for Business Operator Concentration, effective from January 22, 2024. Originally proposed by SAMR in June 2022, the 2024 Provisions have raised turnover criteria, benefiting big tech firms and multinational companies involved in M&A activities.


China’s State Council has released the revised Provisions of the State Council on Declaration Standards Regarding the  Concentration of Business Operators, which took effect from January 22, 2024.

The 2024 Provisions were initially proposed by the State Administration for Market Regulation (SAMR) in June 2022. The comparatively slow legislation process indicates the Provisions had been subjected to heated discussion within the government organs.

Notably, the 2024 Provisions dropped some specific standards proposed in the 2022 draft that required any deal involving a company with annual China revenues over RMB 100 billion to be subject to review by the authorities. According to analysts, this roll-back was designed to favor the big tech firms originally, but will concurrently benefit all multinational companies (MNCs).

This article delves into the significant revisions to China’s M&A declaration thresholds and their implications, providing crucial insights for businesses and stakeholders involved in merger activities.

The 2024 Provisions have significantly raised the turnover criteria for the declaration threshold for concentration of undertakings.

The term “concentration of undertakings” refers to any of the following circumstances:

This article is republished from China Briefing. Read the rest of the original article.

China Briefing is written and produced by Dezan Shira & Associates. The practice assists foreign investors into China and has done since 1992 through offices in Beijing, Tianjin, Dalian, Qingdao, Shanghai, Hangzhou, Ningbo, Suzhou, Guangzhou, Dongguan, Zhongshan, Shenzhen, and Hong Kong. Please contact the firm for assistance in China at china@dezshira.com.

Continue Reading