分类: 未分类

  • 世界进入免费贷款时代

    疫情世界大流行重创经济,导致债务激增,各国已将利率降低至历史的最低,而且业内人士预计未来较长时间不会提高利率。这个情况带来非常深远的后果。

    零利率时代

    法国世界报记者Eric Albert7月6日刊文说,政府,企业,家庭:贷款吧,现在正逢良机,利率从未如此之低,而且未来较长时间内不会涨回去。其实在世界进入Covid-19疫情大流行之际,借贷利率已经是2008年金融危机以来的最低。

    为了在危机期间让各国筹集资金,央行走得更远,朝着货币几乎免费的新货币时代多前进了一点。法国安盛投资管理公司(AXA INVESTMENT MANAGERS)的Mikaël Pacot先生解释说,“利率会在很长时间内非常低。” 丹麦盛宝银行(Saxo Bank)的Christopher Dembik先生也证实说,“我们不会在短期内摆脱离扩张性货币政策”。

    法国世界报说,对于全球经济而言,央行此举将带来重大后果。各央行维持零利率的举措影响到其他的一切因素,比如让购房家庭更便宜地借到钱;让持有资产的最富有家庭变得更富有,同时加剧社会阶层之间和两代人之间的不平等。反过来,现在把钱存在银行里,已赚不到利息了。但是,央行的低利率却可让各国政府前所未有地借到债。

    美联储带头

    随着疫情大流行,所有主要央行都通过启动空前规模的购债计划,对经济提供援助。例如,欧洲央行(ECB)拿出超过1.5万亿欧元,让欧元区的国家更容易筹集资金。虽然各央行都官方宣称,干预行动是暂时的,并且保证会很快提高利率,回归“常态”。不过,惠誉国际评级(Fitch Ratings)首席经济师布莱恩-库尔顿(Brian Coulton)反驳说:“他们在2008-2009年也说过同样的话。”可是十年来的经验教训是,中央银行在恢复常态方面没有走太远。另据牛津经济研究分析公司估计,至少在“未来五年”内,利率会处在低水平。

    法国世界报说,利率的下降趋势可以追溯到1980年代后期。当年美联储 (Fed) 就是带头降息的央行之一。1987年黑色星期一的股灾重创了全球股市。当时美联储主席格林斯潘(Alan Greenspan )刚上任两个月。他承诺在金融泡沫破裂时,不会出手干预,并表示相信市场本身的调节力量。然而,他所做的与他说的这些话恰恰相反,股灾出现后,他立即宣布“随时准备提供流动性”。

    从那以后,每次发生危机,所有的央行都效仿美联储主席法格林斯潘的这个做法,来支持经济,并且干预力度越来越大。比如在2008年大规模金融危机中,欧洲央行和美联储都首次把利率降为零。这样还不够,还启动了购债行动,也就是“量化宽松”政策。不过在2017年,确实美联储试图正常化,调升了利率。可是此举随即引发了金融市场严重动荡,结果在第一次警讯出现后,美联储就恢复了零利率。

    存款负利率

    位于法兰克福的欧洲央行却从未接近过任何正常状态。而且它的存款利率甚至在2014年变成了负数,首先是-0.1%,然后逐渐下降到目前的-0.5%。

    在全球范围内,经济参与者们当然都利用这些反复的降息政策,享受超低利率贷款。但同时他们也承担更多的负债。

    位于亚特兰大的资产管理公司Invesco研究评估指出,30多年来,世界前25个经济体的债务负担越来越重。这些经济体的国家债务,企业债务,家庭债务加在一起,与GDP的比例,从1980年的150%,增加到今天的250%。那么,这样债台高垒,灾难是要来了吗?该公司的分析师Paul Jackson表示,“只要经济增长,而且融资成本很低,就不成问题”。换句话说,只要保持超低利率,一切就都好。不过惠誉主权国家债券总监托尼-斯金格警告说:“我们处在一个恶性循环当中。各国使用这些低利率借贷越多,央行收紧货币政策的能力就越弱。”

    负债多一倍,利息少一倍

    世界报这篇文章说,自疫情大流行以来,各国都发现了这棵神奇的摇钱树,并且花钱如流水。比如,法国政府支出创下了历史新高:补贴部分失业用300亿欧元,延迟企业税费需要320亿美元,还有,对汽车业,航空业,旅游业等各业的援救补贴计划,如果没有央行干预,是根本是不可能实现的。

    如今,法国的十年期债券利率,徘徊在零附近,德国为-0.4%,英国为0.2%。世界报说,这就导出一个奇特的悖论。以法国为例:从2008年到2020年低,国家债务与GDP的比例,从70%增加到115%。但同期,法国为这些债务支付的年息却从GDP的2.8%降到了1.4%。也就是说,债务增加了一倍,债务在政府预算的权重,反而减少了一半。Paul Jackson总结说,这是多亏了几个世纪以来的最低利率。

  • Letting BI supervise banks could backfire, experts warn

    Transferring the Financial Services Authority’s (OJK) supervision over banking back to Bank Indonesia (BI) could cause investors to lose confidence in the country, experts have warned.

    Institute for Development of Economics and Finance (Indef) economist Eko Listiyanto said on Friday that the move could create more uncertainties in the country’s financial sector amid an already risk-filled COVID-19 situation.

    Such a move, he added, could signal that institutions that were supposed to be independent of the government were easily influenced by political interests.

    “This is a political move. President Jokowi [Joko Widodo] should really think about the repercussions and impact on investor confidence in Indonesia,” he told The Jakarta Post, urging the government to focus instead on its efforts to curb the spread of COVID-19.

    Once foreign investors started to lose their confidence in the country, Eko said, Indonesia would face tougher challenges. Foreign investment could leave the country and weaken the rupiah exchange rate, and it could be harder for the government to obtain funding for pandemic-related measures.

    According to a Reuters report, Jokowi is considering issuing an emergency decree to return banking regulation to the central bank because of his dissatisfaction with the OJK’s performance during the pandemic.

    The OJK was established in 2011 to oversee financial institutions. It was modeled on the financial services regulatory structure the prevailed in the United Kingdom at the time. The OJK assumed the role of regulator and supervisor of banks in 2013, taking the responsibility from the central bank.

    One Reuters source said the government was looking at the French structure, where an independent administrative authority under the central bank oversees banking.

    However, presidential expert staff member Dini Shanti Purwono denied the claim. “There has not been any official discussion of the matter so far,” she told the Post.

    Neither BI nor the OJK had responded to the Post’s request for comment by the time of writing.

    The report came after a Cabinet meeting on June 18 where Jokowi said he would reshuffle the Cabinet or even disband government agencies if he felt they had not done enough to tackle the crises brought about by the pandemic.

    The Supreme Audit Agency (BPK) concluded earlier this year that aspects of the OJK’s supervision were not in line with prevailing regulations.

    Although Eko acknowledged that the OJK’s supervision was far from satisfactory, he said the government should reflect on its response to the pandemic before accusing the OJK of ineffective supervision.

    “The government should remember that this was caused by its delayed response to the pandemic, which then caused disruptions to the real sector and hit the financial sector,” he said.

    Indonesia’s loan growth slowed to 5.7 percent year-on-year (yoy) in April, from 7.9 percent recorded in March, Bank Indonesia (BI) data shows. The outbreak has depressed loan demand and disrupted business activity, and some borrowers are facing difficulties repaying their loans.

    As of June 22, the country’s banks had restructured loans worth a total of Rp 695.3 trillion for 6.35 million borrowers, in accordance with a recent OJK regulation that instructed financial institutions to provide relief for borrowers affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.

    Banking expert Paul Sutaryono said the central bank would have to carry heavier responsibilities if the plan went ahead.

    “If OJK’s supervision is deemed unsatisfactory, it doesn’t mean the OJK should be disbanded and its supervisory function brought back to BI,” he said. “It would be wiser if the top management was changed.”

    “Its supervision needs to be improved – not only its quality, such as human resources and the supervision volume, but also the number of the supervisors,” he added.

    Heri Gunawan, a Gerindra politician and member of House of Representatives Commission XI overseeing financial affairs, said a proposal currently on the House’s priority legislation list to revise regulations governing BI might also include discussions about returning the supervisory and regulatory function to the central bank.

    “However, I think we should conduct a comprehensive study before deciding on it because it will make BI’s task a lot harder,” he said.

  • Soaring saving rates pose policy dilemma for world’s central bankers

    Households across the world have been saving up since the coronavirus pandemic hit the global economy, but their cash stash poses a dilemma for policymakers as they try to gauge the amount of stimulus needed to fuel a return to growth.

    It is not clear whether the money represents pent-up consumer demand that is itching to be spent as lockdowns are lifted, known as involuntary saving, or a safety net put aside by households to insure against uncertain times ahead, referred to as precautionary saving. 

    If consumers rush back to the shops, extra government stimulus threatens to generate too much spending and inflation; but if they continue to hoard their incomes, too little stimulus threatens a vicious circle of weak expenditure, slower recovery and higher unemployment.

    The two trends are not mutually exclusive — the likeliest outcome is a bit of both — but the dilemma about which will be more powerful is pitting some of the big beasts in central banking on either side of an intellectual divide. 

    Christine Lagarde, president of the European Central Bank, recently cited a surge in household bank deposits as reason for caution on the speed of the economic recovery, which she forecast would be “sequential and restrained”. But Andy Haldane, chief economist of the Bank of England, said last week that involuntary saving caused by the lockdown was of a scale sufficient to “potentially dwarf any voluntary rise in savings for precautionary purposes”.

    The high level of saving is due in part to governments’ actions to protect the workforce from the sharp downturn. Even though large numbers of households in advanced economies in the US, Europe and Asia have suffered falls in earnings during the pandemic, their incomes have been partly protected, through either welfare systems, such as in the US, or short-time working, mostly in Europe. 

    As shops closed and travel and tourism ground to a halt, households were left with fewer opportunities to spend.

    As a result, the eurozone household saving rate — defined as gross saving divided by gross disposable income — rose to 16.9 per cent in the first three months of the year, up from 12.7 per cent in the previous quarter and the highest since records began in 1999, according to Eurostat data. 

    In the UK, it rose to 8.6 per cent in the same period, from 5.4 per cent in the same quarter a year earlier. In the US, the personal savings rate surged from 7.9 per cent at the start of the year to more than 32 per cent in April, before dropping back somewhat to 23.2 per cent in May, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis.

    Alongside the sharp rise in saving rates, bank deposits have grown at a record pace.

    The sharp increase in household bank deposits in the eurozone suggests that increased s aving continued for much of the second quarter. In the three months to May, eurozone households increased their bank deposits by €71bn a month on average — more than double the same period last year.

    Tim Congdon, an economist who tracks money supply figures, said the growth in deposits in the US and around the world had been “unprecedented in modern peacetime history”. He warned that at some point, such moves would lead to “a significant uptick in inflation”.

    The most recent data have provided some corroborating evidence for those who believe the consumer will come roaring back as economies reopen — there are already signs of a rebound in retail expenditure in many developed nations. 

    French consumer spending on goods surged 36.6 per cent in May, while German retail spending shot up a record 13.6 per cent, rising even above pre-pandemic levels. 

    Katharina Utermöhl, economist at Allianz, said retail sales were likely to keep rising in June and July as the benefits of lifting the lockdowns were felt and as Germany’s temporary cut in value added tax encouraged more consumers to splash out.

    In South Korea, Miguel Chanco, senior Asia economist at Pantheon Macroeconomics, said: “The gains in sales since April have been robust enough to bring the overall level back up above its long-run trend.”

    But not every country can expect to enjoy a rebound in consumer spending. Although large-scale unemployment has so far been avoided — helped by furlough schemes such as those covering more than 40m people in the eurozone — significant job losses are expected in economies such as the US, Spain and Italy. Households in those countries are more likely to hang on to their savings, according to some economists.

    “Because the economic prospects are darker in some countries, like Spain and Italy, so there will be higher levels of precautionary savings in these countries,” Ms Utermöhl said. Allianz has forecasted that insolvencies will rise 12 per cent in Germany by the end of next year, while they will increase 41 per cent in Spain and 27 per cent in Italy. 

    Adam Slater, lead economist at Oxford Economics, said that across advanced economies it was too early to celebrate a V-shaped spending bounce just because there were some initial strong signs of life among consumers.

    “Unemployment and precautionary saving by firms and households will hold down spending,” he said, which would add to corporate bankruptcy threats. Ultimately, deflation was still much more of a risk than inflation, he added. 

    The effectiveness of each country’s health system in dealing with the spread of the virus is another factor that will influence their economic trajectory. The move by some US states to return to lockdown suggests that the virus’s threat to spending patterns is likely to persist for some time.

    Countries that have managed the health crisis well will enjoy a greater rebound in consumer confidence and quicker reopening, say economists — and that is what gives them the best chance of enjoying a V-shaped rebound.

  • European banks team up to offer alternative to Visa, Mastercard

    Sixteen European banks have teamed up to deliver by 2022 a new unified payment system that will offer consumers on the continent both cards and digital wallets that could offer a serious alternative to giants in the sector such as Visa and Mastercard.

    Dubbed the European Payments Initiative (EPI), the “solution aims to become a new standard means of payment for European consumers and merchants in all types of transactions including in-store, online, cash withdrawal and ‘peer-to-peer’ in addition to existing international payment scheme solutions,” the  consortium said in a statement. 

    The proposal would offer consumers the possibility to make instant transactions, a service start-ups have pioneered and which some European banks have begun to integrate into their offers.

    “The big innovation will be to allow making a payment to someone throughout Europe, seven days out of seven, instantaneously and, for example, with the telephone number of the beneficiary,” said Thierry Laborde, a senior executive at French bank BNP Paribas, one of the members of the consortium.

    With payment systems in Europe still fractured and digital services still not available everywhere, the banks behind the initiative believe that European and national authorities will find it useful.

    “The COVID-19 crisis has underlined the need for a unified European digital payment solution,” the EPI consortium said.

    “In this sense, EPI also aims to align the European payments ecosystem of banks, merchants and acquirers/payment services providers, thereby contributing to strengthening of the Single Market and the European digital agenda.” 

    The European Central Bank welcomed the initiative, noting that 10 European countries still have national card schemes that do not welcome cards from other EU member states.

    It said it supports private initiatives that are pan-European in reach, are cost efficient, secure and customer friendly.

    The consortium is still open and members urged others involved in the payments sector to join.

    The project, which is expected to cost several billion euros, aims to eventually capture at least 60 percent of electronic payments in Europe.

  • 货币是什么

    货币是什么?

    货币本质上是一种交换媒介,也可以用来储存财富。

    不言而喻,“交换媒介”指的是可以用来买东西的工具。而所谓财富储备,指的是在获取和消费之间储存购买力的工具。最合理的方式显然就是把钱存起来,以备不时之需,但人们往往不愿意持有货币,而总想把货币兑换成他们想买的东西。这就是信贷和债务发挥作用的地方。

    当出借人放贷时,他们认为收回的钱会比本身持有的钱购买更多的商品和服务。如果做得好,借贷者就能有效地使用这些钱并获得利润,进而偿还贷款并保留一些额外的钱。当贷款尚未偿还时,它是贷款人的资产,也是借款人的负债。当钱被偿还时,资产和负债就消失了,这种交换对借方和贷方都有好处。他们从本质上分享了这种生产性贷款的利润。整个社会也得益于这种机制所带来的生产力提高。

    因此,重要的是要意识到:

    1.大多数货币和信贷(尤其是现存的法定货币)没有内在价值

    2.会计系统,它只是日记可以很容易地改变

    3.系统的目的是帮助有效地分配资源以便生产力增长

    4.该系统会周期性崩溃。所有的货币不是被摧毁就是贬值,财富随之发生大规模转移,对经济和市场产生巨大影响。

    更具体地说,货币和信贷系统并没有完美地运转,而是在循环中改变货币的供应、需求和价值,在上升时产生富裕,在下降时产生重组。

  • 桥水基金创始人达里奥发布了2万字长文,以剖析在长期债务周期中,货币、信贷和债务的相互运作方式,以及它们驱动全球经济和政治变化的方式

    桥水基金创始人达里奥发布了2万字长文,以剖析在长期债务周期中,货币、信贷和债务的相互运作方式,以及它们驱动全球经济和政治变化的方式。达里奥指出,如果不了解货币、信贷和债务之间是如何运作的,就无法理解经济是如何运作的,进而就更无法理解整个经济政治体系是如何运作的。

    为了理解帝国及其经济起起落落的原因,以及现在世界秩序发生了什么,你需要理解货币、信贷和债务是如何运作的。这一点至关重要,因为从历史上看,无论是过去还是现在,人们最乐于为之奋斗的就是财富,而对财富的增减产生最大影响的就是货币和信贷。因此,如果不了解货币和信贷是如何运作的,就无法理解经济是如何运作的,进而就更无法理解整个经济政治体系是如何运作的。

    举个例子,如果不理解二十年代债务泡沫和贫富差距是如何产生的、债务泡沫的破裂又是如何导致了三十年代的大萧条,以及大萧条和过度的贫富差距如何引发了世界各地的冲突,那么也就无法理解是什么力量导致了富兰克林·罗斯福当选总统,以及在他当选后不久所推出的新计划(中央政府和美联储将共同提供大量的资金和信贷)。就是这些改变了当时的世界秩序,而这又与现在正在发生的事情颇为相似,了解其背后的机制和原理,将有助于更好地理解新冠病毒大流行的背景下,接下来会发生什么。

    永恒而普遍的基本原理:货币和信贷

    所有实体(国家、公司、非营利组织和个人)都需处理基本财务,他们的收入和支出构成了净收入,而这些流动是可以用资产负债表中的数字来衡量的。如果一个人赚的比花的多,他就会有利润,从而使他的储蓄增加。而如果一个人的支出大于收入,那么他的储蓄就会减少,或者他不得不通过借钱或来弥补差额。

    如果一个实体拥有巨额净资产,它的支出将可以高于收入,直到资金耗尽,这时它必须削减开支。如果不削减开支,它将会有大量负债/债务,如果它没有足够的收入来偿还,它就会违约。由于一个人的债务是另一个人的资产,债务违约会减少其他实体的资产,进而要求它们削减开支,从而导致债务下降和经济收缩。

    这种货币和信用体系适用于所有人、公司、非营利组织和政府,但有一个重要的例外。所有国家都可以印钞给人们消费或放贷。然而,并不是所有政府发行的货币都具有相同的价值。

    在世界范围内被广泛接受的被称为储备货币。而在当今世界上,占主导地位的储备货币是美元,由美联储发行,占所有国际交易的55%。另一种则是欧元,由欧洲央行发行,占所有国际交易的25%。目前,日元、人民币和英镑都是相对较小的储备货币,尽管人民币的重要性正迅速上升。

    拥有储备货币的国家更容易通过大量借贷摆脱困境。原因在于,世界上其他国家倾向于持有这些债务和货币,因为它们可以用来在世界各地消费。因此,拥有储备货币的国家可以发行大量以储备货币计价的信贷/债务,尤其是在目前这种储备货币短缺的情况下。

    而相比之下,没有储备货币的国家则没有这种选择。它们在以下情况中,特别需要这些储备货币(如美元):他们有很多以他们不能印刷的储备货币计价的债务(如美元);他们在这些储备货币上没有多少储蓄;他们获得所需货币的能力下降。当没有储备货币的国家急需储备货币来偿还他们的债务,以储备货币计价和交易的卖家希望它们用储备货币来支付时,它们就只能破产。这就是现在许多国家的情况。

    这也是许多州、地方政府、公司、非营利组织和个人会面临的情况。当它们遭受了收入损失,有没有多少存款来弥补损失时,它们将不得不削减开支或通过其他方式获得资金和信贷。

    这就是现在的世界上正在发生的事情:风险储蓄即将耗尽,以及债务违约的风险。有能力这样做的政府正在印钞,以帮助减轻债务负担,并帮助为以本国货币计价的开支提供资金。但这将削弱本国货币,提高本币的通胀水平,以抵消需求减少和被迫出售资产所造成的通货紧缩,而那些资金紧张的国家就不得不筹集现金。

  • Could Singapore take Hong Kong’s finance crown

    Hong Kong has a more vibrant capital market ― its stock exchange market capitalisation this month was more than seven times larger than Singapore’s at HK$367.7 billion (US$47 billion), compared to S$9 billion (US$6.4 billion) ― with more Chinese companies choosing to raise funds there. It is also where wealthy mainlanders stash funds.

    More than 420 hedge funds are based in Hong Kong, and these funds manage assets worth almost US$91 billion, more than is managed in Singapore, Japan and Australia combined, according to a Financial Times report this month.

    About 650,000 foreign residents, including domestic helpers, live in Hong Kong, out of a total population of more than 7 million. Singapore has a population of 5.7 million, of whom almost 1.7 million are foreigners. About 400,000 are foreigners on employment passes that mean they earn at least S$2,400 or S$3,900 a month.

    While there have been no signs of an exodus from Hong Kong, bankers and business professionals in Singapore say there have been inquiries from wealthy investors seeking to move more money there and firms mulling over an expansion or relocation of their operations.

    One senior banker said banks had been allocating staff to receive any funds flowing out of Hong Kong and into the city state, but they were not expecting businesses to abandon Hong Kong just yet.

    The banker, who did not want to be named as he was not authorised to speak on behalf of his organisation, said businesses would be mindful that moves to or talk of relocating could be perceived by Beijing as the brand being “unsupportive” of its policies on Hong Kong.

    TMF Group, a professional services firm that provides accounting, tax and human resources support to businesses, said it had received inquiries from companies exploring the possibility of leaving Hong Kong for Singapore. But many of the inquiries “have not translated into action”, said Paolo Tavolato, its head of Asia-Pacific.

    “Almost no firm with a head office or regional head office in Hong Kong has chosen to relocate it.”

    Over at real estate consultancy Knight Frank, head of capital markets Ian Loh said that since January he had got roughly 30 per cent more inquiries from investors based in Hong Kong.

    He has had more clients, ranging from family offices to investment funds, asking about buying strata offices, shophouses and buildings in Singapore, but while some deals have concluded and the investors have moved some business operations to Singapore, Loh said most investors were still in the early stages of exploring their options and were not ready to make decisions yet.

    Business consultancy firm Vistra said it had seen “a strong pickup” of new business enquiries from Hong Kong-based companies in the last month, especially from fund management companies.

    “The intention is to expand their operations in Singapore to complement their Hong Kong operations,” said Otto Von Domingo, head of commercial Southeast Asia at Vistra Singapore.

    Tavolato said his conclusion was that Hong Kong’s strength as a financial and business capital remained, it was “stronger than many give it credit for”, and it had an “incumbent’s advantage” of firms being reluctant to move head offices.

    Fatas, the economics professor at INSEAD, said Hong Kong’s proximity to mainland China was a winning factor, echoing a point made by Hong Kong business leaders, who said the city was the gateway to the mainland for both foreign and local firms.

  • Bank of Korea urged to announce specific plans to retrieve liquidity

    The Bank of Korea (BOK) and the financial authorities here should reveal specific timelines for their plan to retrieve massive anti-coronavirus liquidity supplied to the market, as a lack of such details may end up causing medium- to long-term market confusion here, a former foreign investment ombudsman said in an interview.

    Jeffrey In-chul Kim, now a professor emeritus at Sungkyunkwan University, voiced the need for the central bank to make public its plans as early as possible, as the local currency is not a global reserve currency such as the U.S. dollar.

    “Speculation will run more and more rampant in the market unless the central bank makes timely announcements over how and when to retrieve the supplied liquidity for the economy’s mid- to longer-term recovery,” Kim told The Korea Times, Friday.

    “Some developed countries ― such as the U.S. ― have in recent months pushed for supplying an unlimited amount of liquidity to the market against the virus-induced economic downturn, but they can do so because international currencies run low inflation risks. But this is not the case for the Korean won,” the economist said.

    Following a recent decision by the U.S. Federal Reserve, the BOK also took a similar step to provide unlimited liquidity to financial institutions here, in a move to rev up the sagging economy.

    The unprecedented decision reflected on growing concerns over the economic downturn here in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic and prolonged low interest rate.

    The central bank and the financial authorities have expanded market liquidity to 53 trillion won particularly by purchasing bonds.

    “It is a misunderstanding that the economy will necessarily bounce back if authorities expand liquidity,” he said. “The point is to supply the liquidity to the areas in desperate need of capital.”

    “For the nation’s fiscal soundness, the financial authorities will soon put an end to the liquidity expansion policy,” he said. “But they need to announce the retrieval plans in advance, so the market is not disrupted due to possibly ensuing speculation over its liquidity retrieval.”

  • China had been tightening its control over off-balance sheet lending by banks since 2016 to curb financial risks, but credit growth is needed to rescue the coronavirus-hit economy

    Informal lending by Chinese banks, so-called shadow banking, is back in vogue after two and half years of regulatory clampdown as Beijing pledges faster credit growth to rescue its coronavirus-hit economy, according to a new report.
    Overall shadow banking assets in China rose for the first time since 2017, a report published by American business and financial services company Moody’s on Wednesday showed.
    The report detailed how shadow banking assets in the world’s second largest economy grew 100 billion yuan (US$14 billion) to 59.1 trillion yuan (US$8.4 trillion) in the first quarter of 2020, compared with a 1.2 trillion yuan decline to 60.2 trillion yuan during the same period in 2019.
    This rise suggests that Beijing, which had been tightening its control over off-balance sheet lending by banks since 2016 to curb financial risks, has switched its focus to supporting economic recovery by slowly allowing shadow credit to expand again, according to the rating agency.
    “Increased policy focus to support economic recovery will fuel further expansion of shadow credit. However, a rapid rebound is unlikely as financial systemic stability still remains one of the authorities’ main policy objectives,” Moody’s said.

    Shadow banking had previously increased rapidly in China, mainly driven by the need for borrowing among small and medium-sized companies in the private sector which are unable to obtain loans from banks, which often prefer to lend to state firms and larger listed private companies.
    Wealth management products, which are essentially off-balance-sheet substitutes for deposits without the regulatory interest rate ceilings offered by banks to savers, were a big driver to the growth of shadow credit in the first quarter, Moody’s said.
    Issuance of wealth management products with investment terms of three months or less rebounded to 43 per cent of the total volume in the first three months of 2020, the highest increase since the second quarter of 2018.
    Wealth management products constitute the largest shadow banking segment in China and are often invested in a range of loans and securities that have high exposure to speculative areas such as real estate and stocks or funding weaker borrowers.
    The central government has sought to balance the need to curb the growth of shadow banking as default risks rise in wealth management products and trust products, while leaving some room for the private sector to access credit, but Moody’s expects asset quality to continue to deteriorate this year in the trust sector.
    Trust companies do not face the same government-imposed lending quotas as state banks, giving them more flexibility to hand out loans or pick investment choices.

  • HSBC has little chance of recouping Hin Leong losses. HSBC is among 23 banks owed almost US$4 billion by Hin Leong

    The prospects for HSBC and other banks to recover losses from a failed Singapore oil trader are dimmer than originally thought, after an accounting review found the energy firm overstated assets by US$3 billion and fabricated documents on a “massive scale”.
    Hin Leong Trading has assets of about US$257 million, or 7 per cent of its estimated US$3.5 billion in liabilities, the company’s interim managers said in a report to Singapore’s High Court on Tuesday. That is less than half the assets estimated by founder Lim Oon Kuin and his son Evan Lim, according to earlier affidavits to the court.
    HSBC is among 23 banks owed almost US$4 billion by Hin Leong, one of the largest traders in Singapore before its collapse in April following a plunge in oil prices that exposed what the report found were “manipulated” accounts and frequent double counting of cargo to keep credit lines flowing.
    “The scale and regularity of the fabrication suggests that the practice was routine and pervasive,” the report found. “These forged documents enabled the company to mislead banks in extending financing to the company and also acted as supporting documentation for fictitious gains and profits.”
    HSBC, the London-based bank with the most exposure to Hin Leong at about US$600 million, declined to comment on the report. Hin Leong did not respond to email inquiries seeking comment. The court filing was earlier reported by Reuters and Singapore’s The Straits Times.

    Hin Leong “systematically manipulated its accounts to inflate the value of its accounts receivables” to present an exaggerated picture of its financial health, according to the report by PwC’s Chan Kheng Tek and Goh Thien Phong. Chan and Goh, who were appointed in April as interim judicial managers to oversee the company, added that Hin Leong has “no reasonable prospect” of rehabilitation as a stand-alone entity.
    The trading house and its sister companies owned by the Lim family should be put together as an integrated trading platform to be restructured, while the Lims should inject their personal assets, the managers said in the report. The Lims, who received dividends totalling US$90 million in the 2018 and 2017 financial years, have not responded to this suggestion via their legal advisers, according to the report.
    The Hin Leong collapse has sparked several legal disputes among banks and other creditors seeking to recover losses from the debacle. Sinopec last month lost a legal bid to halt a loan payment, while Winson Oil Trading took Oversea-Chinese Banking Corporation to court, demanding payment for a sale of fuel tied to Hin Leong.