Although many people are concerned about government debt and there was an official statement about local debt at the end of last year, most of us still lack the concept of the overall debt level of China's economy. The prediction on Gaoda should be regarded as the latest prediction I can see, because 20 13 has just ended.
Simply seeing the value of 240% will lead to many misunderstandings. Your first impression should be too high. 1 yuan GDP needs 2.4 yuan's debt to support it? This feeling is right or wrong. You are right, because this ratio is not small; You are wrong, because you may never know the ratio of debt to GDP. You may think that the ratio exceeding 100% is inappropriate.
We need to make some comparisons. Gao Dali thinks that China needs a large-scale debt restructuring, because if his prediction is correct, 240% is not a good sign. "At the worst of the European debt crisis, the total debt in Europe accounted for about 250% of GDP". This is the horizontal ratio. What about the vertical ratio? By the end of 20 12, the total debt of China has accounted for 2 16% of GDP. Therefore, by 20 13, the predicted value is 240%, and the leverage is still rising strongly.
Where does the data of 2 16% come from? Gao Da didn't explain the source clearly, but the approximate data I can find is 2 15%. This data was just released last month from the research group of "China National Balance Sheet Research" of China Academy of Social Sciences. Li Yang, vice president of China Academy of Social Sciences, stressed that the leverage ratio of the whole society in China is already very high, and "deleveraging" is inevitable.
Li Yang believes that China's total debt level is lower than that of most developed economies, but higher than that of other BRICS countries except South Africa, and it is still in a moderately controllable stage. In view of the rapid rise of China's debt level in recent years, we should be vigilant. From the perspective of risk, Li Yang pointed out that the recent risk characteristics of the national balance sheet are mainly reflected in real estate credit, local debt and bank non-performing loans, while the medium and long-term risks are more concentrated in overseas assets, corporate debts and social security debts. No matter what kind of risk is closely related to the development mode and economic structure, the solution is to change the development mode and adjust the economic structure.
What is the difference between Li Yang's talk about changing the development mode and adjusting the economic structure and his talk about large-scale debt restructuring? I don't think it makes any difference. Li Yang is talking about methods, while Gao Dali is talking about methods. Adjusting the economic structure and changing the mode of development will inevitably lead to a large-scale debt restructuring at the practical level.
What is the growth rate from the debt GDP ratio of 20 12 announced by Li Yang at the end of 20 13 to the debt GDP ratio of 240% predicted by Gaoda at the beginning of 20 14? If you still don't know enough, let's take a look at the previous data.
As far as I know, in the month of Standard Chartered Bank (Weibo) 20 12 165438 10, Wang Zhihao predicted that China's debt would exceed 200% of GDP by the end of the year. Looking at it now, it is basically true. At that time, Greentree also mentioned two data he had: "After the rapid growth of credit expansion in China in 2009, the overall leverage ratio rose from 153% at the end of 2008 to 185% at the end of 2009."
If the data of Wang Zhihao is basically accurate and the forecast of Gao Da Li is basically reliable, the overall leverage ratio of China's economy will rise from 153% in 2008 to 240% in 20 13.
It is precisely because of this momentum that Gao Dali said: "If this speed continues, the ratio of debt to GDP may reach 500% within ten years. If such a high leverage ratio is reached, weaker enterprises and governments will inevitably default. In the next five to ten years, China must carry out large-scale debt restructuring, otherwise the risk of default will increase greatly. " .
Since 20 14, I have written three articles in the horizon column, namely, the biggest reason to be optimistic about China on 20 14, Soros's China puzzle, the central bank's abacus: tight deleveraging, and today's article, How high is China's debt leverage? For half a month, I have been discussing the leverage ratio of China's economy.
There is no clear answer here, but it lists the analysis and forecast of China's leverage ratio. Some people are optimistic, while others are extremely pessimistic. However, everyone will admit that GDP growth supported by debt leverage alone is unsustainable, and everyone's disagreement is just where is the leverage process of China's economy? Is it in the process of rising, and is there room for growth? Or has it reached its peak and is about to reverse? Or has it started to reverse and started the process of deleveraging?
I think the answer to this question is very important, because different positions will strongly imply different operations of the central bank's monetary policy. If the leverage ratio is still rising, it means that the desire of market players to take the initiative to increase leverage is still there, so the central bank should tighten or even raise interest rates; If the leverage ratio has begun to decline and the process of debt contraction has begun, the central bank should relax monetary policy to stabilize demand, such as lowering the deposit reserve ratio or even lowering interest rates.
Does the central bank have an answer? According to the latest data released by the central bank, the scale of social financing in 20 13 increased by 9.7% year-on-year, reaching the highest level in the whole year 17.29 trillion yuan, and new RMB loans increased by 8.4% year-on-year. According to the central bank, "the loan data of M2 20 13 basically meets the regulatory requirements. This year, we will continue to implement a prudent monetary policy, timely and moderately pre-adjust and fine-tune, and will not tighten or relax monetary policy. "
Do not tighten or relax, is this the judgment of the central bank on the position of leverage?