How to evaluate the sustainability of the national debt policy and the degree of financial risk, that is, what indicators are used to evaluate whether the national debt policy is sustainable and the degree of financial risk brought about by the expansion of national debt is still a difficult problem to solve. We believe that the sustainability of national debt policy and the measurement of financial risks need to be carried out on the basis of certain principles, and the selection of indicators should be hierarchical, representative, concise and relevant. The unsustainability of national debt policy directly leads to the situation of financial risk (crisis), and the basic factors that affect and determine the sustainability of national debt policy directly determine the formation and development of financial risk. The basic principles of investigating the sustainability of national debt policy include: the principle that the income of national debt is greater than the cost, the principle of intergenerational fair burden of national debt, the restrictive principle of national debt expansion and the flexible principle of national debt policy. It is of great significance to measure the sustainability and financial risk of national debt policy through a number of quantitative indicators. First, further accurately understand the basic meaning of the sustainability of national debt policy and financial risks; The second is to clarify the quantitative standards and boundaries of the sustainability of the national debt policy, so as to provide a basis for economic decision-making; Third, make a reasonable assessment of the financial risk factors that may be brought about by the implementation of the national debt policy, and monitor and warn the relevant financial risks or crisis States. How to evaluate the sustainability and financial risk of the national debt policy, that is, what indicators are used to evaluate whether the national debt policy is sustainable and the financial risk caused by the expansion of the national debt scale is still a difficult problem to solve. We believe that the sustainability of national debt policy and the measurement of financial risks need to be carried out on the basis of certain principles, and the selection of indicators should be hierarchical, representative, concise and relevant. The unsustainability of national debt policy directly leads to the situation of financial risk (crisis), and the basic factors that affect and determine the sustainability of national debt policy directly determine the formation and development of financial risk. Therefore, we can determine the evaluation principles and select relevant indicators according to these factors. The basic principles of investigating the sustainability of national debt policy include: the principle that the income of national debt is greater than the cost, the principle of intergenerational fair burden of national debt, the restrictive principle of national debt expansion and the flexible principle of national debt policy. According to these principles, we can choose the following indicators or methods to measure the sustainability of the national debt policy and its financial risks. I. Sustainability and risks caused by internal factors The so-called internal factors refer to the sustainability and risks caused by the issuance of national debt itself, that is, to examine the sustainability and financial risks of national debt from two aspects: the economic effect and the economic burden of national debt issuance. Relevant indicators include: deficit ratio, national debt burden rate, foreign debt repayment rate, national debt interest rate, and national debt capital asset formation rate. L. deficit ratio deficit ratio is the ratio of fiscal deficit to gross domestic product (GDP). Fiscal deficit is the difference between fiscal expenditure and fiscal revenue in a year. According to the definition of the International Monetary Fund: fiscal deficit (surplus) = (total income+unconditional allocation)-(total expenditure+net increase in loans). "National debt is closely linked to the fiscal deficit, and national debt is the basic means to make up for the deficit. Therefore, long-term high deficit will inevitably lead to high debt. This is because the interest expenditure on debt is a part of fiscal expenditure, and the expansion of deficit requires the issuance of national debt, and the issuance of national debt requires the repayment of interest, thus causing a greater increase in deficit, promoting the expansion of national debt and affecting its sustainable development. Therefore, it is impossible for deficit ratio to remain at a high level for a long time. According to the law of economic cycle, deficit ratio should be negatively correlated with economic growth rate. This is because during the economic recession, the state implemented an expansionary fiscal policy, fiscal expenditure increased, the deficit level increased, and the debt scale expanded. With the increase of total demand level and national income, the fiscal deficit decreases or even appears surplus, and the debt scale tends to decrease. This development trend shows that the national debt policy has entered a benign development track and the financial risk has weakened. 2. The national debt burden rate refers to the ratio of the national debt balance to the gross domestic product, which reflects the total size of the national debt stock and is the basic index to measure the national debt risk. Theoretically speaking, the demand pressure and solvency of national fiscal expenditure, the income and savings level of residents and the scale of GDP are all important factors restricting the issuance scale of national debt. But these factors can be reflected by the scale of GDP. This is because the greater the GDP, the more social funds, the stronger the financial solvency, and the stronger the solvency of enterprises and residents. Therefore, the main aspect of restricting and restricting the scale of national debt and whether it will cause a heavy burden in the future is to examine the relationship between the balance of national debt and GDP, that is, whether the national debt burden rate is appropriate. However, up to now, the economic theory and practical experience at home and abroad have not given a clear and scientific explanation for the reasonable boundary of the national debt scale. Even the national debt burden rate of 60% and deficit ratio's national debt scale safety line standard of 3% stipulated in the Maastricht Treaty signed by EU countries are very inaccurate. Because the Maastricht standard is only to form the same market conditions and is conducive to coordinating the interest rate and exchange rate levels among member countries, it urges countries that fail to meet the target to strive to meet the relevant standards, which reflects an average level and empirical figures of economic development in the EU at that time. Therefore, if we only use this standard to judge the rationality of the national debt scale of other countries, it is suspected of copying mechanically. However, we can still use the index of national debt burden rate to analyze the rationality of national debt scale and the risk of national debt policy. When the increase of a government's fiscal deficit becomes uncontrollable, it may lead to a continuous increase in the debt burden rate or a sharp change, which may accumulate debt risks in the short term; If the interest rate is higher than the economic growth rate, even if the deficit is zero, there will be a vicious circle in which the increase of debt leads to the increase of interest, and the increase of interest leads to the continuous increase of debt, thus making the national debt burden rate rise rapidly. Samuelson pointed out in Economics that domestic debt is money owed by a government to its citizens, and many people think that domestic debt does not constitute a burden. Although this view is too simple, it shows a real insight. Foreign debt is money owed by the government to foreigners. This kind of debt does lead to a net reduction in the disposable resources of citizens of debtor countries. The heavy interest burden of foreign debt means the decrease of a country's consumption level. Therefore, the impact or threat of foreign debt on national debt policy and financial stability may be even greater. A country's current account deficit shows an increase in net debt, but in an open economy, the national income accounting identity relationship is as follows: current account deficit = (investment-savings)+(government expenditure-tax). Therefore, any factor that leads to the increase of investment relative to savings, and any factor that leads to the increase of government expenditure relative to tax revenue may lead to the increase of net foreign debt. Borrowing foreign debts is very important for a country to make up for the shortage of domestic savings and achieve the balance of international payments, but this does not mean that foreign debts of any scale and structural level are appropriate. Because, if the long-term economic growth depends on the inflow of foreign debt, the increasing foreign debt will put pressure on future debt repayment; If the foreign debt is used for profitable projects or for importing high-end consumer goods, it will not increase the output capacity of the export industry, nor will it be possible to improve the current account balance, which will bring greater difficulties to the repayment of foreign debt; If government policies excessively restrain the domestic savings rate, it will also lead to excessive borrowing of foreign debts. Although it is difficult to judge the optimal level of a country's foreign debt by a single index, people think that the debt repayment rate (the ratio of debt repayment to export income) is practical. If it is very high (for example, above 25%), it shows that the country is vulnerable to adverse changes in foreign trade or international interest rates. Since it is a country's basic obligation to repay foreign loans, the government may need to raise domestic interest rates and cut important imports, which will damage the country's economic performance. Supplement: 4. The interest rate of national debt directly affects the borrowing cost. If a large number of bonds are issued during the period of high market interest rate, it will inevitably increase the burden of interest payment in the future, form a peak of debt repayment, and may continue to increase the deficit. Therefore, the rising interest rate of national debt will lead to the increase of financial financing cost, thus weakening the sustainability of national debt policy. The rise in the interest rate of national debt may be the result of the scale of national debt exceeding the capacity of the capital market. Due to the scarcity of funds, excessive issuance of treasury bonds will lead to an increase in market interest rates, which will lead to an increase in the cost of treasury bonds. If the interest rate continues to rise, it still cannot meet the financing needs of the government, which may lead to the monetization of national debt, thus increasing the base currency, expanding the money supply and increasing inflationary pressure. Rising inflation will force the interest rate of national debt to rise, further increase the borrowing cost and form a vicious circle. Therefore, the continuous rise in the interest rate of national debt may be an important manifestation of the problems in the national debt policy and the corresponding increase in financial risks. The interest rate of national debt is also a reflection of the government's credit status, including the evaluation of government debt risk by the capital market. If the government's credit status is good, the risk premium required by investors will be low, the market interest rate of national debt will be correspondingly low, and the price of national debt will tend to rise; On the contrary, the interest rate in the national debt market is high, and the price of national debt tends to fall. In the national debt market, if the interest rate of national debt continues to rise and the price of national debt continues to fall, it is still difficult to attract investors to buy, then the sustainability of national debt policy cannot be discussed. 5. Asset formation rate of national debt If the funds raised through national debt are used for infrastructure and public services, it can provide people with due utility and create favorable conditions for private investment, and the government expenditure formed by national debt will be productive. Because government debt financing is not entirely used for consumption expenditure and transfer payment, but a considerable part is used for public projects and infrastructure investment, forming various "renewable assets" owned by the government. If the pure consumption expenditure of national debt is less and there are many renewable assets, then the ability to repay debts and reduce the burden through asset appreciation will be stronger, and the sustainability of national debt policy will be stronger. Further consideration, if the national debt funds are used for education, training and other recurrent expenditures to form human capital, it will produce positive externalities, improve the social benefits of fiscal expenditures, and enhance the income or utility of future generations. Similar consumer spending activities will not cause a net burden to future generations, thus contributing to the sustainability of the national debt policy and reducing financial risks. Therefore, as long as the government expenditure formed by the national debt is used for projects related to the formation of public physical capital and human capital, it will be conducive to the sustainable supplement of the national debt policy. Second, the sustainability and risk problems caused by external factors. If there is a problem in the financial system, the non-performing assets of banks will increase greatly; If the state-owned enterprises have serious losses and heavy debt burdens, they need to restructure their assets; If the aging population leads to a rapid increase in the pension deficit, the central government will come forward to help. In this case, if there is no necessary market mechanism to solve it, the above hidden contingent debt may lead to a greater increase in national debt, especially in countries with transitional economies. Therefore, the existence of various hidden contingent liabilities will not have a direct and explicit impact on the national debt policy, but its risk transfer function will also significantly constrain the national debt policy, and the government will also face greater financial risks. Evaluating and describing these external factors through certain indicators will help us more accurately grasp the potential impact of related factors on national debt policy and financial risks. I. Ratio of non-performing assets of banks When bank loan losses increase and the level of non-performing assets is high, it shows that the banking system is relatively fragile and its ability to resist risks and crises is insufficient. The fragility of the banking system will affect the financial balance of the country from both income and expenditure. In terms of income, the increase in loan losses will reduce the taxable income of banks and the tax revenue of banks will also decrease; The liquidity support of the central bank to the banking system will bring direct costs to the government or reduce the profit transfer of the central bank; The central bank's takeover of the bank's non-performing assets will lead to a decline in the central bank's profits and taxes. From the aspect of expenditure, because the state-owned banks actually undertake some financial functions, the ultimate responsibility for resolving the bank's non-performing assets can only be the government, that is to say, to a large extent, it is necessary to rely on government investment to make up for the bank's asset losses and replenish capital. The bad assets of these banks have become the burden of the government, and the government can only raise funds by issuing bonds, thus gradually improving the asset quality of banks. Therefore, the judgment of the scale of national debt must fully consider the factors of huge bank non-performing assets. The scale of banks' non-performing assets restricts and weakens the possibility that finance will continue to expand its debt scale for other public consumption and investment expenditures. International experience shows that the ratio of non-performing assets of banks to total loans is less than 10%, and the banking system is relatively stable. The change in the ratio of non-performing assets of banks exceeding this ratio has become an important indicator for us to judge the sustainability of the national debt policy and financial risks. Supplement: 2. The degree of government support and participation in state-owned enterprises or public sectors. In some countries, especially developing countries, the loss of state-owned enterprises is usually one of the reasons for the increase of government fiscal deficit. Although the financial accounts of the central government cannot reflect the financial situation of the public sector, the losses of most state-owned enterprises are ultimately borne by the central government. In many countries, due to weak management and the lack of financial responsibility of the public sector, government expenditures have not been properly controlled, and these expenditures may not be effectively and fairly distributed to places in urgent need of society. Government expenditure is used to support politically powerful groups or only benefit a few people. In the newly industrialized countries in Asia, state intervention in credit distribution is very common, and financial institutions are protected by the government, which makes the banking industry reduce the loan review standard and engage in human loans and preferential loans in order to win customers, resulting in the rapid expansion of non-performing loans. Because big companies are closely related to the government. The government strictly controls the indirect financing of banks, which will inevitably lead to economic corruption and money politics, resulting in inefficient use of loans. In developing countries, it is a common phenomenon that government departments provide guarantees for public loans or infrastructure construction loans, thus forming government explicit contingent liabilities. Due to the lack of other financing channels, the infrastructure debt-dependent financing model makes the local government debt scale increase continuously and the interest burden is heavy. Some can't even repay the interest, so they can only borrow new debts to pay off old debts. Although there is government credit as a guarantee, due to the difficulty in repayment of government projects, banks have correspondingly reduced the credit degree of such projects and increased the cost of government credit refinancing. The government's financial support for state-owned enterprises or public enterprises increases the burden of future financial expenditure, which is the embodiment of deep-seated financial risks. Since 1980s, the fiscal deficit and the scale of national debt in western developed countries have expanded dramatically. The main reason of financial imbalance is the rapid growth of expenditure, among which the biggest factor is transfer payment, and public pension is the main factor. At present, all industrial countries still face the payment gap, especially the major industrial countries, whose annual gap reaches 65438+0.8% of GDP. The accumulation of pension deficit makes the pension liabilities of major industrial countries exceed the tangible government debts of various countries. In developing countries and countries with economies in transition, the pressure of pension expenditure exceeding income on future deficit is even greater than that in developed countries. According to the research results of the World Bank, the public pension liabilities belong to the implicit direct liabilities of the government, that is, the liabilities of the government to employees. It is feasible to issue treasury bonds and sell some state-owned assets as financing channels for the transformation from pay-as-you-go system to full accumulation pension system, but it is almost impossible to finance pension debt through fiscal surplus by raising taxes and reducing fiscal expenditure. Pension liabilities undertaken by the government can be divided into short-term debt and long-term debt. Short-term debt is the pension of retirees and those about to retire. This debt can be solved by expanding pension coverage, raising retirement age, extending payment time, raising payment rate, increasing other taxes and increasing the income from selling state-owned assets. Long-term debt is a pension that needs to be paid after several years. Its repayment will be dispersed for a long time, which will greatly reduce the pressure of raising pension debt in the short term. It can be financed by issuing treasury bonds or taxes after the tax base is expanded. However, whether it is national debt financing or tax financing, future generations will pay more for repaying the transition cost of the pension system. It can be seen that the breach of the pension system will exert pressure on the expansion of future national debt, and the size of this pressure depends on the degree of solving problems through other financial means, whether the market or private (private management or establishment of pension funds). Therefore, investigating and forecasting the income and expenditure of social security such as pension is also an important aspect of evaluating the sustainability and financial risk of national debt policy. -over.-I'm exhausted. I hope LZ works.