David Lipton
First Deputy Managing Director at the International Monetary Fund. Formerly Senior Director at the US National Economic Council and National Security Council during President Barack Obama’s administration and Under-Secretary of the Treasury for International Affairs under President Bill Clinton
China is unique in many respects, but it is not the first country to experience corporate-debt difficulties. Its leaders should heed three broad lessons from other countries’ experience.
First, the authorities should act quickly and effectively, lest today’s corporate-debt problem become tomorrow’s systemic debt problem. Second, they should deal with both creditors and debtors – some countries’ solutions address only one or the other, sowing the seeds for future problems. Finally, the governance structures that permitted the problem to arise must be identified and reformed. At a minimum, China needs an effective system to deal with insolvency; strict regulation of risk pricing and assessment; and robust accounting, loan-loss provisioning, and financial disclosure rules.
Influential voices in China are quick to draw the lesson from international experience that tackling corporate debt can limit short-term growth and impose social costs, such as unemployment. These are valid concerns, but the alternatives – half measures or no reform at all – would only make a bad situation worse.
Strong social safety net
China should begin by restructuring unviable companies in its fastest-growing regions, where workers will find new jobs more quickly and reforms are not likely to hurt growth. Policymakers can then be more selective when it comes to restructuring in slower-growing regions and cities where a single company dominates the local economy.
Moreover, structural unemployment and worker resettlement costs can be mitigated with a strong social safety net that includes funds for targeted labor redeployment so that workers can get back on their feet. This approach would show the government’s commitment to those at risk of displacement.
To its credit, China has already made some efforts to solve its debt problem and begin deleveraging. The current Five-Year Plan aims to reduce excess capacity in the coal and steel sectors, identify and restructure nonviable “zombie” SOEs, and fund programs to support affected workers.
Now is the time for China to push for far-reaching reforms. Banks’ balance sheets still have a relatively low volume of non-performing loans (and high provisioning). The costs of potential losses on corporate loans – estimated at 7% of GDP in the IMF’s latest Global Financial Stability Report – are manageable. Furthermore, the government maintains high buffers: debt is relatively low, and foreign-exchange reserves are relatively high.
The question is whether China will manage to deleverage enough before these buffers are exhausted. Given its record of economic success and the government’s strong commitment to an ambitious reform agenda, China can rise to the challenge. But it must start now.
This article appears courtesy of Project Syndicate
Research papers on China: Routes to private pensions | Global Pension Atlas: China