2/11/2013 6:30 PM ET|
China's undercover banking crisis
Off-balance-sheet lending has exploded in China, and deep problems are starting to turn up. Who will make good when loans go bad is a great unknown that could sting the global economy.
China's banking crisis continues to worsen. But because this is a banking crisis that doesn't -- on paper-- involve China's banks, it's hard to say what the extent of the fallout will be.
To see the crisis, you have to look past the official balance sheets of China's banks to the gray areas of China's financial industry, because what's hiding there could have a broad economic consequences.
In January, China's four big state-owned banks issued a combined 370 billion yuan (about $59 billion) in loans. That was a huge increase in lending from the 163 billion yuan total in January and puts China's banks on an unsustainable pace.
China's big four banks account for about 30% to 40% of lending in a typical year, so January's activity puts China's banks on a pace for somewhere between 11 trillion yuan ($1.7 trillion) and 15 trillion yuan ($2.4 trillion) in lending for 2013. Lending always surges in the weeks before the Lunar New Year holiday (which was Sunday), however, as businesses stock up on cash. The People's Bank hasn't set a lending target yet for 2013, but it's expected to be in the vicinity of 9 trillion yuan ($1.4 trillion) as the Chinese government works to -- modestly -- stimulate the economy.
That would still be a big increase from the 7.5 trillion yuan target in 2011, when the Chinese government was tightening credit to slow the economy, or from the 8.3 trillion yuan banks lent in 2012.
But although these data on bank loans and bank lending are still among the most followed indicators of government policy on economic growth and People's Bank intentions on expanding or contracting the money supply, they capture less and less of the Chinese market for loans. China's "total social financing" indicator shows bank loans hitting a record low of 52.1% of total lending in 2012. Ten years ago, bank lending made up 92% of total social financing. Estimates are that bank lending will drop below 50% in 2013.
It's not that bank lending has collapsed -- in fact, it has been remarkably stable within the up-and-down channel set by government policy. Instead, there's been explosive growth in "trust loans" (a sixfold increase in 10 years) and in bond offerings (up 64%).
And that's the shadow hanging over China's recovery and the global economy, which is why investors here need to keep an eye on it.
Beyond China's banks
What are trust loans and what's behind their explosive growth? Trust loans are essentially off-the-balance-sheet bank loans. While the interest rate that banks pay depositors -- currently 3.25% -- is set by government regulators, banks and savers can get around the restrictions by using wealth-management accounts that move money collected by banks off bank balance sheets and onto the balance sheets of trust companies and securities firms.
In a typical arrangement, the bank contracts with a trust or securities company. The trust or securities company uses the money from the bank to buy notes issued by the bank (backed by bank loans, for instance) or to buy other assets (loans from financial companies attached to local governments, for example). The trust or securities company is paid a fee -- 0.3% on average at the beginning of 2012 -- by the bank. Savers get a higher interest rate -- 4.5% to 5% -- than they'd get from a regulated account at a bank. (With the government's inflation target at 4%, the difference between regulated yields of 3.25% and wealth-management yields of 4.5% could be the difference between losing ground to or keeping ahead of inflation.) Banks are able to keep customers happy and to move loans off their balance sheets and onto those of trust companies and securities companies. (Bank loans sold to trusts and securities companies don't count against a bank's lending quota.)
As you might expect, the advantages of this system of higher rates for savers, fees for trust companies and off-balance-sheet lending for banks has led to an explosive growth in the assets at trust and securities companies. Each of the four big state-owned banks handles an average of 2 trillion yuan a year in off-balance-sheet business -- roughly equal to the bank sector's formal government lending quota. Efforts by government regulators to limit the percentage of assets that trusts could take from bank wealth-management accounts have worked to push these off-balance-sheet yuan to less-regulated securities companies. Assets under management by Chinese securities companies rose to 1.2 trillion yuan at the end of December, up from 280 billion yuan at the beginning of 2012, according to data from the Securities Association of China. About 80% to 90% of that total, according to estimates put together by Bloomberg, was tied to banks and wealth-management accounts. Estimates are that up to 30 trillion of the 66 trillion yuan in credit extended to all formal borrowers in China lies outside the banking system.
The two big risks
There are two big dangers in this situation.
First, there's a good chance that in reaching for 5% yields (instead of 3.25%), investors and savers have taken on more risk than they realize and that this additional risk will rise up to bite them. The promise of the wealth-management accounts to savers is strikingly similar to that during the mortgage-backed asset/global financial crisis: We have figured out a way, the banks, the investment trusts and the securities companies are saying, to pay you higher yields without requiring you to take on more risk.
Think about it: How are banks, profitable with controlled payouts of 3.25%, able to pay 5% and make the same or greater return? (They wouldn't be so assiduously pursuing this wealth-management business if it paid less than their existing business.)
A big part of the answer is that the banks are using the money they take in from wealth-management accounts to make loans at 6%, 7% and even 8% by buying bonds sold by city governments. In the first nine months of 2012, China's Caixin magazine reports, urban bonds raised 471 billion yuan for 401 projects. That was more than the 425 billion yuan raised in all of 2011. Half of all urban bonds issued on secondary markets, Bloomberg estimates, were bought by banks with money from wealth-management accounts.
These bonds are supposed to be low risk. They're guaranteed by local governments, and the assumption is that the national government stands behind these urban bonds (as in the U.S., the mortgage market was assured about the paper issued by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac). In another parallel with the global financial crisis, China's National Association of Financial Market Institutional Investors has raised questions about the high grades given by credit-rating companies to many of these bonds.
So far, the failure rate on these bonds has been extremely low -- near zero. But that's likely an artifact of the very recent surge in issuance, since many of these bonds haven't been around long enough to fail. The effects of a collapse in the real estate market in many Chinese cities in 2010 and 2011, which devastated finances for local governments and the projects they financed, haven't fully worked their way into the market for these bonds.
Second, it's unclear what parties are on the hook and for how much if these products go bad. (Again, this reminds me of the derivative markets in the United States and Europe in the financial crisis, where no one knew for sure what the net positions of the big players were.)
Until very recently, the assumption and practice has been that trust companies do not let trust products default on investors. The trust company doesn't have a legal obligation to pay investors in the case of a default, but, until recently, a trust company would make sure investors were repaid, even if a borrower could not pay the trust what it owed. In the competitive trust market, no trust company would risk its reputation by letting investors take a hit. Consequently no one in China has ever lost money on a trust investment. (The trust sector has assets of 7.4 trillion yuan.) Payments have been late, but they've always been made within the six-month grace period written into a trust contract -- even if the trust company had to dip into its own pockets to pay investors.
But this appears to be changing. In January, Citic Trust, China's largest trust company by asset value, refused to guarantee payment to investors when two trusts that it sold ran into problems. Instead, Citic has moved to sell the collateral put up by borrowers and has told investors that selling the assets of the borrower was the last hope that investors would get their money back. In one case, Citic has used a court order to put up for sale the land owned by property developer Shieldspear Group to recoup some of the 710 million yuan raised in 2010. In another, Citic has threatened to sell the collateral of a producer of steel coatings if the company can't bring its payments up to date.
More from MoneyShow.com:
VIDEO ON MSN MONEY
"To see the crisis, you have to look past the official balance sheets of China's banks to the gray areas of China's financial industry,..."
Don't we have exactly the same problem in the U.S. shadow banking system? (aka off-the-books derivatives and swaps). The only difference is the size of ours isat least 100 times bigger.
The biggest issue is that the numbers provided have been produced and approved by the PRC as they see fit. They own the banks and the investment firms (owned/managed by Party members families), can manipulate anything including the published GDP or inflation/unemployment rates.
Speaking from experience, there is no real transparency or accountability in China, so take the values given with a grain of salt (or make up your own number like they do).
Until the banking regulators can suspend the offshore banking practices in Cayman Islands,Channel Islands,Cyprus,Dubai,Bermuda and
Cuba,it will be impossible to either regulate or control any lending practices.
Insurance companies,shipping companies,multinational corporations,and individuals can maintain the illusion of solvency because their records are invisible,and unattainable under present accounting principles.
First,the Chinese government is trying to stem the flow of cash and assets into Macau,a fruitless task since few if any Chinese leaders will admit there nation has an enormous criminal society.
Secondly,Chinese and many Italians,Spaniards,Portuguese,Indians,Middle Easterners,Africans,and South Americans do not believe in a well-regulated and honest tax system.They believe their money is controlled by their extended family leadership,and should not be open to the inquisitive eyes of revenue agents.
Lastly, the assets held by various offshore banks are the source of problems for almost every divorce attorney in the world.If you examine the statistics around the globe you can see a correlation between divorce settlements,child support,and violence.Individuals think their children can be kidnapped,and definitely believe their assets can be stolen by unworthy spoutse.
By all their actions it is apparent that the federal reserve believes that keeping prices high and rising will increase demand for products and turn around this economy; but the economic law of supply and demand states that lower prices will increase demand.
Maybe the USA can Bail them out and then forgive their debt!
On the backs of the US citizen
They made bad loans to the U.S. Good luck collecting that one.
"Beijing's financial regulators buried massive bad loans by creating new financial companies that bought the bad debt of China's banks and took it off the banks' balance sheets. Then, through complex transactions, these new financial entities buried that bad debt."
Brilliant! What we need to do is borrow $20T more, create a new country "Defaultstan", pass it our national debt, and then declare them responsible. Problem solved
Copyright © 2014 Microsoft. All rights reserved.
Fundamental company data and historical chart data provided by Morningstar Inc. Real-time index quotes and delayed quotes supplied by Morningstar Inc. Quotes delayed by up to 15 minutes, except where indicated otherwise. Fund summary, fund performance and dividend data provided by Morningstar Inc. Analyst recommendations provided by Zacks Investment Research. StockScouter data provided by Verus Analytics. IPO data provided by Hoover's Inc. Index membership data provided by Morningstar Inc.
[BRIEFING.COM] The stock market finished an upbeat week on a mixed note. The S&P 500 shed less than a point, ending the week higher by 1.3%, while the Dow Jones Industrial Average (+0.1%) cemented a 1.7% advance for the week. High-beta names underperformed, which weighed on the Nasdaq Composite (-0.3%) and the Russell 2000 (-1.3%).
Equity indices displayed strength in the early going with the S&P 500 tagging the 2,019 level during the opening 30 minutes of the action. However, ... More
More Market News
|There’s a problem getting this information right now. Please try again later.|
MUST-SEE ON MSN
- Video: Easy DIY smoked meats at home
A charcuterie master shares his process for cold-smoking meat at home.
- Jetpacks about to go mainstream
- Weird things covered by home insurance
- Bing: 70 percent of adults report 'digital eye strain'