Blog Post

Towards further liberalisation of the capital account in China

In China, discussions on capital account liberalisation have recently intensified. The Chinese government plans to gradually liberalise certain capital account items in the areas in which there is sufficient demand from the real economy and areas with relatively low investment risk, while maintaining tight regulation/supervision over the other items of the capital account and the financial sector. In response, Korean financial institutions need to establish strategies that will enable them to take part in this change, especially in the areas expected to undergo capital account liberalisation in the early stage.

By: Date: February 25, 2013 Topic: Finance & Financial Regulation

Summary: In China, discussions on capital account liberalisation have recently intensified. The Chinese government plans to gradually liberalise certain capital account items in the areas in which there is sufficient demand from the real economy and areas with relatively low investment risk, while maintaining tight regulation/supervision over the other items of the capital account and the financial sector. In response, Korean financial institutions need to establish strategies that will enable them to take part in this change, especially in the areas expected to undergo capital account liberalisation in the early stage.

Discussions on capital account liberalisation in China made significant headway in 2012, and various moves will be made in this direction to further open the capital account. China became one of the International Monetary Fund’s Article 8 countries in December 1996, making its current account fully convertible. After its accession to the World Trade Organisation in 2001, China partially opened its financial market, including commercial banks, while maintaining strict control over cross-border FX flows on the capital account.

However, the efforts to liberalise the FX market were suspended for years with the onset of the global financial crisis. Then, in January 2012, Zhou Xiaochuan, then the governor of the People’s Bank of China (PBOC), said that China would not refuse to make its currency increasingly convertible on the capital account. Following this, the PBOC’s Financial Survey and Statistics Bureau published a report in February 20121, in which it presented both short- and long-term roadmaps for capital account liberalisation; the report also drew parallels with the experiences of other countries, and acknowledged that the time was ripe to accelerate liberalisation of the capital account.

The State Administration of Foreign Exchange (SAFE) announced a plan to “liberalise the capital account in an orderly manner” in a press release; top officials, including Xie Ping, Vice President of the China Investment Corporation (CIC) and Guo Shuqing, Chairman of the China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) and a strong candidate for the next governorship of the PBOC, repeatedly emphasised the need for, and the importance of, such moves. In September 2012, the PBOC published the 12th Five-year Plan to Enhance and Reform Financial Industry jointly with three major financial supervisory authorities and the SAFE, which set out the order and principles of capital account liberalisation and emphasised coordination with financial market liberalisation and internationalisation of the renminbi.

China seems keen on capital account liberalisation amid soaring overseas investment by Chinese businesses and financial institutions, and the quickening pace of the renminbi’s internationalisation in the wake of the global financial crisis. Between 2007 and 2011, China’s ODI (outward direct investment) almost tripled from US$ 26.5 billion to US$ 74.6 billion (Table 1). And the government acknowledged that capital account liberalisation would be a prerequisite for internationalisation of the renminbi, and would also facilitate the implementation of the New Development Strategy to shift the focus of the growth strategy from exports to domestic demand over the mid-to-long term.

Moving towards capital account liberalisation, the Chinese government emphasises a step-by-step approach to minimise FX market instability. Currently (Table 2), China completely bans transaction in four out of 40 items on the capital account (by IMF criteria) including foreigners’ issuance and trading of derivatives within China; it partially allows 14 items including investment by Qualified Domestic Institutional Investor (QDII) and Qualified Foreign Institutional Investor (QFII). The country plans to gradually liberalise the capital account, lifting restrictions item-by-item.

Meanwhile, the 12th Five-year Financial Plan mapped out plans to a) start with deregulation of direct investment; b) expand convertibility in equity market through liberalisation of domestic capital markets and foreign stock investment; c) ease regulation and reform the supervisory system on overseas borrowing; and d) gradually allow individuals’ transactions on the capital account.

Additionally, the PBOC introduced both short- and long-term road maps to ensure sufficient demand from the real economy, and to start with capital account liberalisation in areas with fewer risks. Easing regulation on direct investment would be a short-term task (1~3 years), and deregulating commercial finance with relatively less risk would be a mid-term task (3~5 years). In the asset market (real estate, equity and bond), a long-term task will be implemented over five to ten years by first liberalising bond issuance and parceling-out, and allowing non-residents’ domestic transactions.

The Chinese government sees that poor external debt management was largely responsible for the financial and fiscal crises in East Asia and the euro area. Thus, it is likely to maintain close supervision over external debts. Various control/supervisory measures will be maintained over in- and outflows of convertible FX, and the government will intervene in case of market shocks or if excessive short-term, speculative capital inflows are detected.

Against this background, Korea should make efforts to share its experiences with China, and establish strategies to deal with the advancing capital account liberalisation in China. Both countries are extensively analysing related experiences, and sharing information would help to enhance bilateral financial cooperation, and better foresee the movements of the Chinese capital market. Korean financial institutions should pay closer attention to the areas of early capital account liberalisation (eg FDI and trade finance) that will have immediate impact on the market, and should explore how to respond to the forthcoming changes.


Republishing and referencing

Bruegel considers itself a public good and takes no institutional standpoint. Anyone is free to republish and/or quote this post without prior consent. Please provide a full reference, clearly stating Bruegel and the relevant author as the source, and include a prominent hyperlink to the original post.

View comments
Read about event

Past Event

Past Event

A conversation with Jin Liqun, president of AIIB

We were pleased to host Jin Liqun, the president of Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank at Bruegel.

Speakers: Sven Biscop, Guntram B. Wolff and Jin Liqun Topic: Finance & Financial Regulation, Global Economics & Governance Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: January 22, 2018
Read article More by this author

Opinion

China Fails to Woo U.S. With Financial Sector Opening

China's recent announcement of reforming its financial market has received little enthusiasm from the U.S. despite its potential benefits. The lack of a clear agenda regarding its economic rival has pushed the Trump administration to minor any significant progress of China's reform, and to maintain focus on strategic issues.

By: Alicia García-Herrero Topic: Finance & Financial Regulation, Global Economics & Governance Date: January 5, 2018
Read article

Opinion

Chinese banks’ improved asset quality cannot hide other phantoms

The recent improvement in asset quality cannot mask other growing concerns in China’s banking sector. Beyond liquidity concerns, other structural issues such as low profitability and insufficient generation of organic capital, are emerging.

By: Alicia García-Herrero and Gary Ng Topic: Finance & Financial Regulation, Global Economics & Governance Date: December 20, 2017
Read article More by this author

Opinion

South Korea needs to watch the BOJ rather than the Fed

Due its actual economic structure, South Korea should be more worried about BOJ's extremely lax stance than about monetary policy normalization by the Fed.

By: Alicia García-Herrero Topic: Finance & Financial Regulation, Global Economics & Governance Date: December 14, 2017
Read article Download PDF More on this topic

External Publication

Central Asia—twenty-five years after the breakup of the USSR

Central Asia consists of five culturally and ethnically diverse countries that have followed different paths to political and economic transformation in the past 25 years. The main policy challenge for the five Central Asian economies is to move away from commodity-based growth strategies to market-oriented diversification and adoption of a broad spectrum of economic, institutional and political reforms

By: Marek Dabrowski and Uuriintuya Batsaikhan Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: November 14, 2017
Read article More by this author

Blog Post

European worries about isolationist trends

Populist shocks in the UK and US threaten the multilateral order on which the EU depends. What lies behind these earthquakes, and what does it mean for Europe? Withdrawing from the world is no solution to geo-political upheavals, but Europe needs to reassess the future of globalisation.

By: Maria Demertzis Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance, Global Economics & Governance Date: November 7, 2017
Read about event More on this topic

Past Event

Past Event

EU - CELAC Economic Forum - Channels for a joint future

On 11 October Bruegel together with GIGA and Real Instituto Elcano will organise a conference on relations between the EU and the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States.

Speakers: Paola Amadei, Angel Badillo, Paulo Carreño King, Linda Corugedo Steneberg, Gonzalo de Castro, Gonzalo Gutiérrez, Bert Hoffmann, Edita Hrdá, Ramón Jáuregui, Emilio Lamo de Espinosa, Eduardo Levy Yeyati, Gabriel Lopez, Enrique Medina Malo, Maryleana Méndez Jiménez, Luicy Pedroza, Mario Pezzini, Mario Soares, Everton Vargas, Dylan Vernon and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: Global Economics & Governance Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: October 11, 2017
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Long-term growth potential, or dead in the long run?

By linking growth with both employment and the imperative for India to hold its own with China for strategic autonomy, Prime Minister Modi has brought sustainable, high quality, inclusive economic growth to the centre of political discussion, which is where it rightfully belongs.

By: Suman Bery Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: October 5, 2017
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Ukraine’s oligarchs are bad for democracy and economic reform

Ukraine’s late and incomplete economic reform created a class of super-wealthy oligarchs who now stand in the way of further liberalisation. The oligarchs’ oversized influence only deepens public distrust in a structurally weak political system. Nevertheless, Ukraine is making some attempts to uproot corruption and the next steps are clear.

By: Marek Dabrowski Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: October 3, 2017
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Chinese banks: An endless cat and mouse game benefitting large players

As deleveraging moves up in the scale of objectives of the Chinese leadership, banks now face more restrictions from regulators. As a result, banks have been very creative in playing the cat and mouse game in front of evolving regulations.

By: Alicia García-Herrero Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: September 26, 2017
Read about event More on this topic

Past Event

Past Event

14th Asia Europe Economic Forum (AEEF)

The 14th Asia Europe Economic Forum will be held in Seoul on 20-21 September 2017.

Topic: Global Economics & Governance Location: Seoul, Korea Date: September 20, 2017
Read article Download PDF

Policy Contribution

Capital Markets Union and the fintech opportunity

Fintech has the potential to change financial intermediation structures substantially. It could disrupt existing financial intermediation with new business models empowered by intelligent algorithms, big data, cloud computing and artificial intelligence. Policymakers need to consider four questions urgently: Develop a European or national fintech market? What regulatory framework to pursue? Should supervision of fintech be exercised at the European level? What is the overall vision for the EU’s financial system?

By: Maria Demertzis, Silvia Merler and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: Finance & Financial Regulation, Innovation & Competition Policy Date: September 15, 2017
Load more posts