Local government debt - time to pay the bill
Local government debt is back in the headlines. Today, I attended a presentation by Prof Victor Shih, who has just finished some fairly extensive research on the debt taken on by local government investment entities.
The starting point for Prof Shih’s argument is that last year’s massive economic stimulus was massively underfunded by the central government. Local governments were left with colossal spending obligations but no obvious way to pay for them. The solution for many local governments was to set up local government investment entities to borrow the money on their behalf.
The process is quite simple. Local governments set up a financial company and give it some land. Using the land as collateral, the financial company, which is wholly owned by the local government, borrows money form the banks. That money is used to fund local government’s investment projects.
Prof Shih’s calculations suggest that money owed by these finance vehicles now adds up to around CNY11trln - or about 1/3 of Chinese GDP.
This money will now have to be paid back. If, as seems likely, the revenue stream from the projects in which it has been invested are not sufficient, some other way will have to be found. Land sales, higher taxes, or reliance on a bail out from the central government are the most likely options.
The government might have kept the majority of economic stimulus spending off balance sheet, but the bill will still have to paid.
Chinese economists are also alive to the problem of local government debt. These are the main points from a recent blog post by Guo Tianyong:
‘Many of the projects funded through local investment vehicles are not commercially viable. A visit to local areas revealed projects that will not generate revenue for 5 or even 10 years.
That will mean that responsibility for repayment falls back at the door of local government, which has acted as guarantor of the loans.
If the real estate market wobbles and land prices fall, the repayment ability of local government will also come into question.
Properly understood, local government finance risk and bank credit risk are now two sides of the same coin.
A more sensible approach for the future would be for local government to invite bids from the private sector to build local infrastructure. If projects are commercially viable, there should be no problem. If the project fails, the private sector is left with the debt, and its no burden for the government.’
You can see Guo Tianyong’s blog post here. Prof Shih’s research has been getting a lot of play and you can see a summary of it here.
Banking, Financial Crisis, Fiscal Policy, Infrastructure, Property, Regional