Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

China's debt dragon

By Arthur Thomas - posted Wednesday, 14 July 2010


Copying America's Resolution Trust Company (RTC) model after the Savings and Loan crisis, the Ministry of Finance (MOF) approved the formation of five asset management companies (AMCs) to acquire "selected" NPLs for warehousing, and auction to the highest foreign bidders.

Beijing ignored the RTC's success criteria of independent professional management, liquidating weakest entities, debt discounting, and market pricing, and took control, refusing discounting and liquidation of any state owned enterprise.

The MOF authorised the AMCs to purchase about US$204 billion of NPLs from the banks at book value, partly in cash loaned by the Central Bank, and partly in 10-year bonds, both guaranteed by the Central Bank.

Advertisement

The logic was simple. Since the State "owns" the AMCs and the banks, the state incurs no net loss by providing backing. Solvency problem solved. The debt goes around in circles. Some cash and central bank guaranteed bonds with substantial interest revenue replaced the NPLs on the banks' balance sheets.

NPLs again surged in 2002, and in 2003, the AMCs acquired an additional US$120 billion in NPLs, issuing more bonds, at undisclosed discounted values.

In 2002 and 2003, state media reported multi-billion dollar NPL sales to foreign investors.

In 2009, state media reported the AMCs as profitable.

The report defied economic logic, implying likely creative accounting, concealment, collusion, and questionable management standards by the AMCs.

Due to extremely poor asset quality, questionable security, and China's vague laws, among other things, auctions realised just 1.5 per cent to 9 per cent of the NPLs face value. By the end of 2005, only US$20.63 billion of the US$324 billion of saleable NPLs had sold.

Advertisement

Foreign interest evaporated leaving an estimated US$304 billion in unsaleable NPLs on the AMCs balance sheets accruing operating expenses and interest on bonds and cash loans.

Profitability implies that the remaining "dud" NPLs had sold well beyond face value, producing windfall profits clearing the estimated US$325 billion NPL residual, accrued operating expense debt, and interest.

Early 2009 the four state banks were reportedly discussing strategies to bail out their insolvent AMCs.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

10 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Arthur Thomas is retired. He has extensive experience in the old Soviet, the new Russia, China, Central Asia and South East Asia.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Arthur Thomas

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Article Tools
Comment 10 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy