Beijing's Banking Overhaul
China is considering a central bank reform to give itself more clarity and control.
By Phillip Orchard
The Chinese central bank is quietly considering a change       that says a great deal about the progress and perils of China’s broader reform       project. According to Caixin, Beijing may abolish the nine       regional branches of the People’s Bank of China, each of which oversees       several provinces, and replacing them with more than 30 provincial-level       branches – effectively returning to a system it abandoned in 1998. The       plan is expected to kick in by the end of the year.
       
Now, we realize that a bureaucratic overhaul in China is       not very dramatic. But as we discussed following President Xi Jinping's overhaul of the state       bureaucracy during the spring, Xi is in a make-or-break       wrestling match with the system he heads, and there are still several       rounds to go. China is a big and unwieldy place that's ill-suited for       micromanagement. Chinese history is littered with sclerotic, unresponsive       governments getting blindsided by crises bubbling up from the provinces.       And if the Communist Party of China has any chance of surviving amid       slowed growth and trade tension with the West, it will need all the help       it can get.
Reversing Course
On the surface, at least, this change seems like an       admission of defeat. Until 1998, the PBOC had a branch in each of China’s       31 provincial-level administrative units (i.e., provinces, autonomous       regions and biggest cities) that answered directly to the central bank       leadership – a similar structure to the one under consideration. The       problem with this setup was that local governments simply proved too       adept at hijacking monetary policy and financial resource allocation to       support their immediate interests, often at the expense of Beijing’s       macroeconomic goals. Part of the problem was that the incentives of local       governments and provincial PBOC branches were too tightly aligned. The       quickest way to gain promotion up through the Chinese system, whether as       a local administrator or a central bank branch official, was to ensure       that your province was producing sparkling economic data. PBOC branches       were also too dependent on assistance from local governments, which since       the 1980s have had considerable sway over local economic activities and       ample wariness of prying eyes, to be able to carry out their mandate.
       
Thus, a province’s success was the branch’s success,       creating incentives to overlook financial risk and support reckless       lending and development in the name of economic growth. (And, if all else       failed, there were mutual incentives to simply cook the books.)       In other words, what Beijing wanted from the bank branches was a clear       view into local economic activity and prudent allocation of liquidity.       What it got was regulatory capture. This was just the latest       manifestation of an age-old problem in China, where the center has always struggled to control the       country’s disparate parts.
       
And so, in an effort to boost the central bank’s       independence, the PBOC was restructured to resemble the U.S. Federal       Reserve. The provincial branches were abolished, replaced by nine       regional branches responsible for overseeing several provinces. More than       300 municipal sub-branches and more than 1,000 county-level sub-branches       remained, but their responsibilities were confined to financial       supervision, with little ability to alter policy or issue credit       independently – and thus leaving local governments with less influence       over the PBOC. But this system fostered its own problems. In particular,       the regional branches have reportedly struggled to uniformly meet the       needs of multiple provinces, in which economic conditions could vary       widely.
What Has Changed Since 1998
That the PBOC is reversing course says three things about       China’s reform effort. The first is merely that the party leadership       feels it now has the tools to prevent regulatory capture and keep local       governments in check. For example, Xi’s sweeping anti-graft campaign has       extended to every conceivable level of government and, increasingly, into       the private sector and civil society as well. Of the nearly 1.5 million       officials jailed, purged or otherwise disciplined, the vast majority have       not been the high-profile “tigers” (i.e., senior officials ousted, at       least in part, as threats to Xi’s consolidation of power), but rather       lower-level “flies” – those with the most ability to gunk up the machinery       of governance and hijack reform implementation. And Xi’s domestic       surveillance apparatus is only growing: In March, Xi unveiled a new and       improved National Supervisory Commission, which will embed units across       the national, provincial, city and county levels to try to ensure       adherence with contentious reforms. Already, this has shown some success       in reducing the common practice of lower-level governments cooking their       books to stay in Beijing’s good graces.
       
Second, it says that Xi isn’t done peeling away layers of       the bureaucracy that have the capacity to dilute the center’s power and       subvert its reform initiatives. With the PBOC, this process has been       underway for some time. By 2004, according to unnamed officials quoted by       Caixin, the regional branches had largely been defanged, with the       sub-branches taking primary responsibility for local execution of       monetary policy and financial market supervision. The regional branches       had become redundant middle men. Given the scale and complexity of risk       in China’s financial system, any bureaucratic bottlenecks, turf wars or       conflicting regulations are threats to the party’s agenda that it cannot       abide.
       
Indeed, this is just part of a much broader effort to       overhaul China’s sclerotic and chronically overmatched financial       supervisory system. For much of the past year, Xi has been gradually       wringing the primary institutions responsible for provincial development       into submission. In March, for example, Xi stripped the all-powerful       National Development and Reform Commission – which has dominated economic       planning in China since the Mao era, but which had become rife with       corruption – of a wide range of its powers, including some of its       oversight responsibilities. The party has also been inserting political       committees into state-owned enterprises, which likewise are principal       agents for local development. Perhaps most important, the party has been       reining in local governments’ ability to sidestep restrictions       on how they raise funding and how it’s spent.
       
Notably, the Communist Party has also focused on       tightening its control of the PBOC itself, while simultaneously expanding       the bank’s powers to allow it to function as China’s core policymaker on       a range of economic matters. (Unlike the Federal Reserve, the PBOC has       duties far beyond monetary policy.) Its new powers have come at the       expense of China’s top insurance and banking regulatory bodies, which       have been merged and stripped of any major role in drafting new laws and       rules for the finance sector. In other words, Xi has become confident       enough in his control over the PBOC to use it as the party’s pre-eminent       tool to rein in other institutions. And by doing away with the regional       PBOC branches, the provincial branches will be empowered to carry out       Beijing's wishes more capably at lower levels. Theoretically, at least,       this new system will allow Xi’s writ to be felt more clearly down the line.
Reform Whack-a-Mole
The third thing this move tells us is that the CPC’s       ambitious economic reform agenda is turning into a game of whack-a-mole,       with each success breeding a new problem somewhere else. And this game is       going to become only more difficult as growth slows in China and as the sting from the       trade war worsens.
       
For example, the success of Beijing’s sweeping deleveraging       campaign and crackdowns on shadow lending has come       with downsides. For one, China is grappling with a liquidity crunch that       risks sparking a cascade of defaults. For another, the crackdown on       shadow lending has merely pushed firms, local governments and investors       to look for loopholes and embrace even riskier or more opaque fundraising       channels.
| 
 | 
| 
 | 
| 
 | 


 
0 comments:
Publicar un comentario