- I think sometimes we overcomplicate our analysis of issues. I am just as guilty as anyone and not looking at anyone in particular here, but it can be tempting to over complicate an analysis when the reality is much more straight forward and simple.
- There has been some good news reporting on the problems and skepticism even with the Chinese financial and economic world about how well these debt for equity swaps will work. The problems have highlighted such issues as the lack of public capital injection. Persuading existing companies to essentially fund the bailout, the absurdity of having a bank create a WMP to fund purchasing a loan off its balance sheet, or how a bank can receive a debt for equity swap with no discounting of the debt price by the bank when the loan is classified as normal among some of the problems.
- These are all entirely valid concerns but I see a high probability of failure of the debt for equity swap for a much simpler and fundamental reason as compared to previous iteration in China: the gap between growth and debt. Prior to, let’s say 2008 for a simple dividing line, nominal GDP growth and cash flows were higher than debt growth in China. Since 2008 however, debt growth has been about twice as fast as nominal GDP growth and that ratio continues to worsen.
- I do not care how perfect the incentives work, how ideal the financial engineering, or immaculate the restructuring and organization plans: if debt continues to grow at twice the rate of cash flow or nominal GDP growth the debt restructuring will fail and fail spectacularly. We can write a length about a variety of issues about who absorbs the cost of the debt, the difficulty of restructuring, subsidized debt costs, the employment burden, and so many other issues that need to be considered but at the end of the day if debt continues to grow at two times nominal GDP and 3-4 times cash flow growth, there is absolutely no chance solving this debt problem.
- It is also important to note that while some may point to developed countries debt growth and their weak economic growth but these are very different levels. Take a simple scenario, not drawn from any specific country. Assume a country has 2% nominal GDP growth and 4% debt growth. After five years their debt level has risen 22% and GDP expanded 10.4%. Hardly a crippling blow. However, in China assume that debt goes up 15% and nominal GDP expands 7.5% also for 5 years. The debt level has more than doubled by 101% while nominal GDP is only up 44%. Even if a developed country faces the same ratio, debt growth twice as fast as nominal GDP, the scale and speed of the numbers is radically different compared to China.
- This debt swap, whether it is perfectly designed and executed or whether it is a disaster, has absolutely no hope of working absent credit restraint.
- Let’s project this out slightly. To make the fundamentals of the debt restructuring work, we have to either rapidly accelerate growth in China or we have to rapidly cut lending. Right now, for many reasons, it is extremely difficult to see any type of catalyst or driver to significantly accelerate nominal GDP growth in China. Official nominal GDP YTD through Q3 is up 7.4%, leave aside the validity, and I see no obvious indicator of what would push this up above 10% even within the next few years. Some may disagree with my pessimism here, but I don’t know anyone that believes the contrary and simply strains credibility to posit that as reasonable alternative.
- What happens to the Chinese economy if there is any type of significant deceleration of credit growth? Total loans are up 13% and aggregate financing to the real economy is up 12.5%, I have heard some argue that deleveraging is starting and while there may be narrow examples, by firm for instance, there is simply zero evidence of any widespread deleveraging. If you look beneath headline data, the only thing keeping the Chinese economy from likely entering an actual recession is fiscal and quasi fiscal stimulus. What happens if this credit growth is restrained going forward by any significant degree? For instance, if nominal growth continues around 7% and debt growth falls to say 4-6%, what happens to Chinese growth? I don’t think it is unfair to say that absent continued large scale credit growth, the Chinese economy would suffer from a significant slowdown in growth.
- Though I am frequently cynical of Chinese “reforms”, I actually believe Beijing wants to delever. However, and this is an enormous caveat, they do not want to make the trade off that comes with deleveraging of lower economic growth and asset prices. I always tell me students that there is a stunning amount we do not know about economic processes and where reasonable people can have reasonable differences. However, there are a couple of universal laws. One of them is economics is the study of trade offs. What trade offs are we willing to make. I believe China wants to delever but that they do not want to make the trade off involved.