whose money? the tug-of-war over chinese state enterprise

7
WHOSE MONEY? Mikael Mattlin FIIA BRIEFING PAPER 79 April 2011 79 THE TUG-OF-WAR OVER CHINESE STATE ENTERPRISE PROFITS

Upload: others

Post on 14-Apr-2022

3 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Whose Money? The Tug-of-War Over Chinese State Enterprise

WHOSE MONEY?

Mikael Mattlin FIIA BRIEFING PAPER 79 • April 2011

79

THE TUG-OF-WAR OVER CHINESE

STATE ENTERPRISE PROFITS

Page 2: Whose Money? The Tug-of-War Over Chinese State Enterprise

• China’srecentlyapprovedfive-yearplanenvisionsareorientationoftheeconomytowardsamoresociallyequitableandenvironmentallysustainablegrowthmodel.

• Thenewplanlaysthefoundationforanewsocialcontract,aChinese‘NewDeal’.

• Thestateistocollectmoredividendsfromstate-ownedenterprisesthanbefore,improvingitsabilitytofundChina’sdevelopingsocialsecuritysystem.

• Newmeasureshavebeenintroducedtocontrolspeculativeinvestmentsbyenterprises.

• Politicallyinfluentialcentral-levelstateenterprises,theso-calledyangqi,haveresistedeffortstowrestcontroloverprofitsandinvestmentsawayfromthem.

WHOSE MONEY?

FIIA Briefing Paper 79

April 2011

THE TUG-OF-WAR OVER CHINESE STATE ENTERPRISE PROFITS

The Global Security research programme

The Finnish Institute of International Affairs

Mikael Mattlin

Researcher

The Finnish Institute of International Affairs

Page 3: Whose Money? The Tug-of-War Over Chinese State Enterprise

THE FINNISH INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS 3

While China’s reform strategy has largely been asuccessstorythathasseenlivingstandardsrisetre-mendously,ithasalsoledtowideningincomegaps,regionaldisparities,andmuchwastefulinvestment.Largeincomegapsbreedsocialdiscontentthatmayturnintopoliticaldemands.TherulingCommunistParty has proved itself adroit at preventing suchdemands from emerging, by taking timely pre-emptiveactioninresponsetopeople’sneeds.

True to this track record, the 12th five-year plan,accepted in March 2011 by the National People’sCongress,placesmuchemphasisonincomeredistri-bution,developingafunctioningconsumereconomyandpromotingbasicpublicservices.Attheheartoftheplan is themessage that amore equitable andsustainablegrowthmodelisnecessary.Ineffect,theplansetsouta roadmap forbuildinganewsocialcontract between the government and thepeople.Ultimately,theaimistosecurethelegitimacyoftheparty’sclaimtopower.

Inordertoencouragedomesticconsumption,amorecomprehensive social security system is called for.Chineseconsumerscommonlysaveaheftyportionoftheirincome,duetoaninadequatesocialsecuritynetwork.Inacountrywithapopulationof1.3bil-lion,anyimprovementinsocialsecurityis,however,boundtobeanexpensiveaffairthatrequiressome-onetopayup.Theprofitsofstate-ownedenterprises(SOEs) have in recent years emerged as a potentsource of funding. Asmajor Chinese SOEs clearly

increased their profitability over the past decade,theuseoftheirprofitsbecameaboneofcontentioninthepolicydebate.AccordingtoChineseMinistryof Finance figures, last year SOEsmade an aggre-gateprofit in theregionof2 trillionChineseyuan,equivalentto230billioneuros,oraround20%ofthenationalbudget.

State officials regard the profits of state-ownedcompanies as a key building block in funding theevolvingChinesesocial securitysystem,aswellasin restructuring the state-owned economy and increating globally competitive Chinese enterprises.HowSOEprofitsareusedaffectsmanykeyissuesinChina’s macroeconomic management.This paperlooksat thebackgroundto thedividend issueandits relationship to social security funding and thearduoustaskofreininginspeculativerealestateandstockmarketinvestments.

The rise of the yangqi

Withthestate-ownedsector’sshareoftheChineseeconomy in long-term decline and widespreadinterest in the development of China’s privatecorporatesector, it iseasyto forgettheoftencru-cial role thatSOEscontinuetoplay in theChineseeconomy. Contrary to the bankrupt situation ofmany state-owned enterprises in the 1990s, thebiggestSOEsarenowtremendouslyprofitable.Asakeycomponentofwhathasbeencalledthe‘inside

The headquarters of China National Petroleum Corporation and PetroChina in Beijing. Photo: Charlie Fong / Wikimedia Commons.

Page 4: Whose Money? The Tug-of-War Over Chinese State Enterprise

THE FINNISH INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS 4

successfulrestructuringandreorganizationofmajorSOEs is thereforeacrucial taskfortheparty-state.Unsurprisingly,bigstateenterpriseshaveanumberof political aims, such as ensuring that the state-ownedsectorstilldominatestheChineseeconomyandthatfutureChineseglobalchampionsarestate-owned.

Thetop-tierstateenterprisesare,throughtheirsub-sidiaries,alreadyamongthebiggestChineseinves-tors abroad. For example,no less than 13Chinesestate-owned enterprises operated in Libya, withcontractvaluesamountingtoseveralbillioneuros.ThebestSOEshavealsomorphedintoahugemoney-makingmachineandoneofthegreatestconcentra-tionsof assetsglobally.This state-controlledassetconcentration,sometimesreferredtoasChinaInc,naturally proffers political patronage opportuni-ties.ItisalsooneofthemainsourcesoffundingforChina’sdevelopingsocialsecuritysystem.

Managing state assets

China began constructing a new administrativeframework for the control of state enterprises in2003whentheState-ownedAssetsSupervisionandAdministration Commission of the State Council(SASAC)was founded.SASAC is aministerial-levelspecialorganizationdirectlyundertheChineseStateCouncilthatoverseesamulti-trillioneuroconcen-tration of state assets. SASAC has a vast structurewith a central-level organization, aswell as semi-independentprovincialandlocalofficesthroughoutthecountry.

SASAC represents the state’s ownership interests,butinitiallyalsoheldsomeregulatorypowersoverthestate-ownedenterprises.ThesomewhatunclearstatusofSASACwasclarifiedinOctober2008whenalong-awaitedlawonenterprisestateassets(企业国有资产法)wasfinallypromulgated.ThesecondsectionofthelawemphasizesSASAC’sroleastheorganiza-tionthatexercises thestate’sownershiprights, inasimilarfashiontoanyotherlargeequityinvestor.SASAC shares its authority over the state-ownedeconomy with various other organs; in financialmatterswiththeMinistryofFinance,inpersonnelappointmentswith theCommunistParty’sorgani-zationaldepartment,and in industrialpolicywiththeNationalDevelopmentandReformCommission(NDRC)–theformerstateplanningcommission.

thesystem’(体制内)1,theyarealsoofteninaspecialpositionvis-à-vistheauthorities.Forexample,thebulkofamassive4trillionyuan(about500billioneuros)infrastructurespendingpackageannouncedby the government inNovember 2008 to counterthe effects of the global economic downturnwaschannelledthroughSOEs.

Anotherreasonforincreasingpublicinterestintheuseofenterpriseprofits isthatbigSOEsareaveryvisibleandcentralpartoftheChineseeconomy.Thenumberof‘centralenterprises’(央企 yangqi inChi-nese), namelynational-level state companies, hasdroppedfromanoriginal196to121duetomergersandrestructurings.Astatedaim is toreduce theirnumber further to approximately 30-50 globallycompetitiveenterprises. In2010,theyangqimadea combinednetprofitof 849billionChineseyuan(almost100billioneuros)onrevenuesof16.7trillionyuan.

Therewasatimewhentermslikekeiretsuandchae-bolwerepracticallyhouseholdnamesthatarousedcompetitiveanxietiesinWesterncorporateleaders.Yangqiasatermhasnotyetenteredcommonpar-lanceoutsideofChina,butthestate-ownedenter-prisesthatthetermdenoteshavecertainlybeenatthecentreofgreat international interest in recentyears.Ofthe43MainlandChinesecompaniesonthelatestFortuneGlobal500list,30areyangqi,whileninearestate-ownedbanksorinsurancecompanies,andtwoareotherSOEs.Onlytwocanbeconsiderednon-stateenterprises.Theyangqilistalmostreadslike a ‘who’swho’ of China’s corporate elite. Forexample,theparentcompaniesoftelecomoperatorChinaMobile,oilcompanySinopecandthenationalflag-carrier Air China are all yangqi. Yangqi aredominantinanumberofmajorindustriesinChina.Inparticular,theycontroltheenergy,civilaviationanddefence industries,andarealsomajorplayersinthemetals,heavymachinery,shipbuilding,con-structionandcar industries.These industrieshavebeendesignatedbythestateaseither‘strategic’or‘pillar’industries.

The big SOEs are the enterprises chosen by theparty-statetosecuretheparty’sgriponpower.The

1 Seee.g.Walter,CarlE.andFraserJ.T.Howie(2011)Red Capita-

lism: The Fragile Financial Foundation of China’s Extraordinary

Rise.Singapore:JohnWiley&Sons,p.8.

Page 5: Whose Money? The Tug-of-War Over Chinese State Enterprise

THE FINNISH INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS 5

In practice, it is virtually impossible to effectivelycontrol the huge concentration of assets that hasbeenplacedunderSASAC’ssupervisioninacentral-izedmanner.Amanagementmodelthatseemstobegaininggroundisforahandfulofcentralenterprisestoassumerolesasakindofsuperholdingcompanyfor other state enterprise assets, placed betweenSASACandtheotherenterprises.AsoneofSASAC’skeytasksistooverseetherestructuringofthestate-ownedeconomy,theseenterprisesareeffectivelyakind of assetmanagement company dealingwithmergers,restructuringsandtheorderlydisposalofnon-coreassets.Since2005,threesuchassetman-agementcompanieshavealreadybeenformed–theStateDevelopmentandInvestmentCorporation,theChinaChengtongGroupandGuoxinGroup.Thelastonewasestablishedasrecentlyaslate2010.

In practice, SASAC has faced an uphill struggle toestablishitsauthorityovertheSOEsthatitsuppos-edlycontrolsasarepresentativeofthestateowner.Thisispartlybydesign.WhileSASACisaministerial-levelunit,soare54ofthebiggestcentralenterprises.Inotherwords,SASAC’schairman isequivalent inranktothebossesofthecentralenterprisesthatitsupervises,making it hard to issue direct orders.2ThefactthatSASACisaspecialunitonthesidelinesof the formalgovernmentapparatus, lacking inde-pendent authority over personnel appointments,

2 WalterandHowie,Red Capitalism,pp.167–168.

financialmattersandregulations,almostinevitablyresults in a gap between its ambition and actualpowers.Evenintermsofinformalpoliticalinfluence,eversoimportantinChina,powerfulSOEexecutivesare often much better placed than SASAC bosses.Manyofthecentralenterpriseexecutivesholdinflu-entialpartypositionswithadirect line to the topleadership.

The dividend issue

Inmostcountries,thestatecollectsdividendsfromitsenterprises.Dividendandprivatisationproceedscommonly go either directly to the state treasury(Ministry of Finance) as general revenue or aredirectedtoasocialsecurityfund.Alternatively,pro-ceedscanbeearmarkedforaspecificpurpose,suchasreducingpublicdebt.Collectingdividends fromstate-ownedenterprisesreducestheriskofmanag-ers making unprofitable investment decisions onthebackofexcessivefunds.Aselsewhere,Chineseenterprisemanagersprefertoreinvestprofits,some-timesspeculativelyintherealestateorstockmarkets.

Inconjunctionwithabigtaxreformin1994,stateenterprises were exempted from having to paydividendstothestate.However,theirstockmarketlisted subsidiaries still paid dividends to the non-listedwhollystate-ownedparentcompanies.They,inturn,couldretainallprofitsratherthanpassingthemontothegovernment.Forthemostprofitable

People trying to coax donkeys on a riverboat near Yangshuo. SASAC has faced a similar situation when trying

to cajole dividends from state-owned enterprises. Photo: Stougard / Wikimedia Commons.

Page 6: Whose Money? The Tug-of-War Over Chinese State Enterprise

THE FINNISH INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS 6

listedSOEsthismeantthattheirparentcompanieswere frequently awash with cash. In the contextof a long-runningmacro-economicdebateon theChineseeconomy’soverheating,whichcentresonexcessive(andwasteful)investments,SOEretentionof profitsmade it onto thepolitical agenda.Over-capitalisation of some SOEs due to strengthenedprofitability,thedividendexemptionandpoliticallyinfluenced bank lending, has contributed to over-investmentinmanyindustries.

Inthiscontext,itwasdecidedthatdividendswouldagainbecollecteddirectlyfromstate-ownedenter-prises.From2008onwards, thestatehasrequiredallwhollystate-ownedenterprisestopaydividends.However, thedecision to resume the collectionofdividends gave rise to a protracted dispute. TheprincipalprotagonistswereSASAC,whichwantedSOEdividendsearmarkedforrestructuringdomesticindustries and strategic investmentpriorities, andtheMinistryofFinance,whichwantedtheproceedsincludedintheregularstatebudget.

Not surprisingly, the dividend collection systemalsoprovokedmuchresistancefrompowerfulSOEs.Eventually, a compromise solution was reachedwherebySASACbecametheleadagencyincompil-ingtheso-calledstatecapitalmanagementbudgets(国有资本经营预算),themainvehicleforcollectingand redistributing SOE dividends. However, allproceedswerefirsttoberemittedtotheMinistryofFinance,fromwhichfundswouldthenbeturnedovertoSASACforuseinthestrategicrestructuringofSOEs. In simplified terms, the fundsflow fromthestateenterprisesthroughtheMinistrytoSASAC,fromwhichmuch of themoney is eventually re-allocated to the state enterprises, and earmarkedforspecificpurposes.

Whenrolledoutnationally,thedividendratioswereset at ten, five and zero per cent, based on enter-prise categorisations determined by SASAC. Themostprofitablecompanieswererequiredtopaythehighest rate,whilemilitary-industrial enterprisesand research instituteswere largely exempt fromremittingprofits to thestate.Asprofitsarehighlyconcentratedincertainindustries,inpractice,atenpercentratehasbeenappliedtothemostprofitablecentralenterprises,especiallyintheenergysector.

Attheendof2010,theMinistryofFinanceissuedadirective that raises thedividend ratiosacross the

board,commonlybyfivepercentagepoints.Startingthisyear, themostprofitableyangqi (suchaspet-rochemical,powergeneration,tobaccoandtelecomcompanies)willpay15%oftheirprofitstothestate,while steel companies and airlines, for instance,willpay10%.ASASACvice-chairmanrecentlyalsoindicatedthatthedividendratiosshouldgraduallyberaisedclosetothelevelpaidtoshareholdersbystockmarketlistedcompanies inChina.Followingthe announcement of dividend ratio hikes, it canbeexpectedthatthestatewillsubsequentlygathermore than 10billioneuros from thecentral enter-prisesintostatecoffers.Incomparison,thiswouldbeapproximately25timestheFinnishgovernment’sdividendincomein2010.

State capital management budgeting

As a legacy of the planned economy, the govern-menthadverybroadcontroloverstateenterprisesuntil the 1980s.Theywere an integral part of thestatebudgetingsysteminChina,withallenterprisefinancingneedscoveredbythestate,andprofitsandlossesdirectlyincludedinthestatebudget.Thiscon-trolgraduallyloosenedfollowingthereformpolicies,tothepointwhereSOEshadbecomealmostentirelyseparatedfromstatefinancespriortothereinstitu-tionof thedividend. Integral to this developmentwasthe1994dividendexemption.Inwrestingbackcontrol over enterprise profits, the state capitalmanagement budget, stipulated in the enterprisestateassetslaw,isthemaintool.

The state capitalmanagementbudgets aim to con-solidate companies’ investment funds and requirethattheyturnoveraportionoftheirpost-taxprof-its to the state. Inaddition to remittinga shareofoperatingprofitstothegovernment,theenterprisestateassetslawalsostipulatesthatcompanieshavetoremitpartofassetsaleproceeds,liquidationpro-ceedsandotherprofitstothegovernment.

Pre-approvalisalsorequiredfornon-corebusinessinvestments and pre-notification of core businessinvestments. Core business categories have beenofficially determined for each company.With toomuchmoneyat theirdisposalandpoorreturns inmany economic sectors, SOEs account for muchspeculativeinvesting.Nowhereisthismoreevidentthanintheoverheatingrealestatemarkets.Recently,SASACorderedtheyangqitodivestthemselvesofall

Page 7: Whose Money? The Tug-of-War Over Chinese State Enterprise

THE FINNISH INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS 7

non-essentialrealestateinvestments.However,theprocess has been slow with enterprise managersdraggingtheirfeet.AyearagoSASACannouncedthat78yangqi,whoseprimarybusinessisnotrealestate,wouldhavetosellofftheirrealestateinvestments.Yet,only14oftheimplicatedenterprisesdidsointhefirstyearaftertheannouncement,againattestingtothe difficulties SASAC encounters in enforcing itsdirectives.

Followingtrialsinpilotlocations,in2008thestatecapitalmanagementbudgetwasrolledoutnationallyforallstate-ownedenterprises.The2008budgetforcentralenterprisesamountedto54.8billionChineseyuan (6bneurosatcurrentexchangerates).Afterbeing routed through the Ministry of Finance toSASAC, 49% of thismoneywent towards increas-ingstateownershipoverassetsrelatedtonationaleconomic security and people’s livelihood, 36%towardscoveringSOElossesincurredduetonaturalcalamities,andtheresttowardscoveringcorporaterestructuring costs. During the economic down-turnin2009,SASACprovidedemergencyfinancialsupport to ailingyangqi.Thecapitalmanagementbudget dropped considerably during that year, to31.5billionyuan(3.5bneuros).In2010,itjumpedcorrespondinglyto60bnyuan(6.6bneuros).

A Chinese ‘New Deal’?

The16thPartyCongress in2002 set a loftygoal forChina.By2020,Chinashouldhaveachievedsome-thingreferredtoasaxiaokang (小康) society.TheconceptderivesfromclassicalChineseandroughlytranslates asmoderatewellbeing or a society thatis basically well-off. A long line of policy initia-tiveshavesincebeendesignedtofurtherthisbroadobjective,mostnotablyadecisionin2005torelievefarmersofthetaxesandfeesthathadbeenapartoftheir lotforthousandsofyears.The xiaokang goalandthepolicymeasuresembodiedinthefive-yearplancanbeseenassomethingofaChineseversionoftheAmericanNewDealinthe1930s,anewsocialcontract between the government and thepeople.Theyreorientthefocusoftheentireeconomy,fromaninvestment-ledbutwastefulandunevengrowthstrategy to amore consumption-driven, balancedand socially just one.Wealth transfers from state-ownedenterprises to the state canbe seen in thiscontext.

OneoftheaimsofincreaseddividendcollectionfromstateenterprisesistoraisetheabilityofthestatetofundChina’sdevelopingsocialsecuritysystemandpromoteaconsumereconomy.Tofurtherthisaim,inJune2009theStateCouncilalsoannouncedthatallSOEslistedonthestockmarketsince2005havetotransfersharesworth10percentoftheirinitialpublicofferingtothenationalsocialsecurity fund.Demandingmoreremittancesfromstateenterprisesand forcing divestments of speculative real estateinvestments will also assist in macroeconomicadjustment.

The Chinese government’s role in supervisingthe investments of state-owned enterprises hasgradually been enhanced. However, there haveunderstandablybeensomedoubtsas tohoweffec-tiveSASAChasactuallybeeninassertingitsauthor-ity over SOEs, given their political clout and theadministrativeconstraintsonSASAC.Theperennialtug-of-warbetweenSASACandthepowerfulyangqi overtheusesoftheirprofitsatteststothepoliticalstrengththatbigChinesestate-ownedenterpriseshaveacquired,astheofficiallydesignatedcoreoftheChineseeconomy.

Mikael Mattlin

The Finnish Institute of International Affairs

Kruunuvuorenkatu 4

FI-00160 Helsinki

tel. +358 9 432 7000

fax. +358 9 432 7799

www.fiia.fi

ISBN 978-951-769-300-4

ISSN 1795-8059

Cover photo: Nate Luzod / Flickr.com

Layout: Juha Mäkinen

Language editing: Lynn Nikkanen

The Finnish Institute of International Affairs is an

independent research institute that produces high-level

research to support political decision-making and

public debate both nationally and internationally.

The Institute undertakes quality control in editing

publications but the responsibility for the views

expressed ultimately rests with the authors.