China's local city construction investment company (urban investment company) debt risk is related to high -quality development and social stability in local economic and social stability, and local financial security and financial sustainability.In recent years, the significant slowdown in local economic growth, the continuous downturn in the real estate market, and the increasingly sharp contradiction between local fiscal revenue and expenditure have made the operating income of weak quality urban investment companies in some areas decreased sharply, cash flow deteriorated, and the pressure on debt interest payment was steep.In addition, some urban investment bonds have a technical breach of contract, and some urban investment in non -standard debt has a substantial breach of contract, and even public transport suspension incidents occur in some regions, which has a greater impact on local people's livelihood.
Therefore, the issue of debt risk in China ’s local urban investment companies has attracted widespread attention from scholars at home and abroad and all walks of life, and many research institutions have also evaluated this.However, the current parties have not formed a consensus, and there are great controversy.For example, as of the end of last year, the balance of local government debt was RMB 3.506 trillion (about S $ 6.78 trillion), and what was the interest debt of Chinese local urban investment companies?Some institutions estimated that the balance at the end of last year was about 65 trillion yuan, and this data was controversial and was not accurate.
Although local urban investment companies are accelerating market -oriented transformation, many companies have publicly stated that they no longer assume government financing functions, but their project investment and financing, credit rating, business development model, and main business income sources are inseparable from the local area.The influence of the government is inseparable from the credit of the local government.Therefore, the debt problem of local urban investment companies is very complicated, and it is difficult to measure or objective evaluation with a simple standard.So, what should local city investment company debt think?
First of all, the type of local urban investment company needs to be clarified.The types of local urban investment companies cannot be simplified. We can be roughly divided into four categories of "ABCD":
1. Class A (complete marketization): Most of these urban investment companies are provincial -level urban investment in developed areas. The size of assets is large and high -quality, good profitability, stable cash flow, and market -oriented financing channels.Debt is indeed completely corporate debt, does not constitute "government debt", and there is no hidden government debt;
2. Class B (transformed and semi -market -based): Most of these urban investment companies are municipal investment in provincial -level urban investment and developed regions in underdeveloped areas. The size of assets is large but the quality is average.More unblocked, local governments still have certain intervention in investment and financing decisions and business development of urban investment;
Three, C type (being transformed): This type is mostly municipal -level urban investment, the size of the assets is average, the financing channels are not smooth, and the local government has more intervention in investment and financing decisions and business development of urban investment;
Four, Class D (pure government financing platform): This type is mostly district and county investment companies. It has not yet truly market -oriented transformation, undertakes or in disguise to undertake local government financing functions.There are more hidden debts, and it is easy to increase hidden debt, and debt risk deserves high attention.
Secondly, misunderstandings and debt misunderstandings of local urban investment companies must be corrected.
At present, some scholars are demonized urban investment companies that urban investment companies are tumors, and they even advocate cancellation of urban investment companies; some scholars beautify the city investment company and exaggerate the risk of debt of urban investment companies.Three misunderstandings are prone to local urban investment corporate debt and its risk assessment.
I think there are three "cannot be equivalent to":
First, the debt of urban investment companies cannot be equivalent to local government debt.Local urban investment company debt is indeed crossing with local government debt. The hidden debt and new hidden debt of local urban investment companies do constitute local government debt.Essence
Second, the debt of urban investment companies cannot be equivalent to urban investment debt.Local urban investment company debt mainly includes: bank loan, urban investment debt, non -bid debt and other interest -bearing debt.Urban investment bonds are the "standard bonds" issued by local urban investment companies in the open market. As of the end of August last year, the balance of stock urban investment bonds was about 13.78 trillion yuan./P>
Third, the debt of urban investment companies cannot be equivalent to state -owned enterprise debt.Most local urban investment companies have inextricable connections with local governments, which are deeply influenced by local governments. The debt is indeed different from the debt of pure commercial state -owned enterprises, but the city investment company that is fully market -oriented and does not have hidden debtIts debt can be classified as a state -owned enterprise debt.
Finally, how does urban investment company position?How to prevent and control debt risks?What to do in the future?First, we must re -understand the strategic positioning of local urban investment companies, especially the central and local positioning of the positioning of urban investment companies must reach a consensus.Urban Investment Corporation is a "institutional innovation" for China's development of the economy. Especially in the current place, the current local realization of steady growth, high -quality development and employment. The local realization of industrial upgrading, park upgrades, urban operations and resource integration are inseparable from the city.Investment company.It can be seen that local governments still need urban investment companies, but what kind of urban investment companies need in the future are indeed worthy of in -depth research.
I think that in the future, local urban investment companies should be a "new state -owned enterprise" that invest and operate in a market -oriented method to invest and operate in a professional way to achieve local government development planning and goals."Advantages, both the integration of" investment -financing -operation ".
Second, we must further improve the regulatory mechanism of local urban investment companies' debt and achieve the open and transparent debt.In the future, the debt risk of local urban investment companies will face a new situation, and there will be new challenges. If they do not fully understand their debt foundation, if they are not timely, dynamic, and comprehensively monitor the debt of urban investment corporates;It is difficult to prevent and resolve it in a timely manner.
Third, we must further clarify local responsibilities to prevent the risk of debt.The debt risk of local urban investment companies should be one of the focus of the work of the main party and government leaders at all levels at all levels.Especially in the next three years, the debts of local governments and urban investment companies have entered the peak of expiration, and the pressure on debt payments will increase significantly.As a result, risk agglomeration and magnification, and even trigger regional systemic risks.
The author is a researcher at the Chinese Academy of Fiscal Sciences
