Huang Xianhai is Vice President of Zhejiang University
The following views are compiled from Huang Xianhai's speech at the CMF Symposium on Macroeconomic Hot Issues (Issue 74).
Number of words: 1970 words.
Reading time: 5 minutes.
In recent years, a new situation has emerged in the strategic game between China and the United States, which has expanded to the micro enterprise level. The U.S. has taken various measures to force Chinese companies to invest abroad, and this trend is evolving, which deserves our close attention.
1. The basic situation of cross-border transfer of China's industrial chain under the coercion of the United States
Since last year, the United States has implemented the "China+1" strategy based on the so-called "de-risking" considerations, coercing Chinese-funded first-chain enterprises and foreign-funded enterprises in China to relocate, and forcibly implementing the "no transfer, no order" initiative. Many Chinese companies, under the coercion of the main enterprises and buyers of the American chain, have begun to turn to overseas layout of the industrial chain. According to our survey of Zhejiang and other eastern coastal areas, a considerable proportion of first-chain enterprises have or are preparing to carry out overseas layout. For example, there is a company in Zhejiang that produces first-class packaging boxes for KFC and McDonald's in the United States, with annual sales of about 2 billion yuan. Now, KFC and McDonald's have explicitly asked the company to invest in an ASEAN country and set up another production base outside of China. There is also a company on the Apple ** chain, which has annual sales of about 10 billion, and is also required to carry out overseas layout step by step.
In our research, we found that Apple's coercive transfer has an obvious mission map and roadmap, such as the requirement that by next year, it must have a clear overseas layout plan and investment location;By the following year, 30% of overseas factories will start construction;By 2025, construction must start in the investment area. If such a plan is not followed, businesses may be at risk of losing orders.
In addition, the United States has also put forward requirements for foreign-funded enterprises investing in China. For example, Dell has proposed that by 2024, it will no longer use semiconductor components produced in China, and will move 50% of its production capacity out of China by 2025. This is an obvious cross-border transfer of China's industrial chain under US coercion.
2. The policy orientation reflected in the cross-border transfer of China's industrial chain under US coercion
1. The strategic game between China and the United States has a microscopic trend
The original Sino-US strategic game was a contest at the macro strategic level, and since last year, the de-"de-risking" has been extended to the micro level of enterprises and the level of key links in the industrial chain. This kind of coercion and coercion at the micro level and the industrial chain level is more serious, and the impact on the economy is more direct, so we should attach great importance to it.
2. The "de-risking" of the United States shows a trend of generalization and abuse
Previously, the "de-risking" of the United States for some high-tech fields and sensitive industries could also be based on the excuse of industrial security and security. However, judging from the previous examples, the production of KFC and McDonald's packaging boxes does not involve industrial safety and ***, but it is also mandatory to transfer overseas, which shows that "de-risking" has been generalized and abused. In the name of "de-risking", the United States is forcing companies that do not have a problem with industrial security to move overseas.
3. There has been a major shift in U.S. industrial policy
The big turn is mainly manifested in two aspects:First, safety is better than efficiency, and second, implicit industrial policies give way to explicit industrial policies. In recent years, the United States has made great strides out of the tradition of liberalism and turned to interventionism, emphasizing that safety comes before efficiency, and resilience is more important than division of labor, with the intention of establishing an independent and complete set of internal circulation industrial chains between the United States and the West. At the same time, in terms of industrial policy tools, a large span has shifted from traditional implicit industrial policies, such as R&D subsidies, to explicit industrial policies, such as strong policy intervention in production, investment, and market links in addition to R&D, forming a closed loop of explicit policies, breaking through the framework and boundaries of traditional industrial policies in the United States and the West.
3. Policy recommendations
1. Establish an appropriate support and service system for enterprises that are coerced overseas by the United States
In particular, small and medium-sized private enterprises that are forced to "go out" should provide support and assistance as much as possible in the areas of information services, legal services, human resources, and financial services. For example, for the company that produces KFC and McDonald's boxes, it has never made cross-border investments, but now it has to invest. On the one hand, they can establish such support and services themselves, and on the other hand, they can also encourage chain owners and large enterprises to provide support and services through market means. For example, Holley Group in Zhejiang has set up Rayong Industrial Park in Thailand, which provides a relatively complete industrial base and supporting facilities for Chinese-funded enterprises to invest in Thailand, and provides a good environment and conditions for small and medium-sized enterprises to "go global".
In addition, it is necessary to guide the enterprises that are forced to move out, and let them maintain the best and investment ties with the domestic headquarters and bases as much as possible, so that overseas investment is conducive to the production and investment of domestic products.
2. Further actively promote high-level opening up
Against the backdrop of the United States' vigorous promotion of "de-risking" and "new Cold War", China must unswervingly promote high-level and high-standard institutional opening-up, actively seek breakthroughs, expand industrial and technological cooperation with friendly countries, and steadily build a cycle of internationally friendly industries and technologies.
3. Strengthen industrial innovation policies, promote industrial policy coordination, and enhance the global competitiveness of the industry
At present, there has been a major shift in U.S. industrial policy, and China needs to adopt appropriate response policies. It is necessary to strengthen the allocation orientation of industrial innovation policies, empower the main body of innovation, and promote the integration of industrial chain and innovation chain from the source, especially to build a full-process industrial chain system covering technology, parts, software, manufacturing applications and other links with strategic emerging industries and some key industries as the main body, so that China can have stronger international competition in emerging industries or important industrial fields, so as to cope with the strategic game between China and the United States.
ExtensionStretchRead
Yan Yan: Under the bond replacement, urban investment bonds ushered in a wave of early payment, or saved more than 40 billion yuan in debt interest.
Yuan Haixia: Accelerate the resolution of local debts and reform of long-term mechanisms.
Wang Jinbin et al.: The US Dollar Monetary System: A Minimalist Analytical Framework.
Yang Jidong: Digital transformation drives high-quality economic development.
Focusing on "Balance Sheet: Impact Performance and Repair Path Selection", the CMF special report was released.
Wu Ge: Balance Sheet Damage and Incremental Policy Choices.