【英语财经】中国如何真正保护投资者？ Let China’s markets speak truth to power

Recent turbulence in China’s stock market has led some to conclude that the country stands on the brink of a major financial and economic crisis. The rapid decline of equity prices, these bears maintain, is a warning of contagion to come.

While it is no secret the Chinese economy faces significant challenges and headwinds, these have little to do with the sell-off in the stock market. Rather, they stem from underlying structural problems, including unfinished reforms to China’s capital markets. All equity markets are prone to boom and bust cycles. Problems arise when capital markets are under-developed — as they are in China — because these bouts of volatility are magnified.

China is especially vulnerable at this point because while its economy has grown and matured, its capital markets have lagged behind. It is no surprise that those ideologically opposed to markets would use recent events to make the opposite argument — that to prevent market instability, Beijing should slow the pace of financial liberalisation or perhaps even abandon market-based reforms altogether.

With so many retail investors in China’s stock market, a collapse of share prices affects people’s savings, incomes and welfare. Many no doubt invested because they were confident in the government’s capacity to rescue the market. This may explain, in part, why Beijing intervened so quickly when the market plummeted. Still, while Beijing’s instinct to protect investors is understandable, the best way of doing so is to create a modern capital market.

No advanced economy has achieved high-income status — something to which China aspires — with a closed financial system that misallocates and misprices capital. Chinese reformers undoubtedly understand how to create a modern financial system; policymakers have studied this inside out. They have the blueprint in hand, but need to act on it boldly and quickly. If China is to have a well functioning and stable capital market — which can also help to protect investors, particularly unsophisticated individuals — it needs to allow best-in-class financial institutions and professionals, irrespective of national origin, to serve Chinese investors. In my experience, joint ventures simply do not work for global financial institutions.

China would do well to allow a wide range of participants, including top-notch foreign institutional investors, investment banks and brokers, to compete on equal footing. Exposing companies to serious competition will sort out the best institutions from underperforming ones. Beijing can further protect investors by establishing a well enforced regulatory regime designed to minimise accounting fraud and market manipulation, ensure high quality investment products, set appropriate margin requirements, and mandate high standards for the sales practices of brokers that sell to individuals.

Investors also need to be able to diversify their assets. This is one of the reasons Beijing should establish a more robust domestic corporate bond market, and allow the Chinese public to invest more of their assets in foreign securities. Beijing also needs to do

more to ensure a healthy market ecosystem, including transparent accounting and disclosure standards and the presence of professional equity research firms and independent debt rating agencies.

Finally, for public equity offerings, China should move away from a registration system that depends on central government approval. Rather than being the “gate keeper”, the government should simply set appropriately high standards and criteria for companies seeking to go public, thereby depoliticising the process and letting the market be the decisive force.

Recent market tremors have led to some scapegoating of foreign speculators. This volatility should be seen instead for what it is: a sign that financial reforms have yet to be fully realised.

Keeping the present halfway house will make it harder for China to avoid the middle-income trap that has kept many emerging markets from becoming a prosperous economy. Indeed, top Chinese policymakers know they must expend greater energy to execute the reform agenda President Xi Jinping laid out 20 months ago.

For nearly four decades, China has reformed by following Deng Xiaoping’s dictum to “cross the river by feeling for stones”. It is time to more boldly cross the river to reach the other shore.

最近中国股市动荡让一些人断定，中国正处于一场重大金融和经济危机的边缘。这些不看好中国的人士坚称，股价快速下跌是危机即将来临的征兆。

尽管中国经济面临重大挑战和逆风不是什么秘密，但这些却与股市下跌没什么关系。相反，这些挑战源于根本的结构性问题，包括中国资本市场尚未完成的改革。所有股市都会经历牛熊周期的转换。当资本市场发展不足时——现在中国就是如此——问题就会出现，因为这些周期的波动被放大了。

中国在这个时候尤其脆弱，因为尽管中国经济已发展成熟，但其资本市场的发展没有跟上。那些从思想上反对市场的人将会拿最近股市走势来说事，声称为防止市场动荡，北京方面应该放缓金融自由化步伐，乃至完全抛弃基于市场的改革。出现这种情况一点都不会令人感到意外。

由于中国股市散户众多，股价暴跌影响了人们的储蓄、收入和福祉。许多人投资股市，无疑是因为他们对政府的救市能力抱有信心。这可能在一定程度上解释了为何当市场暴跌时，中国政府如此迅速地进行了干预。此外，尽管中国政府这种保护投资者的本能可以理解，但建设一个现代化的资本市场才是保护投资者的最佳方式。

任何发达经济体如果有着一个资本错配和定价不当的封闭式金融体系，那它就不会成为高收入国家——中国渴望成为高收入国家。中国改革派人士无疑明白如何创建现代金融体系，政策制定者们也对此进行了彻底的研究。他们已经制定了蓝图，但还需要大胆而迅速地实施。如果中国想要拥有一个功能完善而稳定的资本市场——这也可以帮助保护投资者，尤其是不成熟的散户投资者——就需要允许最优秀的金融机构和专业人士（无论国别）服务于中国投资者。从我的经验来看，合资企业形式不适合全球金融机构。

中国最好允许包括顶级外国机构投资者、投行和经纪商在内的众多市场参与者展开公平竞争。激烈竞争将会让最好的公司脱颖而出。中国政府可以通过建立一套执行到位的监管机制来进一步保护投资者，这种监管机制的目的是尽可能减少会计欺诈和市场操纵行为，确保优质投资产品，制定适当的保证金要求，以及针对券商向个人投资者的销售行为实施高标准。

此外，投资者需要能够实现多元化投资。这是中国政府应该建设更健全的国内企业债券市场、并允许中国公众将更多资产配置于外国证券产品的理由之一。中国政府还需要采取更多举措来确保健康的市场生态体系，包括实施透明的会计和披露标准，以及鼓励设立专业的股票研究公司和独立的债务评级机构。

最后，就股票公开发行来说，中国应该放弃依赖中央政府审批的核准制。政府应该只是针对寻求上市的公司制定适当的高标准，从而将这一过程去政治化，并让市场成为决定力量，而不是充当“守门员”。

最近的市场动荡导致一些人迁怒于外国投机者。我们应该看清这种波动的实质：它是一个信号，表明迄今金融改革仍未全部完成。

保持目前不完全改革的状态将让中国更难避免“中等收入陷阱”，后者让许多新兴市场国家难以进入富裕经济体的行列。实际上，中国最高层政策制定者知道，他们必须投入更多精力执行国家主席习近平20个月前提出的改革议程。

近40年来，中国在邓小平“摸着石头过河”的指导下开展了改革。现在是更大胆地跨过河抵达彼岸的时候了。

译者/邹策