Connect with us
Wise usd campaign
ADVERTISEMENT

China

China Recovery? Don’t Uncork the Champagne in Beijing Just Yet

China reported on Friday that its economy rebounded in the fourth quarter after seven straight quarters of declining growth. Market analysts are touting a recovery. But economists Barry Eichengreen of the University of California at Berkeley, Donghyun Park of the Asian Development Bank and Kwanho Shin of Korea University warn that Beijing shouldn’t start celebrating yet. China’s economy has already downshifted from more than 10% growth in 2010 to about 8% growth now – and another sharp deceleration is likely to occur in a couple of years, they say.

Published

on

China reported on Friday that its economy rebounded in the fourth quarter after seven straight quarters of declining growth. Market analysts are touting a recovery. But economists Barry Eichengreen of the University of California at Berkeley, Donghyun Park of the Asian Development Bank and Kwanho Shin of Korea University warn that Beijing shouldn’t start celebrating yet. China’s economy has already downshifted from more than 10% growth in 2010 to about 8% growth now – and another sharp deceleration is likely to occur in a couple of years, they say.

In recent years, China has re-invigorated its support for leading state-owned enterprises in sectors it considers important to “economic security,” explicitly looking to foster globally competitive national champions.

In 2006, China announced that by 2010 it would decrease energy intensity 20% from 2005 levels.

The country’s per capita income was at $6,567 (IMF, 98th) in 2009.

Available energy is insufficient to run at fully installed industrial capacity, and the transport system is inadequate to move sufficient quantities of such critical items as coal.

The two most important sectors of the economy have traditionally been agriculture and industry, which together employ more than 70 percent of the labor force and produce more than 60 percent of GDP.

A report by UBS in 2009 concluded that China has experienced total factor productivity growth of 4 per cent per year since 1990, one of the fastest improvements in world economic history.

China’s increasing integration with the international economy and its growing efforts to use market forces to govern the domestic allocation of goods have exacerbated this problem.

China now ranks as the fifth largest global investor in outbound direct investment (ODI) with a total volume of $56.5 billion, compared to a ranking of 12th in 2008, the Ministry of Commerce said on Sunday.

According to the ministry, China’s ODI grew by 1.1 percent from a year earlier to $56.53 billion, which includes investment of $47.8 billion in non-financial sectors worldwide, up 14.2 percent year-on-year.

It also aims to sell more than 15 million of the most fuel-efficient vehicles in the world each year by then.

Although China is still a developing country with a relatively low per capita income, it has experienced tremendous economic growth since the late 1970s.

Despite initial gains in farmers’ incomes in the early 1980s, taxes and fees have increasingly made farming an unprofitable occupation, and because the state owns all land farmers have at times been easily evicted when croplands are sought by developers.

Except for the oasis farming in Xinjiang and Qinghai, some irrigated areas in Inner Mongolia and Gansu, and sheltered valleys in Tibet, agricultural production is restricted to the east.

Horses, donkeys, and mules are work animals in the north, while oxen and water buffalo are used for plowing chiefly in the south.

Offshore exploration has become important to meeting domestic needs; massive deposits off the coasts are believed to exceed all the world’s known oil reserves.

There are large deposits of uranium in the northwest, especially in Xinjiang; there are also mines in Jiangxi and Guangdong provs.

Major industrial products are textiles, chemicals, fertilizers, machinery (especially for agriculture), processed foods, iron and steel, building materials, plastics, toys, and electronics.

Most of China’s large cities, like Shanghai, Tianjin, and Guangzhou, are also the country’s main ports.

Visit link:
China Recovery? Don’t Uncork the Champagne in Beijing Just Yet

Business

Russia’s Booming Economy is Straining a Vital Trading Route with China

Published

on

Russia’s railway industry is experiencing a significant downturn, with a nearly 30% investment cut and a 5% freight volume decline, complicating trade with China amidst the economic impacts of the Ukraine war.


Downward Trend in Russia’s Railway Industry

Russia’s railway industry is currently experiencing a significant downturn, largely due to the impacts of the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. According to MMI Research, this sector is facing its biggest slowdown since the Great Financial Crisis, with freight volumes dropping by 5% in the first 11 months of 2024. The war-driven economy has hindered trade, particularly with China, which heavily relies on rail transport.

Investment Cuts and Economic Consequences

Investment in Russia’s railways is set to decrease by almost 30% next year, dropping to 890 billion rubles (approximately $8.5 billion). This reduction is attributed to high interest rates, currently at a record 21%, which further complicate financing options. The state-owned Russian Railways is reconsidering future investments, indicating potential cuts by another third through 2030.

Challenges Affecting Trade with China

The decline in rail capacity poses significant challenges for Russia’s trade with China. As Western sanctions push Russia to diversify its trade routes, rail transport has become increasingly vital for moving goods. However, supply bottlenecks, exacerbated by the need to transport war-related materials, threaten to disrupt this crucial trading relationship further.

Source : Russia’s overheated economy is squeezing one of Moscow’s key trading channels with China

Continue Reading

Business

Democrat Claims Musk is Undermining Spending Bill Due to China Restrictions – The Hill

Published

on

A Democrat claims Elon Musk influenced the reduction of a spending bill due to its restrictions on China, suggesting his actions impacted the legislation’s progress and funding allocation.


Allegations Against Musk

A prominent Democrat has accused Elon Musk of deliberately sabotaging a significant spending bill in response to China-related restrictions. This accusation comes amid ongoing tensions between the U.S. and China, particularly regarding technology and trade policies. The claims suggest that Musk’s influence is affecting critical legislative processes, raising concerns among lawmakers about foreign influence in American politics.

Implications for Legislation

The potential ramifications of Musk’s alleged actions could be significant. As a major player in the tech industry, his decisions can sway public opinion and impact the economy. Lawmakers fear that if influential figures like Musk oppose necessary legislation, it might hinder efforts to address vital issues such as national security and economic stability.

Political Reactions

The controversy has sparked debates among both Democrats and Republicans, highlighting the intersection of technology and politics. Many are demanding greater transparency and accountability from tech giants. As the situation unfolds, lawmakers may need to reassess their strategies to ensure that essential legislation moves forward uninterrupted.

Source : Democrat accuses Musk of tanking spending bill over China restrictions – The Hill

Continue Reading

China

Dissolving a Company in China: A Comparison of General Deregistration and Simplified Deregistration

Published

on

China promotes simplified deregistration to enhance its business environment, offering a faster process requiring fewer documents than general deregistration. Companies must meet eligibility criteria, resolve issues, and can choose procedures based on their situation, ensuring compliance for both options.


In addition to the general deregistration procedures, China has been promoting simplified deregistration as one of the key measures to enhance its business environment. This article highlights the differences between the general and simplified procedures, explains the eligibility criteria, and clarifies common misunderstandings about these processes.

Foreign investors may decide to close their business for multiple reasons. To legally wind up a business, investors must complete a series of procedures involving multiple government agencies, such as market regulatory bureaus, foreign exchange administrations, customs, tax authorities, banking regulators, and others. In this article, we outline the company deregistration process overseen by the local Administration for Market Regulation (AMR), comparing the general and simplified procedures.

Before 2016, companies could only deregister through the general procedure. However, on December 26, 2016, the Guidance on Fully Promoting the Reform of Simplified Company Deregistration Procedures was released. Effective March 1, 2017, simplified deregistration procedures were implemented nationwide. Since then, there have been two options: general procedures and simplified procedures.

Companies must follow the general deregistration process if any of the following conditions apply (hereinafter referred to as “existing issues”):

Companies not facing the above issues may choose either the general or simplified deregistration process.  

In summary, simplified deregistration is a faster process and requires fewer documents compared to general deregistration. Companies that meet the criteria typically would typically opt for simplified deregistration. Those that do not meet the criteria may choose this route after resolving outstanding issues. For companies with unresolved issues but seeking urgent closure, they can first publish a deregistration announcement. Once the announcement period ends and all issues are addressed, they can proceed with general deregistration. Some companies may question the legitimacy and compliance of simplified deregistration. This is a misconception. “Simplified” does not mean non-compliant, just as “general” does not imply greater legitimacy. Both processes are lawful and compliant. The AMR provides these options to enable companies ready for closure to complete the process efficiently while granting those with unsolved issues the necessary time to address them after publishing the deregistration announcement. Companies can select the most suitable process based on their specific circumstances.

 


This article was first published by China Briefing , which is produced by Dezan Shira & Associates. The firm assists foreign investors throughout Asia from offices across the world, including in in ChinaHong KongVietnamSingapore, and India . Readers may write to info@dezshira.com for more support.

Read the rest of the original article.

Continue Reading