中國央行救市是中國版量化寬鬆

China’s central bank has embarked on unprecedented measures to stabilise the country’s cratering stock market in recent days, in what some are calling quantitative easing with Chinese characteristics.

最近幾天，中國央行採取了史無前例的措施以使中國暴跌的股市企穩，這被部分人稱爲具有中國特色的量化寬鬆。

Yet analysts say China’s action more closely resembles emergency actions used by western central banks to stabilise credit markets at the height of the 2008 financial crisis, and differs significantly from the extended bond-buying programmes subsequently rolled out to stimulate the real economy.

然而，分析師表示，中國的舉措更類似於2008年金融危機最嚴重時西方央行爲穩定信貸市場而推出的緊急措施，與後來逐步推出的、旨在刺激實體經濟的大規模債券購買計劃明顯不同。

At the height of the crisis, the US Federal Reserve created new lending facilities allowing banks to use mortgage-backed securities and other “toxic assets” as collateral at a time when normal demand for these assets had collapsed.

在金融危機最嚴重的時候，美聯儲(Fed)曾創設了新的借貸便利，允許銀行把抵押貸款支持證券(MBS)及其他“有毒資產”用作抵押品，而當時，對這類資產的正常需求已經崩盤。

The move by the People’s Bank of China to lend to China Securities Finance Corp to fund stock purchases similarly casts the central bank as buyer of last resort for assets shunned by investors in the open market. Both forms of intervention expand the money supply.

與此類似，在中國央行向中國證券金融公司（China Securities Finance Corporation，簡稱：證金公司）發放貸款爲購股提供資金的過程中，央行也扮演了資產最後買家的角色，而這些資產正是公開市場投資者不願買入的。上述兩種干預手段，都擴大了貨幣的供應量。

“This is not exactly the US Fed style of QE, but serves the same purpose of stopping market panic and a selling chain reaction through unconventional policies and market interventions,” says Dong Tao, head of Asia ex-Japan economics at Credit Suisse.

瑞士信貸(Credit Suisse)亞洲經濟（日本除外）研究主管陶冬表示：“這與美聯儲式的量化寬鬆並不完全一樣，不過它同樣是通過非常規政策和市場干預行爲，來達到遏止市場恐慌情緒及阻斷拋售行爲連鎖反應的目的。

“If market conditions do not stabilise, we expect a statement of ‘whatever it takes’ from the Chinese government given that social stability is at stake and financial systemic risks are evident.”

“考慮到這關乎社會穩定，而系統性金融風險也十分明顯，我們預計如果市場狀況沒有穩定下來，中國政府會發出‘不惜一切代價’的聲明。”

In the aftermath of the 2008 crisis, as the recovery of real economies in Europe and the US remained sluggish, central banks resorted to a different form of QE: purchases of long-term government bonds. In the eurozone, bond purchases are still ongoing. But this kind of QE is significantly different from what the PBoC has undertaken.

2008年金融危機爆發後，在歐美實體經濟復甦依然乏力之際，各國央行曾採取過一種不同形式的量化寬鬆計劃：買入長期國債。在歐元區，債券買入仍在進行當中。不過，這種量化寬鬆計劃與中國央行採取的措施存在顯著不同。

Bond purchases by western central banks aimed to stimulate the real economy. By pushing down long-term interest rates, authorities hoped to persuade households and businesses to buy homes and expand factories. By contrast, the PBoC action is aimed squarely at the stock market.

西方央行買入債券旨在刺激實體經濟。通過壓低長期利率，當局希望能促使居民和企業買房和擴建廠房。相反，中國央行的舉措則明確針對股市。

“If the PBoC does buy stocks from investors, that definitely injects money to the real economy and is essentially QE for sure,” said Larry Hu, China economist at Macquarie Securities.

麥格理證券(Macquarie Securities)中國經濟學家胡偉俊(Larry Hu)表示：“如果中國央行確實從投資者手中買入股票，這麼做絕對會向實體經濟注入資金，實質上無疑是一種量化寬鬆。

“In that case, what’s in PBoC’s mind is to save the market, rather than stimulate the economy as [then-Fed chair Ben] Bernanke did with QE.”

“但中國央行頭腦中考慮的是救市，而不是像（時任美聯儲主席的）本•伯南克(Ben Bernanke)推出量化寬鬆時那樣，考慮的是刺激經濟。”

Another difference is the context. Western central banks started buying bonds only when their standard monetary policy tool — short-term interest rates — were already at or near zero, leaving no room for further cuts.

另一個區別在於背景。西方央行是在它們的標準貨幣政策工具——短期利率——已處於或接近爲零、無法進一步下調利率的情況下，纔開始買入債券。

The PBoC has cut benchmark interest rates four times since November but the one-year rate, at 4.85 per cent, has room to fall further. In the context of tumbling share prices, however, lower borrowing costs would not persuade investors to buy stocks.

中國央行去年11月以來已經四次下調基準利率，但目前爲4.85%的一年期貸款基準利率還有進一步下調空間。然而，在股價暴跌的背景下，借款成本下降無法說服投資者買入股票。

Unlike bond-buying by western central banks, the PBoC is also not taking stocks directly on to its balance sheet, but is instead using CSF as a conduit to inject funds into the market. In practice, the effect is largely the same, economists say, as loans to CSF also create new money while boosting demand for stocks.

此外，不同於西方央行的債券購買，中國央行沒有將股票直接納入其資產負債表，而是以證金公司爲渠道向市場注入資金。經濟學家表示，實際上二者的效果大體是相同的，因爲向證金公司借出資金也創造了新的貨幣並提振了對股票的需求。

The use of CSF does provide some protection to the PBoC’s balance sheet, however. While the safety of the central bank’s loans to CSF is closely linked to stock prices, CSF has equity capital that could absorb some losses. That would allow CSF to repay loans to the PBoC even if the shares it buys fall in value.

不過，利用證金公司確實給中國央行的資產負債表提供了一些保護。儘管中國央行提供給證金公司的貸款的安全性與股價密切相關，但證金公司擁有可以彌補部分損失的股本。即使證金公司買入的股票價格下跌，證金公司也能夠向中國央行償還貸款。

The bigger quandary for a central bank that finds itself holding stock, whether directly or indirectly, would be how to exit. Just as critics of western governments’ bond-buying worry that developed economies are now “addicted” to QE, so Chinese authorities would confront the risk that once CSF tried to unload the shares it had accumulated, market turmoil would quickly return.

一家央行無論是直接持股還是間接持股，它面臨的更大難題都是如何退出。正如批評西方政府債券購買計劃的人擔心發達經濟體現在對量化寬鬆“上癮”一樣，中國當局也面臨着類似的風險：一旦證金公司試圖脫手其積存的股票，市場動盪會迅速重現。

China’s central bank has not disclosed the scale of its loans to CSF, saying only that its loans have been “ample”. That makes direct comparisons with western QE difficult. Still, with the mechanism for pumping newly created money into the stock market via CSF now in place, the PBoC is clearly ready to shock and awe if necessary.

中國央行並未披露其向證金公司放出的貸款的規模，只是表示提供的貸款是“充足”的。這使得中國央行的舉措與西方的量化寬鬆難以進行直接比較。不過，既然通過證金公司向股市注入新創造的資金的機制已經就位，中國央行顯然已準備好在必要時大顯神威。

“The nuclear measure would be for the PBoC to ramp up its liquidity support either via the CSF or directly, making it a de facto QE programme,” Wei Yao, China economist at Société Générale, wrote. “But we are not sure how far the reform-minded central bank will be willing to go in that direction.”

“核心舉措將是中國央行通過證金公司加大或直接加大流動性支持，使之成爲一個事實上的量化寬鬆計劃，”法國興業銀行(Société Générale)中國經濟學家姚煒寫道，“但我們並不確定擁有改革思維的中國央行願朝這個方向走多遠。

“If the stock market cannot stabilise soon, the government should be careful not to commit too many resources to this goal.”

“如果股市不能迅速企穩，政府應當謹慎行事，不要向這個目標投入太多資源。”