Editor's note: This is second of two articles in a connected series. The other is titled, "China Property Strains Will Roll Off Local Governments, And Land On Their SOEs."
Primary land sales are wobbling in China, disrupting a key source of revenue for local governments. S&P Global Ratings believes this will accelerate the transformation in the way local government financing vehicles (LGFVs) operate. These vehicles, which execute development and infrastructure policy, will need to invest more in projects that produce cash flows to cover costs.
In our view, the impact will be particularly distinct for smaller financing platforms owned by lower-tiered governments, such as districts, counties, or smaller cities. These lower-level LGFVs rely more on land sales and their owners have limited financial resources compared with higher-level government arms, such as provinces and larger municipalities. They will face higher borrowing costs and some will likely ramp up short-term financing to stay afloat. We think a select few could fall into distress.
Nonetheless, we don't see a broad credit deterioration of LGFVs over the next 12-18 months. Our expectation is that the vast majority of LGFVs will remain solvent since they are still backed by a largely stable refinancing environment. Pulling out the rug rapidly would be too risky for China. This is based on our interpretation of the policy directives which describe "financial stability" as a top priority.
Why The Model Is Changing
We estimate that local-government land sales could decline by 20% in 2022 and a further 5% in 2023, magnitudes that have been observed in previous downcycles. This is a turning point because such sales play a critical role in funding development budgets. Land-related development has driven growth in the past but may have also encouraged debt-fueled investments for these vehicles. Governments could assign land development to LGFVs then sell land to developers to fund local investment. Recent volatility in property markets underlines the downside to such financing models.
With slower land sales, LGFVs will have to wait even longer to recoup their huge development outlays (see chart 1).
Chart 1
This will directly strain LGFVs' operating cash flow, especially for lower-level LGFVs--we estimate at least 60%-70% of their revenue is from land development-related businesses.
Two factors will control the fallout, in our view. First, related investments can be postponed accordingly. As a proxy, since last year, China's total land sales-related investments slowed down, allowing an overall surplus to emerge after years of deficit (see chart 2). Second, we believe most LGFVs will be able to refinance, even with negative net operating cash flow. The sector perennially operates under these conditions, and will not be cut off immediately, even as the mandate to change hardens.
Chart 2
Transition Easier Said Than Done
Falling land sales should accelerate change under the LGFV model, which began several years back, when central policymakers guided local governments to improve return structures on its infrastructure projects and to gradually rein in what policymakers have categorized as "hidden debt". This debt is borrowed or guaranteed by LGFVs beyond government issuance quotas but is set to use government budgetary means to repay. At the same time, governments are also under directive to be more disciplined; and their revenues are suffering due to hardships including COVID, and now waning land sales. Stricter government financial discipline points to more selective support to LGFVs, requiring them to become more self-reliant for new market-based investments (see "Gansu Provincial Highway Upgraded; Chongqing Nan'an Downgraded; Ratings On Four Chinese LGFVs Affirmed," Aug. 30, 2021).
Given this hidden debt is estimated by the market to be at least a quarter of China's GDP, any success in resolving this will likely take several years, if not much longer. Beijing's policy initiative to eliminate what it considers hidden debt has been given a 10-year horizon from 2018.
As LGFVs pursue business transformations, growth in new investment and debt will likely decelerate. This is because investment returns will become a crucial consideration. Undertakings will need to be designed and structured so that project cash flows can cover investment costs. We expect this will be a tough transition, because LGFVs have largely been focused on infrastructure projects that bring in broader returns for the local economies, rather than ones that are commercially profitable.
This task will be particularly difficult for lower-level LGFVs. The sector has largely been ineffective, thus far, in heeding China's calls for improved cash generation. Nor have injections of state-owned operating assets managed to reverse the overall cash flow pattern, though deficits have narrowed. Most continue to rely on new financing to bankroll investments (see chart 3). Many lower-level LGFVs' lack solid competitiveness for genuine market-based businesses and the expertise in managing such investments and operations.
Chart 3
Still A Role For Lower-Level LGFVs
Lower-level LGFVs will still have a role in undertaking key infrastructure projects, however. Their future investments are likely to shift toward more visible project returns at scales with more controllable spending, such as small-to-midsized urban renewal and certain in-city new infrastructure. The previous crude "demolition and reconstruction" model won't be as feasible and will likely fade out. Also, government authorities and creditors (including banks and other financial institutions) will play a stronger role in screening out qualifying projects under tightening regulations.
We note that China's latest five-year plan highlighted urban renewal, for the first time, as an important channel to expand domestic demand and stabilize investment. Accompanied by the "new infrastructure" ambition, this is closely in line with China's "dual-circulation" economic strategy of developing more domestic drivers of growth. To improve housing affordability, the central government requests that affordable rental housing represents more than 30% of new housing supply over the five years ending 2025.
In our view, LGFV consolidation will not be a magic bullet. Since several years ago, a number of provinces have been promoting consolidation of the sector, for example merging city-, district- and county-level LGFVs, to improve financing capabilities, operating efficiency and oversight. In recent months, Jiangsu, Yunnan and Guizhou provinces have introduced policies to clear up insolvent and non-functioning LGFVs. Mergers alone cannot produce self-sufficiency, in our view; this will come through investment and financing efficiency. The brutal reality is--bigger does not mean stronger. It can easily take years to integrate different LGFVs effectively to create advantages in financing, let alone produce synergies.
Credit Differentiation Alongside A Protracted Transition
China's policy environment will continue to sustain LGFV refinancing for the most part, given the sector's importance to financial system stability. Refinancing has always been far more crucial than direct government support for most LGFVs to stay afloat, especially while they are resolving hidden debt and moving gradually down the long road toward self-sufficiency.
China central government has provided some refinancing support via the launch of a hidden-debt resolution pilot program. This allows local governments to use a portion of their refinancing bond quota to replace some county-and district-level hidden-debt (with such LGFV debt being the riskiest, in our view). The program focuses on hidden debt from economically weaker regions with high repayment pressure, mostly in the less developed southwest, northwest and northern China. Last year, the Ministry of Finance outlined Chinese renminbi (RMB) 612.8 billion of such hidden-debt refinancing bond quota, with more than 99% of it being issued already by end July this year.
That said, some LGFVs could fall through the cracks. Liquidity-crisis risk has become more acute for lower-level, non-core LGFVs whose government owners have relatively constrained financial resources. Such LGFVs face heightening refinancing risk as well as more hurdles for transition, because their government owners have limited alternatives or assets to provide support. At the same time, bank support could also wane given tighter funding conditions could mean they become more selective with lending to these weaker names. Significantly higher borrowing costs and reliance on short-term financing can further exacerbate their situation.
Examples of sector distress so far this year include:
- In April, Hohhot Chunhua Water Development Group Co. Ltd., a city-level LGFV from Inner Mongolia, was overdue on bank loans and non-standard debt totaling RMB746 million.
- In August, another city-level LGFV, Jilin Railway Investment & Development Co. Ltd., delayed payment on RMB14 million of loan interest payment.
- Less than two months ago, the inability to refinance in the bond market revealed the liquidity crunch at LGFVs in Lanzhou city, the provincial capital of Gansu.
Beyond these examples, dozens of district- and county-level LGFVs from less-developed provinces such as Guizhou, Yunnan, and several others have defaulted on non-standard debt, including trust plans, wealth management products, and private-placement bonds, this year.
Credit differentiation is likely to deepen. Increased regulatory monitoring and public signalling--such as the recent circular 15 (issued directly to banking and insurance institutions) on effectively resolving hidden debt--will make it harder to get bank financing for unrestricted use. Capital markets are also tightening access of weaker LGFVs (see "Riskier China LGFVs Be Warned: Capital Markets May Cut You Off," published Oct. 6, 2021).
An effective resolution for many will still rely on improving investment efficiency through market-based transformation. This means there is a long way to go.
Full names of companies in chart 1: CQNA--Chongqing Nan'an Urban Construction & Development (Group) Co. Ltd. YZETD--Yangzhou Economic and Technological Development Zone Development Corp. LZDC--Guangxi Liuzhou Dongcheng Investment and Development Group Co. Ltd. JNWC--Jinan West City Investment And Development Group Co. Ltd. NJYZ--Nanjing Yangzi State-Owned Assets Investment Group Co. Ltd. QDC--Qingdao Conson Development (Group) Co. Ltd.
Editing: Cathy Holcombe
Digital design: Evy Cheung
Related Research
- China Property Strains Will Roll Off Local Governments, And Land On Their SOEs, Nov. 11 2021
- China's Contagion Risks Rise, Nov. 10, 2021.
- Guangxi Liuzhou Dongcheng Downgraded To 'B+' On Heightening Refinancing Risk; Outlook Negative, Oct. 29, 2021
- China Property Watch: Strains In The Key Of 'B', Oct. 27, 2021
- Riskier China LGFVs Be Warned: Capital Markets May Cut You Off, Oct. 6, 2021
- Gansu Provincial Highway Upgraded; Chongqing Nan'an Downgraded; Ratings On Four Chinese LGFVs Affirmed, Aug. 30, 2021
- Institutional Framework Assessment On China's Local Governments Raised On Central Government's Tightening Control, Aug. 30, 2021
This report does not constitute a rating action.
Primary Credit Analyst: | Laura C Li, CFA, Hong Kong + 852 2533 3583; laura.li@spglobal.com |
Secondary Contact: | Christopher Yip, Hong Kong 852 2533 3593; christopher.yip@spglobal.com |
Research Assistant: | Rick Yoon, Hong Kong |
No content (including ratings, credit-related analyses and data, valuations, model, software, or other application or output therefrom) or any part thereof (Content) may be modified, reverse engineered, reproduced, or distributed in any form by any means, or stored in a database or retrieval system, without the prior written permission of Standard & Poor’s Financial Services LLC or its affiliates (collectively, S&P). The Content shall not be used for any unlawful or unauthorized purposes. S&P and any third-party providers, as well as their directors, officers, shareholders, employees, or agents (collectively S&P Parties) do not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or availability of the Content. S&P Parties are not responsible for any errors or omissions (negligent or otherwise), regardless of the cause, for the results obtained from the use of the Content, or for the security or maintenance of any data input by the user. The Content is provided on an “as is” basis. S&P PARTIES DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ANY WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE OR USE, FREEDOM FROM BUGS, SOFTWARE ERRORS OR DEFECTS, THAT THE CONTENT’S FUNCTIONING WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED, OR THAT THE CONTENT WILL OPERATE WITH ANY SOFTWARE OR HARDWARE CONFIGURATION. In no event shall S&P Parties be liable to any party for any direct, indirect, incidental, exemplary, compensatory, punitive, special or consequential damages, costs, expenses, legal fees, or losses (including, without limitation, lost income or lost profits and opportunity costs or losses caused by negligence) in connection with any use of the Content even if advised of the possibility of such damages.
Credit-related and other analyses, including ratings, and statements in the Content are statements of opinion as of the date they are expressed and not statements of fact. S&P’s opinions, analyses, and rating acknowledgment decisions (described below) are not recommendations to purchase, hold, or sell any securities or to make any investment decisions, and do not address the suitability of any security. S&P assumes no obligation to update the Content following publication in any form or format. The Content should not be relied on and is not a substitute for the skill, judgment, and experience of the user, its management, employees, advisors, and/or clients when making investment and other business decisions. S&P does not act as a fiduciary or an investment advisor except where registered as such. While S&P has obtained information from sources it believes to be reliable, S&P does not perform an audit and undertakes no duty of due diligence or independent verification of any information it receives. Rating-related publications may be published for a variety of reasons that are not necessarily dependent on action by rating committees, including, but not limited to, the publication of a periodic update on a credit rating and related analyses.
To the extent that regulatory authorities allow a rating agency to acknowledge in one jurisdiction a rating issued in another jurisdiction for certain regulatory purposes, S&P reserves the right to assign, withdraw, or suspend such acknowledgement at any time and in its sole discretion. S&P Parties disclaim any duty whatsoever arising out of the assignment, withdrawal, or suspension of an acknowledgment as well as any liability for any damage alleged to have been suffered on account thereof.
S&P keeps certain activities of its business units separate from each other in order to preserve the independence and objectivity of their respective activities. As a result, certain business units of S&P may have information that is not available to other S&P business units. S&P has established policies and procedures to maintain the confidentiality of certain nonpublic information received in connection with each analytical process.
S&P may receive compensation for its ratings and certain analyses, normally from issuers or underwriters of securities or from obligors. S&P reserves the right to disseminate its opinions and analyses. S&P's public ratings and analyses are made available on its Web sites, www.spglobal.com/ratings (free of charge), and www.ratingsdirect.com (subscription), and may be distributed through other means, including via S&P publications and third-party redistributors. Additional information about our ratings fees is available at www.spglobal.com/usratingsfees.