The Chinese government has made preparations to support the Hong Kong stock market if needed to create a positive atmosphere before July 1, when Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) is expected to visit the territory for the first time as president to mark 20 years of Chinese rule.
State-backed institutions have set aside funds to ensure stable trading before the anniversary of Hong Kong’s 1997 handover, according to people with direct knowledge of the matter, who asked not to be named as the information is not public.
It is unclear how much money has been earmarked or what market conditions would trigger government action.
The Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office of China’s State Council did not immediately reply to a faxed request for comment. The office of Hong Kong’s Chief Executive declined to comment.
While state-directed funds intervene regularly to manage swings in China’s US$6.6 trillion equity market, the government has not been known to take an active role in Hong Kong.
The former British colony, which sits near the top of global free-market rankings, is supposed to enjoy a high degree of autonomy under the “one country, two systems” principle enshrined in China’s power-transfer agreement with the UK.
Any attempt to influence Hong Kong stock prices risks provoking critics who say China is interfering too much in the territory’s affairs under Xi’s leadership.
It could also add fuel to the debate over Hong Kong’s future as a financial center.
Much of the territory’s appeal to international investors and businesses comes from its strong rule of law and minimal government interference, attributes that set it apart from China.
Lines between the two markets have blurred with the introduction of cross-border exchange links and cooperation agreements between the Chinese and Hong Kong securities regulators.
“The stock connect has already brought mainland markets closer to Hong Kong, but there will be a lot of people who will be dissatisfied with this, at least in principle,” said Peter Garnry, head of equity strategy at Saxo Bank A/S in Copenhagen. “Expect some political noise.”
China has a history of influencing domestic markets during important political events.
In the latest example, regulators stepped up scrutiny of local stock traders as the government prepared to host representatives at the weekend “One Belt, One Road” summit attended by Xi, according to people with direct knowledge of the matter.
Policymakers were said to intervene during the past two annual meetings of Chinese lawmakers in Beijing.
Authorities might be especially keen to project an image of stability this year as they prepare for a twice-a-decade Chinese Communist Party leadership reshuffle toward year-end.
China has not confirmed that Xi will visit Hong Kong, but past leaders have tended to make the trip for every fifth year of the handover anniversary.
Xi is expected to make a three-day visit for this year’s celebrations, the South China Morning Post reported this month.
The anniversary comes against a backdrop of elevated political tension in Hong Kong. The Occupy Central protests paralyzed parts of the territory in 2014 and many residents are still angry over the lack of a direct election for their chief executive.
Behind-the-scenes backing from China helped Carrie Lam (林鄭月娥) win a resounding victory among the business and political elites who picked the territory’s next chief executive in March. She beat an opponent more popular with the general public.
Not all Hong Kong markets have been insulated from Chinese interference. When the yuan sank in offshore trading in January last year, intervention by China’s central bank led to a short squeeze in Hong Kong.
The episode dented the yuan’s appeal as an international currency, but criticism of the government’s actions was limited, because influencing foreign-exchange markets is a common economic-management tool for governments around the world.
Meddling in Hong Kong’s stock market might be a different story. Aside from a Hong Kong government rescue package during the Asian financial crisis in 1998, shares in the territory have been thought to be largely free of official interference.
If Beijing were to intervene, the purchases could run contrary to Hong Kong regulations on maintaining an orderly market, Low Chee-keong (劉志強), an associate professor at the CUHK Business School and a former member of the Hong Kong exchange’s listing committee, said before Bloomberg News reported on China’s preparations.
Low said that proving market manipulation is often difficult.
A Hong Kong Exchanges & Clearing Ltd spokeswoman said the bourse does not comment on market rumors, adding that market manipulation is an offense under Hong Kong law.
The territory’s Securities and Futures Commission did not immediately reply to an e-mailed request for comment.
“The government’s intervention is unwelcome in Hong Kong, as it could boost risk premiums and pressure the valuation of stocks in the long term,” Hong Kong-based CMB International Securities Ltd (招銀國際證券) strategist Daniel So (蘇沛豐) said by telephone. “Though it could boost stock prices in the near term.”
The Chinese government might decide it does not need to intervene.
Hong Kong’s benchmark Hang Seng Index is trading at the highest level since July 2015 after climbing 14 percent this year, outperforming the MSCI All-Country World Index by about 5 percentage points.
The Hong Kong gauge is valued at 14 times trailing 12-month earnings, the most expensive level since December 2010, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.
“I don’t think anyone needs to support Hong Kong shares or the Hang Seng Index,” said Sandy Mehta, chief executive officer of Value Investment Principals Ltd in Hong Kong. “It’s one of the world’s top-performing markets.”
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers