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.”
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US