Despite repeated government efforts to stimulate the Chinese economy, the country’s animal spirits remain depressed. The unexpected reason for this might be the automatic exchange of financial information between the world’s major economies, which is allowing the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to learn about the bank accounts that Chinese residents hold overseas.
This exposure has effectively transformed wealthy Chinese families’ financial lifeboats into torpedoes aimed back at them.
Worse yet, Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) anti-corruption forces could fire those weapons whenever they wish. The resulting anxiety is most likely contributing to China’s economic slowdown.
The irony is that the torpedoes were armed by the Paris-based Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) — the club of developed countries that see themselves as committed to democracy and a market economy.
By introducing the Common Reporting Standard (CRS) as a way to reduce tax avoidance, well-meaning Western technocrats have unleashed a program with potentially dire long-term economic consequences for China, and for several other countries, too.
These technocrats should have felt more sympathy for those who, unlike them, live under an illiberal regime.
At a time when president-for-life Xi is becoming ever more assertive, and the CCP is building a centralized database to underpin a “social credit system” to monitor the behavior of all Chinese, it is no surprise that the study app for “Xi Jinping Thought” is reportedly the most downloaded on Apple’s Chinese App Store, ahead of even WeChat.
Under the illiberal regimes of the past, this would have triggered a deluge of jokes, but not anymore, because the CCP’s use of artificial intelligence and social media gives it a level of control over its subjects that no dictatorship has ever achieved.
Chinese know well that whatever they might gain through their industriousness is essentially only a temporary, revocable loan from the CCP, as the recent experience of Alibaba founder Jack Ma (馬雲) has highlighted. Sensible Chinese entrepreneurs therefore saw it as a duty to themselves and their families to stash some of their wealth overseas.
Tens of millions of Chinese residents hold an estimated total of well more than US$1 trillion in undeclared assets abroad. They now face the nightmare of being treated as criminals, as Chinese authorities could use the information received from foolhardy Western governments as a tool of repression.
Unlike almost all other countries implementing the CRS, China did not introduce a voluntary disclosure scheme allowing people to declare previously hidden overseas assets and pay a penalty to avoid criminal charges. Fleeing China is also no longer an option, given the harsh immigration restrictions that potential destination countries are implementing.
Little wonder, then, that wealthier Chinese residents are anxious. A sort of rolling economic purge might ensue, and the CCP could conveniently blame slower growth on criminal “tax dodgers.”
What the OECD’s technocrats missed is that tax avoidance is rarely the main motivation for individuals hiding money abroad. Most want to diversify their risks by hiding some of their wealth in safer jurisdictions.
Privacy is crucial for those who live under capricious regimes or are potentially exposed to kidnapping or extortion.
The freedom to choose in which country to hold one’s savings has a deeper meaning than plain financial diversification. Most of all, these Chinese residents wanted to gain the very freedom that their government denies them — including the right not to have their destinies entirely tied to that of the country where they live.
With its misguided CRS crusade against tax avoidance, the OECD is following the bad example set by the US with the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA). Introduced in 2010, FATCA has had estimated implementation costs of at least US$60 billion, and has reduced tax revenues outside the US by about US$10 billion to US$20 billion.
The US government, meanwhile, has recovered only about US$11.1 billion in taxes (or 0.2 percent of its yearly tax revenues) through fewer than 57,000 voluntary disclosures, which cover resurfaced assets equivalent to about 0.1 percent of US households’ net worth.
These embarrassing and rarely cited figures make it clear that FATCA was enacted in response to outrage over a non-existent problem.
The new vulnerability of Chinese residents should make it equally clear that using anger at tax avoidance to curtail people’s right to protect themselves — or at least part of their capital — from the uncertainties of their home country is morally wrong. It is also fiscally irrelevant at best.
Residents’ overseas savings are already subject to withholding taxes in the countries where they are ultimately invested. As taxes withheld in this way usually become tax credits in the saver’s home country, their government might well end up recovering a negative net amount of taxes after the costs of operating the cumbersome new regime are taken into account.
It is easy to dismiss the effect of CRS on wealthy Chinese as simply a problem for the rich, and most of the comments under one of the few news articles about the issue exude frightening xenophobic schadenfreude, rather than compassion for economic fugitives from a repressive regime.
That stance is morally alarming and economically short-sighted. Sinking these Chinese entrepreneurs’ lifeboats could prove deeply demotivating, with potentially significant adverse effects on economic efficiency and growth. If that happens, China’s 1.4 billion people would not be the only ones to suffer.
Antonio Foglia, a board member of Banca del Ceresio, is a member of the Global Partners’ Council of the Institute for New Economic Thinking.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
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.
In the 2022 book Danger Zone: The Coming Conflict with China, academics Hal Brands and Michael Beckley warned, against conventional wisdom, that it was not a rising China that the US and its allies had to fear, but a declining China. This is because “peaking powers” — nations at the peak of their relative power and staring over the precipice of decline — are particularly dangerous, as they might believe they only have a narrow window of opportunity to grab what they can before decline sets in, they said. The tailwinds that propelled China’s spectacular economic rise over the past