论文部分内容阅读
The data about imports and exports volume in 2013 and January 2014 further drew people’s attention to the falsely high trade volume with Hong Kong.
Prof. Zhang Ping with the Economic Institute of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences， said in a public forum that the fake exports data found out in the first half of 2013 has not been deduced
from the published GDP data. The faked exports volume takes at least 30 percent. If this part were removed， the net import would have negative impact over the GDP growth.
He said that the figure of 30% is just a result of estimation， but he did not tell how to get the estimation.
The insiders from the Ministry of Commerce and the General Administration of Customs confirmed the reality of the false part of foreign trade volume in the first four months of 2013. But there is no scientific tool to figure out how much is false. The two departments never revealed the relevant data either. In accordance with the international rules， the original data cannot be restored in that condition.
In addition， the data from the Na- tional Bureau of Statistics， showed that the contribution rate of the net export to the GDP growth ranged from 9% maximally to -44.8% minimally. Last year， the rate of contribution of net export of good and service was -4.4%， even though the GDP growth rate was higher than 7%.
Prof. Yu Miaojie from the National Development Institute of Beijing University， said that the negative contribution rate of the net export shows that the increase in the export （or the trade surplus） is lower than the year before and thus had little connection with the economic development.
Non-computable Fake Trade Volume
The data from the General Admin- istration of Customs showed that the total exports and imports volume of China reached 8.36 trillion yuan， or US$1.33075 trillion， in the first four months of 2013. Apart from the influence of the changed exchange rate， the trade volume increased by 14% year on year.
The volume of trade with Europe and Japan， two traditional markets of China， dropped in that period. But the bilateral trade between Mainland China and Hong Kong increased by 66% to US$150.59 billion. The trade between Hong Kong and its neighbor Guangdong particularly experienced an amazing increase.
The abnormal situation raised the concerns of the central government， which ordered the relevant departments to initiate the investigation. Four months later， the data of the trade volume almost fell back to its “real level”. In the fourth quarter of 2013， the data published by mainland China once again turned out to be hugely different from the one published by Hong Kong， drawing people’s attention back to the false reports about the trade volume between mainland China and Hong Kong. Liu Ligang， chief economist of ANZ Bank Greater China， found that the cross-border trade continuously induced the inflow of capital into mainland China and the increase of RMB deposits in Hong Kong.
For this， some experts represented by Zhang Ping said that the fake parts of the data should be removed from the entire data pool to show the real situation of foreign trade in China.
However， there is no scientific model that can work out how much of trade volume is false. Huo Jianguo， director of the International Trade and Economic Cooperation Institute of the Ministry of Commerce， said that some of the estimations are made too roughly.
Take Guangdong for example： the way to work out the false trade volume is to deduce the economic growth driven by normal figure in the first four months from the general growth rate of the entire country. Concretely， assuming the foreign trade of Guangdong takes 30%-40% of the national trade volume， i.e. US$800 billion. The estimators took out the data in the first four months and neglect edthe high-speed growth in the previous calculation. Instead， they finished the formula with the average growth. The gap between the new figure and the old one is said to be the false part of foreign trade.
“If this method is adopted， Guangdong’s exports and imports growth has only 1%-2% considered to be false. This method is too rough. So far as I know， there is not so much false foreign trade volume in the other areas than Guangdong. The ma- jor problems are found in the bonded area，” he said. “I do not know how the result that the 30% of the foreign trade volume is false is gained.”
Right Procedures Kill the Chance of Modification
Even though the false part of the foreign trade can be tracked down， there is likely no way to modify the already published data in accordance with the international conventions.
The reason to fake the foreign trade is none other than to make use of the gap in the interest and exchange rates to get the exports tax rebate. However， the increase in the price offered for the customs declaration is usually hidden in the details of the contracts， which are concluded with legal procedures. This leads to the difficulties for the surveillance and regulation， especially in the part of foreign exchange settlement and sale. “Every enterprise has its own operating methods. Some enterprises that have overseas branches， for example， can increase the offer to get more from the foreign exchange settlement and sale， based on which they can extract the money from the gap in the interest or exchange rates between China and overseas markets. It is hard to find out and classify the method of every enterprise，” he said.
Here is a typical example： according to the Avoidance Behaviors of Exporters and Importers： Evidence from the U.S.-China Trade Data Discrepancy， a report published by the U.S. International Trade Council in 2008， there are a lot of similar cases among the U.S. exporters， who purposely understate the exports price for customs declaration to avoid paying the tariffs. In addition， the exporters which are multinational purposely increase the imports price to push up the cost so that they can pay less corporate profit tax.
Jia Huaiqin， vice president of the Chinese Society of Statistics of Foreign Economy and Trade， said that the discrepancy in the data， according to the international conventions， could not be modified as long as there are right imports and exports bills and the procedures are finished through legal methods， unless the customs department changes its way of statistics.
Zheng Yusheng， head of the Statistics Department of China’s General Administration of Customs， said that there was no plan to end the discrepancy in the foreign trade data in the first four months of 2014.
Prof. Zhang Ping with the Economic Institute of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences， said in a public forum that the fake exports data found out in the first half of 2013 has not been deduced
from the published GDP data. The faked exports volume takes at least 30 percent. If this part were removed， the net import would have negative impact over the GDP growth.
He said that the figure of 30% is just a result of estimation， but he did not tell how to get the estimation.
The insiders from the Ministry of Commerce and the General Administration of Customs confirmed the reality of the false part of foreign trade volume in the first four months of 2013. But there is no scientific tool to figure out how much is false. The two departments never revealed the relevant data either. In accordance with the international rules， the original data cannot be restored in that condition.
In addition， the data from the Na- tional Bureau of Statistics， showed that the contribution rate of the net export to the GDP growth ranged from 9% maximally to -44.8% minimally. Last year， the rate of contribution of net export of good and service was -4.4%， even though the GDP growth rate was higher than 7%.
Prof. Yu Miaojie from the National Development Institute of Beijing University， said that the negative contribution rate of the net export shows that the increase in the export （or the trade surplus） is lower than the year before and thus had little connection with the economic development.
Non-computable Fake Trade Volume
The data from the General Admin- istration of Customs showed that the total exports and imports volume of China reached 8.36 trillion yuan， or US$1.33075 trillion， in the first four months of 2013. Apart from the influence of the changed exchange rate， the trade volume increased by 14% year on year.
The volume of trade with Europe and Japan， two traditional markets of China， dropped in that period. But the bilateral trade between Mainland China and Hong Kong increased by 66% to US$150.59 billion. The trade between Hong Kong and its neighbor Guangdong particularly experienced an amazing increase.
The abnormal situation raised the concerns of the central government， which ordered the relevant departments to initiate the investigation. Four months later， the data of the trade volume almost fell back to its “real level”. In the fourth quarter of 2013， the data published by mainland China once again turned out to be hugely different from the one published by Hong Kong， drawing people’s attention back to the false reports about the trade volume between mainland China and Hong Kong. Liu Ligang， chief economist of ANZ Bank Greater China， found that the cross-border trade continuously induced the inflow of capital into mainland China and the increase of RMB deposits in Hong Kong.
For this， some experts represented by Zhang Ping said that the fake parts of the data should be removed from the entire data pool to show the real situation of foreign trade in China.
However， there is no scientific model that can work out how much of trade volume is false. Huo Jianguo， director of the International Trade and Economic Cooperation Institute of the Ministry of Commerce， said that some of the estimations are made too roughly.
Take Guangdong for example： the way to work out the false trade volume is to deduce the economic growth driven by normal figure in the first four months from the general growth rate of the entire country. Concretely， assuming the foreign trade of Guangdong takes 30%-40% of the national trade volume， i.e. US$800 billion. The estimators took out the data in the first four months and neglect edthe high-speed growth in the previous calculation. Instead， they finished the formula with the average growth. The gap between the new figure and the old one is said to be the false part of foreign trade.
“If this method is adopted， Guangdong’s exports and imports growth has only 1%-2% considered to be false. This method is too rough. So far as I know， there is not so much false foreign trade volume in the other areas than Guangdong. The ma- jor problems are found in the bonded area，” he said. “I do not know how the result that the 30% of the foreign trade volume is false is gained.”
Right Procedures Kill the Chance of Modification
Even though the false part of the foreign trade can be tracked down， there is likely no way to modify the already published data in accordance with the international conventions.
The reason to fake the foreign trade is none other than to make use of the gap in the interest and exchange rates to get the exports tax rebate. However， the increase in the price offered for the customs declaration is usually hidden in the details of the contracts， which are concluded with legal procedures. This leads to the difficulties for the surveillance and regulation， especially in the part of foreign exchange settlement and sale. “Every enterprise has its own operating methods. Some enterprises that have overseas branches， for example， can increase the offer to get more from the foreign exchange settlement and sale， based on which they can extract the money from the gap in the interest or exchange rates between China and overseas markets. It is hard to find out and classify the method of every enterprise，” he said.
Here is a typical example： according to the Avoidance Behaviors of Exporters and Importers： Evidence from the U.S.-China Trade Data Discrepancy， a report published by the U.S. International Trade Council in 2008， there are a lot of similar cases among the U.S. exporters， who purposely understate the exports price for customs declaration to avoid paying the tariffs. In addition， the exporters which are multinational purposely increase the imports price to push up the cost so that they can pay less corporate profit tax.
Jia Huaiqin， vice president of the Chinese Society of Statistics of Foreign Economy and Trade， said that the discrepancy in the data， according to the international conventions， could not be modified as long as there are right imports and exports bills and the procedures are finished through legal methods， unless the customs department changes its way of statistics.
Zheng Yusheng， head of the Statistics Department of China’s General Administration of Customs， said that there was no plan to end the discrepancy in the foreign trade data in the first four months of 2014.