Opinion

China’s Coronavirus will not lead to recession but to stimulus and even more debt

The coronavirus outbreak will not lead to recession but the costs of ensuring growth targets will be high

By: Date: February 6, 2020 Topic: Global Economics & Governance

The outbreak of coronavirus has struck yet another blow to the Chinese economy after the improvement in business confidence since the Phase One trade deal was announced in mid-December. How severe the coronavirus may be for the Chinese economy will not only depend on the extent and depth of the virus outbreak but also on the government response. The People’s Bank of China immediate and bold reaction to calm markets with the equivalent of USD 170 billion in liquidity injection says it all about the pressure for Chinese policymakers to mitigate the impact of the coronavirus outbreak on financial markets, on sentiment and on the Chinese economy, more generally.

Many take the example of the SARS outbreak in 2003 as a benchmark to estimate the impact of coronavirus on the Chinese economy and beyond. The reality is that China is very different from what it was 17 years ago. First, the service sector, especially service consumption, is China’s key growth engine nowadays, with a contribution to economic growth nearly 40% bigger than it in 2003. Based on the SARS’s experience, the service sector is likely to be more severely affected than the manufacturing sector, especially for transportation, which continues to be an important part of the service economy. The second reason is that investor’s confidence has already been hardly hit by the trade war. The coronavirus is already having a knock-on effect on sentiment which is bound to affect the demand for durable goods, as well as private investment. Beyond this demand shock, we cannot forget that there is a negative supply shock stemming for the large number of companies that have not managed to open their doors in a province, Hubei, which accounts to 10% of total auto production in China and is a key transport nexus for West and East China. Furthermore, the sudden stop of production plants is also extending to other provinces.

Over and above the fact that the large negative demand shock is ,this time around and much more than during SARS, is supply shock as well, the other important difference is that China’s growth was increasing on a structural basis – pushed by the growth of population and urbanization. The opposite is true today.  In other words, the coronavirus is hitting a weaker economy than was the case with SARS. Based on the above, and assuming that the peak of the coronavirus outbreak happens in the first quarter -which is a very optimistic assumption – we should be expecting a rapid deceleration of economic activity in the first quarter and gradual stabilization for the rest of 2020. This would clearly bring China to grow well below the growth target announced by Premier Li Keqiang a couple of months ago, namely a growth rate slightly before 6%) and much closer to 5% in not lower.

Li Keqiang’s growth target is not really only his own but actually that, which ensures the achievement of President Xi Jinping’s very important target of the Nation’s Rejuvenation, namely that of doubling China’s GDP from 2010 to 2020. Given the importance of achieving this objective before the People’s Party 100th Anniversary in 2021, it seems clear to me that no effort will be spared to achieve a high enough growth target to achieve this goal. This is why we should all be expecting unequivocally lax demand policies from the Chinese government in the next few days, weeks and months.  The bigger the shock now, the larger the policy expansion will be needed to achieve the growth target. Such policy expansion, however, has an important constraint, namely inflation, which will might be pushed higher by the limited supply of certain goods. This means that, in the short run, the PBOC’s may not be able to use the most visible tool, namely interest rates cuts, but rather temporary liquidity injection, as has already been announced, and targeted lending and window guidance to steer the cost of funding down. This is particularly needed for those industries most affected by  the coronavirus and we are already seen announcements of targeted PBoC supported to such industries. More generally, the exchange rate might be the most effective demand policy to use and we are already seeing signs of the latter as the RMB quickly goes back to the psychological barrier of 7 RMB to the USD. It seems difficult for Trump to denounce China of current manipulation at such a difficult time so the room is clearly open for more depreciation. Moreover, weaker economic fundamentals and potentially laxer monetary policy will exert downward pressure on the RMB so it will be hard to argue this is not a market-driven process.  Finally, fiscal policies in the form of targeted subsidies and potentially infrastructure investment may also be used.

As such, we expect the quick policy reaction to avoid a sharp correction in growth so that the Party’s objective of income doubling can be achieved.. This means that 2020 growth for China may still hover around 5.7-5.5% but with dear consequences. Debt will continue to pile up, for corporates, for the government and even for households, as they are pushed to consume more durable goods with subsidies and discounts.  More debt for an already highly indebted country like China can only mean lower potential growth than the road. In that regard, one could argue that the negative consequences of the coronavirus on the Chinese economy may be more medium term than immediate and the reason is simply the large stimulus which I expect will follow and, the unavoidable excessive leverage resulting from it.


Republishing and referencing

Bruegel considers itself a public good and takes no institutional standpoint.

Due to copyright agreements we ask that you kindly email request to republish opinions that have appeared in print to [email protected].

Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Podcast

Podcast

Mythbusters: debunking economic myths

Economics seems to be full of myths that are hard to debunk. Will robots take our jobs? Are trade deficits bad? Is China such a big economy simply because of the size of its population? This week, Nicholas Barrett, Maria Demertzis, Marta Domínguez-Jímenez and Niclas Poitiers put on the detective cap and become Bruegel's own economic mythbusters.

By: The Sound of Economics Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: April 3, 2020
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Opinion

Uncoordinated policies behind market collapse

Underlying issues, and not just the coronavirus panic, fed the recent meltdown

By: Alicia García-Herrero Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: March 10, 2020
Read article More on this topic
 

Blog Post

Gerard Masllorens headshot

The cost of coronavirus in terms of interrupted global value chains

The coronavirus is slowly morphing itself into an important shock. While the extent and cost of this pandemic are unknown, we do know that global supply chains that link Europe to China will be seriously disturbed. We take a look at the numbers based on input-output models. The industry that will be the most affected is Computers and Electronics, followed by textiles.

By: Maria Demertzis and Gerard Masllorens Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: March 9, 2020
Read article More on this topic
 

Blog Post

What can the EU learn from the China-Switzerland free trade agreement?

The US-China trade war has placed EU trade relations with China under the microscope. Should the EU challenge China’s trade practices and employ trade defence measures? Or should they be diplomatic and embark on negotiations, perhaps paving the way to a Free Trade Agreement? Close examination of the 2013 agreement between China and Switzerland suggests much will have to change for trade negotiations between China and the EU to succeed.

By: Uri Dadush and Marta Domínguez-Jiménez Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: March 3, 2020
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Opinion

Companies must move supply chains further from China

Virus shows Southeast Asian factories too dependent on imported production inputs

By: Alicia García-Herrero Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: February 28, 2020
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Opinion

Why the US Trade Agreement will slow China’s economy

The response of the global financial markets to the trade agreement reached between the United States and China has been very positive, probably excessively so given the relatively limited size of the agreement reached.

By: Alicia García-Herrero Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: February 20, 2020
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Opinion

Epidemic tests China’s supply chain dominance

Much has been written on the Wuhan coronavirus that causes the respiratory disease Covid-19, but very little is known yet about its impact on the global economy and, in particular, the global value chain. Still, one thing is clear: The shock is bigger than that caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), for the simple reason that China is much more important for the global economy than it was then.

By: Alicia García-Herrero Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: February 17, 2020
Read article Download PDF More on this topic More by this author
 

External Publication

From globalization to deglobalization: Zooming into trade

This article shows some evidence of the decrease in merchandise, capital and, to a lesser extent people to people flows.

By: Alicia García-Herrero Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: February 3, 2020
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Opinion

The US-China trade agreement will not put an end to geopolitical risks

The agreement between the US and China should not be read so positively in Europe, especially in Germany

By: Alicia García-Herrero Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: January 31, 2020
Read article More on this topic
 

Opinion

Stability remains key to China

The most concerning aspect for the Chinese economy will still be to hold up domestic demand. The rapidly rising household debt will put further breaks of the households' ability to purchase durable goods

By: Alicia García-Herrero and Jianwei Xu Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: January 15, 2020
Read article More on this topic
 

Blog Post

Lessons from the China-US trade truce

The tentatively agreed deal between China and the United States temporarily stops a dangerous dynamic, yet it falls far short of the negotiating objectives of both sides. US trade policy has become a dominion of the executive branch guided principally by the President’s electoral interests. Meanwhile, China demonstrates its capacity to resist pressure: it will enact structural reforms at its own pace in line with its interests. Sadly, the deal confirms that the United States no longer feels obligated to follow WTO rules, and can induce others to do the same.

By: Uri Dadush and Marta Domínguez-Jiménez Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: December 19, 2019
Read article More by this author
 

Opinion

Watch out for China’s currency in case of no-deal scenario

The U.S. and China’s negotiations on a phase-one deal seem to have stalled again. The market was already aware of the limited nature of the likely deal, but was still hoping for it. Against this backdrop, the investors have reacted negatively to the increased likelihood of not reaching a deal on December 15. If this is the case, the U.S. will apply additional tariffs on Chinese imports. The obvious question to address, thus, is, what can happen to China under such a scenario?

By: Alicia García-Herrero Topic: Finance & Financial Regulation Date: December 11, 2019
Load more posts