CHINAMacroReporter

Leland Miller on Pressing China Issues

Leland Miller, the founder of China Beige Book, spoke with The Epoch Times about which investors and companies are interested in China, the latest developments in the currency, U.S.-China relations, overcapacity problems, and the One Belt One Road Initiative. : The Chinese economy is strange in many ways. Not only is it a hybrid between private capital and state control, but very few people directly invest in the mainland — and yet everybody is interested in how the second largest economy in the world is going to develop. That’s because Chinese demand determines the prices of world commodities, and the operations of multinational companies in China impact earnings. When the yuan falls, markets across the world get jittery. China watchers accept the fact that official Chinese data is severely flawed, and often simply fabricated, yet they still use it to analyze the Chinese economy and markets because there are few alternatives. One alternative, however, is the China Beige Book International (CBB), a research service that interviews thousands of companies and hundreds of bankers on the ground in China each quarter. They collect data and perform in-depth interviews with Chinese executives.
by

|

China Beige Book

August 2, 2017
Leland Miller on Pressing China Issues

The Epoch Times: Who are the investors and companies interested in China and your services?

Leland Miller: There’s people who play the share roulette or people who have a specific company in mind. We see a lot of this in the retail space and they want to get more information from us. They invest in something where they think there is this untapped market either in China or as China goes abroad.

You’ve got macro firms who may not care about the day-to-day in China but want to make sure they understand the dynamics of China demand, of China credit, of China currency, so that they don’t get caught out.

Commodities are in incredibly high demand. We spend a lot of our time dealing with commodities firms now because we have all this data that’s not typically available. Things like net capacity, and a lot of firms have said, “Well, we have no way of checking government numbers…. If they say they’re cutting capacity, we have to believe them.” Well, we don’t believe them, we do it ourselves and what we found is that the opposite is happening across commodities, across time.

So you have all these different types of firms, but I think there is one uniting factor: whether they’re doing China micro, they’re doing China macro, or some niche element of the economy. If they don’t get China right, there are going to be repercussions in their portfolio.

So even people now who have absolutely nothing to do with China are clients of ours because as they keep abreast of what’s going on, they need to understand this and not get knocked from the side off their feet when they weren’t expecting it.

An increasing share of our clients are people who just want to understand China at the 30,000-feet level. Our early clients are people who want to understand at the 30-feet level. And we have everything in between, but also the corporates. The corporates have a very different mind-set: they need to know different things than, say, a hedge fund or other asset manager, who is simply trying to find a good trade.

The Epoch Times: How do you see the Chinese currency developing?

Mr. Miller: They took a very risky strategy on the currency dating back to last fall, and it worked. But it didn’t have to work and it may not have worked, and I think it’s worth looking back at this chronology because this could have been a very different year had some of this not worked out. Back in September 2016, the Chinese started to understand that there was a very real chance that the Federal Reserve (Fed) was going to hike in December, and they needed to prepare the currency and prepare themselves for a rate hike.

They started doing that and they weakened the currency. And then when President Trump was elected, they said, “Okay, well, we got to do this even more. We have to weaken right up until he gets elected so that we can come back and say we’re going to strengthen it once he gets elected.” Now it’s a very cynical strategy that happened to work, but what’s interesting is that there was an enormous amount of commentary late in 2016, early 2017, about how — and we see this all the time — now that China is pegged to a basket, it’s not pegged to the dollar, and that the Chinese have made this move.

That is just not correct. They had not switched, there has not been this back-and-forth. The yuan is essentially pegged to the dollar. The seven handle on this, the seven yuan to the dollar is extremely important for a lot of reasons, most importantly the politics around this, the politics with Congress, the politics with Trump, the politics with the Chinese leadership.

And the idea of them creeping closer and closer to 7 was a real major problem. They understood that this was a politically charged number and they got real close to it and they timed it well and they backed off it, and it had been strengthening ever since which has been supported by the fact that the dollar has been in a weakening trend.

But the interesting thing here is they figured out, “We’re going to give Trump little rationale for letting him say we are a currency manipulator. But right up until that point, we’re going to keep weakening, and we’re going to hope that nothing bad happens.”

Shockingly, they got up to 6.9 — it was approaching a danger point where I think markets would have started caring, and they backed off at the right time. So they have had the 2017 best case scenario, they haven’t had these interruptions, they haven’t had a super strong dollar that a lot of people thought was going to happen six months ago.

So the yuan is not on the top of people’s worry list right now but it’s just a matter of time before they have to deal with these dynamics again, unless the dollar is in a long term weakening trend.

The Epoch Times: How do you see U.S.-China relations in the future?

Mr. Miller: The administration understood that China’s a radioactive word if you use it politically, so we’re going to fight back on China, we’re going to save American workers from the tyranny of Chinese goods. That was the calling card for a while. And then of course President Xi and President Trump met at Mar-a-Lago and had this beautiful chat and everything turned around.

President Trump was convinced to give the Chinese some amount of time to fix the trade problem and fix North Korea and a whole bunch of other things. A lot of really smart China watchers have been saying recently that the President is angry that the Chinese have not done what he wanted them to do on the trade side of North Korea and he’s flipped and you’re about to see the repercussions.

I would actually push back against that. I think that what you’re seeing right now is a gradual dissatisfaction with this. But the real tea leaf here will be the South China Sea. The U.S. position in the South China Sea has just been invisible for the most part. I mean, they talk about a few spy ops but they have been mostly invisible for the past six, seven months.

And when the President, the White House, the administration makes this turn and decides: “Alright, China is not going to help us out, we now need a stick and we need a big stick,” you’re going to start seeing developments in the South China Sea. The fact that there has been some push back on trade, the fact that we’re talking a little bit about steel, it’s totally misunderstood.

The steel measures being talked about are not anti-China, although they’ll be sold as that. So I think we need to stop jumping the gun on the idea that the president has turned hostile on China. This hasn’t happened. Do we think it will happen? Yes. I think it’s a 2018 thing. But I don’t think that there has been a major shift in policy.

The Epoch Times: Are the Chinese really tackling the overcapacity problem?

Mr. Miller: There are two stories here. The first is what our data is saying and the second is the mistake I think a lot of investors make in seeing commodities as monolithic in China.

People usually think that they’re either going to cut capacity across the board or they’re not going to cut capacity at all. So what we have been seeing is not cutting capacity. When prices have gone up, a lot of investors said, “Look, the Chinese government is making good on their pledges to cut capacity. Look at prices are going up, imports are going up.” Anecdotally, that suggests they’re cutting capacity.

Now, they are cutting gross capacity, but total capacity added has gone up every quarter and it’s gone up in almost every sub-sector every quarter. They are adding capacity, and this is very intuitive if you think about it. There are all these industries who used to laugh about the economic reports we used to get from these firms quarter after quarter after quarter of higher inventories, worse revenue, no profits, more capacity — it was just a joke.

Now all of a sudden they’re getting this good economic scenario and they are not about to cut back. It makes sense that they’re not cutting back, but the narrative on this is that the Chinese government is hard at work cutting capacity, and it’s totally a mistaken narrative. Now, we tracked this very closely across coal, aluminium, steel, and copper, and there is a very clear dynamic there and it’s been clear for the last year plus. They are not cutting net capacity.

Now the other issue here is the differences between sub-sectors. When you look at coal and when you look at steel, there’s a different long term concern about the two of them. With all these Chinese commodities, there’s potential overcapacity issues, but coal kills people and coal turns people’s lungs black.

And so the idea that the Chinese can continue to crank out coal the same way they can crank out steel, with the same repercussions, it’s not there. So over time I think we will see a pullback on the coal side. It’s an open question as to whether we’ll see it in steel and aluminum; a lot of this might be affected by the trade actions coming out of the United States, but right now the major story here is that investors are guessing.

They’re guessing based on prices and they’re getting this wrong more often than not. They don’t understand the degree to which these sub-sectors are cutting back. In fact, they increasing capacity, they’re bringing more capacity online. They take the old ones and take them offline or the ones that aren’t being used, but they’ll activate others or they’ll build others or they’ll upgrade others. So the overall dynamic is that more capacity is being brought online but then make a very big show of what they take offline or what they blow up.

They used to put TNT into giant iron plants and blow them up to show that the government was doing something. This is the equivalent of this in 2017. But net net, they’re not cutting back right now. They’re trying to take advantage of a good market for their goods and so this is going to shock people. It’s already surprised people; that’s why you see these enormous 5 percent, 8 percent moves in a day on these commodity markets. But it’s going to shock people more going forward when they understand the totality of what has happened over the past year.

The Epoch Times: What are your thoughts on the One Belt One Road (OBOR) initiative?

Mr. Miller: What is the real goal for this? The goal is to exert Chinese influence abroad, it’s to recycle surpluses in goods and services abroad to some degree because of oversupply. It will accomplish certain things but is it a worthwhile project? Is it going to do what everyone thinks it’s going to do? No, of course not.

But there are things being done. It is a project large in scope, it will attract headlines for many years, but at the end of the day is this a game changer for China? No. Have the Chinese ever in any context found a sustainable ability to get returns, to get an actual return on their investment? No. And they’re going into a situation where they’re irritating a lot of these states who think that they were going to be able to use their own labor, but the Chinese are using Chinese firms who are doing quite well so far, and having them do the labor.

There are political problems that brings up. They also have a different situation right now than they did three years ago when you talk about the Forex reserves in the capital accounts. So the idea that they had too much and had to figure out ways of dumping Chinese capital in other places, that problem has reversed itself. Now we are not at any kind of problematic point at around $3 trillion, people have the opposite concerns. I think that if this were not a President Xi initiative that he has attached his name to, this would have been deescalated far more dramatically.

They’re going to have to build it up, it still plays a role, it’s still worth watching, but the idea that this is a real game changer similar to the Asian Infrastructure and Investment Bank which was a political upheaval about a year ago, two years ago, whenever it was, these are not game changers. These are Chinese inefficiencies at work abroad.

More

CHINAMacroReporter

February 19, 2021
‘No, China is not the EU’s top trading partner'
‘This week the media seized on a report by Eurostat, the European Union’s statistical agency, to declare that China surpassed the United States in 2020 to become the EU’s main trade partner. This is simply not true.’
keep reading
February 18, 2021
‘China faces fateful choices, especially involving Taiwan’
'Should Mr Xi order the People’s Liberation Army to take Taiwan, his decision will be shaped by one judgment above all: whether America can stop him. If China ever believes it can complete the task at a bearable cost, it will act.’ ‘
keep reading
February 18, 2021
'An Unsentimental China Policy'
'Jake Sullivan, wrote in Foreign Affairs in 2019, “The era of engagement with China has come to an unceremonious close.”Yet it is worth remembering what engaging China was all about.’ For most of the past half century, efforts to improve ties with the country were not about transforming it. Judged by its own standards, U.S. engagement with China succeeded. It was only after the Cold War that a desire to change China became a prominent objective of U.S. policy.’
keep reading
February 18, 2021
'Like It Or Not, America Is Still A Superpower'
‘The twentieth century was littered with the carcasses of foreign leaders and governments that misjudged the United States, from Germany (twice) and Japan to the Soviet Union to Serbia to Iraq. Perhaps the Chinese, careful students of history that they are, will not make the mistake that others have made in misjudging the United States.’
keep reading
February 16, 2021
'Is China experiencing an advance of the state sector?'
‘The value-added produced by state-owned enterprises has usually been in the range of 25-30% of China’s GDP. And what’s really striking about those numbers is that they just haven’t changed very much over the past 25 years. The share of China’s economic output being produced by SOEs today, under Xi Jinping, is not significantly different than it was under Hu Jintao, or even in the later years of Jiang Zemin.’
keep reading
February 16, 2021
‘China Blocked Jack Ma’s Ant IPO After Investigation Revealed Likely Beneficiaries’
‘Behind layers of opaque investment vehicles that own stakes in Ant Financial are a coterie of well-connected Chinese power players, including some with links to political families that represent a potential challenge to President Xi and his inner circle. Those individuals, along with Mr. Ma and the company’s top managers, stood to pocket billions of dollars from a listing that would have valued the company at more than $300 billion.’
keep reading
February 14, 2021
How to Keep U.S.-Chinese Confrontation From Ending in Calamity
'The two countries need to consider something akin to the procedures and mechanisms that the United States and the Soviet Union put in place to govern their relations after the Cuban missile crisis—but in this case, without first going through the near-death experience of a barely avoided war.'
keep reading
February 14, 2021
The United States, China, and Taiwan: A Strategy to Prevent War
‘We believe that a crisis is building over Taiwan and that it is becoming the most dangerous flashpoint in the world for a possible war that involved the United States of America, China, and probably other major powers.'
keep reading
February 13, 2021
Why China Will Go Green - Really
‘To Communist Party leaders, greenery increasingly aligns with their economic and political interests. China, a populous country that is cruelly lacking in clean water and arable farmland, and which hates having to rely so heavily on imported energy, has a selfish interest in embracing what President Xi Jinping calls “ecological civilisation”.’
keep reading
February 11, 2021
'The Biden Team Wants to Transform the Economy. Really.'
‘Biden and his more activist advisers hope to modernize key industries and counter an economic threat from China, swiftly emerging as the world’s other superpower. “The package that they put together is the closest thing we’ve had to a broad industrial policy for generations, really,” says Scott Paul, the president of the Alliance for American Manufacturing.’
keep reading
February 10, 2021
‘What the ‘Hong Kong Narrative’ gets wrong'
‘For a significant cohort of the [“pro-democracy”] protesters, the more accurate label would be “anti-China activists.” The one thing that seems to unite them is not a love of democracy, but a hatred of China.'
keep reading
February 8, 2021
Why the Anglosphere sees eye to eye on China
‘Some of America’s European allies are very wary of what they fear will be a new cold war with China. By contrast, the US is getting more support from the UK, Australia and Canada.’
keep reading
February 7, 2021
' "Longer Telegram" | To Counter China’s Rise, the U.S. Should Focus on Xi'
A strategy that focuses more narrowly on Xi, rather than the CCP as a whole, presents a more achievable objective.'
keep reading
February 7, 2021
'The Sources of Soviet Conduct'
'The main element of any United States policy toward the Soviet Union must be that of a long-term, patient but firm and vigilant containment of Russian expansive tendencies.’
keep reading
February 7, 2021
'Remarks by President Biden on America's Place in the World'
“We’ll confront China’s economic abuses; counter its aggressive, coercive action; to push back on China’s attack on human rights, intellectual property, and global governance.”“But we are ready to work with Beijing when it’s in America’s interest to do so. We will compete from a position of strength by building back better at home, working with our allies and partners, renewing our role in international institutions, and reclaiming our credibility and moral authority, much of which has been lost.”“That’s why we’ve moved quickly to begin restoring American engagement internationally and earn back our leadership position, to catalyze global action on shared challenges.”
keep reading
February 7, 2021
'In Search of Today’s George Kennan'
‘Kennan provided a framework to break through the bitter divide between those who believed America should return to its prewar isolationism, and those who believed the USSR was itching for a dramatic showdown with the capitalist west.’
keep reading
February 7, 2021
' "Longer Telegram" Sets Off Fierce Global Debate'
'The fierce global debate set off this week by a thought-provoking paper - “TheLonger Telegram: Toward a New American China Strategy” – has underscored the urgency and difficulty of framing a durable and actionable U.S. approach to China as the country grows more authoritarian, more self-confident and more globally assertive.'
keep reading
February 7, 2021
The 'Longer Telegram' & Its Discontents
Why everyone wants to be George Kennan‘In 1947 X penned his history-changing “Sources of Soviet Conduct” in Foreign Affairs,’ wrote Edward Luce in the Financial Times in 2018.‘The piece, which crystallised America’s cold war containment strategy, was the making of George F Kennan’s life-long reputation as a master of geopolitics.’‘ As the architect of a doctrine that won the cold war.’
keep reading
February 7, 2021
'Brookings experts analyze President Biden’s first foreign policy speech: Focus China'
'To respond effectively, Biden argued, America will need to rebuild leverage, e.g., by pursuing domestic renewal, investing in alliances, reestablishing U.S. leadership on the world stage, and restoring American authority in advocating for universal values.'
keep reading
February 7, 2021
'Why the ‘Longer Telegram’ Won’t Solve the China Challenge'
‘Perhaps the most problematic aspect of the 'Longer Telegram's' emphasis on Xi—“All U.S. political and policy responses to China therefore should be focused through the principal lens of Xi himself”—is the author’s conclusion that Washington should be seeking to escape from, and even try to effect the removal of, Xi’s leadership because that could restore U.S.-China relations to a potentially constructive path: “its pre-2013 path—i.e., the pre-Xi strategic status quo.” ’
keep reading
February 4, 2021
Why Beijing Is Bringing Big Tech to Heel
‘Beijing’s recent antitrust efforts are motivated less by worries about the tyrannical nature of monopoly power than by the belief that China’s tech giants are insufficiently committed to promoting the goal advanced by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) of transformative technological innovation—and thus may be undermining the effectiveness of Chinese industrial policy.’
keep reading
February 3, 2021
'Secretary of State Antony Blinken on U.S. Policy Toward China'
‘There’s no doubt that China poses the most significant challenge to us of any other country, but it’s a complicated one.’
keep reading
February 3, 2021
'Burma’s Coup and Biden’s Choice'
‘The top U.S. priority in Asia is limiting Beijing’s ability to control independent states like Burma, which is strategically situated in the Indo-Pacific. The U.S. response needs to take into account China’s regional designs.’
keep reading
February 3, 2021
'Myanmar, Burma and why the different names matter'
‘Unlike most of the world, the U.S. government still officially uses "Burma." '
keep reading
February 3, 2021
'Coup a further complication for tricky Myanmar-China ties'
‘Even if China played no role at all in ousting Suu Kyi, Beijing is likely to gain still greater sway over the country.’
keep reading
February 3, 2021
‘Beijing Won’t Let America “Compartmentalize” Climate Change'
‘‘You want China to take action on climate change?" asks Xi Jinping. "Let’s talk about what you’re going to give to get it.’’
keep reading
February 3, 2021
Burma: At the Center of the U.S.-China Competition
In today’s issue: 1. China Lays Out Its Position / 2. The U.S. Lays Out Its Position / 3. Burma: At the Center of the U.S.-China Competition / 4. Burma or Myanmar?
keep reading
February 3, 2021
'A Conversation with Politburo Member Yang Jiechi'
‘History and reality have shown time and again that these issues concern China's core interests, national dignity, as well as the sentiments of its 1.4 billion people. They constitute a red line that must not be crossed.’
keep reading
February 3, 2021
'National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan on U.S. Policy Toward China'
‘Being prepared to act as well to impose costs for what China is doing in Xinjiang, what it’s doing in Hong Kong, for the bellicosity of threats that it is projecting towards Taiwan.’
keep reading
February 3, 2021
'Coup Puts Myanmar at the Center of the U.S.-China Clash'
‘Chinese oil and gas pipelines snake across Myanmar from China’s landlocked Yunnan province to the Bay of Bengal—a route that Beijing wants to transform into a broader economic corridor with road and rail connections.’
keep reading
February 3, 2021
'Biden's whole-of-National Security Council China strategy'
'National security adviser Jake Sullivan is personally focused on China as a priority, building capacity across departments and agencies and running processes that break down old silos between foreign and domestic policy.'
keep reading
January 31, 2021
'Biden’s Nightmare May Be China'
‘The coming years represent the greatest risks since I began covering U.S.-China relations in the 1980s, partly because Xi is an overconfident, risk-taking bully who believes that the United States is in decline.’
keep reading
January 31, 2021
Opinion | Marco Rubio: 'China is exploiting U.S. capital markets and workers. Here's what Biden should do.'
‘China can finance its industrial ambitions with the deepest, most liquid capital markets in the world — our own.’
keep reading
January 31, 2021
The UK Stands Up, the U.S. Not So Much
“We have honored our profound ties of history and friendship with the people of Hong Kong, and we have stood up for freedom and autonomy—values both the U.K. and Hong Kong hold dear.” British Prime Minister Boris Johnson
keep reading
January 31, 2021
'U.S.-China Capital Flows Vastly Underestimated'
‘And yet, debates around US-China passive securities investment suffer from shortcomings similar to those inherent in the early debates about US-China bilateral FDI and VC: official data do not provide a clear picture for policymakers to understand the scope and patterns of two-way investment flows and stocks.’
keep reading
January 31, 2021
'Why U.S. Securities Investment in China is Vastly Underestimated'
‘The conduits of US securities investment in China that are obscured or ignored in the US Treasury International Capital (TIC) dataset constitute a majority of all holdings, so these figures vastly underestimate the true scope at the end of 2020.’
keep reading

Heading

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.