Page 11 - CCFA Journal - Third Issue

CCFF2020/加拿大中国金融论坛 2020 加中金融

我相信亚洲现在比以往任何时候都更不依赖其对美国的出 I believe Asia is now less dependent on its exports to the US than
口，并且对美国的出口在长期内将以明显较低的速度增长。 it once was and export to the US will grow at an appreciably lower
美国如何回到亚洲的所有新兴市场是复苏的关键因素之一， rate over an extended period. How the US is going to find its way
这肯定会需要一些调整。 back to all emerging markets in Asian is one of the key factors for
recovery, which will certainly take some adjustment.

问答环节 Q&A

问题 1：Bruce: 我们的第一个问题来了。在疫情大流行期间，中国在加拿大贸易中所占的份额正在上升。您觉得加拿大是
否可能朝着更多的贸易保护主义政策迈进？当回答这个问题时，请考虑一下即将上台的拜登新政府。您对新美国政府及其政
策立场有任何想法？这对我们的听众也很有用。

Jim: 我认为贸易保护主义从来都以这样或那样的形式存在。一直是自由贸易的倡导者的加拿大可能会遭受很多损失。据报道
加拿大将采取强硬路线应对贸易保护主义，但实施起来有些困难。尽管短期内我们可能会忍受来自其他国家的更多边保护主
义，当然也可以采取 “针锋相对”的应对策略。如果贸易保护主义持续更长时间，它将对加拿大经济的影响比其他国家更大。

我认为拜登政府可能会在一定程度上改变政策，但他会非常小心。对中国贸易政策的反感并不是特朗普或共和党政策的言论，
而是得到广泛政治党派的支持。我认为他在同盟的支持下会更加保守。换句话说，新政府不太可能削弱中美贸易关系。

Loren: 我接着 Jim 的话继续。我同意吉姆的判断。我不希望拜登领导下有大的变化。从奥巴马政府时期开始，一系列与贸易
有关的问题至少已存在了十年。在特朗普执政期间，这些问题变得更加尖锐。我们曾经认为汇率操纵和贸易不平衡一直是争
论的焦点。但正如您所知，这些问题的核心是市场准入，这是我一直关注的领域之一。中国出台的相关政策可能会影响跨国
公司在中国设立公司并在中国市场销售其产品与服务。其次是关于补贴和补贴性质的问题。中国政府通过土地和其他方式将
金融市场导向国有企业，这可能造成市场扭曲。关于国有企业在行业内的作用及政府对国有企业的导向也存在一些问题。当
然有关知识产权的问题也一直存在。我在这里提到的问题非常重要。

我认为中国在许多方面的做法无益于自身利益。正如我在开始时说的那样，中国的经济变得越来越不开放。中国开放时曾经
具有的巨大活力仍记忆犹新。中国加入世贸组织后，中国经济向美国和其他海外市场开放。我们在那个时期观察到的许多经
济活力可以说都与贸易自由化紧密相连。它不一定是零和游戏。保护主义对美国和中国而言都是代价高昂的。如果我们设立
相关法律法规让经济开放，那么将来会有巨大的潜在收益。

Yi: 谢谢 Jim 和 Loren。需要特别注意的是，保护主义在许多方面造成了中美之间的贸易战，金融战和技术战。根据我们的研
究发现，在全球化 2.0 的背景下，世界很难避免与中国建立联系。如果考虑贸易战，无论您是从中国进口还是出口到中国，
你的生产网络，全球供应链，供应商，客户，客户的客户，供应商的供应商都与中国有联系。我们发现，最终任何形式的贸
易保护主义都会导致股票收益下降。尽管中国公司可能会回到中国上市，但世界其他地方的消费者的成本会更高。

从“明星计划”的角度来看，中国公司，尤其是针对科技公司，5G 技术公司和生物技术公司的公司，无需先决条件即可轻
松在上海证券交易所上市。虽然它可能是零和游戏，但我们坚信全球化是有效的。

Question 1: Bruce: So, our first question comes in. China's share of Canadian trade is moving higher during the pandemic. Do
you foresee Canada moving towards more protectionist policies? And maybe as we're answering that, think about the new
Biden administration coming in and if you have any thoughts about the new American administration and their policy stance.
That would also be useful to our audience.
Jim: I think protectionism is with us in one form or another. Canada, having been a champion of free trade, has a lot to lose. Canada is
reportedly to take a harder line, yet I find a little difficult to implement as we were not positioned to do so. While we may endure more
protectionism from others, we can certainly respond with a ‘Tit for Tat’ strategy. If protectionism persists longer, it will affect Canadian
economy more than other ones.
I think Biden administration may change policies to a degree, but I think he will be very careful. It appears that the antipathy towards
Chinese trade policy was not a rhetoric of Trump or republican policy but supported by parties across the broad political spectrum. I
think he will be more civilized while getting allies on side. In other words, the new administration will unlikely soften the China-US
trade relationship.
Loren: I agree with Jim's general assessment. I do not expect big changes under Biden. There is a set of trade related issues existed for
at least 10 years, started during the Obama administration. These issues became more vocal under Trump administration. We are often
led to believe that the key issues are about exchange rates and trade imbalances. But as you know, the core of these issues is centered
around market access, which is one of the areas that I've been looking at. Because the impact of relevant Chinese policies may have
multinationals’ ability to set up companies in China and sell into the domestic market is huge. Then there are issues about subsidies and
the nature of subsidies. Chinese government directs its financial market via land and other means to its firms, which can be distorting.
There are also issues about the role of the SOEs and the government support pivot towards SOEs. There are issues about IP and
intellectual property rights. The issues I mentioned here are just extremely important.

I think that China moved in a direction in many ways not helpful in its own interest. As I said in the beginning, China's economy has
become less, not more, open. Looking back, the enormous dynamism that China once had when the country opened itself up. China's
joining WTO resulted in opening Chinese economy to imports, domestic competition and access to the US and other overseas markets.
So, a lot of that dynamism that we observed during that period can in multiple ways be systematically correlated with the trade
liberalization. Protectionism can be costly for both US and China. There are huge potential gains for the next generation if we have a
legislation that helps to open these economies.
Yi: Thank you Jim and Loren. It is very important to note that protectionism renders in many ways like trade wars, financial wars and
technological wars between US and China. We found based on our research that, in the context of globalization 2.0, it is very hard to
avoid linkage with China. If you think about trade wars, regardless of you import from or export to China, your production networks,
global supply chains, your suppliers, your customers, customers’ customers, suppliers’ suppliers all have connection with China. We
found that in the end any forms of protectionism will result in decline in stocks return. While Chinese companies may go back and list
in China, cost to consumers in the rest of the world will go higher.
CCFA JOURNAL OF FINANCE MARCH 2021 Page 11