Reuters logo
Fitch: Some Chinese LGFV Defaults Likely, Timing Uncertain
September 25, 2017 / 1:10 AM / 3 months ago

Fitch: Some Chinese LGFV Defaults Likely, Timing Uncertain

(The following statement was released by the rating agency) PARIS/SINGAPORE, September 24 (Fitch) The first defaults on public bonds by Chinese local government financing vehicles (LGFVs) are becoming more likely, and will probably trigger a repricing of the market, says Fitch Ratings. However, widespread LGFV defaults remain a tail-risk, given that the authorities continue to rely on local government investment - supported by LGFVs - to hit economic growth targets, and have a broad spectrum of policy tools to limit default contagion. No Chinese LGFV has defaulted to date on its publicly traded debt. Moreover, judging by narrow spreads on LGFV securities, investors have not revised their expectations significantly for government support since the passage of the 2014 Budget Law, which stated that LGFVs are no longer recognised as public-sector liabilities and are not officially eligible for government support. Subsequent guidance reiterating that LGFV debt is to be evaluated by creditors on market principles has also had little impact on investor perceptions. However, there remains a conflict between these stated central government policies and implicit support of LGFVs in practice at the local level. Efforts to disentangle LGFVs from public-sector balance sheets have been part of a broader drive by the central authorities to contain risks associated with growth in municipal contingent liabilities. Debt ceilings and debt swaps to facilitate the conversion of LGFV obligations into explicit local government debt have also been introduced. However, LGFV debt continues to rise strongly. Fitch estimates that CNY4 trillion (5.4% of GDP) in LGFV bonds issued domestically since the Budget Law came into effect in 2015 remain outstanding, and it is likely that this growth has involved at least pockets of excessive risk taking and debt hiding. The authorities' next step to address indiscriminate LGFV debt growth and to encourage greater market discipline might be to allow selected defaults on LGFVs that come under stress. There is a precedent for this in the way some Chinese state-owned enterprises have defaulted over the last couple of years, as the central government has sought to impose hard budget constraints and inject greater market discipline in the credit-allocation process. Selected LGFV defaults would have consequences for the broader LGFV market. For example, we would expect a repricing of LGFV bonds due to better risk discrimination by creditors and an accelerated replacement of the opaque LGFV mechanism with a genuine municipal bond and loan market. It is also likely that market liquidity might dry up for some LGFVs, at least temporarily, which could cause problems for some issuers - particularly those that have issued debt with short maturities and are therefore exposed to refinancing risk. Access to foreign borrowing may also become more limited or expensive for some LGFVs. However, the authorities are in a position to prevent systemic defaults. In particular, the government's pervasive ownership and influence across the financial system provide other tools to limit contagion. The use of fiscal resources to bail out LGFVs would be a last resort, given recent policy efforts to break perceptions of implicit state support, but credit could be directed toward the LGFV sector if required, which would contain the risk of a market panic. We believe only some LGFVs would be likely to default. These would be LGFVs deemed most financially stretched by the authorities, and consist mostly of lower-tier (non-provincial) LGFVs, particularly those that mix commercial with policy activities, such as property with urban development. This excludes the vast majority of Fitch-rated LGFVs, which are connected with high-ranking local governments and undertake key policy roles. Fitch rates LGFVs using a notching approach from the relevant local government, and may widen the notching or switch to a bottom-up rating approach if the policy role of the LGFVs is seen to be diluted. Contact: Nicolas Painvin Head of Criteria, Credit and Research Global Public and Infrastructure Finance +33 1 44 29 91 28 Fitch France S.A.S. 60, rue de Monceau 75008 Paris Terry Gao Senior Director Global Public and Infrastructure Finance + 852 2263 9972 Andrew Fennell Director Sovereigns +852 2263 9925 Dan Martin Senior Analyst Fitch Wire +65 6796 7232 Media Relations: Leslie Tan, Singapore, Tel: +65 67 96 7234, Email: leslie.tan@fitchratings.com; Wai-Lun Wan, Hong Kong, Tel: +852 2263 9935, Email: wailun.wan@fitchratings.com. The above article originally appeared as a post on the Fitch Wire credit market commentary page. The original article can be accessed at www.fitchratings.com. All opinions expressed are those of Fitch Ratings. ALL FITCH CREDIT RATINGS ARE SUBJECT TO CERTAIN LIMITATIONS AND DISCLAIMERS. PLEASE READ THESE LIMITATIONS AND DISCLAIMERS BY FOLLOWING THIS LINK: here. IN ADDITION, RATING DEFINITIONS AND THE TERMS OF USE OF SUCH RATINGS ARE AVAILABLE ON THE AGENCY'S PUBLIC WEB SITE AT WWW.FITCHRATINGS.COM. PUBLISHED RATINGS, CRITERIA, AND METHODOLOGIES ARE AVAILABLE FROM THIS SITE AT ALL TIMES. FITCH'S CODE OF CONDUCT, CONFIDENTIALITY, CONFLICTS OF INTEREST, AFFILIATE FIREWALL, COMPLIANCE, AND OTHER RELEVANT POLICIES AND PROCEDURES ARE ALSO AVAILABLE FROM THE CODE OF CONDUCT SECTION OF THIS SITE. DIRECTORS AND SHAREHOLDERS RELEVANT INTERESTS ARE AVAILABLE here. FITCH MAY HAVE PROVIDED ANOTHER PERMISSIBLE SERVICE TO THE RATED ENTITY OR ITS RELATED THIRD PARTIES. DETAILS OF THIS SERVICE FOR RATINGS FOR WHICH THE LEAD ANALYST IS BASED IN AN EU-REGISTERED ENTITY CAN BE FOUND ON THE ENTITY SUMMARY PAGE FOR THIS ISSUER ON THE FITCH WEBSITE. Copyright © 2017 by Fitch Ratings, Inc., Fitch Ratings Ltd. and its subsidiaries. 33 Whitehall Street, NY, NY 10004. Telephone: 1-800-753-4824, (212) 908-0500. Fax: (212) 480-4435. Reproduction or retransmission in whole or in part is prohibited except by permission. All rights reserved. In issuing and maintaining its ratings and in making other reports (including forecast information), Fitch relies on factual information it receives from issuers and underwriters and from other sources Fitch believes to be credible. Fitch conducts a reasonable investigation of the factual information relied upon by it in accordance with its ratings methodology, and obtains reasonable verification of that information from independent sources, to the extent such sources are available for a given security or in a given jurisdiction. The manner of Fitch’s factual investigation and the scope of the third-party verification it obtains will vary depending on the nature of the rated security and its issuer, the requirements and practices in the jurisdiction in which the rated security is offered and sold and/or the issuer is located, the availability and nature of relevant public information, access to the management of the issuer and its advisers, the availability of pre-existing third-party verifications such as audit reports, agreed-upon procedures letters, appraisals, actuarial reports, engineering reports, legal opinions and other reports provided by third parties, the availability of independent and competent third- party verification sources with respect to the particular security or in the particular jurisdiction of the issuer, and a variety of other factors. Users of Fitch’s ratings and reports should understand that neither an enhanced factual investigation nor any third-party verification can ensure that all of the information Fitch relies on in connection with a rating or a report will be accurate and complete. Ultimately, the issuer and its advisers are responsible for the accuracy of the information they provide to Fitch and to the market in offering documents and other reports. In issuing its ratings and its reports, Fitch must rely on the work of experts, including independent auditors with respect to financial statements and attorneys with respect to legal and tax matters. Further, ratings and forecasts of financial and other information are inherently forward-looking and embody assumptions and predictions about future events that by their nature cannot be verified as facts. As a result, despite any verification of current facts, ratings and forecasts can be affected by future events or conditions that were not anticipated at the time a rating or forecast was issued or affirmed. The information in this report is provided “as is” without any representation or warranty of any kind, and Fitch does not represent or warrant that the report or any of its contents will meet any of the requirements of a recipient of the report. A Fitch rating is an opinion as to the creditworthiness of a security. This opinion and reports made by Fitch are based on established criteria and methodologies that Fitch is continuously evaluating and updating. Therefore, ratings and reports are the collective work product of Fitch and no individual, or group of individuals, is solely responsible for a rating or a report. The rating does not address the risk of loss due to risks other than credit risk, unless such risk is specifically mentioned. Fitch is not engaged in the offer or sale of any security. All Fitch reports have shared authorship. Individuals identified in a Fitch report were involved in, but are not solely responsible for, the opinions stated therein. The individuals are named for contact purposes only. A report providing a Fitch rating is neither a prospectus nor a substitute for the information assembled, verified and presented to investors by the issuer and its agents in connection with the sale of the securities. Ratings may be changed or withdrawn at any time for any reason in the sole discretion of Fitch. Fitch does not provide investment advice of any sort. Ratings are not a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security. Ratings do not comment on the adequacy of market price, the suitability of any security for a particular investor, or the tax-exempt nature or taxability of payments made in respect to any security. Fitch receives fees from issuers, insurers, guarantors, other obligors, and underwriters for rating securities. Such fees generally vary from US$1,000 to US$750,000 (or the applicable currency equivalent) per issue. In certain cases, Fitch will rate all or a number of issues issued by a particular issuer, or insured or guaranteed by a particular insurer or guarantor, for a single annual fee. Such fees are expected to vary from US$10,000 to US$1,500,000 (or the applicable currency equivalent). The assignment, publication, or dissemination of a rating by Fitch shall not constitute a consent by Fitch to use its name as an expert in connection with any registration statement filed under the United States securities laws, the Financial Services and Markets Act of 2000 of the United Kingdom, or the securities laws of any particular jurisdiction. Due to the relative efficiency of electronic publishing and distribution, Fitch research may be available to electronic subscribers up to three days earlier than to print subscribers. For Australia, New Zealand, Taiwan and South Korea only: Fitch Australia Pty Ltd holds an Australian financial services license (AFS license no. 337123) which authorizes it to provide credit ratings to wholesale clients only. Credit ratings information published by Fitch is not intended to be used by persons who are retail clients within the meaning of the Corporations Act 2001

0 : 0
  • narrow-browser-and-phone
  • medium-browser-and-portrait-tablet
  • landscape-tablet
  • medium-wide-browser
  • wide-browser-and-larger
  • medium-browser-and-landscape-tablet
  • medium-wide-browser-and-larger
  • above-phone
  • portrait-tablet-and-above
  • above-portrait-tablet
  • landscape-tablet-and-above
  • landscape-tablet-and-medium-wide-browser
  • portrait-tablet-and-below
  • landscape-tablet-and-below