Huatai Securities: Do other central banks buy stocks to save the market?

Huatai Securities: Do other central banks buy stocks to save the market?

文 | 华泰宏观李超团队  内容摘要  >>核心观点  我们认为,国际上央行救市的案例并不少见,不要简单带着价值标准来看待中央银行持股,但是任何的救市都是要付出代价的,Regardless of whether it is a rescue agency or a direct admission to the market, there are their own pros and cons. You need to balance the pros and cons before making a choice.
The case of the central bank holding shares to rescue the market mainly occurred in East Asian economies. The advantage of the central bank holding shares to save the market is that it reduces the moral hazard of financial institutions, but destroys market rules.
The European and American countries stabilize the financial market by injecting liquidity into the market. The “pros” of helping financial institutions without directly saving the market lies in maintaining market rules, while the “disadvantage” lies in fostering the moral hazard of financial institutions.
  >>中央银行直接持股救市的案例主要发生在东亚经济体  梳理发现中央银行持股救市的案例主要发生在东亚经济体,央行持有股票救市优点是降低了金融机构道德风险,但是破坏了市场rule.
The basis of the Bank of Japan’s rescue is the close bank-enterprise relationship. The Japanese main bank system is a bank-enterprise combination system in which banks and enterprises are deeply connected. Banks holding corporate equity is one of the important ways of the bank-enterprise relationship.
When a crisis occurs, the Bank of Japan buys it directly into its own balance sheet, and if there is no economic boom afterwards, the Bank of Japan buying an ETF is equivalent to self-help.
The Hong Kong Monetary Authority of Hong Kong’s market stabilization measures include the direct use of foreign exchange funds to buy HSI blue-chip large-cap stocks and the Hong Kong dollar, as well as market control measures such as restrictions on short selling.
  >> European and American countries are rescue organizations that do not directly enter the market to establish a bailout fund. European and American countries stabilize financial markets by injecting liquidity into the market.
During the subprime mortgage crisis, the Federal Reserve ‘s rescue measures mainly include the release of liquidity to stabilize the stock market through traditional monetary policy tools, the provision of liquidity support to financial institutions through various innovative monetary policy tools, and assistance to financial institutions in difficult liquidity.
During the European debt crisis, the European Central Bank adopted a number of response measures, such as adjusting policy rates, purchasing sovereign debt in the euro area, and implementing long-term refinancing plans, to inject liquidity into financial institutions.
Similar to the Federal Reserve’s rescue policy, the European Central Bank also rescues financial institutions and money markets, rather than directly entering the market.
We believe that the “pros” of helping financial institutions not directly entering the market to set up a rescue fund lies in maintaining market rules, while the “disadvantage” lies in fostering the moral hazard of financial institutions.
  >> Don’t simply view the central bank’s holdings with value standards. We believe that after the macro-prudential dual pillars of China’s monetary policy are constructed, the use of central bank tools cannot be simply viewed from the perspective of traditional monetary policy.
The macro-prudential perspective makes it necessary for the central bank to use more tools to maintain financial stability, and it is still the central bank’s main responsibility to prevent systemic financial risks caused by large stock fluctuations.
We don’t think that the central bank’s shareholding should be viewed simply with value standards, but any rescue of the market will have to pay a price. Whether it is a rescue agency or a direct entry to the market, there are their own advantages and disadvantages. You need to balance the advantages and disadvantages to make a choice.; Strengthening financial stability, and more centrally, strengthening macro-prudential supervision rules, and resolving financial risks before turning them into financial crises is the focus of supervisory authorities.
  Table of Contents / Zheng Wenwen 1.

The case of the central bank directly holding shares to rescue the market mainly occurred in East Asian economies> 1.

1 The Bank of Japan: The close bank-enterprise relationship is an important basis for the Bank of Japan to purchase ETFs. Japan is a special case mainly due to its main banking system.
Japan’s main banking system is a bank-enterprise combination system in which banks and enterprises are deeply connected. Banks’ holding of corporate equity is one of the important ways of the bank-enterprise combination relationship.
The main banking system refers to a bank-enterprise combination system where a company uses a bank as its main lending bank and accepts the financial trust and financial monitoring. This means that most of the company’s financial services and business needs are provided by a corresponding bank orYes, this bank is the main bank.
Generally speaking, the establishment of business owner banks is closely related to the relationship between banks and enterprises. The closer the relationship between banks and enterprises, the more likely it is that the bank will become the master bank. This relationship between banks and enterprises is mainly manifested in the following types.The bank has the most loans. The bank is one of the major shareholders of the company. There is a comprehensive transaction relationship between the bank and the company (account management, stock and bond issuance, etc.). The bank has close personal relationships with the company (sending directors).Finally “a stick” pressure and so on.
Of course, companies can also become shareholders of banks and obtain corresponding loans from banks.
Bank-holding enterprises are one of the typical characteristics of Japan’s main banking system. Banks and enterprises not only have debt claims, but also have ownership relationships, that is, banks as creditors and major shareholders of enterprises.
This system design created a close bank-enterprise relationship, which became an important driving force behind Japan’s rapid economic growth and escaping the economic downturn after World War II.
Japan does not believe that there is a related party transaction in the main banking system, but rather that it eliminates information asymmetry and reduces the risk prevention and control costs of banks.
  Japan’s main banking system has laid the foundation for bank-owned companies.
The bank-enterprise relationship with the shareholding relationship as the tie is a relatively distinctive feature of Japan’s main banking system. The formation of this relationship comes from the historical crystallization of the Japanese economic and financial system.
First, the corresponding relationship between banks and enterprises stems from the close business relationship between banks and enterprises under the development direction of key industries. During World War II, banks and munitions companies were paired to provide funds to support armaments. During the period of rapid economic development, banks provided funds for large industries and large projects.The support for boosting investment growth reflects the important role played by the “path dependence” (debt-investment drive) of economic growth; the close bank-enterprise relationship helps strengthen the linkage between the banking system and entities. Under the main banking system, banksAs a major shareholder and creditor, they form a long-term two-way reciprocal relationship with the enterprise. The main bank provides support for the development of the enterprise. The expansion of the enterprise has also resulted in a substantial return for the main bank, which has helped to improve the quality of bank assets.Helps promote each other and hedge against negative impacts.
However, it is worth noting that, unlike the normal shareholding relationship, the main bank generally does not interfere with the business activities of the company and implements targeted measures to prevent the company from going bankrupt when the company is in a financial crisis, such as injecting capital into the company, delaying interest payments, reducing interest rates,Interest payable is exempt, and the main bank plays a more investor role than a manager.
  We believe that the close relationship between banks and enterprises under the Japanese main banking system has made important contributions to the rapid growth of the Japanese economy. Directed and sustained financial support promotes the development of enterprises. Enterprise development helps improve the quality of bank assets.In the event of an exogenous shock, the close equity relationship between banks and enterprises has become a cushion for enterprises, helping them ease the pressure of liquidity and debt tightening, highlighting the important role of the main banking system in procyclical and countercyclical.
We believe that banks holding corporate equity is the highlight of the main banking system, which is an important reason to understand why the Bank of Japan holds corporate equity and even buys ETFs.
  The close bank-enterprise relationship means that the ability to resist common risks is weak, and the main banking system is an important foundation for monetary authorities to hold shares.
Although Japan has had the opportunity to establish a US-style bank-enterprise separation system, the role of the growth path has led Japan to develop toward the establishment of a main banking system (a tight bank-enterprise relationship), and this trend has been obtained during the period of rapid economic growthstrengthen.
The close bank-enterprise relationship can transfer risks by changing the behavior of banks and enterprises in both pro-cyclical and counter-cyclical situations, but they will be greatly impacted when facing common or systemic risks. The collapse experience of the bubble economy, exogenous risksDeterministic shocks have highlighted the shortcomings of Japan’s close bank-enterprise relationship. The Internet bubble burst in 2002 and the financial crisis in 2008 are typical cases. Banking companies under the main banking system cannot respond to the crisis by changing their behavior, but because of mutual infectionIt is easy to fall into the crisis “vortex” of debt deflation. In order to resolve the “dilemma” of enterprises and financial institutions, the Bank of Japan launched the “stock purchase plan” twice in 2002 and 2009 to announce the “entry” of capital.
Therefore, from this perspective, we believe that the internal mechanism of the main banking system is flawed in dealing with common and systemic risks, which has become an important basis for the “entry” of capital holdings by the monetary authorities and explains why the Bank of Japan will”Unusual” market rescue.
In addition, the central bank can also achieve the purpose of stabilizing market prices, repairing investor sentiment, and alleviating liquidity tension through direct and indirect “holdings”.
  >> 1.

1.1 The Bank of Japan holds shares in two ways: the “Stock Purchase Plan” and “ETF Funds”. Historical operations indicate that the Bank of Japan can obtain “stocks” in two ways.Through the purchase of ETF funds to access the market; we believe that under the main banking system, the former purchases stocks directly from banks to help stabilize bank-enterprise relations, provide liquidity support and improve the asset quality of financial institutions, and also relax corporate financing constraints;ETFs drive incremental funds into the market and purchase targeted funds. These funds should include industries or enterprises that are beneficial to the long-term development of the Japanese economy, in order to stimulate the economy, and restore market sentiment, stabilize market prices, and improve liquidity.Sexual environment.  The Bank of Japan has launched the “Stock Purchase Plan” twice.
When the economic and financial markets show greater risks, the Bank of Japan will directly purchase corporate stocks from banks to support them. The Bank of Japan purchased stocks from banks twice in October 2002 and February 2009. The former was mainly due to the bursting of the Internet bubbleThe BoJ ‘s withdrawal from easing and other factors led to economic downturn, wealth shrinkage, and debt deflation. The BoJ started a “stock purchase plan” to deal with it; the latter was due to the 2008 global subprime mortgage crisis that led to the outbreak of the global financial crisis and external risk shocks.Japan’s economy fluctuated sharply, and the Bank of Japan restarted its “stock purchase plan” again.
  The Bank of Japan launched the “Stock Purchase Plan” for the first time in October 2002.
Affected by the bursting of the U.S. Internet bubble and the easing of the Bank of Japan, the decline of fundamentals such as economic downturns, capital outflows, and wealth shrinkage and the deterioration of the financial environment have impacted the Japanese financial market. The quality of bank assets and corporate operations are facing major impacts.The problem of non-performing loans caused by the bursting of the price bubble has improved the profitability of companies and financial institutions. Based on a comprehensive review of non-performing loans in September 2002, the Bank of Japan ‘s Monetary Policy Committee decided to launch the “Stock Purchase Plan”, which was the first time inStock purchases in the market.
On October 11, 2002, the Bank of Japan officially released the “Stock Purchase Plan”.
The plan defines a series of target standards, shareholding periods, shareholding scales, etc .: 标 The target standard of the stocks purchased: 200 days of actual trading on the stock exchange, an annual turnover of 20 billion yen, and the debt letter on BBB-Stocks of companies above the level.
  Purchase price and target: market price (fair price), financial institution (bank).
  Purchase term and total scale: The total size of the central bank’s purchase of stocks at market prices does not exceed 2 trillion yen (using the one-year average exchange rate in the year in which it occurs is equivalent to 1,339.
6.6 billion yuan) until the end of September 2003 (if the cumulative number of shares purchased by the end of September 2003 has not reached 2 trillion yen, the period can be extended to the end of September 2004).
  Limits on the size of each bank’s purchase: The limit on the stock purchased by each bank does not exceed the minimum value of the bank’s Tier 1 capital or 500 billion yen, and the limit for each stock purchased is 5% or less of the voting rights of the stockThe amounts listed in the table.
  After the Bank of Japan implemented the stock purchase plan in October 2002, it has promised that it will not begin selling shares before the end of September 2007, and will dispose of the purchased shares as early as October 2007 and complete the disposal by October 2017.
  In actual implementation, on October 14, 2008, in consideration of the impact of the global financial crisis, the Bank of Japan issued a document on “suspending the sale of stocks held,” announcing the suspension of the plan to sell stocks purchased in 2002, and began new stock purchases in 2009.plan.
  In February 2009, the Bank of Japan launched the “Stock Purchase Plan” again.
The financial crisis hit the Japanese economy and financial markets, and the Bank of Japan launched the “Stock Purchase Plan” again.
Affected by the financial crisis in 2008, the global financial market was under pressure. The sharp fall in fundamentals, the deterioration of the liquidity environment and very pessimistic market sentiment led to a significant decline in the Japanese stock market. The market was relatively volatile. To maintain stability, the Bank of Japan ‘s Banking Policy CommitteeDecided to suspend the sale of stocks purchased (the stocks purchased by the Bank of Japan for the first time in 2002 and planned to be sold between 2007 and 2017); in February 2009, the global financial market further fell, liquidity tightened, credit costs increased, pessimistic expectations, etc.It has had a substantial impact on financial institutions and enterprises. In order to reduce the risk of financial institutions’ holdings and ensure the stability of the financial system, the Bank of Japan decided to resume stock purchases of financial institutions.
On February 3, 2009, the Bank of Japan officially launched the “Resumption of Stock Purchase Plan”.
  Japan’s “Resumption of Stock Purchase Plan” in 2009 is slightly different from the “Stock Purchase Plan” of 2002.
The 2009 version of the “Restoration of Stock Purchase Plan” has been adjusted in terms of target selection, purchase scale, etc .: 对象 Purchase target (target institution): The target bank must meet one of the following conditions, and the stock holding exceeds one level50% of the capital, with a total stock of more than 500 billion yen, meeting the capital adequacy ratio based on international standards.
  Purchase price: market price (fair price).
  Selection of target and purchase scale: The stocks purchased should be stocks of companies with a credit rating of BBB- or above, which have been actually traded on the stock exchange for 200 days per year and have an annual turnover of 20 billion yen.
The total size of the central bank’s stock purchases at market prices does not exceed 1 trillion yen, and the limit for stocks purchased from each bank does not exceed 250 billion yen.
Implemented from February 23, 2009, and until April 2010, the Bank of Japan terminated the stock purchase plan as scheduled, and the total amount of commercial bank stock purchased in this “stock purchase plan” reached 38878 billion yen.
  Shareholding period: The Bank of Japan promises not to sell shares before March 2012, and will dispose of all stock assets before October 2017.
  In actual implementation, the Bank of Japan has not yet sold its shares.
In the actual implementation process, the Bank of Japan has postponed the stock sale plan several times, from the initial sale in 2017 to 2019 and 2021. Currently, from the latest postponed stock sale document disclosed on December 18, 2015,The Bank of Japan postponed the sale of its shares until March 2026.
  >> 1.1.2 Under the goal of QQE, the Bank of Japan has continuously purchased ETF funds and indirectly purchased stocks since 2010. In response to the 2008 subprime mortgage crisis, the Bank of Japan upgraded its quantitative easing policy and implemented QQE policies. ETF fund purchase is one of the important ways to purchase assets.
The outbreak of the global financial crisis in 2008 hit the Japanese economy in a rebound period, with GDP growth and core CPI falling. The Bank of Japan decided to lower the policy interest rate to 0 on December 19, 2008.
1%, the basic loan interest rate and the benchmark discount rate are also reduced to 0.
3%.
Subsequently, the Bank of Japan announced that it would expand its QE policy and upgrade its use of the QQE policy (Japanese QQE policy, Quantitative and qualitative monetary easing with a negative interest rate, that is, quantitative quantitative qualitative monetary easing with negative interest rates).
Under the QQE policy, from October 5, 2010, the Bank of Japan officially established a total asset purchase plan of 35 trillion yen, including 5 trillion yen in asset purchases. The main targets are government bonds (JGBs) and Treasury bills.(T-Bills), commercial paper (CP), corporate bonds (Corporate Bonds), ETF index funds and real estate investment funds.
Among them, ETF index funds and real estate trust investment funds are the newly added targets.
It means that the Bank of Japan’s limited available assets before purchase must be expanded.
From the previous period (2002 and 2009), the Bank of Japan’s purchase of stocks from commercial banks (the Bank of Japan’s “Stock Purchase Plan”) shows that the Bank of Japan has repeatedly postponed the sale of shares and instead bought ETFs, which is also a kind of self-help.
  With the establishment of the “Asset Purchase Plan” in 2010, the Bank of Japan began to access the “holdings” of the market through ETF funds and continued to purchase ETF index funds. Since 2010, the Bank of Japan has adjusted the details of purchasing ETF index funds several timescontent.
  The first ETF purchase plan was implemented in 2010 with the goal of currency easing.
On November 5, 2010, the Bank of Japan issued detailed rules for purchasing ETFs through the “Asset Purchase Plan”. The ETF index funds purchased are for tracking the Tokyo Stock Price Index (TOPIX) or the Nikkei 225 Stock Index.
(The Tokyo Stock Price Index is a stock price index for all Japanese companies listed on the Tokyo Stock Exchange.The Nikkei 225 Stock Index is a price index calculated by modifying the average stock price of the stocks of the largest 225 companies listed on the Tokyo Stock Exchange.
In terms of purchase methods, the plan recognizes the requirements: 1. As a trustee and beneficiary, a bank should entrust a trustee bank as a trustee to establish a currency trust to purchase ETFs as trust property.
2. The trustee must purchase ETF funds in accordance with bank standards.
In terms of purchase price, the purchase price of each ETF fund should be one of two, the volume-weighted average price of the financial instrument exchange, or the price at which the trustee trades on the financial instrument exchange by referring to the volume-weighted average price.
In terms of purchase limits, the maximum purchase amount of each ETF should be approximately the same as the ratio of the bank purchase amount to the total market value of the ETF.
The purchase scale of the ETF purchase plan is 450 billion yen per year, which will last until about the end of 2013.
  From 2013 to 2016, the Bank of Japan made small adjustments to the ETF purchase plan to increase the scale of purchases and increase the types of ETF funds.
In 2013, in the 2010 version of the ETF asset purchase plan, the Bank of Japan increased the purchase scale from 450 billion yen to 100 billion yen.
In November 2014, as the economy weakened, the Bank of Japan made further amendments to the main terms and conditions of ETF purchases, further expanding the types of ETF purchases, and joining the JPX Day on the Tokyo Stock Price Index ETF or the Nikkei 225 Index ETF.The 400-index ETF (JPX Nikkei 400 Index consists of 400 stocks with high investment attractiveness. When determining the selected stocks, refer to financial indicators that measure corporate profitability and growth capabilities, such as corporate asset-liability ratio and sales profit.Rate, return on equity (ROE), etc.).
  Since 2016, the Bank of Japan has directed the purchase of ETFs to support corporate physical and human capital investments, and has launched a structural policy.
In order to stimulate the fixed capital and human capital investment of enterprises, in March 2016, the Bank of Japan ‘s Monetary Policy Committee formulated special rules for purchasing ETFs to support enterprises ‘active investment in material and human capital. The scale is 300 billion yen per year.The purpose is to stimulate the related human and fixed capital investment of enterprises to achieve economic stimulation.
The specific selection criteria for the ETF funds purchased are the following three points: 1. Stocks with an upward trend in corporate capital expenditures or R & D expenditures.
2. Stocks with an upward trend in human capital expenditure.
3. The investment portfolio for fixed capital and human capital must increase corporate profitability in the future.
  In September 2016, the Bank of Japan further increased the scale of ETF purchases and changed the underlying structure.
In September 2016, the Bank of Japan further raised the size of ETF purchases to 5.
7 trillion yen, in terms of underlying structure, 2.
7 trillion is used to purchase the Tokyo Stock Price Index, and the other 300 million are allocated to the Tokyo Stock Price Index Fund, the Nikkei 225 Stock Average Index Fund, or the JPX Nikkei 400 Index Fund according to the current purchase volume and the ETF issuance volume.
  In July 2018, the Bank of Japan’s benchmarking structure continued to adjust.
In July 2018, the Bank of Japan made further adjustments to the ETF purchase plan.
In order to strengthen the “continuous and strong monetary easing framework”, the Bank of Japan Policy Committee further revised the pace and distribution of ETF purchases.
First of all, the original uniform buying will be changed into buying according to market conditions.
Second, the 300 billion yen per year targeted purchase of ETFs to support corporate investment in physical and human capital has not changed, but it will be 5.
The underlying structure of the 7 trillion yen ETF was adjusted, of which 1.
5 trillion yen will be used to purchase three fixed funds (Tokyo Stock Price Index Fund, Nikkei 225 Stock Average Index Fund or JPX Nikkei 400 Index Fund), with the remaining 4.

2 trillion yen will be used to target ETFs that track the Tokyo Stock Price Index Fund.
  >> 1.1.3 日本央行“股票购买计划”和购买ETF的政策效果不一  日本央行可以通过“股票购买计划”和ETF基金渠道持股,通过梳理日本央行“持股”的历史操作,我们认为,从逻辑和In terms of policy influence, the Bank of Japan’s operating logic and purpose can be found from the following aspects. Under different external conditions such as economic fundamentals and the financial market environment, the Bank of Japan will use different “holding” measures in conjunction with its own policy objectives.To respond, the main measures include buying stocks from financial institutions, delaying the sale of purchased stocks and extending the purchase of stocks, continuing to buy ETF funds, and controlling the allocation of ETF funds in a targeted manner.
  When fundamentals and financial markets deteriorated sharply, the core of the Bank of Japan’s “Stock Purchase Plan” was designed to “rescue” financial institutions and businesses.
Affected by the Internet bubble around 2001 and the financial crisis in 2008, the Bank of Japan launched the “Stock Purchase Plan” twice to purchase corporate equity from banks at market prices, not incremental capital.
Considering the downside risks to the economy, the Bank of Japan has repeatedly postponed the stock sale plan, which is currently tentatively sold out by March 2026.
We believe that the core of the central bank’s purchase of stocks is to rescue banks and enterprises, and repairing the stock market is only a joint action.
Under the Japanese main bank system, the relationship between banks and enterprises is close, but it is difficult to cope with common and systemic risks. The close relationship between banks and enterprises may exacerbate debt deflation and risk contagion.To improve the quality of assets and repair the balance sheet, on the other hand, bring liquidity to enterprises and reduce pressure on financing constraints, helping banks and enterprises avoid bankruptcy liquidation and reduce the impact of risk contagion.
The logic of the stock market repair is more the result of the central bank helping banks and enterprises to improve their operating expectations and enhance their confidence, which will lead to the recovery of corporate profit expectations and the ease of market sentiment.
Therefore, we believe that when the economic and financial environment is rapidly deteriorating, the Bank of Japan launched the “stock purchase plan” out of the original intention of “rescue” banks and enterprises, which cannot be directly understood as a market protection.
  The central bank’s delay in the sale of purchased stocks and the extension of stock purchases have helped the market to a certain extent.
Combined with the two “Booth Purchase Plans” of the Bank of Japan, both the stock purchase time and the stock sale time were clarified after the plan was issued. In the specific implementation process, the Bank of Japan can adjust the original plan, which is generally extended by the time or delayWe believe that the former means that the stability of the market will be prolonged, which can be understood as an incremental benefit, and the latter can be considered as a negative effect on the market.
Currently, according to the “Delayed Stock Sale” document disclosed by the Bank of Japan at the end of 2015, the Bank of Japan will 苏州夜网论坛 sell all stocks by March 2026, which can play a role in reducing shocks and appeasing the market to some extent.
  The Bank of Japan’s continued purchase of ETFs is aimed at maintaining market stability. The purpose of adjusting the structure of ETF targets is to support targeted companies in a targeted manner. The former stabilizes or drives stock indexes, and the latter favors the industry.Since the implementation of the QQE policy in 2010, the Bank of Japan has continued to purchase ETF index funds and gradually expand its scale. As the funds purchased by the Bank of Japan are equivalent to market incremental funds, this part of the funds will form a positive support for the Japanese stock market after entering the market.450 billion yen has been raised to 1 trillion yen and 6 trillion yen (refer to Figure 6 for the specific 南宁桑拿 proportion of 60,000 yuan). With the increase in the scale of ETF fund purchases, the Japanese stock market has risen correspondingly with the increase of funds.
We believe that the increase in the purchase of ETF funds has led to the stability and recovery of the overall valuation and the stock index. The continued purchase of ETF funds by the Bank of Japan can help maintain stability and even drive market recovery.
On the other hand, since 2016, the Bank of Japan has adjusted the target structure of ETF purchases in a targeted manner, increasing the allocation of human capital and fixed capital investment ETF funds with more stocks.In 2018, the allocation of the Tokyo Stock Price Index ETF (i.e.An ETF that tracks the Tokyo Stock Price Index. The Tokyo Stock Price Index is a stock price index for all Japanese companies listed on the Tokyo Stock Exchange.
With the total purchase scale unchanged, changes in the structure of these targets will benefit the target enterprise or industry and make them relatively beneficial.
  The Japanese case is quite special, and it is understood that the Bank of Japan’s holdings are closely related to its main banking system.
Under the QQE policy, the Bank of Japan’s purchase of ETF funds is a way to expand and upgrade its asset purchase plan. As the QE policy has already purchased a large amount of assets such as government bonds, corporate bonds, and bills, the Bank of Japan under the QQE policy further expanded its balance sheet.The scope of asset purchases.
Secondly, due to the objective existence of the Japanese main banking system, there is a close relationship between banks and enterprises, as well as debt claims and equity ownership relationships. The main bank is an important creditor and major shareholder of the enterprise. On the one hand, stock market fluctuations will affect the bank.The quality of assets has an impact on corporate operations and investments. On the other hand, the Bank of Japan is still selling the stocks held by the two previous “stock purchase plans”. In the case of postponing the sale of held stocks, the Bank of Japan’s increased purchase of ETFs also has hedge salesThe negative impact of stocks helps maintain stability and support the market.
  > 1.2 The Bank of Korea set up a bond market stabilization fund and a bank capital expansion fund to stabilize the market. The Bank of Korea has gone through several stages to stabilize the financial market.
During the Asian financial crisis in 1997, the Bank of Korea mainly stabilized the financial market by releasing liquidity through open market operations and providing special loans to financial institutions.
For example, on October 16, 1997, the Bank of Korea issued 1 trillion won to 16 commercial bank companies struggling with lack of liquidity (approximately 10.
US $ 900 million / 9.1 billion yuan) special loan. In December, the Bank of Korea decided to provide financial institutions with temporary cash flow problems11.
3 trillion won.
  After the Asian financial crisis, in order to strengthen the independence of the central bank, South Korea established a centralized and unified financial supervision system. The 1997 Bank of Korea Act stipulated that the Bank of Korea specializes in monetary policy functions while retaining a small number of indirect supervisory functions.The financial supervision function is concentrated in the newly established Financial Supervision Committee (FSC) directly under the State Council. At the same time, a deposit insurance company was established in 1998 to exercise inspection and supervision power over all financial institutions.
  Even so, during the financial crisis in 2008, South Korea’s financial market fluctuated sharply. In order to maintain financial stability, the Bank of Korea again took a number of measures to participate in the rescue.
In addition to cutting interest rates and injecting liquidity into open market operations, it has also stabilized the market by establishing bond market stabilization funds and bank capital expansion funds.
From September 2008 to March 2009, the Bank of Korea invested a total of 18.
5 trillion won, including bonds of government agency bonds and other eligible collateral in open market operations, and starting December 2018, 12 new securities companies have been added as open market counterparties.
At the end of 2008, the Bank of Korea initiated the establishment of a bond market stabilization fund to address liquidity issues in the bond market.
The fund plans to raise 10 trillion won. On December 17, 2008, the fund reached 5 trillion won and began to operate. The South Korean central bank mainly provided financial institutions by repurchasing various bonds. 2.
1 trillion won, capital injection of bond market stabilization funds.
The fund is operated by major bond investment institutions, including banks, insurance companies, securities, and pension funds. It purchases bond products such as corporate bonds and financial bonds to provide funds for the bond market.
  In order to expand bank capital, the Bank of Korea supported its capital expansion by paying interest to banks’ reserve deposits. In December 2008, the Bank of Korea and the Korean government jointly established a “Bank Recapitalization Fund”, which is mainly used for purchases.Mixed capital bonds, subordinated debt and preferred stocks of financial institutions. The fund was established by the Bank of Korea, the Industrial Bank of Korea, and general investors. The Bank of Korea provides the Korean Industrial Bank with a loan of 10 trillion yuan for a maximum period of one year.KRW funds, the Korea Industrial Bank used these funds and its own 2 trillion won to support the fund, together with 8 trillion funds from institutional and public investors, raised a total of 20 trillion won.
  Because of the central bank’s importance for maintaining financial stability, South Korea re-initiated the revision of the “Korea Banking Law” at the end of 2009. The new “Korea Banking Law” was officially promulgated in September 2011. It has expanded regulatory powers and increased macro-prudential tools., Further strengthening the role of the Bank of Korea in maintaining financial stability.
Among the more noteworthy amendments are: 1) the central bank is given the function of maintaining financial stability.
In addition to “maintaining price stability”, the Bank of Korea is clearly given the “maintaining financial stability” function.
2) Improve emergency mobility support tools and relax support conditions.
Banks in Korea can provide emergency liquidity support to financial institutions that are experiencing tight liquidity due to imbalances in financing and use of funds, regardless of whether they hold qualified collateral.
Incorporating securities borrowing into open market operations tools.
Provide short-term financing for a shortage of clearing funds for members of the Bank of Korea’s clearing system.
It can be seen that the Bank of Korea is currently responsible for financial stability, and emergency liquidity support tools and securities borrowing are in the toolbox.
  South Korea’s stock market stabilization fund sources are more complex, but the establishment of several stabilization funds has not been funded by the central bank.
The Korean stock market fell by 23% in 1990, and the Korean government established a scale of 4 trillion won in May of the same year (at the exchange rate of May 1990, about 59.
US $ 200 million) of the Korean Stock Market Stabilization Fund, which is mainly sourced from securities companies, banks, insurance companies, and listed companies.
In September of the same year, the South Korean government established a Guaranteed Stock Fund with a scale of 2.
6 trillion won, mainly from investment trust companies.
After the entry of the Korean Stock Market Stabilization Fund, the stock market trend has stabilized. Since the end of 1993, the Korean government has begun to sell its holdings on the principle of not jeopardizing market stability.
In 2003, the South Korean stock market was in a slump. The four agencies of the Korea Stock Exchange, the Korea Securities Association, the Korea Securities Depository Center, and the Korea Securities Dealers Association Automatic Quotation System established a joint investment fund with a total value of 400 billion won to participate in the rescue.
During the financial crisis in October 2008, the Korea Stock Exchange, the Korea Securities Association, and the Korea Securities Depository Center raised funds to set up a stabilization fund with a total value of 515 billion won. At the same time, the South Korean government has adopted other rescue measures such as limiting stock shorts.The stock market has been picking up quickly.
  > 1.3 The monetary authorities in Hong Kong, China actively participate in the rescue of the market. Hong Kong, China is one of the few regions in the world that implements mixed operation and separate supervision. Its financial supervision adopts a two-level supervision model of government supervision and industry self-regulation.
The financial regulatory framework in Hong Kong, China is composed of the Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA), which is responsible for the supervision of monetary authorities and banks, the Securities and Futures Commission (SFC), which is responsible for the supervision of the securities industry, and insuranceThe Industry Supervision Office of the Insurance Supervision Office consists of three major regulatory agencies and the corresponding industry self-regulatory associations.
  The Hong Kong Monetary Authority is an integral part of the organizational structure of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government. It has six departments: Banking Supervision Department, Banking Policy Department, Foreign Affairs and Economic Research Department, Reserve Management Department, Monetary Policy and Market Department, and Economic Research DepartmentSet up another legal counsel office.
Its main function is to maintain currency stability through the sound management of the Exchange Fund, monetary policy operations and other appropriate measures within the framework of the linked exchange rate system in Hong Kong. The Hong Kong Securities Regulatory Commission is a statutory organization independent of the government’s civil service structure and is responsible forSupervising the operation of the securities and futures market in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.
  During the Asian financial crisis from 1997 to 1998, the Hong Kong stock market also suffered a great shock.
The Hang Seng Index has fallen significantly since August 1997. By August 1998, the cumulative decline over the year was close to 60%.
The way that short-sellers attack Hong Kong’s financial market is to short the stock index futures of the HSI and the Hong Kong dollar forward contract at the same time, in an attempt to trigger the depreciation of the Hong Kong dollar forward exchange rate, the tightening of liquidity of the Hong Kong dollar (the rise of the Hong Kong dollar borrowing rate), and the decline of Hong Kong stocks.
In order to counter the external shocks of the foreign exchange market and the stock market, the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government decided to enter the market with the foreign exchange fund managed by the Hong Kong Monetary Authority, perform its role as the lender of last resort, and play the role of “market rescue”.
  The HKMA’s market stabilization measures include direct use of foreign exchange funds to buy HSI blue-chip large-cap stocks and the Hong Kong dollar, as well as market control measures such as restrictions on short selling, and intervention in the foreign exchange market and the stock market.
The main methods are summarized as follows: (1) After the HSI has gradually repaired the rebound, the problem shifted from “rescue the market” to how to withdraw and withdraw funds in an orderly manner, and minimize the impact of the withdrawal process itself.
The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government decided in November 1999 to establish the Treasury ETF Index Fund, which issued the funds raised to the public for the purchase of Hang Seng Index constituents purchased during the previous government bailout period from the Exchange Fund to complete the exit of the bailout capital.
Within each quarter, the total number of shares that Trafford funds can purchase from the Exchange Fund and the shares that investors can use to purchase Trafford funds are subject to the maximum limit issued by the HKMA.
This exit method is relatively stable and orderly, which can promote the market to form stable expectations.
  > 1.4 Taiwan’s monetary authorities did not participate in the bailout fund >> 1.
4.1 Taiwan’s financial supervision system: At the beginning of this century, Taiwan joined the WTO.
In order to improve the level of financial supervision, Taiwan has reformed the financial supervision system, from a decentralized financial supervision system to a unified financial supervision system.
Under the new regulatory system, the Financial Supervision and Administration Commission (hereinafter referred to as the HKMA) is the unified authority for Taiwan ‘s financial supervision and management, and has unified the functions and powers of all financial market supervision authorities.
There are banking bureaus, securities and futures bureaus, and insurance bureaus under the HKMA to oversee the banking, securities, and insurance industries, respectively.
In addition, the HKMA has set up a supervisory bureau to unify all the inspection powers distributed among financial management units with the HKMA (similar to the mainland’s on-site inspection and audit functions), forming a “separated management and centralized inspection” pattern.
  Under the current financial supervision system, the “Ministry of Finance” only performs fiscal related work; the “Central Bank” is the competent authority in charge of monetary policy and related businesses; the Central Deposit Insurance Corporation is positioned as a pure insurance company.
In addition, in order to establish a normalized financial stability mechanism to ensure the stability of the entire financial market and maintain economic security, Taiwan has established a stabilization fund (National Financial Stability Fund).
The stabilization fund realized market stability through the reverse operation of the securities market and prevented the stock price from skyrocketing.
  In 1996, in order to reduce the impact of mainland military exercises on the Taiwan stock market, Taiwan announced the establishment of a stock market stabilization fund with a size of NT $ 200 billion (the government’s four major funds: “Labor Insurance Fund”, “Labor Retirement Fund”, “The “Retirement Pension Fund for Public Education Staff” and the “Postal Savings Fund”) have played a role in stabilizing the confidence of the stock market, and no monetary authority has participated in the fund.
The 1997 financial turmoil also prompted the Taiwan authorities to consider further establishing a normalized financial stability mechanism to ensure the stability of Taiwan’s entire financial market and maintain economic security.
In July 1999, the Taiwan authorities proposed the idea of establishing a “National Financial Stability Fund” (referred to as “National Security Fund”), which was formally launched in 2000 after it was passed by the “Legislative Yuan” of Taiwan.
The size of the National Security Fund of the Taiwan stock market is NT $ 500 billion (equivalent to 1,325 at the 2000 average exchange rate.
(About 600 million yuan), of which 300 billion was invested by the four major government funds, and the other 200 billion was obtained from financing of financial institutions by government treasury shares.
The National Security Fund has a special “National Financial Stability Fund Management Committee”. The committee handles major decisions by 11 to 13 members, and the “Vice President of the Executive Yuan” and “Chairman”. The National Security Fund can be used only after the management committee decides.
  In Taiwan’s financial management system, the “Central Bank”, “Ministry of Finance” and the Financial Management Commission are all subordinate to the Executive Yuan, which is the highest administrative organ in Taiwan.
The chairman of the National Security Fund Management Committee is the vice president of the Executive Yuan, explaining that the rescue operation of the National Security Fund is also affected by the Executive Yuan.
  >> 1.4.2 台湾的救市历史  从股价的反应来看,台湾当局在推出救市措施的当时,大多数情况下并没有如预期那样稳定住股市的下跌,而是在后期随着经济基本面的好转才导致救市Funding was withdrawn.
The trend of stock prices in Taiwan around 2000 was basically consistent with the changes in the industrial production index.
The industrial growth rate is highly correlated with the growth rate of export orders.
This shows that changes in stock prices in Taiwan are mainly affected by external demand.
Taiwan ‘s market is small, and exports are the main means of creating demand and increasing economic growth.
The increase in external demand has improved the economic fundamentals of Taiwan and pushed up the stock price, while the bailout of the Guoan Fund has played a limited role in raising the stock price.  >> 1.4.3 Negative impact of market rescue measures in Taiwan on the market The market rescue of the Taiwan authorities will, to a certain extent, reduce the self-restraint of the financial market, increase expectations of government assistance and moral hazard.
Knowing that the Guoan Fund will enter the market when it dips, making investors’ risk awareness weak. Financial institutions or shareholders are motivated to continue to engage in high-risk businesses in order to obtain high returns.
At the same time, the government’s behavior of protecting the disk is to subsidize specific stocks in disguise, which is contrary to the principle of free competition in the market.
  In addition, the National Security Fund’s entry is to promote the entire market, so it must choose a stock combination with a larger weight.
This makes the “Guo An Fund” trading strategy such as entry time, buying points and stock selection easy to be seen through, thereby arbitrage from it.
There are also significant financial risks in the Guoan Fund’s safeguarding behavior.
Because part of the funds of the Guoan Fund comes from loans from financial institutions, the purpose of the rescue of the Guoan Fund is to exclude profit and loss, but if losses occur, it will easily lead to default risks and affect the stability of the financial market.
  2. European and American countries do not directly set up bailout funds to enter the market. European and American countries inject liquidity into financial markets and financial institutions to prevent negative transmission of financial institutions and stabilize financial markets.
During the subprime mortgage crisis, the Federal Reserve ‘s rescue measures mainly include the release of liquidity to stabilize the stock market through traditional monetary policy tools, the provision of liquidity support to financial institutions through various innovative monetary policy tools, and assistance to financial institutions in difficult liquidity.
During the European debt crisis, the European Central Bank adopted a number of response measures, such as adjusting policy rates, purchasing sovereign debt in the euro area, and implementing long-term refinancing plans, to inject liquidity into financial institutions.
Similar to the Federal Reserve’s rescue policy, the European Central Bank also rescues financial institutions and money markets, rather than directly entering the market.
In our view, the “benefit” of rescuing financial institutions from not directly establishing a bailout fund to enter the market is to maintain market rules, and the “disadvantage” is to promote moral hazards for financial institutions.
  > 2.

1 次贷危机时,美联储重点救助的是金融机构的流动性,防止负向传染  2008年次贷危机,美国基准利率的上升以及随之而来的美国房地产价格下跌共同导致了次级抵押贷款的Default rates have risen sharply.
Under the influence of the subprime mortgage crisis, the US stock market began to fall all the way from October 2007. As of November 2008, for more than a year, the Dow Jones Index fell from a maximum of 14,279 points to a minimum of around 7,800 points, a drop of 45%.
The sharp decline in U.S. stocks triggered large-scale risk contagion in financial institutions, and the credit crisis further evolved into a financial crisis.
The US Federal Reserve uses unconventional monetary policy operations for rescue, which mainly include the following four aspects: First, the US Federal Reserve stabilizes the stock market by releasing liquidity.
On August 17, 2007, the Fed lowered the discount rate for the first time in response to the crisis, and extended the rediscount period from overnight to a maximum of 30 days.
On September 18, 2007, the Fed began to cut interest rates from 5.
25% drops to 4.
75%.
In the following 1 year or more, the target rate of the federal funds was reduced 10 times, and fell to 0-0 at the end of 2008.
25% interval.
On September 18, 2008, the Federal Reserve issued a joint statement with six central banks including the European Central Bank and the Bank of Japan, announcing that they would jointly inject $ 247 billion into the financial system.
  Second, the Fed provides liquidity support to financial institutions through a variety of innovative monetary policy tools, including term auction loans (TAF) for depository financial institutions, major dealer credit loans (PDCF) for primary dealers, andCommercial paper loans (CPFF) by commercial paper issuers, and maturity asset-backed securities loans (TALF) for asset-backed securities buyers.
The Fed’s focus is on liquidity in financial institutions (preventing negative contagion), not liquidity in the stock market.
The Federal Reserve plays a greater role in stabilizing the currency market.
  Third, the US Federal Reserve set up multiple SPV companies to help various financial institutions (two houses, commercial banks, investment banks, and insurance), put in reloans to financial institutions, and financial institutions decide whether to enter the market in accordance with market-oriented mechanisms.
For the two houses, on July 13, 2008, the Federal Reserve and the US Treasury Department jointly announced that they would provide assistance to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The Federal Reserve allowed the two houses to borrow from the New York Fed’s discount window.
On September 7, the US government announced that it would take over Fannie Mae and Fannie Mae.
Commercial banks take Citibank as an example. On November 24, 2008, the US Treasury Department, the Federal Reserve and the Federal Reserve Insurance Corporation issued a joint statement announcing a rescue package.
On the basis of the first round of government-funded stock purchases, the program added three major institutions to provide guarantees for Citibank’s troubled assets.
On the investment bank side, the Federal Reserve provided emergency funding to investment bank Bear Stearns through JP Morgan Chase to assist it through the liquidity crisis.
In addition, Merrill Lynch, the third largest investment bank in the United States, announced that it was acquired by Bank of America, and Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, the two largest investment banks in the United States, announced their conversion to bank holding companies.
In terms of insurance institutions, the US government and the Federal Reserve respectively issued three sets of programs to rescue the American International Group (AIG) in September 2008, November 2008, and March 2009.
The Federal Reserve provides mortgage loans to American International Group (AIG) on condition that it nationalize AIG.
  It is worth mentioning that there has been a leveling fund during the subprime crisis.
On September 14, 2008, the Federal Reserve, in conjunction with Bank of America, Barclays, Citigroup, Credit Suisse, Deutsche Bank, Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan, Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley, and UBS, set up a total of $ 70 billionLeveling fund.This leveling fund is mainly used to provide financial protection for financial institutions that are at risk of bankruptcy, ensure market liquidity, and prevent the subprime crisis from further intensifying.
It can be seen that the stabilization fund of the US is aimed at financial institutions with liquidity crisis, rather than directly entering the market.
Even if the U.S. government and the Federal Reserve intervened conservatively on problematic institutions, they have received more blame after the financial crisis subsided. For example, the American International Group (AIG) complained of lower government bids and more control after government control.
  Fourth, since November 2008, the Federal Reserve has carried out three rounds of quantitative easing (QE), buying a large amount of national debt and institutional mortgage-backed securities, and lowering long-term interest rates to promote corporate investment and household consumption and stimulate the US economic recovery.
The first round of QE focused on maintaining the stability of the entire financial system. Asset purchases were mainly mortgage-backed bonds (MBS) issued by Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, and Ginnie Mae.Treasury bonds and federal agency bonds are supplemented.
The last two rounds of QE focused on driving down long-term interest rates and supporting economic and employment recovery. Long-term government bonds were the main asset purchases, supplemented by MBS.
  > 2.2 During the European debt crisis, the European Central Bank also rescued financial institutions and currency markets, rather than directly entering the market. Under the impact of the financial crisis, the Greek sovereign debt crisis in 2009 was the trigger, and the European debt crisis broke out.
In 2011, the German DAX reached a maximum of 7600 in the year in 4 months.
4 fell to a low of 4965.
8, a drop of 35%; France’s CAC40 from 4169 in 7 months.
The high of 9 dropped to 2693.
2, the decline also reached 35%; the British FTSE 100 index fell 22% within six months, from 6105.
8 points fell to 4791.
0 o’clock.
The International Monetary Fund (IMF), the European Central Bank (ECB), the European Financial Stability Fund (EFSF), and the European Financial Stability Mechanism (EFSM) constitute the “iron triangle” of European crisis relief.
The European Union’s temporary European Financial Stability Mechanism (EFSM) and European Financial Stability Fund (EFSF) are designed to provide emergency loans to euro zone member states that have applied for and been approved for assistance, and to increase the scale of loan assistance that can be provided through leverage.
Among them, the euro zone member states, the European Commission and the IMF are the main funders, while the European Central Bank mainly plays the role of analysis and supervision of solvency.
  Due to the European Financial Stability Mechanism (2011.
1 ~ 2013.
6) and European Financial Stability Fund (2010.
5 ~ 2013.
6) All are temporary organizations. The permanent European Stability Mechanism (ESM) replaced the European Financial Stability Fund as the permanent rescue fund of the Eurozone in 2013.
The European financial stability mechanism is a permanent fund established by the euro zone countries to cope with and prevent the debt crisis, but it is more regarded as a major measure for the euro zone countries to carry out structural reforms and promote political and economic integration.
Its main functions are as follows: 1. Buying the national debt of member countries facing severe financial crisis; 2. Providing loans to heavily indebted member countries, and injecting capital from the member countries to the banks that have problems; 3. Problems that may directly affect member countries in the futureBanks make capital injections.
The role of the European Central Bank in the Permanent European Stability Mechanism is to conduct financial assessments of the submitting member states and play a certain supervisory role.
  In order to avoid a deepening economic downturn caused by the escalation of the crisis, the European Central Bank has adopted a number of measures to adjust policy interest rates, purchase sovereign bonds in the euro area, and implement long-term refinancing plans to inject liquidity into financial institutions.
Similar to the Federal Reserve’s rescue policy, the European Central Bank also rescues financial institutions and money markets, rather than directly entering the market.
Due to the shortcomings of the system under the EU framework and the differences among countries over the rescue, the rescue process was delayed and decision-making was difficult.
Opposition to bailout member states believes that both the Maastricht Treaty and the Lisbon Treaty have “no bailout clauses” and that the implementation of bailout policies can easily lead to moral hazard. The structural reform of the heavily indebted countries is the key.
The member states that endorse the bailout believe that the debtor country should be bailout to avoid risk transmission.
The divergence of views among member states on bailouts precisely reflects the pros and cons of bailout policies.
  三、不要简单带着价值标准来看待中央银行持股  我们认为,不要简单带着价值标准来看待中央银行持股,但是任何的救市都是要付出代价的,不论是救机构还是直接入场救市Both have their own pros and cons, and they need to balance their pros and cons before making a choice. Strengthening financial stability, and more centrally, strengthening macro-prudential supervision rules, and resolving financial risks before turning them into financial crises is the focus of supervisory authorities.
  > 3.

1 用发展的眼光看待“双支柱”工具箱  十九大报告中,金融体制改革目标增加了一个新的表述——“健全货币政策和宏观审慎政策双支柱调控框架”,这也是“双支柱”Relevant expressions for the first time appeared in the report file at the central level.
Improving the dual-pillar regulatory framework of monetary policy and macro-prudential policy is the work that the central bank is focusing on.
Monetary policy focuses on price stability, economic growth, employment, and basic balance of payments.
Macro prudence focuses on financial stability.
We believe that the fundamental purpose of the central bank to create a dual-pillar regulatory framework is to alleviate the pressure of multi-target monetary policy.
Too many monetary policy goals can easily lead to conflicts between the goals, making it difficult for the central bank to implement monetary policy.We believe that the central bank’s macro-prudential assessment policy can divert financial stability goals and is also a more important one of the dynamic goals of monetary policy, reducing the central bank’s considerations in formulating monetary policy.
  In the “China Financial Stability Report (2018)”, the central bank pointed out that special risk disposal mechanisms should be established for financial institutions, especially systemically important financial institutions, to ensure timely intervention by regulatory authorities and adopt effective disposal tools to deal with risks quickly and in an orderly manner.To maintain uninterrupted key business and services, and to avoid the systemic impact of the collapse of a single institution on the financial system or the economy.
In order to reduce reliance on public funding assistance and prevent moral hazard, the losses of financial institutions’ failure should be borne by shareholders and unsecured creditors first, and secondly, the involvement of various types of protection funds formed by the industry should be considered, and the central bank should act as the “last lender” when necessary Provide assistance and the use of public funds by the financial sector to provide funding to problem institutions to maintain the systemic stability of the financial system.
  We believe that after the macro-prudential dual pillars of monetary policy are constructed in China, the use of central bank tools cannot be viewed simply from the perspective of traditional monetary policy.
The macro-prudential perspective makes it necessary for the central bank to use more tools to maintain financial stability, and preventing systemic financial risks caused by large stock fluctuations remains the main responsibility of the central bank. When the protection fund is invalid, the central bank can only appear as the last lender.In the last line of defense, all assets should be considered in its toolbox.
  > 3.2 Risks are better for institutions than markets. In 2008, the world suffered the worst financial and economic crisis since the Great Depression.
This is the total outbreak of accumulated financial risks in the context of deregulation and liberalization in the financial sector.
During the crisis, large financial institutions such as Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, American International Group (AIG), and Citigroup fell into trouble or even went bankrupt, which severely damaged the global financial system, exacerbated the deterioration and spread of the financial crisis, and caused some parts of Europe.The state has exacerbated the sovereign debt crisis due to higher rescue costs.
The crisis concentratedly exposed the main weaknesses and deficiencies of the financial supervision system at the time, that is, the lack of effective prevention of systemic risks, inadequate supervision of large and complex financial institutions, and the problem of “big and cannot fail” was prominent.
  Therefore, the failure of systemically important financial institutions has led to the rapid spread of the crisis, which is highly destructive.
Systemically important financial institutions occupy an important position in the financial system and assume key functions. If major risks occur, they will cause greater damage to the financial system and economic activities.
On the one hand, counterparties face credit risk and may directly suffer significant losses; on the other hand, the failure of systemically important financial institutions as the main brokers of many institutions prevents these institutions from operating normally.
In addition, systemically important financial institutions are forced to sell assets to pay off debts, which may trigger a wide range of asset price revaluations, forming a vicious cycle of “stop loss-sell-re-stop loss-re-sell”, exacerbating financial market volatility, triggeringSystemic risk.
  We believe that once the financial market appears to be at a higher risk, the central bank needs to make a trade-off between choosing to rescue the market or rescue institutions, especially the systemic important institutions to launch rescue to maintain the basic functionality of the financial market is the key to rescue the market.
The advantage of the central bank’s choice of a rescue organization is that it maintains market rules, but the disadvantages are equally clear. That is, it promotes moral hazards in financial institutions, making some system-based financial institutions truly “big and cannot fail” institutions.
  > 3.3 特殊情况下,央行是最优救市主体  我们认为,在市场快速下跌的特殊情形下,中央银行因为可以提供无限流动性,有助于市场迅速修复信心,因此中央银行是政府的最优救市主体.
The advantage of the central bank to save the market is that it reduces the moral hazard of financial institutions, but it destroys market rules.
  > 3.4 救市退出机制是制度设计核心  我们认为,任何的救市都是要付出代价的,不论是救机构还是直接入场救市,都存在自身的利弊,需要平衡利弊后做出选择;在对金融机构进行In the effective rescue process, the exit mechanism should be designed in advance.
At present, China has a good foundation for recoverable and disposable schemes of systemically important financial institutions. In the event of unexpected shocks to the future economy and markets, it is necessary to design early exit mechanisms to deal with preplans to minimize moral risks.
  Risk Warning 1.China’s economy has an unexpected downside risk, which results in the probability of large fluctuations in the financial market; 2.2. The results of the US trade negotiations are still unclear, and there is a probability that the results of the negotiations will disturb the financial markets; 3.External risk factors such as US stock market volatility risk are transmitted to the domestic market and are expected to increase the volatility of the domestic stock market.