Being an international financial center, Hong Kong has long been proud of its free flow of capital, sound financial infrastructure, an influx of talent from across the world and an independent legal system.
However, China’s plans to impose national security legislation on Hong Kong have raised concerns about a potential flight of capital and talent from the financial hub. US Secretary of the Treasury Steven Mnuchin’s remarks on Thursday last week that he was working on measures that could restrict capital flows through Hong Kong signified that Washington’s responses to Beijing’s security legislation are not merely verbal threats, but actions in the making.
The announcement came after US President Donald Trump early this month ordered the US Department of the Treasury-led Working Group on Capital Markets to recommend measures to protect US investors from Chinese companies’ failure to adhere to US rules on accounting and disclosure.
A report on policy recommendations is due within 60 days. Subsequently, Washington is to roll out capital market measures in response to the security legislation, restricting and likely undermining Hong Kong’s status as a global financial hub.
Any move to rattle the financial system of Hong Kong — which is the third-largest US-dollar trading center in the world — would have an enormous effect on the territory as well as global financial markets. Restricting Hong Kong’s use of the US dollar in the settlement system, for instance, would be an extreme measure that could force many financial institutions in the territory into a crisis regarding their business operations.
Businesses in Hong Kong, ranging from trading firms to hedge funds, if subjected to capital flow restrictions, would face capital chain disruptions and might have to consider moving their assets out of the territory.
Reports over the past few weeks have indicated higher demand for US dollars from Hong Kong firms and banks, with some even saying that wealthy residents of the territory have started to seek offshore options to park their assets.
Ironically, a number of Chinese companies have been considering listing their shares in Hong Kong after the US Senate last month passed a bill that could expell Chinese companies from US stock exchanges unless US authorities can inspect their audits.
Last week, Netease Inc became the latest US-listed Chinese firm to complete a secondary listing in Hong Kong, which came after Alibaba Group Holding Ltd’s Hong Kong listing last year and ahead of JD.com Inc’s planned debut on Thursday.
Over the past 20 years, Chinese companies have been seeking to list their shares on US stock exchanges, which has always been a hot topic among investors. Listing shares on foreign exchanges has enabled Chinese business owners to move their assets out of the country for various purposes, while US and international investors have been able to buy Chinese equities with rapid growth potential.
However, US-China relations are changing, and the trend of Chinese firms shifting listings from the US to home markets, including Hong Kong, is here to stay.
Hong Kong Exchanges & Clearing Ltd was the fifth-biggest stock exchange worldwide last year. However, the proposed national security legislation would weaken Hong Kong’s status as a global trade and financial center, and change the characteristics of the local stock exchange, adding more Chinese firms to the Hang Seng Composite Index.
In other words, the Hong Kong stock exchange is becoming more Sinicized rather than internationalized, and should Hong Kong’s role wane, it would be quickly supplanted by other international commercial centers and might be phased out.
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) challenges and ignores the international rules-based order by violating Taiwanese airspace using a high-flying drone: This incident is a multi-layered challenge, including a lawfare challenge against the First Island Chain, the US, and the world. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) defines lawfare as “controlling the enemy through the law or using the law to constrain the enemy.” Chen Yu-cheng (陳育正), an associate professor at the Graduate Institute of China Military Affairs Studies, at Taiwan’s Fu Hsing Kang College (National Defense University), argues the PLA uses lawfare to create a precedent and a new de facto legal
In the first year of his second term, US President Donald Trump continued to shake the foundations of the liberal international order to realize his “America first” policy. However, amid an atmosphere of uncertainty and unpredictability, the Trump administration brought some clarity to its policy toward Taiwan. As expected, bilateral trade emerged as a major priority for the new Trump administration. To secure a favorable trade deal with Taiwan, it adopted a two-pronged strategy: First, Trump accused Taiwan of “stealing” chip business from the US, indicating that if Taipei did not address Washington’s concerns in this strategic sector, it could revisit its Taiwan
Chile has elected a new government that has the opportunity to take a fresh look at some key aspects of foreign economic policy, mainly a greater focus on Asia, including Taiwan. Still, in the great scheme of things, Chile is a small nation in Latin America, compared with giants such as Brazil and Mexico, or other major markets such as Colombia and Argentina. So why should Taiwan pay much attention to the new administration? Because the victory of Chilean president-elect Jose Antonio Kast, a right-of-center politician, can be seen as confirming that the continent is undergoing one of its periodic political shifts,
Taiwan’s long-term care system has fallen into a structural paradox. Staffing shortages have led to a situation in which almost 20 percent of the about 110,000 beds in the care system are vacant, but new patient admissions remain closed. Although the government’s “Long-term Care 3.0” program has increased subsidies and sought to integrate medical and elderly care systems, strict staff-to-patient ratios, a narrow labor pipeline and rising inflation-driven costs have left many small to medium-sized care centers struggling. With nearly 20,000 beds forced to remain empty as a consequence, the issue is not isolated management failures, but a far more
RSS