An investigation by the Academy of Social Sciences found that some local government debt information disclosures "should avoid the most important issues"
Preventing risks puts a "tightening curse" on government debt
□ Our reporter Wan Jing
On September 16, the Law Institute of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences and the National Rule of Law Index Research Center released the "Report on the Third-Party Evaluation of China's Government Affairs Open (2019)" (hereinafter referred to as the "Report").
This is the sixth consecutive year that the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences has issued the "Third-Party Evaluation Report on Open Government Affairs in China."
This "Report" conducted a thorough investigation on the disclosure of information on 205 local government debts in 31 provincial governments, 49 larger municipal governments, and 125 county (city, district) governments.
The results show that the situation of my country's local debt information disclosure is not optimistic, and the transparency of many local government debt information has the problem of "avoiding the most important and negligible".
Centralized release of debt information
Facilitate public inquiry and supervision
The Rule of Law Index Innovation Project Team of the Institute of Law (hereinafter referred to as the project team) spent several months in 2019 to conduct a thorough investigation and evaluation of the 2018 government debt status of 205 local government portal websites and their financial department portal websites. .
The indicators examined mainly include: whether all kinds of debt information are centralized and disclosed, whether the debt limit, debt balance, debt ratio, debt service ratio, debt type (such as special debt, general debt), and debt maturity structure of government debt in 2018 are disclosed , Use of debt funds, etc.
The survey results show that the centralized disclosure of government debts of some assessment targets is better.
Except for the three governments in Nanmulin County, Xigaze City, Tibet Autonomous Region that did not disclose information on their government debts in 2018, and six assessment targets including Wanbailin District, Taiyuan City, Shanxi Province, which had no government debts in 2018, 97 of the remaining 196 governments The government debt information of the assessed objects has been published in a centralized manner, which is convenient for the public to find, accounting for nearly 50%.
For example, Hubei, Hunan, Hainan and other provinces have set up government debt topics to centrally publish the occurrence of each debt; Gansu, Qinghai and other provinces have set up government debt information columns, which not only disclose government debt information at the provincial level, but also use a table Summarize and disclose the debt limit and debt balance of all cities and counties in the province.
What is worthy of recognition is that some local governments centrally disclose government debt information in public reports on budget and final accounts.
For example, when the Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region made public its 2018 government final accounts, 38 sub-forms were published. The forms related to government debts include the "General Debt Limits and Balances of the District Government in 2018" and "2018 Autonomous Region Level Table of General Debt Limits and Balances'' ``Table of General Debt Limits and Balances of Municipal and County Governments in 2018'' ``Table of General Government Debt Sub-regional Balances in 2018'' ``Table of Newly-added General Government Bond Project Arrangements in 2018'' Table of Special Debt Limits and Balances of District Governments'' ``Table of Special Debt Limits and Balances of Autonomous Region Governments in 2018'' ``Table of Special Debt Limits and Balances of Municipal and County Governments in 2018'' ``Table of Special Debts by Regions in 2018'' There are 10 sub-tables in the Schedule of Newly Added Special Government Bond Projects in 2018. The information is detailed and easy to find.
Type of debt limit balance
High transparency of information disclosure
According to Lu Yanbin, the project team leader and a researcher at the Institute of Law of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, the positive significance of information transparency in enhancing the supervision of local debt information is self-evident.
In recent years, my country has strengthened the work requirements for the transparency of local government debt information. For example, in December 2019, the General Office of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China and the General Office of the State Council issued the "Opinions on Further Promoting Budget Disclosure Work", which required to enhance the transparency of local government debt information. , Consciously accepting supervision can better prevent local government debt risks.
In April 2019, the General Office of the State Council issued the "Government Affairs Disclosure Work Points in 2019", which requires that the construction of a national unified local government debt information disclosure platform be promoted, and local governments regularly disclose their debt limits, balances, debt ratios, debt service ratios, and Information on economic and financial status, bond issuance, duration management, etc.
The spirit of these central documents all put forward specific requirements for the disclosure of local debt information.
The "Report" shows that most local governments in my country have a relatively high degree of transparency in the overall situation of the debt limit, debt balance and debt types of local debt.
In addition to the 6 evaluation objects that had no government debt in 2018, a total of 175 evaluation objects disclosed debt limits, accounting for 87.93% of the total. Among them, provincial governments, larger municipal governments, and county (city, district) governments There are 28, 47 and 100 companies respectively.
A total of 180 assessment subjects disclosed their debt balances, accounting for 90.45% of the total.
Among them, there are 30, 47, and 103 provincial governments, larger municipal governments, and county (city, district) governments, respectively.
A total of 179 assessment subjects disclosed the types of debts, accounting for 89.95% of the total.
Among them, there are 30, 48, and 101 provincial governments, larger municipal governments, and county (city, district) governments, respectively.
When individual assessed local governments disclose information on the use of government debt, they can refine the specific items used, and list the basic conditions and specific debt quotas used item by item. The accounts are clear and standardized, which is beneficial to the use of government debt projects. Supervision.
For example, in Shijiazhuang City, Hebei Province, in the "Shijiazhuang City 2018 City-level and City-wide Financial Final Statements" attached to the "2018 Shijiazhuang City Level New Local Government Bond Usage Table", the government debt allocation was disclosed item by item The conditions of the used projects cover 176 different projects, and clearly list the project name, field, competent authority, implementation evaluation object, bond nature, issuance time and other information. The content is detailed and standardized for easy reference.
About debt service ratio
Low transparency of key indicators
Shi Zhengwen, director of the Finance and Taxation Law Research Center of China University of Political Science and Law, pointed out that with the rapid growth of local government debt, the borrowing, management, use, and repayment of local debt are not standardized, and the solvency of some regions and industries is weak, and there are hidden risks. It is necessary to prudently handle local government debt issues and possible risks.
Among them, increasing and strengthening the government information disclosure of local debt is a very effective measure.
After analyzing the evaluation results of the "Report", the Shi text believes that indicators such as local debt limit, debt balance and debt structure types can only judge the situation of local debts from the total scale, but they are not really useful for judging the effectiveness of local debt risk control. The key, the key indicators are the debt ratio, debt service ratio, debt maturity structure and other information of local government bonds.
However, according to the data disclosed in the "Report", the transparency of key judgment information such as debt ratio, debt service ratio and maturity structure of most local governments in my country is low.
According to the "Report", in addition to the 6 evaluation objects that occurred in 2018, a total of 175 evaluation objects have not disclosed their debt ratios in 2018, accounting for 87.94% of the total.
Among them, there are 21, 42 and 112 provincial governments, larger municipal governments, and county (city, district) governments, respectively.
There are 196 assessment subjects who have not disclosed the repayment rate of government debt in 2018, accounting for 98.49% of the total.
Among them, there are 30, 49, and 117 provincial governments, larger municipal governments, and county (city, district) governments, respectively.
There are 153 undisclosed debt maturity structures of the assessed objects, accounting for 76.88% of the total.
Among them, there are 21, 33, and 99 provincial governments, larger municipal governments, and county (city, district) governments, respectively.
According to the text of the implementation, the debt ratio is the ratio of the government's foreign debt balance to export revenue, and is the main indicator for measuring the burden of foreign debt and the risk of foreign debt.
The internationally recognized safety standard for debt ratio is less than 100%.
The local government debt service ratio is also called the fiscal debt service ratio.
Local government debt service ratio = (local government financing platform loan principal and interest repayment amount in the year + local government bond repayment amount in the year + local government foreign debt repayment amount in the year) / local government public fiscal budget revenue for the year.
The higher the index, the weaker the solvency.
Debt maturity structure refers to a combination of different debt maturities, which affects the efficiency of debt financing governance and guarantees financial security.
Inappropriate debt maturity matching will not only affect the efficiency of debt financing governance, endanger the financial security of the enterprise itself, but may also endanger the security of the country.
For this reason, the "Report" pointed out that the debt ratio can reflect the debt default risk of a region, and the debt servicing ratio can measure the debt solvency of a region. It is recommended that governments at all levels add public content on the basis of existing data and establish "government debt “Risk early warning mechanism”, public “debt ratio” and “debt service ratio”, and set a warning line to put a “tightening curse” on government debt.
At the same time, the debt maturity structure can measure the composition of the government's short, medium and long-term debt funds and the proportional relationship between them, and disclose the local government debt maturity structure in a timely manner, so that local governments can implement dynamic adjustments based on project funding conditions, market demand and other factors, and arrange bond maturities reasonably structure.
Improve debt management system
Improve the efficiency of capital use
The "Report" pointed out that, on the whole, most governments did not reasonably analyze local government debt data, and debt information disclosure was not detailed enough.
The “Measures for Disclosure of Information on Local Government Debts (Trial)” issued by the Ministry of Finance requires that local financial departments at and above the county level should disclose local government debt limits, balances, use arrangements, and debt service and other information along with their budgets and final accounts; Disclosure of the budget for the current year's local government debt limit for the region and the local government at the same level, the use of new local government bonds at this level, etc.; together with the final accounting disclosure of the local government debt limit for the region, this level and the region to which it belongs, the final account balance, and local government bonds The final accounts of issuance, repayment of principal and interest, and arrangements for the use of bond funds, etc.
The "Report" analyzes that the disclosure of the use of government debt is conducive to standardizing the debt management of local governments, giving full play to the role of public supervision of government debt, and improving the use of government debt funds.
However, the evaluation found that, except for the 6 evaluation objects that did not have government debts, a total of 84 evaluation objects did not disclose the specific use of government debt at the level in 2018, accounting for 42.21% of the total, of which 13 were provincial governments and 10 Larger municipal governments and 61 county (city, district) governments.
To this end, the "Report" recommends that governments at all levels improve the debt management system in a timely manner, and disclose the use of debt funds in a timely manner, so as to better prevent risks, standardize management, accept supervision, and improve the efficiency of fund use.
Shi Zhengwen believes that open and transparent information on local debt will help prevent corruption and mobilize public supervision.
More importantly, the disclosure of local financial information can improve budget performance and balance the cost-benefit ratio of government projects.
According to data from the Ministry of Finance, as of the end of May, a total of 31,977 billion yuan of local bonds will be issued in 2020, of which 272.4 billion yuan will be newly added bonds and 497.3 billion yuan will be refinanced bonds.
With the acceleration of the expansion of local debt, the effect of escorting the "six stability" and "six guarantees" will be further revealed.
The newly-increased special bond funds are all used for major projects in the field of infrastructure and public services.
This will help expand effective investment and better play the role of local bonds in protecting the “six stability” and “six guarantees”.
For this reason, it is necessary to strengthen the risk prevention, control and supervision of local debt, and improving the transparency of various information on local debt will undoubtedly promote the above work.