Huarong Issues Hint at Deeper Issues for the Credit Rating Agencies and their New Chinese Adventure


In today’s short post, the developing problems with Huarong – a state-backed asset manager that is one of China’s largest offshore issuers – are revealing some engrained issues within the credit rating industry that may provide insight into the future of the Big Three’s relationship with China as it continues to open its doors to the international rating agencies.

 

The company has missed a number of financial disclosure deadlines and, according to the Financial Times, is in the middle of a massive sell-off, which started a few weeks ago. However, it is only over the past few days that the rating agencies have begun to take action, which is leading some to declare that there are similarities between this and the agencies’ actions regarding the collapse of Lehman Brothers. Whilst some negative credit watches have been established, it is Fitch who have broken rank and downgraded the company, from A to BBB. The company itself is in disarray, with it declaring that it will miss an April deadline to report its financials, as well its chairman Lai Xiaomin being executed in January for crimes that included bigamy and the abuse of power to allocate credit. Bloomberg asks how the rating agencies have gotten it so wrong again, and there is a particular reason for this.

 

In providing context for its downgrade, Fitch declared that it ‘believes the government sponsor’s indication of support has not been forthcoming’, which all three agencies have relied on given that, as of last June, the company was 57% owned by the Ministry of Finance. As the company was set up in 1999 to help banks dispose of their distressed assets, Moody’s believed that they would be enjoying a ‘very high level’ of government support, and therefore provided it with some its highest ratings. Moody’s even declared in a report published last year that a stand-alone credit analysis on these companies i.e. not taking into account governmental support, is ‘either irrelevant or misleading’. However, this hints at a much larger problem.

 

The Chinese environment is a controlled environment, and the international agencies will never be in a position to understand the rationale and direction of the controlling communist party; the agencies are placed within a reactionary position, in that sense. So, rating very highly on the premise of governmental intervention is both particularly short-sighted and also favours state-owned enterprises in a slightly imbalanced way. When it comes to firms that issue offshore bonds, the international investor ought to consider this dynamic much more than they are doing. The credit rating agencies are not in a position to know the directing mindset behind governmental intervention, and they are also, arguably, in a conflicted position whereby providing support to state-owned enterprises keeps the government onside in what is an incredibly lucrative endeavour for the for-profit rating agencies. The Chinese realm is the new goldrush for the agencies, and this needs to be remembered at all times as well. If one applies just an ounce of cynicism, then the answer to Bloomberg’s question of ‘how have the rating agencies gotten it so wrong again?’ is arguably clear for all to see.

 

Keywords – China, Huarong, offshore

 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Lloyds Bank and the PPI Scandal: The Premature ‘Out of the Woods’ Rhetoric

Image
Today’s very short post focuses upon the news that the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has recently extended the deadline to claim compensation for mis-sold ‘Payment Protection Insurance’ (PPI). Whilst a lot of financial institutions will have to prepare to offset the extended deadline, it is Lloyds that has grabbed the business headlines by apportioning an extra £350 million to offset any further claims that may be made of it – however, this comes only a week or two after the Bank posted its best performance figures in over a decade, as was previously discussed in Financial Regulation Matters . This post will therefore argue that the rhetoric being advanced recently regarding Lloyds – rhetoric like Lloyds represents ‘ a modern day success story ’ is wide of the mark and creates a false sense of security that we simply cannot afford to believe in. The ‘ robust recovery ’ was heralded far and wide upon the publication of Lloyds Bank’s financial performance for the previous fi
Read more

The Analytical Credit Rating Agency: A New Entrant That Will Further Enhance Russia’s Isolation

Image
This short post is based upon a forthcoming article by this author that examines the viability of the latest entrant into the credit rating arena, the Analytical Credit Rating Agency (ACRA). The article, which is due to be published in the European Company Law Journal (and is available here in a pre-published version), looks at the chances of the ACRA succeeding when viewed within the parameters of perception , an aspect that underpins the credit rating sector. For this post, the focus will be upon introducing the ACRA, and then on examining the effect it may have upon the wider political issues affecting the Russian Federation. The Analytical Credit Rating Agency was established in November 2015 and comprises of 27 major Russian companies and financial institutions that serve as its shareholders. The agency, which became the first rating agency to receive accreditation from the Russian Central Bank under the new N 222-FZ Law which was designed to protect investors, has a re
Read more

The Case of Purdue Pharma, the Sackler Family, and the Opioid Crisis

Image
In the first of two short posts today, we will look at the case of the billionaire Sackler Family and their remarkable effect upon American society. The family, who own Purdue Pharma amongst a list of other ventures, have this week seen a massive legal action taken against them by the State of New York who argue that the company is ‘ responsible for the opioid epidemic ’ sweeping through the United States. The attorney-general for New York has called the lawsuit the ‘ nation’s most extensive ’ with respect to the pharmaceutical industry and comes right on the heels of a $270 million suit that was settled in the State of Oklahoma on exactly the same grounds. Whilst the company and the billionaire family who own it did not admit guilt (settling parties rarely do, hence why they settle outside of court) it has potentially opened the trapdoors for litigation. It comes as no surprise then that the company is reportedly considering bankruptcy proceedings in the face of such an onsl
Read more