Poor Countries Set To Pay $22billion For China Debt
The research, released last month, showed China is set to call in US$22 billion for debts from 75 countries assessed by the World Bank as the world's poorest and most vulnerable in 2025.
Ten Pacific nations were on the list.
China's foreign ministry, meanwhile, denies Beijing is responsible for developing debt.
Lowy research author Riley Duke said China had shifted from lead bilateral banker to chief debt collector for the developing world.
"Because of the large amount of lending that China did in the mid-2010s, and the way it structured its loans through its Belt-and-Road initiative, this year, it is seeing a huge spike in repayments," he said.
For Pacific countries that had borrowed from China, Duke said repayment strain was already an issue. He identified Tonga, Samoa and Vanuatu as being at higher risk due to respective loans.
In Tonga, the impact of Chinese loans had been a "big political issue" this year. Duke anticipated that about 15 percent of the government's revenue over the next few years would be devoted to debt repayments.
"Last year, Tonga spent more on its debt repayments than it did on health for its citizens," he said.
"And so when we look at the….forward outlook, there are more challenges on the horizon. There are key development issues across the Pacific that countries and their governments and their people want to be dealing with.
"But instead, these debt burdens are there and they're persistent.
"Again, just to focus on Tonga…. [it] ran five successful budget surpluses in the lead-up to having a big wave of Chinese debt repayments coming in.
"But then it faced huge economic costs from the pandemic, from the earthquake, from cyclones, and so that wiped out all the money that [the government] had put aside."
Duke believed the amount of China's lending into the region was less than a quarter of the level it was in the mid-2010s.
"I'd be surprised to see any new large loans from China in the region, and I think related to that is the broader topic of whether Pacific countries should take on lots of debt.
"Pacific countries have large financing gaps. There's a lot of infrastructure that needs to be built, and sometimes loans are the best way to do that, and ultimately that just comes back to the quality of the project.
"People are a bit afraid of debt, and I think it's a bit…of a dirty word, but if a loan is taken out to finance a project that is good for economic growth, good for a Pacific country [because] it drives connectivity [and] it drives the economy, then it's a good loan, and it's good debt to take on, and it will pay itself back."
He said there had also been a shift in how China engaged with the region.
"China's main form of engagement with the Pacific 15 years ago was lending. I think 80 percent of all of China's development financing to the region was in the form of loans, and that's fallen off dramatically since around 2018."
That shift was due to a range of factors, including increased financing options for Pacific governments, Duke said.
"In 2010, China might have been the only partner offering large-scale infrastructure financing.
"Australia is now offering more financing in that space. The World Bank is offering more financing in that space; there's climate funds that are also offering adaptation projects and adaptation infrastructure.
"So there are more options on the table for Pacific countries than there was previously. And I think that is part of the reason that China's lending has declined."
China's foreign ministry denied Beijing was responsible for developing debt.
"China's cooperation on investment and financing with developing countries follows international practice, market principles, and the principle of debt sustainability," spokesperson Mao Ning said.
"A handful of countries are spreading the narrative that China is responsible for these countries' debt.
"However, they ignore the fact that multilateral financial institutions and commercial creditors from developed countries are the main creditors of developing countries, and the primary source of debt repayment pressure.
"Lies cannot cover truth and people can tell right from wrong."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Techday NZ
13 hours ago
- Techday NZ
MetaComp completes first cross-border payment using carbon stablecoin
MetaComp has executed what it describes as the first real-world cross-border payment using the CNT Carbon Stablecoin framework, combining blockchain technology with regulated foreign exchange infrastructure and embedded carbon credits. The transaction was completed using MetaComp's StableX platform, enabling a same-day settlement from euros (EUR) to offshore Chinese yuan (CNH). StableX leverages blockchain technology to facilitate settlements more rapidly than traditional multi-day, multi-intermediary methods, while embedding verified carbon credits into each transaction. Transaction details According to MetaComp, the newly applied CNT Carbon Stablecoin framework operates by converting verified decarbonisation activities into programmable, carbon-backed stablecoins. Each unit of the CNT stablecoin issued is directly backed by certified emission reductions, tracked and audited using Alpha Ladder Group's Non-Fungible Digital Twin (NFDT) technology. The company states that the transaction demonstrated both the efficiency of blockchain-facilitated payments and the integration of sustainability through verified carbon credits. This particular CNT carbon stablecoin was underpinned by Chinese Certified Emission Reduction (CCER) credits from a wind power project in Zhangjiakou City, which was co-host of the 2022 Winter Olympics. These credits are registered with China's national carbon credits registry, ensuring traceability and authenticity. The issuance and management of the stablecoin were handled by Alpha Ladder Finance (ALFin), which is regulated under Singapore's Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) framework. The stablecoin itself is registered as a Collective Investment Scheme (CIS) unit token under Singapore's Securities and Futures Act. Same-day settlement MetaComp notes that the payment was completed in hours, bypassing several intermediaries and their respective operating hours. The use of programmable stablecoins allowed for near-instant settlement finality, as well as the real-time recording of corresponding data on-chain. The company highlighted the scalability of the approach, with its MAS-regulated payment infrastructure, supported by ALFin in its capacity as a MAS-regulated dealer of securities and CIS, facilitating a compliant cross-border transaction. Integrated sustainability Every CNT carbon stablecoin is created through association with verifiable carbon reduction projects, embedding documented sustainability value into the digital currency. MetaComp argues that such integration allows institutions to consider both financial efficiency and climate benefits in their international money movements. This first real-world transaction shows that sustainable cross-border payments are not a future concept – they are here today," said Tin Pei Ling, Co-President of MetaComp. "By integrating Alpha Ladder's patented CNT framework into our regulated payments infrastructure, we are enabling institutions to move money globally with both financial efficiency and verifiable climate benefit. Regulated infrastructure MetaComp is headquartered in Singapore and operates on a regulated basis through licensing from MAS under the Payment Services Act. The company focuses on providing institutional clients, fintech firms, and other entities with services such as over-the-counter and exchange trading, fiat payment rails, regulated digital asset custody, and prime brokerage. Its Client Asset Management Platform (CAMP) aims to bridge traditional financial services with digital asset capabilities. StableX, described as MetaComp's new cross-border FX and liquidity routing infrastructure, is responsible for the programmable execution and optimisation of multi-currency settlement, using a mix of stablecoins and fiat currencies. Role of Alpha Ladder Group Alpha Ladder Group, which describes itself as a digital green technology enterprise, holds patents on the CNT Carbon Stablecoin framework and the associated NFDT technology. The group's objective is to build interoperable financial systems that prioritise both speed and environmental sustainability in global transactions. The partnership between MetaComp and Alpha Ladder Group reflects a coordinated approach to delivering regulated, sustainability-focused payment solutions targeted at institutional users and supporting the broader move towards integrating ESG compliance in financial services.
Otago Daily Times
a day ago
- Otago Daily Times
Co-operating with overseas firms
A new era is dawning for Alliance Group and how that plays out now lies in the hands of its 4000-odd shareholders. On Tuesday, the red meat industry's worst-kept secret was confirmed; Irish company Dawn Meats Group would take a 65% stake in the wholly farmer-owned co-operative for $250 million, subject to shareholder and regulatory approvals. Alliance says the investment will reduce its short-term working capital facility by about $200m, accelerate the board's strategic capital expenditure programme and enable the distribution of up to $40m to the co-operative, subject to shareholder livestock supply. In many ways, it is a repeat of 2016 when China's Shanghai Maling (now Bright Food Group) took a 50% stake in Silver Fern Farms for $267m. Just like then, one has to ask if shareholders do not give the international investment a tick at a special general meeting in October, then what? For Silver Fern Farms, there was no other option and it is looking very similar for Alliance. It was 1948 when a collective of Southland farmers came together to establish Alliance Freezing Company Ltd. In 1980, the company underwent a change in ownership structure, transitioning into a co-operative. Since then, it has proudly lauded its farmer-owned status, particularly — and rather smugly — following the Silver Fern Farms' Chinese deal which left it the only true 100% farmer-owned red meat co-operative. Alliance farmers have now been forced between the proverbial rock and hard place. The future of their co-operative lies with them; say yes to the deal and 65% of ownership of what has been a traditional proud southern company goes offshore. Chief executive Willie Wiese says it could trade its way out but the time it would take was far too long from a banking perspective. So say no, and the bankers will be banging on the door. There appears to be little room for sentiment or tradition. It is somewhat inexplicable that Alliance finds itself in this position, with many questioning how a company can go from a record $116.3m profit in 2022 to two thumping losses in the following years. Last year, experienced agribusiness leader Mark Wynne was appointed chairman of Alliance and he did not mince words when it came to the task at hand. "I'm not doing this for a good time or a long time. This is damn hard work. We've got an enormous amount to do to turn this big super-tanker around," he said at the time. So why was the super-tanker ever grounded in the first place? And where is the accountability from those who allowed it to get so far off course? The future ownership of the co-operative might lie with its farmers but it is not those folk who got their company into such a perilous position that selling 65% of it is the only way forward. Mr Wynne has previously said that remaining a 100% farmer-owned co-operative was a choice and if farmers wanted it to remain that way, then the company needed their livestock. That was their clearest way of showing their support. But loyalty is a two-way street and Alliance used to have that in spades from its suppliers. Over time, it has eroded. For farmers already battling with rising on-farm costs, a few dollars more on their killing sheet from selling to a competing company offering a better price makes a substantial difference. Dollars and service can quickly replace any misty-eyed values around tradition and 100% farmer ownership when it comes to paying the ever-present stack of bills. Alliance has signalled site closures and asset sales are possible if the Dawn Meats deal is not inked. The company is a large employer, particularly in the South, and that would have huge ramifications for both rural and urban communities. But as livestock numbers continue to fall amid pine-tree studded farmland, the long-standing wider issue of over-capacity in the country's red meat sector continues to be the elephant in the paddock, and plant closures appear inevitable. What is guaranteed is that more change is coming in the sector — to be sure, to be sure.
RNZ News
2 days ago
- RNZ News
More people making losses when selling their homes
The number of people losing money on home sales is at the level since 2014. Photo: RNZ / REECE BAKER The number of people making losses when they sell their homes is at the highest level since 2014, property data firm Cotality says, and Auckland sellers are being hit particularly hard. In three months, there was $128,362,612 lost by sellers. Cotality has released its latest Pain and Gain report, which shows the proportion of sellers making a loss or a gain on sales across the country. In the second quarter of this year, 89.4 percent of sellers made a gross profit - 10.6 percent made a loss. This does not include the cost of the sale, such as real estate commission. But in Auckland, the number losing money increased to 15.9 percent. In Tauranga, it was 13.2 percent and Wellington 11.9 percent. Christchurch had the smallest proportion of loss-making sales, at 4.9 percent. Cotality chief property economist Kelvin Davidson said it reflected how much prices had fallen in Auckland, and the higher number of apartments, which were more likely to lose money. The median profit among those who sold for a gain was $279,000. That is well down on the $440,000 median gain recorded during the 2021 peak, but higher than anything recorded before the end of 2020. The median loss was $52,500. Combined, the total gain made by sellers in the quarter was $4.9 billion. Cotality chief property economist Kelvin Davidson. Photo: SUPPLIED Davidson said the length of time that someone had owned a property played a big part in whether they made a gain or a loss. "Almost 50 percent of the loss-making resales in the three months to June had been held for less than three-and-a-half years." Those who made a gain had held their properties for 9.4 years. Davidson said that was the longest hold period for a gain since the mid-1990s. He said the weakness in property values could be encouraging some owners to hold for longer to allow gains to accumulate. "In other cases it may just reflect the fact that in a quiet market a lot of sellers simply have to wait longer for a deal to be achieved. "Indeed, some property owners may also just be choosing to hold for a bit longer if they're uncertain about their job prospects or don't want to pay transactions costs such as an estate agent's commission or conveyancing fees as regularly. In addition, lending restraints such as the loan to value ratio rules may have kept more people where they are for longer." He said investors could sometimes choose when to make a move but owner-occupiers were often driven by life events. It was not always a bad thing to move in a soft market, he said. "You might get less than what you might like for your own house but you may well get a bargain on the next one. "You might come out better off." He said there were hints that some sellers were choosing to take their properties off the market rather than accept a disappointing price. Wellington real estate salesperson Mike Robbers said he was seeing that. He said separating couples would sometimes put a house on the market, and then when offers came in lower than they wanted, one person would buy the other out instead . Standalone houses were less likely to sell for a loss. Almost 34 percent of apartments sold for less than they were bought for. Investors' experience was very similar to that of owner-occupiers, at 10.7 percent of sales making a loss compared to 10.1 percent for owner-occupiers. Investors had slightly larger gains when they made a profit and slightly bigger losses. In Auckland, 17 percent of investors were making a loss. Gareth Kiernan, chief forecaster at Infometrics, said the current downturn was so far shorter than one recorded from 1998 to 2001 and from 2008 to 2012. But he said there were signs that people who bought in the peak might have to hold on longer than in previous downturns to get back to neutral. "It's worth noting that house prices are currently still sitting about 13 percent below their 2021 peak. At the same stage of the cycle, 13 quarters after the December 1997 and December 2007 peaks, house prices were only 2.0 percent and 5.5 percent below those respective peaks. In other words, although the 1998-2001 and 2008-2012 loss-making periods were getting close to ending by this stage of the cycle, this time around we're still a long time away from everyone not facing a loss when selling property. Our current house price forecasts could see people in 2030 who bought at the peak of the market in 2021 still be making a loss if trying to sell. In the context of the NZ housing market experience of the last 75 years, that would be an incredibly long time to still be making a loss." Davidson agreed the downturn was "fairly prolonged". "The current cycle is deeper - in the GFC prices only fell about 10 percent peak to trough. This time they were down closer to 17 or 18 percent, we're three-and-a-half years into the cycle and nowhere near the peak. This has been a deeper and more drawn out episode. In some ways we're only halfway through or even less. "It's taking longer to accumulate gains and I guess it's also taking longer to avoid losses." Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
