Connect with us

Finance

Where ‘Made in China 2025’ missed the mark

Published

on

Smart robotic arms work on the production line at the production workshop of Changqing Auto Parts Co., LTD., located in Anqing Economic Development Zone, Anhui Province, China, on March 13, 2025. (Photo by Costfoto/NurPhoto via Getty Images)

Nurphoto | Nurphoto | Getty Images

BEIJING — China missed several key targets from its 10-year plan to become self-sufficient in technology, while fostering unhealthy industrial competition which worsened global trade tensions, the European Chamber of Commerce in China said in a report this week.

When Beijing released its “Made in China 2025” plan in 2015, it was met with significant international criticism for promoting Chinese business at the expense of their foreign counterparts. The country subsequently downplayed the initiative, but has doubled-down on domestic tech development given U.S. restrictions in the last several years.

Since releasing the plan, China has exceeded its targets on achieving domestic dominance in autos, but the country has not yet reached its targets in aerospace, high-end robots and the growth rate of manufacturing value-added, the business chamber said, citing its research and discussions with members. Out of ten strategic sectors identified in the report, China only attained technological dominance in shipbuilding, high-speed rail and electric cars.

China’s targets are generally seen as a direction rather than an actual figure to be achieved by a specific date. The Made In China 2025 plan outlines the first ten years of what the country called a ‘multi-decade strategy’ to become a global manufacturing powerhouse.

The chamber pointed out that China’s self-developed airplane, the C919, still relies heavily on U.S. and European parts and though industrial automation levels have “increased substantially,” it is primarily due to foreign technology. In addition, the growth rate of manufacturing value add reached 6.1% in 2024, falling from the 7% rate in 2015 and just over halfway toward reaching the target of 11%.

“Everyone should consider themselves lucky that China missed its manufacturing growth target,” Jens Eskelund, president of the European Union Chamber of Commerce in China, told reporters Tuesday, since the reverse would have exacerbated pressure on global competitors. They didn’t fulfill their own target, but I actually think they did astoundingly well.”

China continues to be a key market for Nvidia, says T. Rowe Price's Tony Wang

Even at that slower pace, China has transformed itself over the last decade to drive 29% of global manufacturing value add — almost the same as the U.S. and Europe combined, Eskelund said. “Before 2015, in many, many categories China was not a direct competitor of Europe and the United States.”

The U.S. in recent years has sought to restrict China’s access to high-end tech, and encourage advanced manufacturing companies to build factories in America.

Earlier this week, the U.S. issued exporting licensing requirements for U.S.-based chipmaker Nvidia’s H20 and AMD’s MI308 artificial intelligence chips, as well as their equivalents, to China. Prior to that, Nvidia said that it would take a quarterly charge of about $5.5 billion as a result of the new exporting licensing requirements. The chipmaker’s CEO Jensen Huang met with Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng in Beijing on Thursday, according to Chinese state media.

The U.S. restrictions have “pushed us to make things that previously we would not have thought we had to buy,” said Lionel M. Ni, founding president of the Guangzhou campus of the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. That’s according to a CNBC translation of his Mandarin-language remarks to reporters on Wednesday.

Ni said the products requiring home-grown development efforts included chips and equipment, and if substitutes for restricted items weren’t immediately available, the university would buy the second-best version available.

In addition to thematic plans, China issues national development priorities every five years. The current 14th five-year plan emphasizes support for the digital economy and wraps up in December. The subsequent 15th five-year plan is scheduled to be released next year.

China catching up

It remains unclear to what extent China can become completely self-sufficient in key technological systems in the near term. But local companies have made rapid strides.

Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei released a smartphone in late 2023 that reportedly contained an advanced chip capable of 5G speeds. The company has been on a U.S. blacklist since 2019 and released its own operating system last year that is reportedly completely separate from Google’s Android.

“Western chip export controls have had some success in that they briefly set back China’s developmental efforts in semiconductors, albeit at some cost to the United States and allied firms,” analysts at the Washington, D.C.,-based think tank Center for Strategic and International Studies, said in a report this week. However, they noted that China has only doubled down, “potentially destabilizing the U.S. semiconductor ecosystem.”

For example, the thinktank pointed out, Huawei’s current generation smartphone, the Pura 70 series, incorporates 33 China-sourced components and only 5 sourced from outside of China.

Huawei reported a 22% surge in revenue in 2024 — the fastest growth since 2016 — buoyed by a recovery in its consumer products business. The company spent 20.8% of its revenue on research and development last year, well above its annual goal of more than 10%.

Overall, China manufacturers reached the nationwide 1.68% target for spending on research and development as a percentage of operating revenue, the EU Chamber report said.

“‘Europe needs to take a hard look at itself,” Eskelund said, referring to Huawei’s high R&D spend. “Are European companies doing what is needed to remain at the cutting edge of technology?”

Dutch semiconductor equipment firm ASML spent 15.2% of its net sales in 2024 on R&D, while Nvidia’s ratio was 14.2%.

Overcapacity and security concerns

However, high spending doesn’t necessarily mean efficiency.

The electric car race in particular has prompted a price war, with most automakers running losses in their attempt to undercut competitors. The phenomenon is often called “neijuan” or “involution” in China.

“We also need to realize [China’s] success has not come without problems,” Eskelund said. “We are seeing across a great many industries it has not translated into healthy business.”

He added that the attempt to fulfill “Made in China 2025” targets contributed to involution, and pointed out that China’s efforts to move up the manufacturing value chain from Christmas ornaments to high-end equipment have also increased global worries about security risks.

In an annual government work report delivered in March, Chinese Premier Li Qiang called for efforts to halt involution, echoing a directive from a high-level Politburo meeting in July last year. The Politburo is the second-highest circle of power in the ruling Chinese Communist Party.

Such fierce competition compounds the impact of already slowing economic growth. Out of 2,825 mainland China-listed companies, 20% reported a loss for the first time in 2024, according to a CNBC analysis of Wind Information data as of Thursday. Including companies that reported yet another year of losses, the share of companies that lost money last year rose to nearly 48%, the analysis showed.

China in March emphasized that boosting consumption is its priority for the year, after previously focusing on manufacturing. Retail sales growth have lagged behind industrial production on a year-to-date basis since the beginning of 2024, according to official data accessed via Wind Information.

Policymakers are also looking for ways to ensure “a better match between manufacturing output and what the domestic market can absorb,” Eskelund said, adding that efforts to boost consumption don’t matter much if manufacturing output grows even faster.

But when asked about policies that could address manufacturing overcapacity, he said, “We are also eagerly waiting in anticipation.”

Continue Reading

Finance

Treasury Bond Volatility Forces Bessent to Double Debt Buyback Size as Yields Swing

Published

on

Bessent

A turbulent week in the U.S. Treasury market prompted the Treasury Department to sharply increase the size of its long-term debt buyback program, as bond prices fell even while equity markets pushed toward record highs. The divergence has drawn attention from fixed-income strategists who see it as a signal of underlying investor unease about federal borrowing levels.

What Happened This Week

U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told CNBC on Thursday, August 20, 2026, that the Treasury had doubled the size of its long-term debt buyback operations, moving from roughly $2 billion to at least $4 billion per operation. Bessent indicated the figure could climb further, saying “we’re going to increase the size of the buyback,” and noted the accelerated pace could exceed the announced $4 billion threshold per issue.

Buybacks allow the Treasury to repurchase outstanding government bonds directly from the market, which can help support prices and dampen yield volatility during periods of stress. The expanded program came as stocks staged a late-week recovery: the S&P 500 and Russell 2000 both advanced on Friday, August 21, even as Treasuries logged mild losses, according to Bloomberg market data.

Why Bond and Equity Markets Are Diverging

Capital.com senior market analyst Daniela Hathorn described the week’s dynamic as markets “ending the week on a softer tone after the relative calm of early August was disrupted by renewed pressure in global bond markets, another rise in oil prices, and growing uncertainty around the Federal Reserve’s next move.” She noted that higher long-term borrowing costs are increasingly challenging elevated equity valuations, even as U.S. equities pull back modestly from record highs.

This divergence — equities near record levels while bonds sell off  is unusual and reflects two different sets of investor concerns. Equity investors have remained focused on corporate earnings strength, particularly from large technology companies ahead of Nvidia’s closely watched August 26 earnings report. Bond investors, by contrast, are more directly exposed to concerns about the scale of federal borrowing, highlighted this week by the national debt crossing the $40 trillion threshold for the first time.

The Fed and Treasury “Working in Opposite Directions”

Wilmington Trust senior bond portfolio manager Wil Stith told Yahoo Finance that current conditions reflect “the Fed and the Treasury basically working in sort of opposite directions,” adding that the imbalance will likely require the Federal Reserve  which he described as having “the larger sandbox”  to adjust the federal funds rate rather than relying on Treasury market interventions alone to manage yields.

Notably, the bond market’s reaction to the Treasury’s buyback expansion was relatively muted; strategists described the move as being largely absorbed without a major rally, suggesting the underlying pressure on yields stems from factors, such as inflation persistence and debt sustainability concerns, that a buyback program alone cannot resolve.

What Comes Next

Markets are now looking to two major events in the days ahead: Nvidia’s earnings report on Wednesday, August 26, and the Federal Reserve’s Jackson Hole Economic Symposium, running August 27-29. This will be the first Jackson Hole gathering under new Fed Chair Kevin Warsh, whose public communication style and policy signals remain less established than his predecessors’, according to market commentary from Regards of Wall Street.

For investors, the key metrics to watch are the size and frequency of future Treasury buyback operations, movements in the 10-year Treasury yield, and any policy signals from Warsh’s keynote address. Continued yield volatility alongside record equity valuations would suggest the market imbalance identified this week has not yet been resolved.

 

Continue Reading

Finance

Cross-Border Settlement Innovation and Real-Time Payment Architecture

Published

on

The global banking system is undergoing a comprehensive modernization of cross-border payment infrastructure. Driven by real-time settlement networks, open banking APIs, and interoperable messaging standards, financial institutions and multinational corporations are eliminating multi-day delays and reducing transaction costs associated with legacy international wire transfers.

Transition to Real-Time Gross Settlement Networks
Historically, international business-to-business (B2B) payments relied on complex correspondent banking relationships involving intermediary fees and processing delays. In 2026, the widespread adoption of ISO 20022 messaging protocols alongside interconnected Real-Time Gross Settlement (RTGS) systems allows direct, end-to-end processing of cross-border transfers.

Commercial banks are providing corporate clients with continuous, 24/7 payment clearing capabilities. Real-time transaction confirmation and automated FX rate locking allow international businesses to settle cross-border trade obligations within minutes, significantly reducing counterparty risk.

Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) Interoperability
Wholesale Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) pilot initiatives are reaching operational maturity across several key financial centers. Collaborative multi-CBDC platforms enable participating central banks and commercial institutions to settle foreign exchange and international trade transactions directly on shared distributed ledgers.

These wholesale digital currency networks eliminate traditional clearinghouse delays and minimize foreign exchange slippage. Enterprise treasury departments benefit from enhanced liquidity management, as cross-border cash balances can be deployed and repatriated instantaneously.

Corporate Treasury Transformation
For enterprise treasurers, instant cross-border settlement transforms cash management strategies:
– Working Capital Optimization: Reduced transaction float allows companies to lower precautionary cash reserves and optimize short-term liquidity investments.
– Automated Reconciliation: Enriched data formats embedded in ISO 20022 payment messages streamline automated general ledger posting and invoice matching.
– Reduced Processing Overhead: Account-to-account (A2A) real-time clearing bypasses costly intermediary correspondent banking fees.

Strategic Financial Priorities
1. Upgrade Treasury Systems: Ensure internal core enterprise software supports real-time ISO 20022 payment messaging standards.
2. Leverage Instant Clearing Rails: Utilize direct payment networks to lower cross-border transaction fees and eliminate settlement delays.
3. Evaluate Multi-Currency Liquidity: Modernize liquidity management frameworks to capitalize on 24/7 real-time settlement capabilities.

Continue Reading

Finance

Private Credit Expansion and Regulatory Oversight in 2026 Capital Markets

Published

on

The global private credit market has solidified its role as a fundamental pillar of enterprise finance, expanding rapidly across middle-market lending, asset-backed finance, and infrastructure financing. As non-bank financial institutions capture a larger share of corporate debt origination, global regulatory bodies are increasing oversight to evaluate market transparency and systemic risk interconnections.

Growth Drivers in Direct Lending
Direct lending platforms have continued to attract substantial institutional allocations from pension funds, sovereign wealth entities, and insurance companies seeking attractive risk-adjusted yields. Private debt funds offer corporate borrowers customized financing structures, faster execution timelines, and confidentiality compared to syndicated loan markets.

In 2026, private credit managers are increasingly financing larger corporate transactions, providing multi-billion-dollar credit facilities for buyout deals and corporate restructurings. The flexibility of private debt contracts—featuring unitranche pricing and tailored covenant packages—has made direct lending the preferred capital source for middle-market enterprise sponsors.

Regulatory Scrutiny and Systemic Risk Assessment
The rapid growth of non-bank intermediation has drawn heightened scrutiny from financial regulators in North America and Europe. Because private debt agreements are negotiated privately without public exchange disclosures, central banks are evaluating potential vulnerabilities related to asset valuation consistency and fund liquidity profiles.

Regulatory agencies are introducing guidelines aimed at improving reporting standards for private investment vehicles managing institutional assets. Key focus areas include monitoring leverage ratios within private credit funds and evaluating indirect credit exposures between commercial banking institutions and private debt funds.

Navigating Elevated Refinancing Costs
With benchmark interest rates remaining elevated, private debt borrowers face higher debt service obligations on floating-rate credit facilities. Financial advisory firms report an increase in proactive liability management strategies, including payment-in-kind (PIK) interest options, equity infusions from sponsors, and covenant modifications.

Private credit managers with deep operational capabilities are actively working alongside portfolio companies to optimize working capital and maintain cash flow coverage ratios during periods of higher borrowing costs.

Key Financial Takeaways
1. Mainstream Asset Class: Private credit has expanded beyond niche alternative asset status into a core corporate finance solution.
2. Enhanced Transparency Standards: Regulatory frameworks are evolving toward greater disclosure requirements for private debt managers.
3. Proactive Risk Management: Lenders and sponsors must prioritize debt sustainability and active portfolio monitoring amid high benchmark rates.

Continue Reading

Trending