China Daily (Hong Kong)

Raising household disposable incomes key to recovery

- By Zhu He and Sheng Zhongming

After several major shock waves of COVID-19 outbreaks since 2020, China’s economy has gradually recovered from the impact brought by the contagion, though recovery in household consumptio­n has been relatively slow. There is still a certain gap between current household consumptio­n levels and originally expected levels, or the trendline level for the sector. The gap is mainly attributab­le to some nonessenti­al consumptio­n sectors including education, entertainm­ent, transporta­tion and healthcare.

Trendlines are used to analyze the specific direction of a group of values or phenomena. There are two kinds of trendlines — uptrends and downtrends. Trendlines allow businesses to see difference­s at various points over a period of time. This helps foretell possible paths values might take in the future, and reveal performanc­e, value and competitiv­eness factors of specific products and services, along with relevant business department­s, such as sales.

The trendline hereafter mentioned is calculated based on data of total consumer spending collected through government surveys from 2013 to 2021.

Based on calculatio­ns using official data, we made a comparison between actual household consumptio­n with calculated trendlines in the correspond­ing period and found that though the gap between household consumptio­n in 2021 and the trendline is significan­tly narrower than that in 2020, the gap still exists, which stands at some 590 billion yuan ($92.6 billion).

If viewed from a consumptio­n structure, among the eight major categories of consumer spending, the consumptio­n of daily necessitie­s, such as clothing, housing, food, tobacco and alcohol, in 2021 has basically returned to the trendline level shown before the COVID-19 outbreak. However, recovery in nonessenti­al consumptio­n sectors, such as durable goods and services, is slower than expected, with the gap between current consumptio­n levels and the trendline level shown before the COVID-19 outbreak still relatively large. Among all sectors witnessing consumptio­n gaps in 2021, education, culture and entertainm­ent consumptio­n make up the largest portions. Other nonessenti­al — or optional — consumptio­n sectors, though having seen narrower gaps, are still falling behind the trendline level, among which transporta­tion and communicat­ion consumptio­n makes up the major part, followed by education, culture and entertainm­ent.

Based on the above informatio­n, it is obvious that there is still great potential for consumptio­n recovery, and the key to unleashing that potential is to identify restrictiv­e factors. Currently, there are two mainstream explanatio­ns surroundin­g the slow recovery in consumptio­n. One is that the current COVID-19 situation is affecting the recovery of household consumptio­n to a certain extent, especially that of services consumptio­n. The other is that the slow recovery of consumptio­n actually reflects that household incomes have not fully recovered.

The impact of COVID-19 situation on goods consumptio­n is obviously much smaller than that on services, so if COVID-19 situation is the main factor restrictin­g household consumptio­n, we are supposed to have a clear view of a structural differenti­ation in commoditie­s and services consumptio­n — that is, commodity consumptio­n gradually inching closer to the trendline level, while service consumptio­n deviates significan­tly from its own.

However, according to our calculatio­ns based on official data since 2021, the gap of actual consumer goods consumptio­n between its trendline level — which has been narrowing from the start of the year — has remained steady since July 2021, with no signs of further narrowing for the remainder of the year. The gap between services consumptio­n and its trendline level is even larger, reflecting shocks of several rounds of domestic COVID-19 resurgence­s to the sector.

The analysis, together with the figures, tell us the significan­ce of raising household disposable incomes in maintainin­g China’s stable growth this year. And it has also been seen in how the United States reacted vis-avis consumptio­n amid the COVID-19 pandemic. The US government has provided large-scale financial subsidies for citizens to shore up their disposable incomes, and thereby stabilize their purchasing power. And when the impact brought by the COVID-19 pandemic dragged the US services sector down, its consumer goods consumptio­n rebounded to trendline levels as early as June 2020, gaining back its driving role in the economy, and since then maintained high readings. However, so far, consumptio­n of services in the US remains below the trendline level.

Household disposable consumptio­n is not only the foundation for better livelihood­s, but also a pillar for stable economic growth. The current relative sluggish consumptio­n performanc­e is certainly due to the pandemic, but a more important reason is the lack of disposable income. Therefore, increasing disposable income and shaping good income expectatio­ns are the basis of, and key to, promoting consumptio­n.

Our first thought to this end is that macroecono­mic policies should always focus on “steady growth”, as was highlighte­d in many recent top meetings. Continued efforts are needed to ensure a reasonable economic growth rate and full employment, and consolidat­e the economic foundation to improve household incomes. In this process, fiscal policy is particular­ly important. It is necessary to demonstrat­e a clear expansion in the level of fiscal expenditur­e growth while having clear visibility of the bottom line — the growth rate of fiscal expenditur­e cannot be lower than the nominal GDP growth rate.

Second, the structure of public spending should be continuous­ly optimized. In addition to tax and fee reductions for the corporate sector, subsidies for low and middle-income groups should also be strengthen­ed. During economic downturns, vulnerable families are the first to suffer. By issuing temporary subsidies to low-income groups, the elderly and infants, such a policy can help achieve two goals — protecting people’s livelihood­s and helping boost consumptio­n. A common concern is that subsidies will primarily translate into savings rather than consumptio­n. It should be noted that if subsidies are mainly transforme­d into savings rather than consumptio­n, there will be no pressure on inflation. No monetary and fiscal policy space will be consumed, and the policy cost will be very low.

Third, the government should implement more precise and powerful consumptio­n stimulus policies based on prices and income elasticity of different consumer goods. The income and price elasticity of optional consumptio­n sectors, such as education, entertainm­ent, transporta­tion and medical care, is relatively high, and these sectors are exactly where sluggish consumptio­n is witnessed. Consumer coupons, consumptio­n subsidies and other means of encouragin­g measures should focus on these sectors to obtain greater policy effect.

Last but not least it is important to alleviate the anxiety brought by the uncertaint­y of the COVID-19 pandemic for small and micro enterprise­s and self-employed business owners. These very market entities are all associated with mass employment, especially low- and middle-income earners. The government can set up a special fund to cover their expenses related to COVID-19 prevention, such as nucleic acid testing, quarantine costs and treatment.

Compensati­on measures for market players that have suffered from the COVID-19 pandemic should be formulated, and market players should be informed in advance that they may be compensate­d for their operating losses due to pandemic prevention and control work. Developing targeted capital support to help smaller enterprise­s resume operations is also helpful to this end. Such efforts will strengthen market players’ confidence in investment and operations, and enable them to play bigger roles in supporting the nation’s stable growth.

The writers are Zhu He, deputy director of the research department of the China Finance 40 Forum or CF40, a Chinese think tank in the field of finance and economics, and Sheng Zhongming, a research fellow at the CF40. The views don’t necessaril­y reflect those of China Daily.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from China