Four Things China Could Do to Address Capital Outflows

Tuesday, May 24, 2016
china's foreign exchange reserves are dwindling

The Chinese government holds more foreign exchange reserves than any other country, but those assets are dwindling. A recent Economic Synopses essay explored how can China respond, and what these responses might mean for the U.S. economy.

Assistant Vice President and Economist Christopher Neely noted that China built up these reserves because the Chinese sell more goods and services than they purchase. This surplus indirectly went into buying foreign assets.

However, Neely noted that the People’s Bank of China (PBC) has been indirectly selling some of these assets to domestic residents. These residents have been diversifying their portfolios as the Chinese economy slows and domestic real estate remains highly priced. Neely wrote: “Although China has very substantial reserves, continued outflows will reduce reserves below desired levels and eventually the authorities may have to choose some combination of policies to stem these outflows.” He noted four potential responses to stemming the tide of capital outflows.

Restricting Foreign Asset Purchases

Neely pointed out that China has long had regulations on international purchases and sales of assets. He wrote: “The purpose of these capital controls is to reduce the volatility of such flows (for stability) and to skew the flows toward foreign direct investment (FDI), which is seen as being stable and encouraging technology transfer.”

The author noted that this particular path wouldn’t really affect the U.S. economy, but it wouldn’t be in line with China’s goal of reducing financial regulation.

Tightening Monetary Policy

Neely also noted that China could increase reserve requirements, raise domestic interest rates or both. He wrote that higher rates would make Chinese bonds relatively more attractive, which in turn could reduce purchases of foreign assets. “But such a tightening would have the very undesirable side effect of slowing domestic growth. Such a policy would have little direct effect on the United States, though.”

Devaluing the Yuan

Another potential option that Neely explored was devaluing the yuan against a basket of foreign currencies. According to Neely, such a move could have opposing effects:

  • After the devaluation, foreign assets would be more expensive, which would reduce purchases.
  • Prior to the devaluation, however, people may buy more foreign assets than they currently are to get them before they become more expensive.

Regarding the effect on the U.S., Neely wrote: “Such a devaluation would make Chinese goods less expensive relative to foreign goods, thereby making U.S. industries less competitive with their Chinese counterparts.”

Defer a Decision

Of course, China could simply continue to sell foreign assets to domestic residents. Neely noted that large sales could raise U.S. interest rates. He wrote: “But if the sales merely reflect a transfer of assets from Chinese authorities to Chinese residents, one must wonder if they will have any effect at all. In addition, rapid sales that raise U.S. bond yields significantly would also reduce the value of the Chinese portfolio, making it an unpalatable strategy for the Chinese authorities.”

Additional Resources

Posted In Financial  |  Tagged christopher neelychinacapital outflowsyuandevaluation
Commenting Policy: We encourage comments and discussions on our posts, even those that disagree with conclusions, if they are done in a respectful and courteous manner. All comments posted to our blog go through a moderator, so they won't appear immediately after being submitted. We reserve the right to remove or not publish inappropriate comments. This includes, but is not limited to, comments that are:
  • Vulgar, obscene, profane or otherwise disrespectful or discourteous
  • For commercial use, including spam
  • Threatening, harassing or constituting personal attacks
  • Violating copyright or otherwise infringing on third-party rights
  • Off-topic or significantly political
The St. Louis Fed will only respond to comments if we are clarifying a point. Comments are limited to 1,500 characters, so please edit your thinking before posting. While you will retain all of your ownership rights in any comment you submit, posting comments means you grant the St. Louis Fed the royalty-free right, in perpetuity, to use, reproduce, distribute, alter and/or display them, and the St. Louis Fed will be free to use any ideas, concepts, artwork, inventions, developments, suggestions or techniques embodied in your comments for any purpose whatsoever, with or without attribution, and without compensation to you. You will also waive all moral rights you may have in any comment you submit.
comments powered by Disqus

The St. Louis Fed uses Disqus software for the comment functionality on this blog. You can read the Disqus privacy policy. Disqus uses cookies and third party cookies. To learn more about these cookies and how to disable them, please see this article.

Subscribe to
On the Economy

Get notified when new content is available on our On the Economy blog.

Email Alerts  |  RSS

About the Blog

The St. Louis Fed On the Economy blog features relevant commentary, analysis, research and data from our economists and other St. Louis Fed experts.

Views expressed are not necessarily those of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis or of the Federal Reserve System.

Contact Us

For media-related questions, email For all other blog-related questions or comments, email