China posts quarterly trade deficit

[nimo_cn]

Why should it bother us?

CCP has projected that annual GDP growth will slow down to 7% in 2011. It is a good idea to start achieving this goal with a quarterly trade deficit.

 

[no smoking]

Is that a fact?

http://www.census.gov/ipc/prod/sp/SP76.pdf

China has been cooking its trade statistics along with the rest of its books for decades. The final numbers are all provided to secure their social and international image they want to project to their people and the world. The Chinese economy is far worse off than CCP wants us to see which is why such huge overcapacity exists, yet somehow still makes it into GDP calculations.

Ok, my friend, have you read this report?

This report was talking about how the mid-trading role of Hong Kong has impact the trading figures published by China and US. It didn't say anything about if China cook its trading book. In contrast, according to this report, China was underestimating its exportation comparing to US figure because HongKong's re-export was excluded from China's statistics.

 

[DMF]

China is cooking his books for sure, but that is also true for everybody else.

Americans insist to use their standard and valuation to calculate the import and export figures and force other countries to use such standard.

As a matter of fact, according to the Americans calculation, China's export to USA figure was much lower than it should (i.e. China's performance was better than what China wants to admit).

There are many American company making goods in China and export back to USA and other European countries. There are goods made in China and export via Hong Kong etc. All these would be calculated differently by China and USA. If we also consider service payment, USA actually enjoyed a positive balance with China but this is not recorded in American standard.

Therefore, it is better to "Listen" to both side instead of taking one side's story and jump to conclusion.

China posts quarterly trade deficit because the Chinese new year was in the February, all the factories on holyday, even the shipment of goods in March was sluggish, but now in April, very busy to export, we have two containers of bearing to export, but can not book container this week, and sea freight is going up the next week.
"China has been cooking its trade statistics along with the rest of its books for decades." This statement maybe not true, can't you see that China is really geting a increase in the economy? The government already asked to change the way the economy develops, now China will change to be a consuming orientated economy, not depend on cheap labor, but by up grading the industry and services.
You know that China is not quiet a democratic, so when the government just say it, it happened, very effective.
When Japan, Taiwan, South Korea were at 1960's and 70's, even at the 80's are not real democratic, the Singapore untill now still not quiet democratic. This kind of government is very effective when they make correct decisions, also can make big damage when they are wrong.

Japan was a copy of China's Tong dynasty, Korea a copy of China's Ming dynasty, and Taiwan and Singapore are Chinese people. The Mainland China fought the USA immediately after the republic established, the USA, not won the war. And since the 1958, till the early 1980's, China were busy with revolution, that's reason that Taiwan, Korea and Japan arrived where they are. If not for the Korea war, Japan's way will be much harder with the occupying USD army. Now China wake up, is on way to be industrialized, and mind you that when China is industrialized, not other country will get industrialized again, the South Korea is the only one and the last one to be fully industrialized country after the WAR II. LETHALFORCE SAY "India has more or less jumped from agriculture to the information age(still plenty of industrilization)", very right, is very difficulty for India to be a fully industrialized.
China will not collapse.

 

[Armand2REP]

Ok, my friend, have you read this report?

This report was talking about how the mid-trading role of Hong Kong has impact the trading figures published by China and US. It didn't say anything about if China cook its trading book. In contrast, according to this report, China was underestimating its exportation comparing to US figure because HongKong's re-export was excluded from China's statistics.

It was talking about how China uses Hong Kong to reship its crap to distort its trade numbers. China has to pay a surcharge to ship which increases more cost than the actual export effecting 16-24% of statistics. It wasn't a big deal in the 90s, but it is a big deal now as exporters are hardly breaking even. China is going on a major port building spree to get off it.

 

[no smoking]

It was talking about how China uses Hong Kong to reship its crap to distort its trade numbers. China has to pay a surcharge to ship which increases more cost than the actual export effecting 16-24% of statistics. It wasn't a big deal in the 90s, but it is a big deal now as exporters are hardly breaking even. China is going on a major port building spree to get off it.

Here we are discussing if China cook the trading figure to make its recod looks more attractive. How and whether these exporters get their profit is another story. I pretty sure they got it as my brother was doing it for years.

Those Hong Kong's reshiping was not included in China's figure because it is exportation to Hongkong from China's point of view. The US figure, in the contrast, recorded these shiping based on their production place. Furthermore, US also recorded Hongkong's charge as China's income, which overestimates China's exportation.

So, if your report is right, then China has been trying to hide its exportation profit for years, which oppose your conclusion.

 

[Armand2REP]

Actually, the point of posting it was to show China manipulates its trade numbers and that cross-checking with other countries will never match up, as per the originating post of this discussion.

China can and does manipulate its trade numbers up and down. When international pressure hits it makes it look like they have a deficit, when exports are down they make it look like they are doing better. It all part of the fuzzy math of the CCP.

 

[amoy]

Those Hong Kong's reshiping was not included in China's figure because it is exportation to Hongkong from China's point of view. The US figure, in the contrast, recorded these shiping based on their production place

It's a two-way issue as lots of imp to China is reshipped via HK as well. That's also a factor for statistics discrepancy. As I wrote earlier unlike a slumping March April exp is picking up and distinctively upbeat

One may claim China is concocting numbers but there're shipping indices like HRCI and BDI, which reflect market strength and supply-n-demand

 

[Armand2REP]

Simple fact is, we really don't know how China is doing in trade because their statistics are unreliable. I prefer to look at US tables to get the general sense of exports from China.

January 2011 8,078.1 31,349.6
February 2011 8,437.2 27,278.7
March 2011 8,257.5 24,671.3

So we have two consecutive months in declining exports to the US with a 22% drop with a pretty static import quota. My thoughts... Chinese exporters are suffering from oil prices pinching wallets in the US and the rest of the world.

 

[no smoking]

Simple fact is, we really don't know how China is doing in trade because their statistics are unreliable. I prefer to look at US tables to get the general sense of exports from China.

January 2011 8,078.1 31,349.6
February 2011 8,437.2 27,278.7
March 2011 8,257.5 24,671.3

So we have two consecutive months in declining exports to the US with a 22% drop with a pretty static import quota. My thoughts... Chinese exporters are suffering from oil prices pinching wallets in the US and the rest of the world.

I thin it is too early to make a conclusion. What we have to do is to wait for the whole year statistics. But there is one thing for sure: China will reduce its trading imbalance in long run.

 

[amoy]

China's official data released can easily be challenged but look at below for physical movement of cargo, which's reported to pick up

Asia to Europe rates still on the slide

Damian Brett | Thursday, 13 Apr 2011

But vessels are sailing with more cargo



Container rates on the Asia to Europe trade continued to slide last week, but vessel utilisation levels on the trade have climbed back up to 90%.

The latest figures from the Shanghai Containerised Freight Index (SCFI) show that all-in spot rates on services from Shanghai to Europe slipped to US$978 per teu at the end of last week, down $14 on the previous week.

Meanwhile, rates from Shanghai to the Mediterranean fell $15 to $963 per teu over the same period.

Reports in the shipping press have suggested that prices are now less than the average bunker adjustment factor (BAF), but one freight forwarder contact told IFW prices had not slipped to this level.

He said: "BAF is around $550-650 per teu and rates, as far as we are concerned, are just about holding.

"My China agent informs me vessels are 90-95% full again, the lowest rate any of my customers have been offered by other forwarders, via a carrier with an acceptable transit time, is US$900 per teu."

He added that some carriers were offering services as low as $1,400 for a 40ft container – the amount quoted in one press report – but said 95% of importers wouldn't accept their service as the transit time was more than 40 days.

The current BAF being charged by Maersk Line stands at $690 per teu for a dry container, although this is set to increase to $760 per teu in May.

He warned that the new Evergreen/China Shipping/Zim Asia-Europe service, due to be launched at the end of April, could also adversely affect rate levels.

Container derivatives broker GFI agreed that rates would not increase over the next few weeks.

It said: "With the market haemorrhaging on the Far East–Europe route, it is hard to see any rate upside in the near term.

"Despite carriers and some freight forwarders reporting utilisation levels of above 90%, this is hardly justified by physical spot rates.

"If the momentum continues to fall at the same speed, then rates could reach $906 per teu by the end of next week."

Meanwhile, rates on Asia to North America continued to pick after the increase recorded two weeks ago. Prices to the US West Coast from Shanghai jumped $26 to $1,657 per feu, while prices to the East Coast were up $76 to $2,981 per feu.