2015-07-11 季天鹤，央行观察

作者：季天鹤，央行观察专栏作家

闪电熊中，人们纷纷发现跌停板也出不了货，仿佛曾经遍地都是的资金一夜之间消失，而不少报道也纷纷开始讨论一代中产阶级的财富被抹去。想要理解上述现象，不得不从救市前后的资金格局开始分析。

我们知道，非银行类金融机构，企业和个人的资金都是存款，而存款则是银行的负债。广大股民都熟悉“银证转帐”的操作，一方面减少了股民在银行的一般存款，另一方面增加了股民通过证券公司在银行存放的证券保证金存款。而购买基金，则首先使基民的一般存款变为了基金在银行的存款。

一级市场出售股票，无论是IPO还是增发，之所以被称作“圈钱”，是因为上市公司通过发行新股票，将购买股票的人的存款“圈”成了自己的存款，而且被“圈”走的存款通常会用于实业投资。与之类似的是大股东减持，只不过发行新股票增加了股票总数，而大股东减持是在股票总数不变下的股票与资金的换手。二级市场交易股票，是资金在买方、卖方、证券公司和政府国库之间的换手。买方的存款流向卖方换取股票、流向证券公司缴纳手续费、流向国库缴纳印花税。此外，回购和分红则是上市公司的存款流向股票卖方或者股东的过程，但对整个银行体系而言，存款的总数是不会变化的（例外是缴税，但影响很小），只是存款所有权改变。

什么时候存款总数会发生变化呢？

当然是银行资产发生变化的时候，包括银行直接买入股票和借钱给别人买股票。银行直接买入股票时，银行资产侧增加了股票资产，而负债侧则给股票卖家增加了存款。银行借钱给别人买股票的情况和直接买入类似，资产侧增加了对股票买家的贷款，负债侧增加了股票买家的存款。也就是说，银行可以创造出存款来直接或间接入市。而当银行卖股票时，由于此时的股票买方会将存款转让给银行，因此银行在消去股票资产的同时也会消去负债侧的存款，而这两者当然可能会有差异，如果股票的买方溢价从银行手里买了股票，则相当于消去的存款（买方用这部分存款买股票）多于股票资产的成本价值，这就会使得银行负债减少得比银行资产减少的多，资产负债表平衡就意味着银行净资产增加，反之则减少。

股灾和融资使整个金融体系面临两种不同的问题。问题一是，银行贷款给投资者，同时也创造了更多存款，这部分存款何时才能在还款中和银行贷款一起消失？问题二是，投资者和场外配资公司，投资者和证券公司之间的借贷关系虽然没有创造新存款，但造成了存款的转移，那么负债的投资者如何能通过股市把当初买股票扔给卖家的钱再套回来，用来还债？

我们可以想象股市中有三种投资者：自有资金投资者，向银行借钱的投资者，向其他非银机构和个人借钱的投资者。这些人各自都投入了5万亿人民币，其中自有资金投资者和向其他非银机构和个人借钱的投资者只是转移了现有的一般存款进入股市，而向银行借钱的投资者使用的是银行新创造的存款。这15万亿进入股市买入股票后，意味着原先的股票卖方、证券公司和政府获得了这15万亿，其中上市公司和减持股东（包括散户股东）拿走大头。这些卖方有些就把钱拿走变为一般存款了，股市资金池的整体水位下降。而当股价下跌，杠杆投资者想要离场的时候，他们可能面临的市场里一共也没有10万亿资金的情况，他们无论怎样卖出股票也兑不出10万亿还债。当然更有可能的是资金总量虽然超过10万亿，但资金方大多持币观望，吐给杠杆投资者还债的少于10万亿，大家就会总觉得卖股票套不到钱。

解决的办法，一是让持币者买股票解救持股者，二是创造出更多货币来入市。证监会的操作，无论是拉股指还是做期货，其实都在想办法通过交易手段，使足够量的资金从持币者手中流向杠杆投资者手中。社保基金、汇金都是大的持币者，如果愿意出手的话总可以买入很多股票，让投资者解套和去杠杆。创造更多货币救市就需要银行出面，但法律规定银行不得直接购买股票，所以我们现在看到的就是银行扩张资产负债表，资产侧增加对证券公司的债权，负债侧增加等量的证券公司在银行存款，而这些存款可以被证券公司用来买股票。

上面的操作面临一个约束，就是当银行创造的大量存款通过证券公司给了投资者用来套现之后，这些存款就变成了投资者在银行的一般存款，或者场外配资中的出资者在银行的一般存款，银行就面临了准备金的约束，这也就使得央行需要增加超额准备金总量。央行的办法一是逆回购，二是降准，三是通过给非银行机构贷款，同时增加银行在央行的准备金存款以及非银机构在银行的存款。

所以我们看到股市去杠杆，银行和券商反而加杠杆。银行扩张出大量存款，通过券商打入股市，这部分存款一部分被用来归还银行前期的贷款，一部分被用来偿还场外配资，一部分被用来还场内配资，一部分用来给本来就没有杠杆的投资者套现。救市后和配资前，银行系统多创造出来的存款，就是救市行动创造的存款。由于M2现在包括证券保证金存款，预计会在数据上看到救市导致的M2增长。

因此，救市后的资金格局是：

银行增加对证券公司的债权，同时增加存款，寄希望于证券公司还款时重新收缩资产负债表，还能赚取利息；证券公司收回场内融资时，资产减少了债权，增加了银行存款，但救市中增持了股票，同时增加了对银行的债务，因此券商寄希望于股价上升后减持，重新套回股民手中的大量银行存款，以归还对银行债务，同时还能有利润；股民们归还了对银行、券商和相互间的债务，但整个非金融部门拥有了更多的银行存款，未来可能会通过重新入市接了证券公司的抛盘把存款转给证券公司。

这里面的薄弱环节是证券公司。证券公司持有大量股票后仍然会遇到股价下跌的可能，这时候减记净资产就会出现资不抵债的情况，当然只要银行不停地债务展期，证券公司就可以继续争取时间等待股价反弹，或者通过经营收入还债。当然如果股票都能被证金公司一家持有市的话，事情会简单很多，只要央行保驾证金一家即可。

国家本来希望本轮牛市能够让趴在存款帐户上的存款动起来，投资者把自己的存款给上市公司，上市公司进行投资和其他支出，在创造就业岗位的时候创造GDP，走出一条盘活存量的新路。但没想到牛市变成了闪电熊，不但让投资者远离了股市，证监会暂停了IPO，盘活存量又让救市变成了搞出增量。未来股市的任务，不但要帮助实体经济流动起来，还要让证券公司从股民那里套到更多的钱来还欠银行的债，可谓任重道远。

如果银行新增了4万亿贷款用来救市，会不会造成08/09年4万亿的那一波对实体经济的冲击？目前看未必会，因为救市的4万亿存款一下子就进入了投资者的帐户，没有08/09年发放贷款进行投资本身有一个带动经济创造GDP的过程。股民把本来并不打算花的钱投入了股市，然后在救市中重新把钱捞了回来，未必就能开始花这些钱，真正花钱的希望，还是要寄托在牛市中把钱圈走的人的身上。

至于本文开头提出的中产阶级财富被抹去的问题，我们看到存款总量并没有减少，而是重新分配给赚钱套了现的股东以及发行新股的上市公司了。中产阶级还是有机会拿回这些财富的，但需要付出汗水从套现股东和上市公司那里换取了。

During the 'Lightning Bear' period, people found that even the limit-down stocks couldn't be sold, as if the funds that used to be everywhere had vanished overnight. Many reports began to discuss the wiping out of wealth for a generation of middle-class. To understand this phenomenon, we have to start analyzing the fund flow pattern before and after the market rescue.

We know that funds from non-bank financial institutions, enterprises, and individuals are all deposits, and deposits are liabilities of banks. Most stock investors are familiar with the operation of 'bank-to-broker transfers,' which reduces the general deposits of investors in banks, while increasing the security deposit for stock trading through securities companies at banks. When buying funds, investors' general deposits are transformed into deposits held by the bank for the fund.

In primary market stock offerings, whether it's IPOs or additional issuances, the term 'raising funds' is used because the issuing companies 'raise' the funds of those purchasing stocks, converting them into their own deposits, which are often used for industrial investments. Similar to this is the case with major shareholders reducing their holdings, except that new stocks issued increase the total number of stocks while major shareholder reductions involve a turnover of stocks and funds under the constant number of stocks. In the secondary market, trading stocks involves the turnover of funds among buyers, sellers, securities companies, and the government treasury. Buyer's funds flow to sellers in exchange for stocks, flow to securities companies as transaction fees, and flow to the treasury as stamp duty. Repurchases and dividends involve the transfer of funds from companies to stock sellers or shareholders, but for the entire banking system, the total amount of deposits does not change (with the exception of tax payments, which have a negligible effect), only the ownership of deposits changes.

When does the total amount of deposits change? It's when bank assets change, including banks directly buying stocks or lending money to others to buy stocks. When banks directly buy stocks, their asset side increases with stocks, while their liability side increases deposits for stock sellers. When banks lend money to others to buy stocks, the situation is similar to direct purchases; the asset side increases with loans to stock buyers, and the liability side increases with deposits from stock buyers. In other words, banks can create deposits to enter the market directly or indirectly. When banks sell stocks, as stock buyers transfer deposits to banks, banks erase both stock assets and corresponding liabilities (deposits), which can lead to a difference between liabilities and assets. If stock buyers pay a premium to purchase stocks from banks, it means more deposits (used for purchasing stocks) are being erased than the cost value of stock assets, resulting in an increase in bank net assets. Conversely, if stock buyers buy at a lower price, it leads to a reduction in both deposits and assets, resulting in a decrease in bank net assets.

The stock market crash and financing create two different problems for the entire financial system. The first problem is that banks lend money to investors, creating more deposits. When will these deposits disappear together with bank loans? The second problem is that although the borrowing-lending relationship between investors, off-exchange margin trading firms, and securities companies does not create new deposits, it causes the transfer of deposits. How can the investor who is in debt to use the stock market to obtain the money initially used to buy stocks?

We can imagine three types of investors in the stock market: investors with their own funds, investors who borrow from banks, and investors who borrow from non-bank institutions or individuals. All these investors have contributed 5 trillion RMB each. Investors with their own funds and those who borrow from non-bank institutions or individuals are merely moving their existing general deposits into the stock market, while those who borrow from banks are using newly created deposits. After entering the stock market, these 15 trillion RMB are used to buy stocks. This means that the original stock sellers, securities companies, and the government have received these 15 trillion RMB, with listed companies and reducing shareholders (including retail shareholders) receiving the largest portion. Some of these sellers might convert the received funds back into general deposits, lowering the overall level of funds in the stock market. When stock prices fall, leveraged investors looking to exit might face a situation where there isn't even a total of 10 trillion RMB in the market. No matter how they sell stocks, they won't be able to generate 10 trillion RMB for debt repayment. More likely, although the total amount of funds might exceed 10 trillion RMB, most of these funds remain on the sidelines. Giving money to leveraged investors for debt repayment might be less than 10 trillion RMB, leading to the perception that stocks can't be sold for money.

The solution is for holders of money to buy stocks to rescue those holding stocks. The other solution is to create more money to enter the market. The operations of the China Securities Regulatory Commission, whether boosting stock indexes or engaging in futures trading, are essentially trying to use trading to shift sufficient funds from holders of money to leveraged investors. The Social Security Fund and China Investment Corporation (CIC) are large holders of money; if they are willing to intervene, they can buy a significant amount of stocks, helping investors reduce their leverage. Creating more money to rescue the market requires the involvement of banks. However, laws prevent banks from directly buying stocks. Therefore, what we observe is banks expanding their balance sheets, increasing their claims on securities companies as assets, and increasing deposits from securities companies as liabilities. These deposits can be used by securities companies to buy stocks.

However, the above operation is constrained. When a large amount of deposits created by banks flows to investors through securities companies and is used for cashing out, these deposits become general deposits in banks, whether for those who initially invested their own money or those who participated in off-exchange margin trading. Banks then face reserve requirements constraints. This forces the central bank to increase the total amount of excess reserves. The central bank's methods include reverse repurchases, reserve ratio cuts, and providing loans to non-bank institutions while increasing banks' reserve deposits in the central bank and non-bank institutions' deposits in banks.

Therefore, we see that while the stock market is deleveraging, banks and securities firms are actually leveraging up. Banks expand their balance sheets, creating a large number of deposits, which flow into the stock market through securities firms. These deposits are used in part to repay banks' previous loans, part to repay off-exchange margin trading, part to repay on-exchange margin trading, and part to help investors cash out. After the market rescue and before margin trading, the deposits created by banks are a result of the market rescue. As M2 now includes deposits for securities margin trading, we may observe an increase in M2 due to market rescue in the data.

Therefore, the post-rescue fund flow pattern is as follows:

Banks increase their claims on securities companies while increasing deposits, hoping that when securities companies repay loans, they can shrink their balance sheets again and earn interest.

Securities companies retrieve funds from on-exchange margin trading, decreasing assets in terms of claims but increasing deposits in banks. However, due to their increased stock holdings during the market rescue, they also increase their debt to banks. Therefore, securities firms hope to sell stocks after stock prices rise, recouping a significant amount of bank deposits from the market and using them to repay bank debt, while also making a profit.

Investors repay debts to banks and securities firms, but the non-financial sector as a whole has more deposits in banks, which they may transfer to securities companies by participating in the market again.

The weak link in this process is the securities companies. Even after holding a large number of stocks, securities companies may still face the possibility of stock price declines. In this case, their net assets could fall below their liabilities. Of course, as long as banks continue to extend their loans, securities firms can buy time to wait for stock prices to rebound or repay their debts through operating income. If all stocks are held by China Securities Finance Corporation, the situation would be much simpler, as long as the central bank supports China Securities Finance Corporation.

Initially, the government hoped that this round of bull market would encourage funds lying idle in deposit accounts to flow into the market. Investors would provide their funds to listed companies, which would invest and spend, creating employment and GDP. This would open up a new path to activate existing funds. However, the bull market unexpectedly turned into a lightning bear, causing investors to withdraw from the stock market and the China Securities Regulatory Commission to suspend IPOs. The plan to activate existing funds turned into generating new funds. In the future, the stock market's task is not only to stimulate the real economy but also to help securities firms obtain more money from investors to repay bank debts. The journey ahead is arduous.

If banks add 4 trillion RMB in loans to rescue the market, will it create an impact on the real economy similar to the 4 trillion RMB stimulus in 2008-2009? Currently, this is not very likely, as the 4 trillion RMB in deposits created for market rescue have instantly entered the accounts of investors. Unlike the 2008-2009 stimulus, there is no process of investment that drives economic growth and GDP. Investors invested money they didn't intend to spend into the stock market and then retrieved the money during the rescue. It's not guaranteed that they will start spending this money. The hope for real spending still lies in those who profited from the bull market.

As for the issue raised at the beginning of this article about the erasure of middle-class wealth, we can see that the total amount of deposits has not decreased; rather, it has been redistributed to shareholders who have profited from the market and to the listed companies issuing new stocks. The middle-class still has an opportunity to reclaim this wealth, but it requires effort and hard work to obtain it from those who have cashed out their stocks and the listed companies.