US-China frictions: Reading between the headlines

We highlight the escalating conflict between the US and China and discuss potential investment implications.

Views expressed are those of the authors and are subject to change. Other teams may hold different views and make different investment decisions. The value of your investment may become worth more or less than at the time of original investment. While any third-party data used is considered reliable, its accuracy is not guaranteed. For professional or institutional investors only.

Relations between the United States and China have further deteriorated since the beginning of May. Although the structural, multiyear conflict had briefly paused when both countries signed a “phase one” trade agreement in January, tensions escalated again recently with a number of significant actions from both sides (Figure 1).

FIGURE 1

Tracking the conflict

We believe these events indicate an unsurprising reacceleration of this conflict. Evidence can also be seen in the rising tensions in the South China Sea, as well as in the recent military conflict between China and India, a US ally. In the near term, US-China relations are likely to remain under particular stress as November’s US presidential election approaches and the COVID-19 pandemic continues.

The potential impact of US legislation

“The Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act” is one of roughly 270 proposals in the US Congress targeting China, many of which touch on capital markets and investing. The proposed law would bar any foreign company from listing on US securities exchanges if it has failed to pass the US Public Company Accounting Oversight Board’s (PCAOB’s) audits for three straight years. This development is neither unprecedented nor unexpected as the inconsistencies between the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)/PCAOB rules and Chinese national security legislation have long been discussed.

The bill, which was approved in the US Senate, will now need to be passed in the House of Representatives and be signed by the president in order to become law. In its current form, the law would not cause Chinese companies in the US to be delisted automatically. Instead, as noted, companies would need to fail three consecutive years of audits and be deemed subject to removal by the SEC.

If the law is passed as written, we think its direct and immediate impact on equity markets may be limited. After all, the bill’s design offers years for Chinese companies to adapt to the new US standard. And even if Chinese ADRs were to ultimately delist, Chinese domestic capital markets are supported by deep local savings pools. Importantly, this proposed law would also not stop existing US investors from trading ADR ownership for locally listed ownership, as it does not prevent US-based investors from purchasing the equity of Chinese businesses listed in Asia.

In addition, a comparison of two major Chinese conglomerates — one with a US listing and one without — shows that the firm with an ADR listing does not receive a valuation premium for its access to US capital markets. This could indicate that at least large companies may be able move away from ADR listings through new listings on exchanges such as Shanghai or Hong Kong without harming their market capitalizations. However, the law may prove challenging for smaller Chinese companies that are only listed in the United States.

New Hong Kong security laws

Notably, the US was not alone in announcing new legislation. China opened its annual National People’s Congress meeting in May by revealing new laws that seek to prevent, stop, and punish secession, subversion, foreign interference, and terrorism in Hong Kong. The decision sidestepped Hong Kong’s legislature and has called into question the “one country, two systems” model which has been in place since Hong Kong was turned over by the British. In response, President Trump announced that the US would terminate Hong Kong’s special trading status — which would allow the possibility of US sanctions. Since the law took effect at the end of June, the US has enacted several policies that further distance the two countries and prompted tit-for-tat responses from Beijing.

Looking ahead

While the US-China conflict has been shaped by the Trump administration’s policy, increasingly negative perceptions of China in the US have yielded bipartisan support for tough policies (Figure 2). We therefore believe tensions are unlikely to end regardless of the outcome of November’s US presidential election. In fact, we think the conflict will continue to escalate as rhetoric accelerates approaching the election. However, we are also mindful of the deep economic and financial ties that continue to bind the world’s two largest economies together. Within the confines of economically rational decision making, we think these ties will draw boundaries around negotiations.

FIGURE 2

Negative views of China continue to grow in US

We find it helpful to consider US-Russia relations as an example of where we may ultimately see the limits of this conflict. In 2018, various Russian sanction proposals were put forward, but most were not implemented. This was, in part, due to their inevitable impact on other economies and financial markets. For instance, we think the US Treasury Department understood that forced sales of foreign-owned Russian assets would negatively impact US institutions and individuals, as well as our allies.

Finally, we know from experience that disruption creates winners and losers. Select companies in and around China continue to benefit from a multiyear import substitution trend, driven by the trade dispute. In addition, the COVID-19 crisis is likely to further accelerate the evolution of global supply chains. While this may eventually harm some Chinese exporters, such as health care equipment manufacturers, at the same time, we expect many consumer and technology companies to see increased demand as Chinese buyers shift to shopping locally.

As US-China tensions intensify amid COVID-19, the US election, and many legislative proposals, we’ll continue to offer our latest insights on how the evolving conflict could impact global investment markets.

Please see the important disclosure page for more information.

RECOMMENDED FOR YOU

Will non-US value ever outperform? A contrarian value perspective
The valuation gap between growth and value stocks has reached new extremes. What will it take for value to finally bounce back? Two of our senior contrarian investors offer their take on international markets, including thoughts on traditional value sectors, such as energy and financials.
August 2020
Will non-US value ever outperform? A contrarian value perspective
,
The US election: Is there a “blue wave” coming?
How could blue-collar distress impact the US election outcome? Macro Strategist Juhi Dhawan considers several scenarios and the potential economic and market effects.
August 2020
The US election: Is there a “blue wave” coming?
,
US-China frictions: Reading between the headlines
We highlight the escalating conflict between the US and China and discuss potential investment implications.
August 2020
US-China frictions: Reading between the headlines
,
<span>Top of Mind</span> Back to before or protracted pain ahead?
After a tumultuous first half of 2020, what comes next for the pandemic, the economy, and the markets? Multi-Asset Strategist Adam Berger considers several scenarios and offers a set of near-term and longer-term investment policy ideas.
July 2020
Top of Mind Back to before or protracted pain ahead?
,
Millennials coming of age: An underappreciated<br> positive for US growth
The millennial generation is coming to the fore in the US labor market, a demographic trend that has major implications for housing and other sectors, economic growth, inflation, and the upcoming US election.
July 2020
Millennials coming of age: An underappreciated
positive for US growth
,
Imbalanced credit markets create opportunities
Learn why we believe today's credit market dislocations will persist into the future, providing exploitable inefficiencies for opportunistic fixed income investors.
July 2020
Imbalanced credit markets create opportunities
,
EMs join QE club: The context you need
Emerging markets (EM) central banks across the globe have recently unveiled asset purchase programs loosely referred to as “quantitative easing (QE).” Our macro team takes a closer look and considers potential investment implications.
June 2020
EMs join QE club: The context you need
,
Global cycle: Uniform shock, uneven fiscal response
While most economies face a similar threat from the coronavirus, their fiscal responses have varied widely. Macro Strategist John Butler believes this will present investment opportunities in the years ahead.
May 2020
Global cycle: Uniform shock, uneven fiscal response
,

We use cookies to improve your experience on our website. To accept cookies click Accept & Close, or continue browsing as normal. For more information, visit Cookies & Tracking NoticE.