原创 2016-06-19 季天鹤央行观察

行动不能脱离时代，现有的统计条件使得社会融资规模以现在的方式出现，已经难能可贵，值得人们为之点赞。

作者：季天鹤，方正中期研究院研究员、央行观察专栏作家

2016年3月6日，《央行观察》发表了《社会融资规模成为货币政策调控目标》一文。从2010年10月周行提出，能否从金融机构资产侧搞出一个补充M2的指标开始，社会融资规模已经问世将近七年。社会融资规模的提出和应用，是理论和实践的创新。本文试图从社会融资规模的现状出发，畅想社会融资规模的未来。

M2的问题

货币量和实体经济之间存在传导机制，而传导机制本身随着时间推移会有变化。实体经济有自己的供给和需求，货币有自己的供给和需求，这四者还会相互作用，从而体现为实体经济活动以及价格水平的变化，这里的价格水平不仅是实体商品和服务的价格，也包括二手房和金融产品等资产的价格。

货币量增加，要转化为对实体经济的购买，才会对实体经济产生影响。在中国，货币量的增加，部分被用来满足人们的投资需要，例如简单持有以应对未来支出(包括积累购房首付)，或者没有丰富投资渠道获取利息或分红从而“被迫”简单持有存款。这部分货币不用来支出，对实体经济当然没有影响。

新创造的货币被支出，还要看实体经济的情况。过去人们物质生活匮乏，有了钱就进行购买。在这一情况下，货币量增长会转化为对商品的全面购买。如果此时供给侧产能很大或者产能很容易跟上，那么对商品的全面购买就转化为产出的增加。如果供给侧产能有限或者不容易跟上，那么对商品的全面购买就转化为价格全面上涨。

现在人们物质生活丰富了，脱离了什么都买的情况，而是有选择的购买，价格（包括商品服务和金融资产）全面上涨就变成了有涨有跌。现在新增的货币量，一部分被简单持有，一部分被用来购买部分商品服务，一部分用来投资各类金融资产。这和过去物质匮乏时代，新增货币量基本被用来购买商品从而带动产出不同。

另外，随着金融的发展，金融工具的发行本身会造成货币从出资人到融资人那里，而这个过程里并没有货币总量的增加，而只有转移。在这一情形下，货币总量这一指标是完全没有变化的，但融资人拿到钱之后的支出会带动产出增加，产出是会变化的。由此我们看到，货币总量这一指标此时就忽视了直接融资带来对实体经济的影响，后面还会提到这一点。

总之，在现在的情况下，传导机制已经变化。货币量增速加快未必对应着产出或价格的增速加快，而货币量增速下降也未必对应着产出或价格的增速下降。由此，人们考虑寻找新的指标。

社会融资规模的目的

社会融资规模和GDP一样也是一个流量。比如说人民币贷款，就是金融机构通过贷款这一途径给实体经济提供的资金净规模，债券就是通过债券这一途径给实体经济提供的资金净规模，信托贷款就是信托这一非银行金融机构通过贷款这一途径给实体经济提供的资金净规模。融资人拿到钱之后就会花掉，如果不花掉的话，应该也就没有融资的必要和需要。融资人的购买会带动产出，直到不再被支出，或者离开实体经济进入金融市场打转为止。这些融资人的资金来源，要么是银行创造的钱，要么是一些有钱但是不花钱的人的钱被挪过来。这两种情况对于融资人是一样的，融资以后发生的事情也是一样的，人们不会区分这笔钱是创造的还是挪移的。

如果把所有融资人融资的钱的规模搞清楚，并假定钱被花出去后，这些钱和经济中已经运转的钱的运转情况一样，那么一段时间内融资的规模和新增的经济产出之间，就会有比较好的相关关系。社会融资规模较货币量有优势，因为融资本身意味着支出，避免了货币量增长但却被用来留在手里的问题。同时，社会融资规模考虑了货币规模不变时货币挪移给融资人后被支出这一情况，因此也克服了货币总量无法涵盖直接融资的问题。

而之所以说社会融资规模是考虑资产侧，一方面是因为贷款等项目确实是在金融机构的资产侧，而另一方面或者更深入的一方面，乃是因为对金融机构来说，资产意味着货币创造和流动的轨迹。从信贷收支表的角度看，银行的资产被称作资金的“运用”，这虽然沿袭了纸币时代的视角，但相比存款被称作资金的“来源”已经不适用于货币创造的时代而言，贷款被称作资金的运用在现在依然准确。

不过说到轨迹，我们会觉得社会融资规模存量有些耐人寻味。把10年里面股票融资的和加总的意义是什么呢？把10年的保险赔付加总的意义是什么呢？或者，把10年的GDP加总的意义是什么呢？由此，在使用社会融资规模存量这个指标的时候，要仔细思考其背后的意义。

社会融资规模的未来：与实体经济的关系

经过了上面的分析，我们就能更好地思考社会融资规模的未来。社会融资规模需要解决两块问题，一个是其与实体经济的关系，一个是如何统计各种融资。

社会融资规模假定融资人融到资并支出之后，会按照现有货币流的运动方式运动。但是，融资人可能上来就把钱投入了金融市场，例如银行给企业贷款，但企业用贷款炒股，使得股票市场池子里的钱变多，但实体经济并没有受到拉动。即使融资人把钱投入了实体经济里，运动的方式也未必是按照现有货币流方式运动。

实体经济内部也会有各种融资，而实体经济外部可以通过非融资的方式提供货币。民间借贷、商业汇票乃至赊购赊销都是融资，但社会融资规模并不考虑。同样，人民银行贷款给证金公司救市，这笔钱被创造出来，通过证金公司流向股民手里，其实和人民银行对股民增发货币等价，股民可以用来购买(比如炒房和螺纹钢)，但社会融资规模并不考虑这些。上述例子均表明，社会融资规模忽略了一部分对实体经济产生影响的融资。

另外，社会融资规模没有考虑跨境收付款与结售汇对经济的影响。人民币下跌中，把人民币坚挺时还的美元，在人民币下跌后又换成人民币，会迫使银行创造更多人民币。出口商拿到美元换人民币也会创造人民币。这里面新增的人民币被支出自然会影响实体经济，社会融资规模也没有涵盖。但是，如果没有被支出而是留在外汇市场，那么对实体经济又没有影响。考虑到现在结汇已经不是像10年前一样对实体经济产生巨大影响，或者说结售汇的金融属性比过去更强，因此社会融资规模不考虑结售汇或许问题不大。结售汇的情形，和银行购买各类固定资产是类似的。

社会融资规模的未来：如何统计各种融资

我们可以考虑两个参数。第一个是融资角度，到底是有后续现金流义务或者可能的债务、股权，还是没有后续的给与，这一划分标准容易理解。第二个是出资角度，出资人给出的是自己的资产、负债或所有者权益。这方面更仔细的讨论，可以参考《央行观察》此前发表的《直接融资和间接融资的新框架》。

负债/所有者权益出资里面，目前可能的出资人包括央行、银行和余额宝。央行可以提供从准备金存款/纸币（央行负债）、到银行存款（银行负债）、到余额宝余额（余额宝权益）的各层流动性。银行可以提供银行存款和余额宝余额等各层流动性。余额宝只能提供余额宝余额这一层流动性。这种划分方法，给未来增加更多子孙层面的余额宝留下可能。这样的出资，全都用动词“创造……给”表示。

资产出资里面，目前可能的出资人是央行、银行、非银行（包括余额宝）、余额宝持有者等。出资内容可能是所有机构的资产（典型的就是外币和黄金），准备金存款（央行负债，例如银行给财政）、银行存款（银行负债，例如信托给企业、企业给企业、民间信贷）、余额宝权益（例如余额宝持有者把余额宝份额借给另一个余额宝用户）。这样的出资，全都用动词“转移……给“表示。

这样的划分方法，允许了流动性层级无限扩张，也允许了各种新的流动性内涵的诞生。我们不但可以把现有的各种业务放到这个框架里面，同时可以利用这个框架推演出很多可能的新操作。比如，人民币贷款是银行创造银行负债给非银，外币贷款是银行转移外币资产给非银，委托贷款、未承兑汇票、信托贷款、保险赔付都是非银转移银行负债给非银，股票和债券都需要进一步细化。

而对于还不在社会融资规模里的操作，我们可以看出，蚂蚁花呗是非银创造非银权益给非银，蚂蚁借呗是非银转移银行负债给非银，理财产品借款给房地产公司也是非银转移银行存款给非银。央行给证金的贷款，是央行创造银行负债给非银，并同时创造了央行负债给银行。黄金借贷之类的业务也可以被纳入到这个体系当中。

小结

行动不能脱离时代，现有的统计条件使得社会融资规模以现在的方式出现，已经难能可贵，值得人们为之点赞。而未来随着技术的不断进步，社会融资规模也会不断改善，最终越来越精确地描绘货币的来去生灭，人们可以更清晰地看到实体经济和货币是怎样互动的。这不仅是周行看似不经意的发问，更是17世纪重商主义者以来，历代货币学者一直的追求，即透过货币总量，看到货币运动。社会融资规模的未来，充满希望，衷心祝愿这一指标越走越好。

The action cannot be separated from the era. The existing statistical conditions have led to the emergence of the total social financing in its current form, which is already commendable and deserving of praise.

On March 6, 2016, "Central Bank Observation" published an article titled "Total Social Financing Becomes a Target of Monetary Policy Regulation." Since the introduction of the concept by Zhou Xiaochuan in October 2010, it has been almost seven years since the concept of total social financing first appeared. The introduction and application of the concept of total social financing represent an innovation in theory and practice. This article attempts to start from the current situation of total social financing and envision its future.

Issues with M2

There exists a mechanism of transmission between money supply and the real economy, and this mechanism changes over time. The real economy has its own supply and demand, while money has its own supply and demand. These four factors interact with each other, leading to changes in real economic activities and price levels. Here, price levels encompass not only the prices of physical goods and services but also asset prices such as second-hand housing and financial products.

An increase in the money supply needs to be transformed into purchases in the real economy in order to impact it. In China, an increase in the money supply is partly used to meet people's investment needs, such as holding money for future expenses (including accumulating down payments for housing) or for the lack of diverse investment channels to earn interest or dividends, thus being "forced" to simply hold deposits. This portion of money not used for expenditure naturally has no impact on the real economy.

The newly created money, when spent, also depends on the situation of the real economy. In times of material scarcity in the past, having money meant making purchases. In such cases, the growth of the money supply would be translated into comprehensive purchases of goods. If the supply-side production capacity is large or easily keeps up at this time, the comprehensive purchase of goods would translate into increased output. If the supply-side production capacity is limited or not easily matched, the comprehensive purchase of goods would lead to overall price increases.

Now that people's material lives are more abundant and no longer involve buying everything, but rather selective purchases, the comprehensive rise in prices (including goods, services, and financial assets) becomes more variable, with both increases and decreases. The newly added money supply is partly held, partly used to purchase some goods and services, and partly invested in various financial assets. This is different from the past era of material scarcity when the newly created money supply was primarily used to purchase goods and thereby drive output.

Furthermore, with the development of finance, the issuance of financial instruments itself can result in the transfer of money from contributors to financiers, a process that does not increase the total money supply but only redistributes it. In such a scenario, the total money supply as an indicator remains unchanged, yet the spending of financiers after receiving the money stimulates increased output, which can change. Thus, we see that the total money supply indicator at this point overlooks the direct impact of direct financing on the real economy, and this point will be mentioned later.

In summary, under the current circumstances, the transmission mechanism has already changed. A faster growth rate of the money supply does not necessarily correspond to a faster growth rate of output or prices, and a slower growth rate of the money supply does not necessarily correspond to a slower growth rate of output or prices. Therefore, people are considering finding new indicators.

Purpose of Total Social Financing

Similar to GDP, total social financing is also a flow indicator. For example, RMB loans are the net scale of funds provided by financial institutions to the real economy through loans, bonds are the net scale of funds provided by financial institutions to the real economy through bonds, and trust loans are the net scale of funds provided by non-bank financial institutions to the real economy through trust loans. After financiers receive money, they will spend it. If they do not spend it, there would be no need for financing. The spending of financiers will stimulate output until it is no longer expended or until it leaves the real economy and enters the financial market. The sources of funds for these financiers either come from money created by banks or from money moved from individuals who have money but don't spend it. For financiers, these two cases are the same, and the events that occur after financing are also the same. People do not differentiate whether this money was created or moved.

If the scale of all funds financed by financiers is clarified and assuming that after the funds are spent, these funds move in the same way as the existing money flow, then there should be a relatively good relationship between the scale of financing and the newly added economic output over a period of time. Total social financing has advantages over the money supply because financing itself implies expenditure, avoiding the problem of money supply growth being held instead of spent. At the same time, total social financing takes into account the situation where money moved from the money supply to financiers is spent, thereby overcoming the problem of money supply not covering direct financing.

The reason why total social financing is considered from the perspective of the asset side is partly because items like loans are indeed on the asset side of financial institutions. On a deeper level, it's because for financial institutions, assets represent the trajectory of money creation and circulation. From the perspective of the balance of payments, a bank's assets are referred to as "use of funds." Although this perspective has its origins in the era of paper money, it is no longer applicable to the era of money creation, where the term "source of funds" is no longer suitable. Loans being referred to as the use of funds remains accurate.

However, when it comes to trajectory, the stock of total social financing is intriguing. What is the meaning of summing up stock from stock market financing over ten years? What about summing up ten years of insurance payouts? Or summing up ten years of GDP? Therefore, when using the stock of total social financing, it's necessary to carefully consider its underlying meaning.

The Future of Total Social Financing: Relationship with the Real Economy

After the analysis above, we can better contemplate the future of total social financing. Total social financing needs to address two issues: its relationship with the real economy and how to measure various types of financing.

Total social financing assumes that after financiers receive and spend funds, they will move in the same way as the current monetary flow. However, financiers might invest the money in the financial market right away. For example, when banks lend to enterprises, but enterprises use the loan to speculate in stocks, it increases the funds in the stock market pool, but the real economy is not boosted. Even if financiers invest the money in the real economy, the way it moves might not necessarily follow the current monetary flow.

Various types of financing also exist within the real economy, and the external real economy can provide money through non-financing means. Private lending, commercial drafts, and even deferred purchases all involve financing, but total social financing does not consider them. Similarly, when the People's Bank of China lends to the China Securities Finance Corporation to stabilize the market, although this money is created, it flows to stockholders through the China Securities Finance Corporation, which is essentially equivalent to the People's Bank of China issuing money to stockholders. However, total social financing does not consider these aspects. The examples above show that total social financing ignores some financing that affects the real economy.

Additionally, total social financing does not consider the impact of cross-border receipts and payments and foreign exchange transactions on the economy. In the context of the depreciation of the renminbi, exchanging renminbi for US dollars when the renminbi is strong and then exchanging it back into renminbi when the renminbi has depreciated will compel banks to create more renminbi. Exporters exchanging US dollars for renminbi will also create renminbi. The newly added renminbi from such transactions, when spent, will naturally affect the real economy, but total social financing does not cover this aspect. However, if the funds are not spent but rather remain in the foreign exchange market, it will have no impact on the real economy. Considering that now, foreign exchange transactions no longer have a huge impact on the real economy like they did ten years ago, or in other words, the financial attributes of foreign exchange transactions are stronger than in the past, total social financing not considering foreign exchange transactions might not be a significant issue. The situation of foreign exchange transactions is similar to banks purchasing various fixed assets.

The Future of Total Social Financing: Measuring Various Types of Financing

We can consider two parameters. The first one is from the perspective of financing, whether there are subsequent cash flow obligations or possible debts and equity, or whether there is no subsequent obligation. This division criterion is easy to understand. The second parameter is from the perspective of investment, whether the provider offers their assets, liabilities, or ownership equity. More detailed discussions in this area can refer to "Central Bank Observation's" previously published article, "A New Framework for Direct and Indirect Financing."

Among liabilities/ownership equity investment, possible providers currently include the central bank, banks, and Yu'ebao (a money market fund). The central bank can provide various levels of liquidity from reserve deposits/paper currency (central bank liabilities) to bank deposits (bank liabilities) to Yu'ebao balances (Yu'ebao equity). Banks can provide various levels of liquidity, including bank deposits and Yu'ebao balances. Yu'ebao can only provide Yu'ebao balances as one level of liquidity. This method of categorization leaves room for the possibility of adding more levels of Yu'ebao in the future. These forms of investment are all described using the verb "create... for."

Among asset investments, the possible providers currently are the central bank, banks, non-banks (including Yu'ebao), and holders of Yu'ebao. The content of investment may be the assets of all institutions (typified by foreign currency and gold), reserve deposits (central bank liabilities, for instance when banks provide funds to the government), bank deposits (bank liabilities, for instance when trusts provide funds to enterprises or when enterprises provide funds to other enterprises or private loans), and Yu'ebao equity (for instance when holders of Yu'ebao balances lend them to another Yu'ebao user). This form of investment is described using the verb "transfer... to."

This classification method allows for unlimited expansion of liquidity levels and also permits the emergence of various new liquidity connotations. We can not only place existing business activities within this framework but also use this framework to deduce many possible new operations. For example, RMB loans involve banks creating bank liabilities for non-banks, while foreign currency loans involve banks transferring foreign currency assets to non-banks. Entrusted loans, unaccepted drafts, trust loans, insurance payouts, all involve non-banks transferring bank liabilities to non-banks. Stocks and bonds both need further refinement.

As for operations not yet included in total social financing, we can see that Alipay's Huabei creates non-bank equity for non-banks, while Alipay's Jiebei transfers bank liabilities to non-banks. Lending financial products to real estate companies is also the non-bank transferring bank deposits to non-banks. The People's Bank of China's loan to the China Securities Finance Corporation involves the central bank creating bank liabilities for non-banks, while simultaneously creating central bank liabilities for banks. Operations such as gold borrowing and lending can also be included in this framework.

Summary

Actions cannot be divorced from the era. The existing statistical conditions have brought about the current manifestation of total social financing, which is commendable and deserving of praise. With continuous technological progress in the future, total social financing will continue to improve, ultimately providing a clearer depiction of the creation, circulation, arrival, and departure of money, allowing people to more distinctly see how the real economy and money interact. This is not only a seemingly casual question posed by Zhou Xiaochuan but also a pursuit that monetary scholars have sought since the mercantilists of the 17th century—to see money movement through the total money supply. The future of total social financing is full of hope, and it's sincerely hoped that this indicator will continue to improve.