巴曙鬆教授主持、蔣丹芃女士採訪：與美國前財政部長顧問對話

【特邀嘉賓】

Craig Phillips於2017年1月-2019年1月擔任美國財政部長顧問，主要工作是金融機構和資本市場政策、財政政策運行、政府的資產負債管理和總體經濟政策。他負責制定了13772行政令監管美國金融體系的核心原則。他協助財政部長姆努欽制定了房地產金融綜合改革和財政部對兩房的投資監管。此前Craig曾就職於黑石、摩根斯坦利和瑞信。他是證券化產品領域的開拓者。

對話採訪人Maggie Jiang蔣丹芃是中國銀行紐約分行的SVP，近期負責協助中資客戶在整個美洲的日常經營融資、跨境併購、結構融資等。蔣女士之前就職瑞士信貸、巴克萊斯、和花旗集團,從事結構產品一級資本市場發行、併購諮詢及融資。蔣女士也是全美華人金融協會（TCFA）董事及前主席，前美國結構產品行業協會中國委員會主席，現任紐約非贏利醫療服務中心The Family Center 董事。

【會議紀要】

（文中觀點僅僅代表主講人個人觀點，不代表任何機構的意見，也不構成投資建議，僅供內部討論）

一、中美關係/US China Relationship

蔣女士： Mr. Phillips, thank you so much for taking the time to be with us today! First, let’s start with US/China Relationship.

At one point during the earlier phase of the trade negotiations it was believed that the Trump Administration was considering a policy of limiting U.S. inflows into China. You were quoted in the press that such actions “had the potential for tremendous unintended consequences”. Why did you say that and where do you think discussions on that matter stand?

蔣女士：首先我們來聊聊中美關係。中美第一階段談判中，曾經傳出特朗普政府正考慮禁止美國資本流入中國的措施，您當時對媒體表示這將產生非我們所願的巨大後果。您為什麼這麼說？

Craig: Sure, one of the key parts of success of the global economy is the free flow of capital. At one point there was a rumor that if the U.S. cannot reach an agreement with China on trade that was acceptable, restrictions on investments into China could be introduced. I am of the opinion that would be a very poor policy and there would be no reason to link capital flows to trade negotiations. It was going to be a disadvantage for U.S. party by not giving them the opportunity to invest in China, or anywhere else where such a policy was adapted for that matter. If China reataliated with a similar policy the consequences would escalate. For instance, the United States is very dependent on Chinese flows in our Treasury debt market. So I am pleased to see that policy was not pursued and I would not expect to be on future policy agendas.

Craig: 全球經濟成功的一大原因來自資本自由流動。當時有一種傳言（更像是一種威脅）如果美國得不到想要的協議，就會禁止向中國投資。我認為這是非常糟糕的政策，不應該將資本流動與貿易談判掛鉤。對於美國來說，如果因此而不能投資中國或其他任何區域，將是一大損失。如果中國以牙壞牙，那麼結果會進一步惡化。例如，美方本身非常依賴中國資金流入美國國債市場。因此我非常高興這項政策沒被執行，我認為這項政策也將不會出現在政策日程表上。

蔣女士：What do you see next for China and U.S. Trade talks now that a phase-one deal has been agreed?

蔣女士：中美第一階段協議達成後，下一步怎麼走？

Craig: The U.S. election is in November and we are now at the final stage of the Democratic primary to select their candidate for president. Obviously the election will also dictate the control of Senate and House of Representatives. So really everything is politics now. I think there was a very strong motivation for President Trump to reach the Phase One trade deal and to pause the phase-two agreement to after the election. I suspect that we will live with the current state throughout the year, and it won't be resumed until after the election. Obviously, if President Trump is re-elected, and I believe that he will be, he will be in charge of it. If he's not re-elected, we will see what posture a Democratic Administration may take. The American public were fatigued with the negotiations, to be honest, as I'm sure the Chinese people were. While this was a popular election issue and an issue on which President Trump was elected, there been a lot of consequences to the tariffs which many found unacceptable. So I think the US public is relieved that we got to this phase and may be satisfied if we don't open it up to another phase thereafter. That will remain to be seen based on the election.

Carig：總統大選是在11月份，我們目前所處的階段是民主黨初選，當然我們還有參眾兩院選舉，所以現在一切都與政治相關。我認為總統特朗普有很強的意願去先達成一個階段性協議，並把第二階段留在大選之後，所以2020年的中美貿易關係傾向於維持現狀。如果特朗普連任，那麼他會主導第二階段談判，如果他沒有連任，我們需要觀察民主黨會採取何種姿態。我認為美國民眾已經對談判有些疲勞了，中國人民應該也是。這項談判本身是特朗普當初得以當選的政治承諾之一，但在實際執行過程中對關稅與原有的貿易狀況造成了諸多衝擊，也已經開始引發一部分人不滿。我認為美國民眾對第一階段協議達成的反應是長舒一口氣，如果未來宣佈第二階段不再開啟（談判就此結束），會有更多人感到解脫，當然這取決於選舉的結果。

蔣女士：What do you think the market is telling us about their comfort with global trade tensions? Do we face any down-side surprises?

蔣女士：您認為市場正在以什麼樣的方式講述它對全球貿易摩擦的認識？我們正面臨什麼下行風險嗎？

Craig: I think trade tensions presented tremendous downside to the markets. And I think the thing we recognize was that China wasn't the only country that we had issues with. President Trump opened trade issues with numerous counties in a manner that was not highly disciplined sort of didn't have enough discipline and wide range of products and trade flows. This may be an ongoing characteristic of a second Trump term if re-elected. The IMF and many others have also cited trade as one of the biggest uncertainties to the world economy.

Craig: 我認為貿易爭端帶來了巨大的下行風險。目前我們不僅與中國有貿易爭端，特朗普總統在與其他眾多國家的貿易爭端中也有些缺乏規則，並且具體問題廣泛涉及商品和貿易。如果特朗普連任，這一特點將在其第二個任期中延續。IMF和許多其他機構已經把貿易視作全球經濟的最大不確定性之一。

蔣女士：Some of the regulatory reforms were designed to make U.S. companies more competitive globally. What does that mean for cross-border capital flows and implications for emerging markets?

蔣女士：一些監管改革使美國公司更具國際競爭力，並且更好地適應了不同地區銀行的要求，這對新興市場的跨境資本流動有什麼參考意義？

Craig: Global trade is complex and difficult to reduce to a bilateral basis between two countries. Our largest companies operate all around the world. They access labor markets and supply chains all around the world, not just China. So while General Motors sells a lot of cars in the U.S. also sell a lot of cars in China. BMW which is a German company, manufacture a lot of their cars here in the U.S.

Because of these factors, it is difficult to assess the impact of tariffs on U. S. companies. The general idea was that jobs would come back to the U.S. if we had “fair trade”. That may not be realistic expectation due to our cost structure, availability of natural resources and other factors.

But generally speaking, it's very important that you have companies that are competitive and pursue policies that achieve that goal.

Carig: 全球貿易極為複雜，很難將其簡單的簡化為兩國之間的雙邊貿易。美國的大公司遍佈世界，他們進入全球勞動力市場和供應鏈，這不僅是在中國。通用在中美都銷售大量的汽車。寶馬是德國公司，同時也在美國製造生產。

基於上述原因，很難評估關稅對美國公司的影響。通常人們會認為，如果美國獲得了“貿易公平”，工作崗位就會回到美國。但考慮到我們的成本結構、自然資源的可得性和其他原因，這恐怕是不切實際的期待。

簡言之，非常重要的是，一個國家應該擁有具備競爭力的公司以及提高公司競爭力的政策。

蔣女士：Do you think the big US asset managers, banks, and insurance companies like Blackrock, Alliance Bersten, Fidelity, JPM Morgan, Bank of America, Morgan Stanley, MetLife, New York Life, etc. are likely to expand in China in a meaningful scale later 2020, or they are still watching out on how the Chinese government and related agencies can carry out the phase one trade agreement first? Or would the mid to small size asset managers/banks more likely to make the first move?

蔣女士：您認為美國大型資產管理公司、銀行和保險公司,比如Blackrock, Alliance Bersten, Fidelity, JPM Morgan, Bank of America, Morgan Stanley, MetLife, New York Life等公司是否會在2020年以後擴大在中國的經營規模？他們還在觀望中國政府和相關機構如何實施第一階段貿易協議嗎?中小型資產管理公司/銀行更有可能邁出第一步嗎？

Craig: For almost three years I listened to a lot of CEO and they really have two issues. The number one issue was just equal access to the domestic Chinese market. Because the US allows China, as well as every other country, to invest in businesses here we would like symmetrical treatment. The other issue is improving the protection of intellectual property.

So I really do think that the Chinese government would be well served to allow financial institutions to enter China. I think that move would promote economic growth and opportunity in both countires. It also may mitigate future and tougher stances on trade negotiations. Historically, many of the companies you mentioned, like Blackrock, JP Morgan, Bank of America and Morgan Stanley, access the financial market in China through subsidiaries in Hong Kong or by entering joint ventures. Hopefully, new policy will allow them to consider creating on-the-ground presence to operate in China. A long term stable environment of trust between the two countries with lessen tension on trade in the long run.

I also think that China will benefit from the innovation that U.S. companies could introduce in the domestic market. So you do have a lot of things in China that mirror things that exist in the western world, but you duplicate things in Chinese terms. There will be a meaningful increase in commerce and investment ideas and innovation. China will benefit from investing around the world, so honestly, if you don't allow equal investment in China, eventually other countries may limit investment opportunities around the world, which won't really help China.

Craig：我在過去三年聽取了很多CEO們的意見。提到最多的是希望能夠對等的進入中國市場，因為美國允許中國和其他國家在美投資，我們希望能夠獲得對等的對待另一個問題是改進知識產權保護。因此我認為，如果允許金融機構進入中國，中國政府將從中獲益。這不僅會促進中美雙方的經濟增長和更多的機會，而且還可能緩和美方未來在貿易談判中更加強硬的立場。你提到的許多公司，如Blackrock，JP Morgan, Bank of America, Morgan Stanley，他們歷史上多通過香港的分支機構或以合資企業的形式進入中國。希望新的安排能讓他們考慮在中國的業務進一步落地。兩國之間長期穩定的信任環境從長遠來看會降低貿易緊張程度。

我還認為，中國將從美國公司進入中國國內市場帶來的創新中受益。在中國確實有很多東西是西方世界的翻版，但是你們用中國的方式複製。這將會促成商業、投資理念和創新的顯著增長。中國將從世界各地的投資中受益。所以老實說，如果不允許在中國進行平等的投資，最終其他國家可能會限制世界各地的投資機會，這對中國沒有好處。

蔣女士：The Phase one agreement almost mentioned that US will expedite the outstanding license application by CITIC 中信 and CICC 中金. What kind of timeline do you think this can be? Will this be conditioned on China’s progress in opening up its financial markets?

蔣女士：第一階段協議中提到美國將加快中信和中金的許可申請，您有什麼時間節點上的判斷嗎? 這是否仍取決於中國開放金融市場的進展?

Craig: I agree with that it is a 2-way street. Our host for this session today, the Bank of China, operates a large subsidiary here in the U.S. Encouraging Chinese broker dealers to operate in the U.S. is good policy. It will create a healthier capital flows between the countries.

Craig：我認為這是雙向的。今天我們討論的主持人（注：蔣丹芃女士）來自中國銀行，中國銀行在美國有一家很大的分行。鼓勵中國的券商進入美國市場是一項好措施。這會促成雙方更為健康的資本流動。

二、美國大選/US Election

蔣女士： We are in the midst of US election cycle now. What do you think the market is telling us about the outcome of the 2020 elections?

蔣女士：我們目前正處於美國大選的中段，您認為是市場告訴我們怎樣的選舉結果？

Craig: I think the market has been very bullish and has been able to absorb a lot of bad news, such as military tension, immigration issues and many other factors. The virus is another factor introducing tremendous uncertainty.

But I think in general, the U.S. market is now pricing in a Trump re-election. The market is certainly not pricing in the consequences of an extremely progressive Democrat being elected. On the democratic side, there's surely some very radical policies that are being advocated like socialist type ideas of free education, universal health care and the series of other benefits that if they were enacted and they clearly have social value, but would probably significantly increase the deficit, and the deficit is already very high. So once we know who the Democratic candidate is we can assess the range of outcomes of the election and that may be reflected in the market, depending on the outcome.

The other big factor that may impact the market is the direction in tax policy. The Trump tax policy has been good for the market. Obviously, part of the reason why we are still in a continued expansion is we are in a the lower tax rates to make US more competitive. Some of the candidates are in favors of raising tax rates and , in some cases, eliminating capital gains benefits. So as we get closer to the election this factor could also have an impact.

So I think the market is more positioned to assume President Trump is re-elected.

Craig：我認為到目前為止美國股市一直非常強勁，並且經受住了諸如軍事衝突、移民問題以及許多其他要素的打擊。但是，當前新冠病毒帶來了巨大的不確定性。

但我認為市場總體在定價特朗普會連任，顯然市場當前的價格並未反映激進的民主黨人會獲勝。在美國國內，競選中當然會提倡一些激進的政策方針，如社會主義類型的免費教育、全民醫保以及一系列競選承諾。這些承諾固然具有社會價值，但這也同時將導致本身就已極高的赤字變得不可收拾。因此一旦我們知道民主黨候選人是誰，我們就可以評估選舉結果的範圍。這可能反映在市場上，具體如何反映取決於選舉結果。

另外一個影響市場的重要因素是稅收政策的方向。特朗普的稅收政策對市場有利。很明顯，我們仍在持續擴張的部分原因是美國的稅率更低，使美國更有競爭力。一些候選人傾向於提高稅率，在某些情況下，取消資本利得收益。所以隨著大選的臨近，這個因素也會產生影響。

所以我認為市場更傾向於認為特朗普總統會連任。

蔣女士：The 2016 election result has been surprising, do we face any downside surprises now?

蔣女士：2016年的大選結果令人大跌眼鏡，我們目前看得到相關風險嗎？

Craig: The U.S. is right now very bitterly divided along partisan lines. Also many do not like the styla and personality of President Trump not respect how he has staffed his Administration. I think the election will come out to be very close, and it's very hard project. Who the Democrats select to run is a big factor. But at this point I would tend to agree with the market. Trump is more likely to be reelected than not.

Craig：美國現在的黨派分歧非常嚴重。還有很多人不喜歡特朗普總統的風格和個性，不認可他組織政府的方式。我認為選舉結果會非常接近，這會非常艱難。民主黨選擇誰來競選是一個重要因素。但在這一點上，我傾向於同意市場的看法，特朗普連任的可能性更大。

三、美國經濟與市場/ Economy & Market

蔣女士：The “lower for longer” rates environment is now with us. How is it impacting the U.S. and global economy? What policy options do Central Banks have available to them?

蔣女士：我們現在處於長期低利率環境中，這將如何影響美國與全球經濟？央行還有什麼政策選項？

Craig: I never thought that we would have rates as low as they are. When I joined the Treasury, our deficit had been rising and I really thought that would drive interest rates higher. But you just have saw very strong stimulation (of low interest rate policy) out of Europe, a lot of negative rates and sort of a flight to quality, which has driven US rates a very low level. So this is creating potential bubble in asset prices, because people can fund assets so cheaply. At the same time, it is creating some real pressure on bank and insurance company earnings and also putting a lot of pressure on people to save for retirement and grow their assets.

So I think low rates are an outcome that we're going to live with it for a long time. A consequence is that it leaves very few policy options to stimulate the economy in the event of a shock or a downturn. So here we are having a long recovery, but there will be a downturn that I am not really sure how you could stimulate it then since we have such low rates now.

So we talk about quantitative easing, but central banks also still have very elevated balance shets. So I think there are something we should assume, we have low rates for a long time and I think they have put a lot of pressure on the performance of the financial sector and savers, and it leaves very few policy options to stimulate the economy when we needs to.

Craig：我從未想到我們處於如此低的利率中。當初我加入財政部時，美國的赤字因短期減稅政策而攀升，我本以為這將引發利率上升。但正如你看到的，歐洲經歷的負利率氾濫以及資產逐利，間接導致了美國利率下行至低水平，並藉由低廉的融資成本進一步創造了潛在的資產泡沫。然而低利率同時給銀行、保險公司以及其他依賴利差為生的機構以極大的盈利壓力，同時對於為退休和資產增長儲蓄的人們構成了威脅。

我認為我們將繼續與低利率共存相當長的時間。其結果就是，當面臨衝擊或經濟下行時，政策空間極其有限，而在經歷瞭如此長時間的復甦之後，我們總會碰到週期下行，而目前的低利率讓我不知道屆時的刺激空間在哪。

談到量化寬鬆，央行資產負債表規模龐大。因此，我們應該假設，低利率已經相當長的時間了，這對金融板塊與儲戶造成很大壓力，並且可能導致經濟在需要刺激時缺乏手段。

蔣女士：There is much commentary on the status of the U.S. corporate credit market, and particularly leveraged loans. Do you see volatility there and how is it impacting the CLO market?

蔣女士：目前市場對美國企業信貸市場十分關注，尤其是槓桿貸款市場。您是否在企業信貸市場看到波動率即將上升， 這對擔保貸款憑證（CLO）市場又將產生什麼影響？

Carig:

First of all, there's a lot less leverage in the system than there was before the last crisis. Banks are much better capitalized with transparent liquidity requirements, perform stress tests and have resolution plans. I believe that despite we are at late cycle, the credit markets of the U.S. economy and the banking system are in a very strong shape.

The last down turn was led by the consumer and particularly mortgage borrowing that was too risky which led to a collapse in house prices and many mortgage delinquencies. Right now U.S. housing market is in an extremely conservative shape. Home equity is almost 17 trillion, our mortgage debt is about 10 or 10.7 trillion, but the home values are worth over 27 trillion. So the home equity cushion is extremely high.

So when people talk about the corporate market, by comparison, corporate debt has risen quite a bit. Total corporate debt is at a secular high of 48% of the GDP. More public companies operate with lower ratings, down to BBB, as they are rewarded by buying back stock and financing themselves more aggressively.

I think at the margin, if we had a recession, you attend to see maybe more impact on the US corporate credit market than the consumer market initially. Some of that debt is financed in the CLO market. I think the CLO are well-structured, the risks are well described, and I think investors know what they're buying. There are AAA tranches that are purchased by banks and other conservative, institutional investors. Also higher yield bought by hedge funds and others. I think most people know what they are buying. The size of the CLO market is less than a trillion dollars. So it's just not big enough really to move the whole U.S. economy. So we might have some setback within the cycle at corporate debt, probably rotating based on sectors.

Craig:我認為美國經濟目前非常健康，並沒有看到什麼崩盤或金融恐慌跡象。因此每當人們高呼恐慌就要來到時，我並不同意。第一，我們現在有著比金融危機前更低的槓桿，銀行的資本充足率更高，它們有透明的流動性要求，進行壓力測試，並有解決方案。我認為儘管我們處於晚週期，美國經濟的信貸市場和銀行系統都處於一個非常好的狀態。

上次危機是由消費者、尤其是風險極高的抵押貸款導致的，這導致了房價暴跌和許多抵押貸款拖欠。目前，美國房地產市場處於極度保守的狀態。房屋淨值接近17萬億美元，我們的抵押貸款債務約為10萬億或10.7萬億美元，但房屋價值超過27萬億美元。因此房屋淨值安全墊非常高。

公司債市場有所不同，公司債務有所上升，其佔總GDP比重已經到達了48%的歷史高點，這主要是由於上市公司不斷回購股票回購，融資更為激進。因此目前上市公司中BBB評級的公司更多了。

邊際上看，如果我們將迎來一場衰退，美國企業信貸市場受到的衝擊可能比消費者更大，而在企業信貸市場中的部分債務融資是通過擔保貸款憑證（CLO）完成的。我認為擔保貸款憑證結構良好，風險描述清晰，換言之購買者知道他們在買什麼——銀行和其他保守投資者往往持有AAA評級的部分，高收益型部分被對沖基金與其他機構買走。此外，擔保貸款憑證的市場規模在萬億美元以下，而整個槓桿貸款市場加起來也不過是1.3萬億美元，體量不足以撼動整個美國經濟。因此，在企業債務週期內，我們可能會遇到一些挫折，會根據行業出現輪動。

四、金融監管/ Regulation

蔣女士：Now turning the topic to regulations. Last June, Bloomberg News described you as the architect of much of President Trump’s plans for relaxing regulation for our financial institutions and capital markets. Where does that initiative stand?

蔣女士：我們來聊聊金融監管吧，去年6月，彭博將您描述為特朗普放鬆金融機構與資本市場監管計劃的總設計師，他為何這麼說？

Craig: Part of the task I had was just leading a study of regulation. And our general belief was that since the crisis there have been layers and layers of regulation introduced to our financial institutions that have become burdensome, particularly for smaller financial positions. So one of the main developments we advocated for relief for community banks and regional banks. So we did pass a major piece of banking legislation that raised the threshold for CCAR and exempt banks under $10 billion of assets from the Volcker Rule and a series of other things.

But for largest banks, there hasn't been much change at all. So I think that attitude initiative has been good to get credit flowing better, less burden on consumer and on decrease unnecessary regulation. Our largest banks still have the same level liquidity, capital and capital rules with a little more transparency and things like stress testing.

But I think the vision is laid out, the banking bills passed, and the current regulators are finishing the process. Some of the rulemaking does take a while. So there are still things in motion.

Craig：我的部分職責是領導一項關於監管的研究。我們的總體觀點是危機之後金融機構被施加了過多的監管，以至於對它們造成了沉重的負擔，尤其是小金融機構。因此，我們的一項重要任務就是為社區銀行與區域銀行減負。相應的，我們通過了一項提高CCAR（美聯儲綜合資本分析和審查）審查門檻的重要銀行法案，並免除了資產低於百億美元銀行包括沃爾克法則在內的一系列限制。

但對於大銀行來說，監管還沒有改變太多。我認為我們的出發點是讓信貸更自由地流通，降低消費者的負擔，並減少不必要的監管。大銀行在流動性、資本充足率以及資本規則上沒有變化，並且還有更多的透明度，以及壓力測試之類的要求。

但我認為前景已經確定，銀行法案已經通過，目前的監管機構正在完成這一過程。一些規則的制定確實需要一段時間。所以仍然有一些行動還處在過程中。

蔣女士：The Administration wants to end the conservatorship of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. What does that mean for international investors and the U.S. housing market?

蔣女士：政府打算結束對房地美和房利美的接管，這對國際投資者以及美國房地產市場意味著什麼？

Craig: The US government plays a large role in housing finance. In the U.S., we have a number of insured and guaranteed programs, 40% of the housing finance is funded by Fannie and Freddie. Brining the whole government share to 65% or 70%.

And so the government part is a big part of the system. Fannie and Freddie failed during the last crisis and were put into conservatorship. Our recommendation was that they be rehabilitated as private company, They will be allowed to build capital again to be able to absorb losses during times of stress and to protect the taxpayer.

Treasury has advocated for legislative changes that reform the system and support the release from conservatorship. But in the absence of such legislation, the Administration favors ending the conservatorships through administrative means. Preparation of that work appears to be well underway. Treasury stopped sweeping the dividends into U.S. Treasury and Fannie and Freddie are both companies are now building up capital through their earnings. These two companies earn in aggregate over $25 billion a year, so over the course of four years, they would build up a hundred billion capital. Under the most recent capital rule that is still under consideration, they would require total capital of $150 to 160 billion, so some external capital-raising is required.

Since we are having election year, this process might be paused. Obviously, that raises some risk. If President Trump is re-elected I believe we will see and end to the conservatorships of the GSE early in the next term.

Craig: 美國政府在房地產融資市場扮演重要角色，我們擁有一系列政府擔保項目，40%的房地產融資都是通過房地美和房利美完成的，這使得政府在房地產融資中的佔比達到65%~70%。因此政府是美國住房體系中的重要角色。房地美和房利美在上次危機中失敗並接受了政府接管，我們的建議是私有化，允許它們重新建立資本，以便在壓力時期能夠承受損失，並保護納稅人。

美國財政部主張對住房金融體系進行立法改革，並支持解除政府對兩房的接管。但在缺乏相關立法的情況下，政府更傾向於通過行政手段終止接管。這項工作的準備工作正在順利進行。財政部停止了兩房對財政部的股息發放，兩房現在都在通過收益積累資本。這兩家公司每年的總收益超過250億美元，所以在四年的時間裡，他們積累了1000億美元的資本。根據最新的仍在考慮中的資本規則，他們將需要1500到1600億美元的總資本，因此需要一些外部融資。

由於2020年是大選年，這一進程可能會暫停。顯然，這帶來了一定的風險。如果特朗普總統再次當選，我相信我們將在其下一個任期初就看到改革方案，以及政府結束對兩房的接管。

蔣女士：On affordability of housing and house ownership, what did US policies makers do or can do in the future in these area to maintain the affordability to the general public?

蔣女士：在房屋可負擔層面，美國的政策制定者做了什麼，或者未來能做什麼來幫助普通大眾買得起房子?

Craig: One reason the government is so active in the market is people in the US prefer a 30 year fixed rate mortgage, and the only way to create a 30 year fixed rate is to give originators the ability to sell into the secondary market through securitization.

But the problem is there're shortage of housing built up over time since the crisis. We are very concentrated areas of tremendous economic growth and activity, both in San Francisco and New York. In those areas, It's just harder for the average person to afford a house, so housing affordability is a major social issue.

You can only do so much of that to financing, because if you make risky address your mortgages, you're just recreating the subprime crisis, which is no good. So I think policy makers need to keep working on other factors of effect, the creation of more housing supply, more affordable supply, some of that is the individual building laws and local laws. This requires looking at policies that help homeowners but also renters.

Craig: 政府在美國住房金融市場上如此活躍的一個原因是美國人通常選擇30年期的固定利率抵押貸款，而創造30年期固定利率抵押貸款的唯一方法是將其證券化。問題是，自金融危機以來住房建造不足，且美國是經濟活動非常集中的經濟體，經濟活動集中在舊金山地區、紐約等地，一般人很難在這些地方承擔購房支出，住房負擔是一個主要的社會問題。

而關於融資政府也無法做更多，因為過高風險的抵押貸款會帶來下一次次貸危機。顯然這並非好事。所以我認為政策制定者需要繼續研究其他影響因素，如提供更多的住房供應，更多的負擔得起的住房供給，個人住房及相關本地法規的制定。這就需要制定政策來同時幫助購房者和租房者。

五、金融科技/

蔣女士：Fintech has been a hot topic among the financial professionals for many reasons.

You are the architect of Fintech/Blockchain report published by the US Government, can you share your views on the current status of Cryptocurrency, and more broadly, block chain application in business?

蔣女士：金融科技一直是金融從業者們的熱門話題，這其中原因有很多。您是美國政府發佈的金融科技/區塊鏈報告的起草者，您能否就加密貨幣的現狀，以及更廣泛的區塊鏈在商業中的應用，分享您的觀點?

Craig: All the financial technology is booming here in the U.S. amongst companies of all sizes. And it's going across the whole ecosystem, impacting banking services and deposit accounts, consumer and commercial lending, mortgage lending, and payments. Almost every aspect of the financial system is benefiting from increased speed, use of data and mobile computing. So first of all, I'm extremely positive on the value of ongoing innovation.

We think this would be a level playing field. So people are in banking, they should regulate it like a bank. Encouraging financial institutions to partner with technology companies, and having regulatoion that facilitates that, helps accelerate innovation. So while the biggest banks in the country can create their own financial innovation, most banks need a partner or buy services. I think it lowers the cost of credit, increases access to financial services, and also just modernize the other system. Block Chain is one part of financial innovation and will play an important role in the financial system.

So the SEC and the CFTC are working with regulators around the world to create a consistent and predictable regulatory environment for digital assets. So I think the block chain market will expand and it will be a meaningful role in the technology. I think the crypto market has the catch up with that.

Craig：金融技術正在美國各種規模的企業中蓬勃發展。它正在跨越整個金融生態系統，影響銀行服務和存款賬戶，消費者和商業貸款，抵押貸款和支付。金融系統的幾乎每個方面都受益於速度的提高、數據的使用和移動計算。首先，我非常肯定持續創新的價值。

我們認為這將是一個公平的競爭環境。從事銀行業的業務，應該按照銀行來進行監管。鼓勵金融機構與科技公司合作，並推進便利雙方合作的監管，有助於促進創新。我認為這降低了信貸成本，增加了金融服務的可及性，也使其他一些體系更加現代化。區塊鏈就是其中之一，並將會發揮重要作用。

SEC和CFTC正在與世界各地的監管機構合作, 他們正在試圖為數字資產創造一致的、可預測的監管環境。因此，我認為區塊鏈市場將會擴大，它將在科技中扮演重要角色，加密貨幣已經迎頭趕上。

蔣女士：Do you follow Libra of Facebook?

蔣女士：您關注Facebook的Libra嗎？

Craig: Facebook encountered a lot of resistance to their ideas watching a currency back coin to be used as payment. They did have a consortium of companies that would use it. I think they just had a little ahead of themselves in terms of working with the financial regulators around the world on the plan. Also, as a company, there's such a big difference between being a social media company and a financial services company, something Facebook perhaps did not given evough consideration to. In policy circles, the company had a reasonable amount of unresolved issues around trust, privacy and other issues. So I think unfortunately the reaction was less about the cryptocurrency and more about Facebook entering financial services. I hope Facebook and their partners can find a way to move forward with this innovative idea. The idea of having a stable coin crypto and an inter-connected global payment system is an interesting one.

Craig：Facebook在用於支付的電子貨幣Libra上遭遇了許多阻力。他們確實有一個使用它的公司聯盟，但我認為他們在與世界各地的金融監管機構就該計劃進行合作方面有點超前了，社交媒體公司和金融服務公司之間有很大的區別，這一點他們缺乏考慮。在政策圈，該公司在信任、隱私和其他問題上有相當多的未解決問題。所以我認為不幸的是，人們的反應更多的是Facebook進入金融服務領域，而不是加密貨幣。我希望Facebook和他們的合作伙伴能夠找到一種方式來推進這個創新的想法。擁有穩定的硬幣密碼和相互連接的全球支付系統是一個有趣的想法。

蔣女士：Can you share with us the landscape of FinTech in US? How are the big tech giants shaping up the financial industry and how have the traditional banking system overhaul itself due to the new challenges from outsiders?

蔣女士：你能和我們分享一下美國的金融科技嗎?大型科技巨頭是如何塑造金融業的?傳統的銀行體系又是如何在外界的新挑戰下進行自我改革的?

Craig: the biggest thing happening in the US is probably the same as China that people just want to leverage their mobile connectivity. Simply stated, people expect to access financial services by their phone – it is the new bank branch. Speed, better use of data and lower costs are all part of that. It should also help financial inclusion. You have to have the right approach to cyber security is, to protect data and avoid idendity fraud, among other things. increase to the digital identity theft and other factors.

There is a surge of banks partnering with fintech innovators and that is a very positive trend.

Craig: 美國今天的情況和中國類似，人們更偏好移動互聯網系統。因此，人們希望通過手機獲得金融服務，手機成為了新的銀行分支。速度、更好的數據利用和更低的成本都是其中的一部分。它還應該有助於提高金融包容。你必須有正確的方法來處理網絡安全，保護數據，避免身份欺詐和數字身份盜竊等因素。

與金融科技創新者合作的銀行數量激增，這是一個非常積極的趨勢。

巴曙松教授：

Hi Mr. Phillips, Maggie and all the friends here

Thanks for your time and insightful views. Mr. Phillips’s researches cover different fields, ranging from the financial markets and the economy to the forefront of Fintech. All his influential researches enriched our minds. Among them, China-US relations are one of the most important bilateral relations. Currently, the whole world is concerned with the economy and financial markets of China and the US as well as trade relations between them. All the issues undoubtedly affect the global economy. The outbreak of coronavirus in 2020 affected the global industrial chain, which makes us deeply feel that the whole world’s manufactures and industries are closely linked. Under this situation, our dialogues are proved to be more worthwhile.

At the same time, I also want to thank Maggie for her actively organizing and facilitating this interview. The Wall Street dialogue has lasted for 141 sessions. The event was originally set up to promote exchanges between the financial instituts of China and the U.S. Under the background of trade war, it is more valuable to continue the non-official dialogue between China and the U.S. Thanks to the initiatives from many friends like Maggie, Wall Street dialogue can last for more than six years. I hope that more friends from the financial fields of the two countries continue to contribute your wisdom and enhance the exchanges. Thank you for your participation. And thanks again to Mr. Phillips for his wonderful speech.

巴曙松教授：

Phillips先生和Maggie，以及線上的各位朋友，大家好！

謝謝Phillips先生帶來的富有洞察的觀點。Phillips先生今天涉及的領域非常廣泛，從金融市場、宏觀經濟到最前沿的Fintech都頗有研究，給我們帶來了一場內容豐富的問答。其中，中美關係是全球最重要的雙邊關係之一，中美各自的宏觀經濟金融運行以及中美經貿關係到全球經濟的冷熱，無疑是全球最為關切的問題。2020年新冠肺炎疫情爆發對全球產業鏈的衝擊，更讓我們深刻的感受到，各國的產業已經是環環相扣。在這個背景下，這次討論也更有價值。

同時，也感謝Maggie積極組織聯繫促成了本次訪談。連線華爾街對話，從我2013年到哥倫比亞大學商學院擔任高級訪問學者時發起，至今已經持續了141期，活動設立的初衷是促進中美雙方金融界的交流。在當前中美貿易戰的背景下，堅持中美間的市場與民間對話更有價值，他們的討論都僅僅代表個人的意見，不代表任何機構的看法。正是有像Maggie等不少來自中美兩國金融界的朋友積極聯絡推動，連線華爾街能夠持續6年多的時間。也希望各位中美金融界的朋友繼續貢獻智慧，加強中美金融界額交流。感謝大家的參與。也再次感謝Mr Phillips的精彩演講。

六、Q&A

Q1: I have a question about the coronavirus. I'm interested to hear more about your thought on the pandemic in China and as well as on the world economy in the short term and long term impact.

Q1：我有一個關於冠狀病毒的問題,我很想聽聽您對於疫情對世界經濟的短期和長期影響方面的看法。

While we are in early days, we are just seeing how fear of the virus will impact the global economy. That may be the larger risk relative to the medial risk that the virus presents. I think the stock market reaction is probably appropriate. There are a lot of unknowns.

Craig:首先，我不是這方面的專家，所以我沒有任何特別的信息可以透露。我認為我們現在仍然處在未知中。中國的病例之多在中國引起巨大反響，而病毒正在向其他國家和地區蔓延。雖然我們還處於早期階段，但我們剛剛看到對這種病毒的恐懼將如何影響全球經濟。這可能是相對於病毒風險而言更大的風險。我認為股市的反應可能是適當的。目前仍有很多未知數。

Q2：Will the spread of coronavirus have negative impact on the global industry chain，will it speed up the decoupling，especially between China and the United States？

Q2：冠狀病毒的傳播是否會對全球產業鏈產生負面影響，是否會加速脫鉤，特別是中美之間的脫鉤?

Craig: The virus is clearly interrupting businesses in China. That presents an immediatel supply chain problem to U.S. companies. We don't know yet the magnitude，I mean in some cases businesses have been closed, people been sent home – the real question is how long that will continue. Obviously personal and business travel is being interrupted to and from China which in turn will have a second order impact. So it is too early to assess the impact but it clearly might be significant.

Craig: 病毒顯然正在干擾中國的商業活動。這給美國公司帶來了迫在眉睫的供應鏈問題。我們還不知道其規模。我的意思是，在某些情況下，企業已經關閉，人們被送回家——真正的問題是這種情況會持續多久。顯然，往返中國的個人和商務旅行正在被中斷，這反過來又會產生二次影響。因此，現在評估其影響還為時過早，但它顯然可能影響巨大。

Q3：How do you think the election will go and how will it influence the US market?

Q3：您如何看待選舉，它將如何影響美國市場？

Craig: I think the difference between some of the potential candidates are very large. From the international side, the most important thing is to wait and see who is running against President Trump. So while President Trump has a clear identity the others in the Democratic field are less well know. They also lack, for the most part, wide scale funding. Personally, I think we will end up with a more moderate candidate that arises with the nomination, but that remains to be seen.

Craig: 我認為潛在的候選人之間的差異是非常大的。從國際層面來看，最重要的事情是靜觀其變，看誰會和特朗普總統的競選。特朗普總統風格鮮明，相比而言人們對民主黨其他候選人缺乏瞭解，因此在很大程度上他們也缺乏大規模的競選資金。就我個人而言，我認為隨著提名的出現我們最終會有一個更溫和的候選人，但這還有待觀察。

Q4：Do you think there will be any adjustment on the Phase One agreement because of the coronvirus?

Q4：你認為第一階段的協議會因為疫情而有任何調整嗎?

Craig: I must say I haven't really thought of it. I hope that the coronavirus is not of a magnitude that it requires sort of a global repositioning of anything, trade or any other laws，hopefully we don't really get to that point. I don't know any humanitarian reasons, at this day, that would result in any change in policies or trade policies. The U.S. people are compassionate and worried about the humanitarian impact of the virus in China and around the world.

Craig：我得說我還沒有真正想過。我希望冠狀病毒的衝擊不那麼大，不需要全球重新定位任何貿易規則或其他法律，希望我們不會真的達到那個程度。我不知道有什麼人道主義原因會導致任何政策或貿易政策的改變。美國人民很有同情心，並對該病毒在中國和世界各地造成的人道主義影響感到擔憂。

本文為內部交流紀要，未經主講嘉賓本人審閱，所載信息均為個人觀點，不代表任何機構的意見，僅供“全球市場與中國連線”的活動參會人員使用。紀要根據參會者發言整理，不保證相關信息的準確性和完整性。紀要中所述內容和意見僅供參考，不構成對所述資產的投資建議。

本文版權為“全球市場與中國連線”會議秘書處所有，本團隊對本紀要保留一切權利，未經事先書面許可，任何機構和個人不得以任何形式翻版、複印、發表或引用本紀要的任何部分。

閱讀更多 巴曙鬆 的文章

關鍵字: 花旗集團 摩根士丹利 紐約