美国把中国投资当作特洛伊木马？

根据美中经济与安全审查委员会公布的一份最新报告显示，中国对美国的投资“之前难以察觉，但现在却急剧上升”。 美国应该担心吗？这会不会是现代的特洛伊木马？ 我想还不至于。 这份名为《美国经济投资中国分析》的报告提供了有关中国对美的对外直接投资(FDI)及潜在经济利益的详细分析。 截至2011年底，中国的累计投资额已成长到300亿美元，而2010年底才仅58亿美元。如下图所示，中国的FDI近10年来一直稳步上升。中国对美投资主要集中在哪些领域，而我们又可以从这些统计资料中采取何种策略呢？

1982~2010年中国对外直接投资统计。 (单位：10亿美元) / 资料来源：UNCTADSTAT http://unctadstat.unctad.org/TableViewer/tableView.aspx
fAeesmc

美中委员会的统计资料显示，中国国有及国家控股企业主导着中国的对外投资。 该报告指出，北京将其外币资产转化为硬资产的决定相当明智。这使其建立了主权财富基金，进而投资美国股市、私人企业和房地产市场。 中国政府的FDI策略也一直在改变。中国领导人之前鼓励投资的方向是收购开发中国家的能源和资源，但现在也鼓励投资先进国家，包括美国在内。 北京的投资目标包括“获得能源及矿产，以及得到更先进的技术，以期让中国超越现有的竞争对手”。此一策略符合中国的十二五产业发展政策。 收购先进技术反映了中国作为“第二代创新者”的策略，即中国透过发展制造业，汲取他人的创新经验，再于国内市场重新发挥。 本文授权编译自EE Times，版权所有，谢绝转载 本文下一页：美国的经济利益何在？

相关阅读：
• 夏普据称与英特尔及高通磋商投资事宜
• 热情消退，第三季度科技业并购总价值大幅衰退
• 大有可为，中国人均IT技术支出仅为美国的3%fAeesmc

{pagination} 美国的经济利益何在？ 然而，中国的投资额在近几年大幅度增加，但这可不是中国单方面造成的。这份报告指出，经济衰退加上联邦收入减少对美国政府带来的挑战，都使其努力吸引来自中国的新建投资项目，希望创造就业机会并协助当地经济发展。 另一个事实，是中国的投资都挹注在财力较弱，但拥有可能对中国而言是有用技术的公司。 我们如何衡量中国对外直接投资对美国经济的利弊？该报告的评论是“温和”。过去5年内，美国人在中国国有企业的就业人数增加了1~2万个。其中一部份可能会对美国整体就业情况有所影响，但美国就业市场现况也不容小?。 这份报告认为中国的FDI有助于陷入经济困境的公司。主权财富基金也对美国经济有所助益，有助于巩固金融市场和促进房市发展。 该报告还援引了匿名资料来源，指出自2007年以来，东南和西南地区，以及大湖和远西地区受益最大。这些地区的工业市场吸引了最多投资，包括石化燃料、化学品、工业机械和IT产业等。另外，金融业也是 中国FDI最主要的接收者。 委员会担心中国中国企业对美投资终将获得决策主导地位。该报告警告道，这些国有企业反映了北京的诉求－－政府主导着国有企业的投资，包括鼓励对何种产业，以及以何种目的进行投资。 在收购美国公司资产时，国有企业也较私人企业更具优势。该报告指出，中国政府的大量金援对于收购美国企业将具有决定性作用。 这份报告一直提到中国在美国FDI是潜在的特洛伊木马。确实，经济和能源安全一直是关注焦点。该报告也谈到了中国在三种能源技术方面的投资。而最后，作者表示，以这些收购技术而开发的产品生产，都将被转移到中国。 本文授权编译自EE Times，版权所有，谢绝转载 编译： Joy Teng 参考英文原文：Yoshida in China: Beijing's U.S. investments and economic security，by Junko Yoshida

相关阅读：
• 夏普据称与英特尔及高通磋商投资事宜
• 热情消退，第三季度科技业并购总价值大幅衰退
• 大有可为，中国人均IT技术支出仅为美国的3%fAeesmc

{pagination} Yoshida in China: Beijing's U.S. investments and economic security Junko Yoshida NEW YORK – Chinese investment in U.S. companies was "hardly noticeable before, but now it is rising sharply," according to a new report released by the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission. Should we be worried? Is this some sort of Trojan horse? I wouldn’t go that far. The report to Congress, “An Analysis of Chinese Investments in the U.S. Economy,” offers a detailed look at China's foreign direct investment (FDI) in the U.S. and the potential economic benefits. The cumulative value of Chinese investments grew to $30 billion through the end of 2011, compared to $5.8 billion at the end of 2010. As the chart below shows, Chinese FDI here has been rising steadily over the last decade. What sectors is China targeting with its U.S. investments and what if any strategy can we divine from these statistics? China's Foreign Direct Investments, 1982-2010 (Unit: Billions of dollars) Source: UNCTADSTAT http://unctadstat.unctad.org/TableViewer/tableView.aspx. The U.S.-China commission's statistics reveal that China’s state-owned and state-controlled enterprises (SOEs) are dominating China’s outward investments Beijing “has made a conscious decision to diversify its foreign currency assets into hard assets,” the report explains. This has led to the creation of sovereign wealth funds that make portfolio investments in U.S. equities, private firms and real estate, according to the report. The Chinese government’s FDI strategy is also shifting. While Chinese leaders previously encouraged investments “almost exclusively toward energy and resource acquisition in developing countries,” it now also encourages “investments in advanced countries,” such as the U.S. Beijing’s goals for these investments include “securing energy and mineral resources and acquiring advanced technologies in industries where China wishes to leapfrog existing competitors." This strategy falls in line with China’s industrial policy as articulated in Bejing's 12th Five-Year Plan. The acquisition of advanced technologies reflects China's strategy as a "second-generation innovator" that tailors technologies to its domestic market, then innovates from the ground up through manufacturing advances. Economic benefits for U.S.? The sharp increase of Chinese investment here in recent years, however, is not entirely a one-way street. State governments, squeezed by the recession and reduced federal revenue sharing, are "vigorously trying to attract Chinese greenfield investments in the hope of creating jobs and jump-starting local economies," the report correctly notes. Here’s another salient fact: Chinese investments are flowing here "by the availability of financially weak firms, some of which possess potentially useful technologies for China." How do we measure the economic benefit of Chinese FDI in the U.S.? Unfortunately, the report describes it as "modest." Employment in Chinese-owned companies in the U.S. increased by 10,000 to 20,000 jobs during the past five years. Some may discount this total relative to overall U.S. employment, but it's nothing to sneeze at given the current U.S. job market. The report credits Chinese FDI with helping to stabilize some financially troubled firms. Portfolio investments by sovereign wealth funds also have helped the U.S. economy by solidifying the financial system and providing liquidity in property markets. The report also attempted to determine the regional impact of Chinese investment. Citing a unidentified source, the authors found that since 2007 that the Southeast and Southwest along with the Great Lakes and Far West regions have benefited the most. Industry sectors attracting the most investment included fossil fuels and chemicals, industrial machinery and IT. The financial sector also is a major recipient of Chinese FDI. The Commission appears worried about the dominant roll of SOEs in U.S. investment decisions. SOEs reflect the demands of Beijing, while the government “behaves like an owner, providing overall direction to SOE investments, including encouragement on where to invest, in what industries and to what ends,” the report warned. SOEs also have unfair advantages over private firms when competing to purchase U.S. assets. Massive financial support from the central government could “determine market outcomes for purchases of U.S. business,” the report noted. As for national security concerns, the report goes so far as to characterize Chinese FDI in the U.S. as "a potential Trojan horse." I don’t subscribe to this view. Indeed, economic and energy security appear to be the long-term concerns. For example, the report described Chinese investments in three energy technologies. Eventually, the authors said, production based on the acquired technology was shifted to China.