government industry fund is doing now a lot of places, dimensions differ, name is differ, but fell into however in a few places "blindly follow the wind" error area, specific expression has the following respects. one is "no use". the fund was set up, but the money could not be spent and the enterprises could not use it. a lot of money even sleeps in accounts for a year or two, where the market can't find it. second, "it doesn't work well." some local governments lack professional talents and management ability, and are unwilling to entrust third-party professional institutions to manage the fund. as a result, the fund is inefficient and cannot play its due role. some places even use the fund as government subsidies and policy incentives. third, "use not long". the fund has a single source of funds and no profit generating capacity. the fund has no effective replenishment mechanism and lacks sustainability. over time, the "capital pool" has become a backwater.
the government industrial fund itself should be a financial lever, aiming to guide the idle or deposited social funds in backward production capacity to emerging industries, innovative industries, medium and high-end industries, and to form cluster advantages and scale effects. but why, in some places, are funds either nominal, or not used for, or unsustainable?
the author thinks, investigate its reason, reflect the problem of business environment above all. government industry funds have become a "glass ceiling", not because there is no demand, but because of asymmetric information or cumbersome procedures. secondly, it reflects the problem that the relevant local governments are not emancipated enough. some government personnel always have too much concern about the investment and safety of the fund. they are too strict, too strict in control, too much intervention, their own capacity is insufficient, and they are not sure to entrust the management of the fund to a third party.
the author thinks that the most important thing is to grasp the "two principles" and realize the "two functions".
the first is the principle of marketization. different from policy awards and subsidies, government industry fund is an equity investment of the government, which drives a large amount of social capital investment with a small amount of financial funds. if funds are run by administrative thinking instead of market principles, instead of letting the market determine the allocation of resources, how can social capital have enthusiasm and sense of security?
second, the rule of law. from the external environment, the rule of law is the best business environment. we need to reduce the cost of cooperation between market players and funds, promote information symmetry and achieve equal opportunities through legal principles, legal procedures and inventory services. from the perspective of internal operation of the fund, the rights and obligations of all parties should be reasonably determined, and feasible participation mechanism, supervision mechanism and exit mechanism should be determined in advance. in this regard, excessive government intervention and control is not an effective means to prevent the loss of state-owned assets. the rule of law is a truly reliable and solid "firewall".
"two functions", one is "guide", the other is "pry", which is also the most core function and demand of government industry funds, is the "foundation of the foundation of this kind of funds. cannot "guide" cannot "pry" word, that is "from disuse wu gong", nominal, still how can call its industrial fund?
to guide is to lead. capital is the lifeblood of the economy. with the input of government funds, we need to ensure that social capital flows from the low end of the industrial chain to the high end, from backward drivers to advanced drivers, and from sunset industries to sunrise industries, so as to promote the conversion of old drivers, industrial transformation and upgrading, and the optimization and adjustment of the economic structure.
"pry" is a pry. the most prominent nature of government industrial funds is leverage, whether to attract social capital accumulation or to increase industrial output. its purpose is to invest a certain amount of financial funds, do more with less, and produce multiple effect. the greater the multiple, the better the leverage performance of the fund, the better the utility. then through this "amplification", to promote and catalyze the development of the industry, growth, enhance the level of energy level, stronger industrial advantages.
in fact, to sum up, for the government industry fund, it is just three words: first, "let professional people do professional things", which refers to the operation; second, "good steel is used on the blade", which refers to the throwing; third, the "four twofold", which refers to its leverage and performance. by doing these three things, government industrial funds will be activated and "fired up" to tap the potential of the market, stimulate the vitality of the industry and increase the upward momentum of the economy.
source: china economic net