Category Archives: Global Finance
Protected: Latin America Private
Protected: Hong Kong Gateway
Protected: The Sobering?
Our Take On China

Free Vikings – Our Take on China
By M.W. Tyler – October 23 2025
Overview
China is navigating its most challenging transition in decades. Three intertwined pressures dominate the picture:
- Domestic property crisis – the sector that once supplied roughly a quarter of GDP is collapsing.
- Deflationary dynamics – weak demand is pushing consumer‑price inflation to zero and producer prices into negative territory.
- External squeeze – strategic competition with the United States, the EU and other partners is reshaping China’s export‑oriented model.
The old, debt‑fuelled growth engine is fading; a new model centered on high‑tech manufacturing and exports is taking shape, but the shift is uneven and fraught with friction.
1. The Domestic Economy – From Property to Production
| Issue | What’s happening | Implications |
|---|---|---|
| Property anchor gone | Pre‑sales of unfinished homes have collapsed; developers such as Evergrande and Country Garden are in lengthy restructurings. | Massive unfinished projects erode consumer confidence and create a negative wealth effect. |
| Deflationary spiral | CPI is flat (≈0 %) and producer‑price indices have been negative for over a year. | Signals under‑utilised capacity, raises real debt burdens, and discourages spending. |
| “New Engine” – Manufacturing overdrive | Beijing is doubling down on EVs, lithium‑ion batteries and renewable‑energy equipment. China now dominates global EV and solar‑panel output, creating sizable overcapacity. | Overproduction forces China to export excess, depressing global prices and heightening trade tensions. |
Takeaway: The state‑driven push into high‑tech manufacturing is necessary but currently lopsided. It does not generate enough domestic jobs or consumer confidence to replace the lost property sector, leaving China vulnerable to both internal stagnation and external backlash.
2. The External Environment – “Peak China” and Geopolitical Squeeze
- End of “Chimerica” – The United States and EU are no longer reliable, open‑ended markets. Tariffs, the Inflation Reduction Act, and EU anti‑subsidy probes target Chinese EVs and other high‑tech exports.
- Friend‑shoring & de‑risking – Companies are relocating supply‑chain elements to Vietnam, India, Mexico, etc., reducing reliance on China.
- “Peak China” narrative – IMF’s 2025 growth forecast for China sits at 4.4 % (still strong by developed‑world standards but far below the double‑digit rates of the past).
Takeaway: Beijing’s assertive foreign policy (“Wolf‑Warrior” diplomacy) has accelerated the very containment it seeks to avoid. Restrictions on advanced semiconductors and other strategic technologies have created a tangible vulnerability.
3. Global Impact – Economic Statecraft in Action
- Exporting deflation & overcapacity – Surplus production of cars, batteries and chemicals floods overseas markets, pressuring prices and hurting manufacturers in Europe, North America and emerging Asia.
- The Global South as a battleground – China deepens ties through a scaled‑down Belt‑and‑Road Initiative and BRICS cooperation, gaining alternative markets but also saddling partners with debt risks.
Takeaway: China leverages its manufacturing heft as a tool of statecraft. While it can still innovate and compete at scale, the resulting backlash threatens a bifurcated global tech‑trade ecosystem.
Bottom Line – A Nation at a Crossroads
- Bull case: Successful deleveraging of the property sector, a boost to domestic consumption, and a moderated foreign policy allow China to settle into slower, technology‑driven growth.
- Bear case: Deepening property distress triggers a broader financial crisis; the West successfully walls off key markets, leading to prolonged stagnation reminiscent of Japan’s “lost decade.”
Most likely outcome: A messy middle. China will likely avoid a full‑blown collapse but will struggle to reignite robust, balanced growth. It will remain an indispensable yet disruptive global player, with trade and geopolitical tensions shaping the next decade.
Tyler’s Additional Analysis
1. Structural Imbalance and the “Growth‑Consumption Gap”
China’s historic growth model relied heavily on investment‑led expansion, especially in real‑estate and infrastructure. The current transition attempts to re‑balance toward consumption‑led growth, but the policy mix remains skewed:
- Fiscal stimulus – Recent measures (e.g., a ¥10 trillion local‑debt refinancing package) have helped shore up liquidity but raise fiscal deficits to historic highs (~4 % of GDP).
- Monetary easing – The People’s Bank of China cut rates in September 2025, yet credit growth remains modest because banks are wary of further exposure to distressed developers.
Without a significant uplift in household disposable income, the consumption component will stay muted, prolonging the “growth‑consumption gap.”
2. Demographic Headwinds
China’s fertility rate has slipped to ≈1.01 births per woman, the lowest on record. By 2035 the working‑age population could shrink by ≈150 million, eroding the labor pool that underpins both manufacturing output and tax revenues. Even aggressive automation cannot fully offset the loss of human capital, especially in service‑oriented sectors that drive domestic demand.
3. Technology Self‑Reliance – A Double‑Edged Sword
The “Made in China 2025 2.0” agenda pushes for semiconductor, AI and quantum breakthroughs. Success would:
- Reduce vulnerability to export controls.
- Potentially catapult China into a position of strategic technological leadership.
However, the R&D intensity required (≈3–4 % of GDP) competes with already strained fiscal resources. Moreover, talent acquisition is hampered by tighter immigration rules and a brain‑drain of top engineers seeking more open ecosystems abroad.
4. Geopolitical Risk Premium
Western allies are increasingly coordinating policy tools (tariffs, investment screening, export bans). This creates a risk premium on Chinese‑origin assets that could:
- Dampen foreign direct investment inflows.
- Increase borrowing costs for Chinese firms that rely on offshore financing.
Even if China’s sovereign credit remains strong (large FX reserves, low external debt), private‑sector financing may become more expensive, feeding back into the domestic slowdown.
5. Scenario Outlook (2026‑2030)
| Scenario | Key Drivers | Likely GDP Path (2026‑30) |
|---|---|---|
| Optimistic Rebalancing | Effective stimulus, modest consumption recovery, partial tech self‑sufficiency | 4.5 %–5.0 % avg. |
| Stalled Transition | Persistent deflation, demographic drag, continued external pressure | 3.5 %–4.0 % avg. |
| Severe Financial Shock | Property defaults spiral, banking sector stress, sharp capital outflows | ≤3.0 % avg., risk of “Japan‑style” stagnation |
Given current data, the “Stalled Transition” appears most probable: growth will hover around 4–4.5 %, with periodic bouts of volatility tied to policy adjustments and external shocks.
6. Strategic Takeaways for Stakeholders
- Investors – Diversify exposure away from sectors overly dependent on Chinese domestic demand (e.g., real‑estate, consumer durables). Focus on export‑oriented high‑tech firms that benefit from global market share.
- Policymakers (outside China) – Continue coordinated technology‑access controls while offering market incentives for alternative supply‑chains, mitigating over‑reliance on China without triggering a full decoupling.
- Chinese decision‑makers – Accelerate social‑welfare reforms (pensions, healthcare) to boost household confidence, and prioritize skill‑development programs to counter demographic decline.
Final Thought
China stands at a pivotal juncture: its ability to navigate the domestic property fallout, tame deflation, and manage geopolitical friction will determine whether it settles into a stable, mid‑range growth regime or slides into a prolonged stagnation trap. The coming years will be a litmus test for the resilience of its state‑guided economic model in an increasingly multipolar world.
Schwab Advisor Network (SAN) from $500,000 to $2 million.
What’s happening
- Starting in 2026 Charles Schwab will raise the minimum client‑asset level required for a referral through its Schwab Advisor Network (SAN) from $500,000 to $2 million.
- The change is part of a broader effort to position the SAN program as a channel for higher‑net‑worth investors, while keeping mass‑affluent clients inside Schwab’s own in‑house wealth‑management platform (Schwab Private Client Services).
Why Schwab is doing this
| Reason | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Clearer segmentation | By moving the referral threshold upward, Schwab draws a sharper line between the “mass‑affluent” segment (served internally) and the “ultra‑affluent” segment (served by independent RIAs). This reduces overlap between Schwab’s own advisory business and the external advisors it refers to. |
| Higher‑quality pipeline | Advisors in the SAN program receive a steady flow of prospects who already hold a substantial amount of assets, improving the economics of the referral relationship (the fee is a small % of assets). |
| Revenue protection | As more assets stay within Schwab’s own wealth‑management suite, the firm retains more advisory fees and cross‑selling opportunities (e.g., banking, brokerage, retirement accounts). |
| Strategic focus on organic growth | With fewer low‑balance referrals, Schwab encourages RIAs to grow organically—through existing client relationships, new acquisition strategies, and deeper service offerings—rather than relying heavily on Schwab‑driven pipelines. |
Implications for Registered Investment Advisors (RIAs)
- Refine your target market – Focus on prospects who already exceed the $2 M threshold or who are likely to reach it soon. Emphasize sophisticated wealth‑management services (tax planning, estate strategy, alternative investments) that justify higher asset levels.
- Strengthen organic channels – Invest in client‑referral programs, digital marketing, and thought‑leadership content to attract high‑net‑worth individuals without relying on Schwab referrals.
- Re‑evaluate SAN participation – If your firm’s average client size is below $2 M, the cost‑benefit of staying in the SAN program diminishes. Consider exiting or negotiating a different arrangement.
- Leverage Schwab’s internal platform – For clients below the new threshold, you might still refer them to Schwab’s in‑house wealth service and earn a modest fee, but the upside is limited compared with high‑balance referrals.
- Adjust fee structures – Since SAN fees are based on a small percentage of referred assets (0.25 % on the first $2 M), you may need to offset reduced referral volume with higher advisory fees or performance‑based compensation for existing clients.
What this means for the broader market
- Consolidation pressure – Larger RIAs with $250 M+ AUM (the minimum to join SAN initially) will benefit most, potentially accelerating consolidation among boutique firms seeking scale.
- Competitive advantage for Schwab – By keeping the bulk of mass‑affluent assets in‑house, Schwab can deepen its cross‑sell of banking, lending, and brokerage products, reinforcing its position as the nation’s biggest custodian for RIAs.
- Potential fee hikes – Industry chatter suggests Schwab may also revisit the 0.25 % referral fee after a decade of stagnation, further incentivizing RIAs to shift away from the program if costs rise.
Bottom‑line advice for advisors
- Audit your client mix now: identify how many current or prospective clients sit near or above the $2 M mark.
- Develop a high‑net‑worth acquisition plan that doesn’t rely on Schwab referrals (e.g., targeted events, partnerships with CPAs/lawyers, LinkedIn outreach).
- Monitor Schwab communications closely for any additional changes (e.g., fee adjustments, new eligibility criteria).
By proactively adapting to Schwab’s threshold increase, RIAs can protect their referral pipeline, capture higher‑value business, and position themselves for sustainable, organic growth.Previous message