China Economy
China’s Property Woes Could Last Until 2030—Despite Beijing’s Best Censorship Efforts
The world’s second-largest economy faces a reckoning that no amount of information control can erase
The construction cranes stand frozen against Shanghai’s skyline like monuments to excess. In Guangzhou, half-finished apartment towers cast long shadows over streets where homebuyers once lined up with cash deposits. Across China’s tier-two and tier-three cities, the evidence is impossible to ignore: new home prices dropped 2.4% year-on-year in November 2025, marking the 29th consecutive month of price declines.
This isn’t just another market correction. It’s the unraveling of a $60 trillion real estate ecosystem that powered four decades of unprecedented growth—and here’s what keeps global economists awake at night: despite aggressive government intervention and increasingly sophisticated censorship machinery, this crisis won’t bottom out until 2030.
The Staggering Scale of China’s Property Collapse
Numbers tell stories that social media censors can’t delete. The Index of Selected Residential Property Prices registered a 6.40% year-on-year contraction in Q2 2025, but the human cost cuts deeper. Zhang Wei, 34, has dutifully paid mortgage installments for two years on an apartment in Chongqing that remains a concrete skeleton, unfinished and uninhabitable. His story echoes across hundreds of cities.
The developer collapses read like a who’s who of China’s corporate giants. China Evergrande Group, with over $300 billion in debt, received a liquidation order in January 2024 and was delisted from the Hong Kong Stock Exchange in August 2025. But Evergrande wasn’t alone. China Vanke Co. reported a record 49.5 billion yuan ($6.8 billion) annual loss for 2024, sending shockwaves through a sector that believed state-backed developers were immune to failure.
Country Garden, once China’s largest private developer with 3,000 projects nationwide, defaulted on international bonds in October 2023 after missing payments within a 30-day grace period. Investment in real estate development declined by 14.7% in the first ten months of 2025, with sales of new homes projecting an 8% decrease for the full year, marking the fifth consecutive year of negative growth.
The construction sector tells an equally grim story. The total area of residential projects started declined by 22.55% year-on-year to 536.6 million square meters, while completed residential units fell by 25.81% to 537 million square meters. Construction workers remain unpaid, suppliers face bankruptcy, and the entire supply chain—from cement manufacturers to elevator installers—struggles to survive.
Why This Isn’t Just Another Downturn: The Structural Trap
Understanding why recovery will take until 2030 requires examining the unique architecture of China’s economy. Unlike typical real estate downturns, this crisis strikes at the foundational model that has powered Chinese growth since the 1990s.
The Property-Dependency Problem
Real estate and related industries accounted for approximately 25% of China’s GDP in 2024, despite the ongoing decline. This isn’t simply about construction—it’s about land sales, furniture manufacturing, home appliances, property management, legal services, and financial products all built around housing.
Housing prices have fallen 20% or more since they peaked in 2021, and with 70% of household wealth tied to property, falling home prices directly erode family balance sheets. This creates a vicious cycle: declining wealth leads to reduced consumption, which slows economic growth, which further pressures property values.
The Local Government Fiscal Catastrophe
Here’s where the crisis becomes truly intractable. Revenue from land sales by China’s local governments dropped 16% in 2024 compared with the previous year, after a 13.2% decline in 2023. But land sales aren’t just one revenue stream among many—they’ve been the primary funding mechanism for local governments since the 1990s.
Local Government Financing Vehicles (LGFVs), the shadow banking entities that local officials created to circumvent borrowing restrictions, are now drowning. Total debt raised directly by local governments and via their financing vehicles now stands at around 134 trillion yuan, equal to roughly $19 trillion.
These LGFVs were designed with a simple assumption: land values would continue rising, providing both collateral for new loans and revenue from sales to service existing debt. That assumption has catastrophically failed. The call for LGFVs to buy land to create revenue for local governments made matters worse, turning land from a key source of revenue into a source of new debt.
The Inventory Overhang
The inventory turnover ratio in China shortened by five months from its peak of 25.9 months in April 2025, but at the current pace, it may take another year and a half for the clearance cycle to reach 12-18 months—a relatively healthy range. That’s optimistic. In many tier-three and tier-four cities, years’ worth of unsold inventory sits vacant, with no clear demand in sight.
The math is unforgiving. Even if sales stabilize tomorrow, clearing existing inventory while developers and local governments simultaneously restructure trillions in debt requires time measured in years, not quarters.
Censorship vs. Economic Reality: When Propaganda Meets Balance Sheets
Beijing has deployed its formidable censorship apparatus with surgical precision. In less than three weeks, social media platforms Xiaohongshu and Bilibili removed more than 40,000 posts under a “special campaign” to regulate online real estate content. The Shanghai branch of the Cyberspace Administration led efforts to scrub negative sentiment about housing markets from social media.
The censorship strategy extends beyond simple post deletion. After authorities urged platforms to clean up material containing problems such as “provoking extreme opposition, fabricating false information, promoting vulgarity, and advocating bad culture,” the Cyberspace Administration of China announced in early 2025 that platforms had removed more than a million pieces of content.
This represents a coordinated campaign to control the narrative around the property crisis. Posts discussing falling home values, developer defaults, or economic pessimism are systematically removed. Even discussions of the Zhuhai vehicular attack in November 2024 were censored, part of a broader effort to suppress anything that might undermine social stability.
But here’s the fundamental problem with censoring an economic crisis: you can delete social media posts, but you can’t delete non-performing loans. You can remove hashtags about Evergrande’s default, but you can’t remove the actual debt from bank balance sheets. You can silence influencers discussing property values, but you can’t force buyers into a market where confidence has evaporated.
The contrast between official statements and ground-level reality grows starker by the month. State media emphasizes “stability” and “gradual recovery,” while sales of the top 100 developers plunged 36% in terms of value in November 2025 from a year earlier. Beijing announces stimulus packages, yet investment in fixed assets, which includes property, contracted 2.6% over the January through November period compared with a year earlier.
The 2030 Timeline: Breaking Down the Recovery Math
Why 2030? The projection isn’t arbitrary—it’s based on the time required to work through structural imbalances that took decades to build.
Inventory Clearance: 3-4 Years Minimum
Even optimistic scenarios require 2027-2028 to clear excess housing inventory in major cities, and potentially 2029-2030 for tier-three and tier-four cities. This assumes sales don’t deteriorate further—an assumption that grows shakier as demographic headwinds intensify.
Developer Balance Sheet Repair: 4-6 Years
Dozens of Chinese developers have been approved for debt restructuring plans since the start of 2025, clearing more than 1.2 trillion yuan ($167 billion) in liabilities. But this represents a fraction of total developer debt. The restructuring process—negotiating with creditors, selling assets, and gradually rebuilding financial viability—typically requires multiple years even in the best circumstances.
Local Government Fiscal Restructuring: 5-7 Years
This is the longest and most complex component. Beijing authorized 10 trillion yuan in local debt issuance—to be disbursed over five years—to address hidden obligations in 2024. But this merely refinances existing debt at lower interest rates; it doesn’t create new revenue sources.
The fundamental problem remains: local governments structured their finances around continuously rising land values. Rebuilding fiscal sustainability requires either dramatically cutting expenditures (politically painful and economically damaging) or finding alternative revenue sources (difficult and slow to implement).
Demographic Drag: Permanent Headwind
China’s working-age population is shrinking, and urbanization—the force that drove housing demand for three decades—has plateaued. These aren’t cyclical issues that resolve with stimulus; they’re structural realities that reduce baseline housing demand permanently.
Historical Parallels: Lessons from Japan’s Lost Decades
The comparison to Japan’s 1990s property bubble isn’t perfect, but it’s instructive. By 2004, prime “A” properties in Tokyo’s financial districts had slumped to less than 1 percent of their peak, and Tokyo’s residential homes were less than a tenth of their peak. It took until 2007—16 years after the bubble burst—for property prices to begin rising again.
From 1991 to 2003, the Japanese economy grew only 1.14% annually, while the average real growth rate between 2000 and 2010 was about 1%. What was initially called the “Lost Decade” became the “Lost Two Decades,” and many economists now reference “Lost Three Decades.”
Japan’s experience demonstrates several sobering realities:
Balance sheet recessions take years to resolve. Even with aggressive monetary easing (Japan pioneered zero-interest-rate policy in the late 1990s) and massive fiscal stimulus, deleveraging proceeds slowly. Households and corporations prioritize debt repayment over spending and investment.
Zombie companies drain economic vitality. Banks kept injecting funds into unprofitable firms that were too big to fail, preventing capital reallocation to productive uses. China faces a similar risk with its state-owned enterprises and developers.
Property-driven wealth effects create powerful negative feedback loops. As Japanese real estate values declined, household wealth evaporated, consumption stagnated, and deflation became entrenched. China’s even greater concentration of household wealth in property suggests potentially worse wealth effects.
The key difference: China’s crisis is arguably more structurally complex. Japan’s property bubble was primarily driven by speculative excess and loose monetary policy. China’s bubble involved speculation plus local government fiscal dependency plus shadow banking plus a fundamental economic model built around property development. Unwinding this requires more than monetary and fiscal tools—it requires redesigning the growth model itself.
Global Ripple Effects: No Crisis Is an Island
China’s property troubles send shockwaves far beyond its borders. Australia and Brazil, major commodity exporters, already face reduced demand for iron ore, copper, and other construction materials. European luxury brands that catered to China’s affluent property developers and homebuyers report softening sales.
The exposure runs deeper than trade flows. Foreign investors hold portions of Chinese developer bonds, though many have already taken massive losses. More concerning are the indirect linkages: Chinese state-owned companies with overseas investments potentially scaling back as domestic pressures mount, Chinese tourists and students spending less abroad as household wealth declines, and geopolitical implications of a economically stressed superpower.
Financial contagion risks remain contained for now—China’s capital controls and state banking sector provide insulation. But the growth drag is unavoidable. China’s housing market correction continues as an ongoing headwind, with KKR’s chief economist for Greater China estimating a 1.5 percentage point dent on China’s gross domestic product in 2025, compared with 2.5 percentage points in 2022.
What Tier-1 Companies Should Do Now
For multinational corporations and investors, the 2030 timeline requires strategic adjustments:
Diversify China exposure. Companies heavily dependent on Chinese property-related demand should accelerate diversification into other Asian markets or sectors. The “China-only” growth strategy needs fundamental reevaluation.
Watch local government creditworthiness. Companies with receivables from Chinese local governments or infrastructure projects face rising payment risks. Credit insurance and careful monitoring of local fiscal conditions are essential.
Reconsider real estate collateral. Lenders and investors using Chinese property as collateral should reassess valuations aggressively. The assumption that property values provide a floor has proven catastrophically wrong.
Monitor consumer wealth effects. Consumer-facing businesses should prepare for years of constrained spending as household wealth remains depressed. The Chinese consumer, long expected to drive global growth, faces significant headwinds.
Prepare for policy volatility. Beijing will likely cycle through various stimulus measures, creating temporary market movements. Distinguishing genuine structural improvements from short-term liquidity injections is critical.
The Painful Path Forward
Beijing recognizes that the core issue lies in reducing local governments’ dependence on LGFVs, with Premier Li Qiang underscoring the need to “remove government financing functions from local financing platforms and press ahead with market-oriented transformation”. This is the right diagnosis, but the treatment will be painful and prolonged.
“China’s property crisis represents more than a cyclical downturn—it’s the unwinding of a growth model that took 30 years to build. Recovery to sustainable equilibrium requires 5-7 years minimum, with 2030 representing the earliest realistic bottom under optimistic scenarios. Censorship can control information but cannot alter the underlying economics.“
China needs to rebuild its entire fiscal architecture. This means new tax structures, revised central-local government responsibilities, transparent budget constraints, and allowing insolvent entities to actually fail rather than propping them up indefinitely. Each of these reforms faces powerful resistance from vested interests.
The alternative—continuing to refinance bad debts, prop up zombie developers, and hope for a return to property-driven growth—merely extends the crisis. It’s Japan’s playbook from the 1990s, and the results speak for themselves.
Conclusion: When Censorship Meets Economic Gravity
Beijing’s censors can scrub social media clean of negative sentiment. They can delete posts, suspend accounts, and create the digital appearance of stability. What they cannot do is delete the structural imbalances in China’s economy, rewrite the math of debt-to-GDP ratios, or manufacture demand in a demographically declining society with excess housing supply.
The 2030 timeline isn’t pessimism—it’s arithmetic. Clearing inventory, restructuring debt, rebuilding local government finances, and allowing new economic models to emerge requires time measured in years, not quarters. Japan’s experience, with similar structural challenges but arguably simpler economics, took more than a decade even with aggressive policy responses.
For global businesses, investors, and policymakers, the implications are profound. The Chinese growth engine that powered the global economy for three decades is fundamentally transforming. The property-driven model is over, and what replaces it remains uncertain.
The censors can control the narrative on Weibo. They cannot control economic reality. And economic reality suggests that 2030 marks not the beginning of recovery, but merely the year when China might finally hit bottom—if, and only if, Beijing pursues genuine structural reforms rather than continued extend-and-pretend tactics.
For hundreds of millions of Chinese families like Zhang Wei’s, still paying mortgages on unfinished apartments, that timeline offers cold comfort. But it offers something perhaps more valuable: honesty about the scale of the challenge ahead. No amount of censorship can change what the numbers tell us—this is a crisis that will define China’s next decade.
Data Sources :
This analysis draws from National Bureau of Statistics of China, International Monetary Fund reports, Bloomberg Intelligence, Goldman Sachs research, and major property developer financial statements through December 2025. Statistical projections are based on historical recovery timelines from comparable property crises, adjusted for China-specific structural factors.
Discover more from The Economy
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Analysis
China-Russia Trade: Why Beijing Now Holds All the Leverage
For years, the phrase “no-limits partnership” defined how Beijing and Moscow described their relationship. It’s still the phrase both governments use publicly. But look closely at what’s actually happening in the energy trade underpinning that partnership, and a very different picture emerges — one where China holds nearly all the leverage, and Russia is discovering that a lifeline can also function as a leash.
The Summit That Produced Declarations, Not Deals
The most recent Xi-Putin summit, which concluded on May 20, 2026, generated the usual round of cooperation announcements across economy, trade, education, science, and technology. But beneath the diplomatic choreography, the meeting failed to deliver the one outcome Russia actually needed: a finalized pricing agreement for the Power of Siberia 2 pipeline (OilPrice.com).
That pipeline matters enormously to Moscow. Russia’s pipeline gas exports to the European Union collapsed from roughly 157 billion cubic meters before the 2022 invasion of Ukraine to just 18 bcm in 2025, dragging Russia’s gas-related tax revenue down 7%. Power of Siberia 2 would add 50 bcm of annual capacity and could roughly double Russia’s share of China’s total gas consumption, from about 10% to 20%. Without that eastward redirection, Russia’s massive Yamal gas reserves — once feeding Europe — risk becoming stranded assets with nowhere to go (Insight EU Monitoring).
Why China Isn’t in a Hurry
Here’s the detail that gets lost in most “Russia-China axis” coverage: China doesn’t actually need this pipeline urgently, and its behavior reflects that. When Gazprom announced a 30-year memorandum on the project in September 2025, Beijing didn’t issue any matching statement. China’s own 15th Five-Year Plan, approved in March 2026, mentions only “advancing preparatory work” — deliberately non-committal language for a project Russia has been publicly promoting for years (Insight EU Monitoring).
The pricing standoff illustrates the imbalance clearly. Putin has insisted gas flowing through the pipeline should use a market-based pricing formula similar to what Russia once charged Europe. Gazprom reportedly made what one source close to the company called a “very competitive offer.” Chinese counterparts still haven’t shown willingness to move forward. Meanwhile, as Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov was in Beijing promoting the pipeline, China’s Vice Premier Ding Xuexiang was simultaneously in Turkmenistan signing deals to expand gas cooperation with China’s second-largest pipeline gas supplier — a live demonstration that Beijing is actively diversifying away from dependence on any single supplier, Russia included (Insight EU Monitoring).
Even the project’s own timeline undercuts any sense of urgency: the head of research at China National Petroleum Corporation has noted that projects of this scale require eight to ten years to build, and Gazprom itself doesn’t expect the pipeline to reach even half capacity before 2034-2035, assuming deliveries start after 2031 (Insight EU Monitoring).
The Trade Numbers Tell an Uncomfortable Story for Moscow
Bilateral trade between China and Russia soared 55% between 2021 and 2025, comfortably surpassing the two countries’ shared $200 billion target set back in 2019. But 2025 marked the first annual decline since the pandemic year of 2020, with trade falling 7% to $227.6 billion (The Moscow Times).
Economically, the asymmetry is stark. China’s economy is nearly eight times larger than Russia’s on a nominal GDP basis, and Russia represents just 4% of China’s total international trade — while China accounts for the overwhelming majority of Russia’s trade relationships (OilPrice.com). That imbalance shows up directly in Russia’s war-fighting capacity: Russia now imports more than 90% of its sanctioned technology from China, up 10 percentage points from 2025. Some of that includes high-end Chinese components that Ukrainian forces have physically extracted from intercepted Russian Kinzhal missile warheads, while Chinese microchips reportedly provide processing power for Iskander ballistic missile and Lancet loitering munition targeting systems (OilPrice.com).
A Temporary Rebound, Not a Reversal
There has been a recent uptick worth noting: Russian oil exports to China surged 22% and oil products rose 9% in early 2026, partly a byproduct of the Iran-linked conflict disrupting Middle East energy flows through the Strait of Hormuz, pushing buyers toward Russian crude that doesn’t depend on that chokepoint (The Moscow Times). Chinese exports to Russia also strengthened, helped by lower Russian interest rates and a stronger ruble reviving consumer demand — car exports nearly doubled, while telecom and computer exports both rose 21%.
But Moscow-based analysts are cautioning against reading too much into this bounce. Economist Andrei Gnidchenko of the CMAKP research center expects trade growth to slow through the second half of 2026 as China builds up energy reserves and economic activity in both countries remains subdued, projecting total 2026 trade will land just 5-10% above 2025 levels — essentially flat versus 2024 (The Moscow Times). And because energy accounts for nearly all of what Russia sells to China, Moscow has little else to offer once oil and gas demand plateaus — Russian oil shipments to China were already slowing to an average 2.2 million barrels per day by April, still above year-ago levels but below Q1 2026’s pace, while pipeline gas exports are already running at maximum existing infrastructure capacity.
The Bigger Picture: China Buys Discounted Oil Precisely Because It Can
China’s discount on Russian crude peaked at roughly 18% in 2022 before easing to around 5%, then rising again in late 2025 following new US sanctions targeting buyers. Between April 2022 and February 2026, China’s average discount stood at 7.7%, saving Beijing an estimated $18.3 billion over that period (Merics China-Russia Dashboard). That’s not a partnership priced between equals — it’s a buyer’s market where China sets the terms because Russia has nowhere else to sell.
What This Means for Global Markets and Investors
For energy traders, the practical takeaway is that Russian crude flows to China will likely keep growing in volume terms but shrink in strategic leverage, since China’s diversification into Central Asian gas (via Turkmenistan) and its patient negotiating posture on Power of Siberia 2 signal it isn’t willing to let Moscow dictate pricing terms. For geopolitical risk analysts, the widening asymmetry suggests China is positioning itself to treat the Russian Far East as a sphere of economic influence rather than a genuine strategic equal — a dynamic that could accelerate if Russia’s war-driven isolation from Western markets continues.
For businesses assessing sanctions exposure, the growing volume of dual-use Chinese components inside Russian weapons systems is likely to keep secondary-sanctions risk elevated for Chinese financial institutions and industrial firms doing cross-border business — a trend that expanded significantly throughout 2025 and shows no sign of reversing.
The Bottom Line
The “no-limits” framing was always more useful as propaganda than as an accurate description of the relationship’s power dynamics. China gets cheap, reliable energy and expanding influence across Russia’s Far East. Russia gets a lifeline that grows thinner and more conditional with every passing quarter. Unless the trajectory of the war in Ukraine or Russia’s broader economic fortunes shifts dramatically, that imbalance is set to deepen — and the Power of Siberia 2 stalemate is the clearest evidence yet of who is actually setting the terms.
Discover more from The Economy
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Analysis
China Economy 2026: Export Growth Masks Manufacturing Overcapacity
China’s exports have been the good-news story in an otherwise mixed economic picture. They’re not just holding up; through the first four months of 2026 they were running about 14% to 15% above the same period a year earlier, according to figures cited by the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission and Vanguard’s economic outlook. That’s the kind of number that would normally signal a healthy economy. The complication is what’s happening underneath it.
A growth model showing its age
Manufacturing capacity utilization fell to 73.9% in early 2026 — near a decade low outside of the pandemic shutdowns, per the Commission’s bulletin. That’s the tell. China is producing and shipping more, but a growing share of its industrial base is running under capacity, which points to a structural mismatch: the country’s manufacturing engine has outgrown both its domestic consumption and, increasingly, what the rest of the world is willing to absorb without pushback.
Goldman Sachs Research, in a report cited by Goldman Sachs’ own analysis, forecasts 4.8% real GDP growth for 2026 — above consensus expectations of 4.5% — driven substantially by continued export strength and a softening drag from the property downturn. But that same report flags the labor market as a genuine weak spot: hiring, measured across a weighted average of PMI employment sub-indexes, is at its most depressed level in a decade outside Covid, and urban nominal wage growth slowed to just 3.8% year-on-year in Q3 2025.
Why Beijing isn’t reaching for stimulus
Given the export strength, one might expect policymakers to feel less urgency about consumption-side stimulus. That’s roughly what’s happening — and it’s a deliberate choice, not an oversight. Xi Jinping’s government remains committed to dominating high-value manufacturing, which means comprehensive fiscal stimulus aimed at consumers remains unlikely even as domestic demand stays soft, according to the Commission’s bulletin.
The People’s Bank of China is expected to hold its policy rate steady through the rest of the year, preferring targeted structural tools over a broad-based rate cut, per Vanguard’s forecast. That’s a notably cautious stance given how weak the property sector remains — property investment indicators are down 50% to 80% from their 2020–21 peaks, and a “meaningful domestic-demand turnaround remains elusive,” in Vanguard’s own words.
The regulatory push to keep capital at home
Two moves by Chinese regulators in mid-2026 point to where Beijing’s real priority sits: keeping household savings and private capital funneled toward domestic industrial policy rather than flowing overseas. New rules taking effect July 1 restrict outbound investment that could be used to export restricted technology or expertise under the guise of ordinary capital flows, with violations carrying fines, visa restrictions and industry blacklisting, according to the Commission’s bulletin. The regulations follow Beijing’s move to block the founders of AI firm Manus from completing a sale to Meta, even after the company had relocated its headquarters from China to Singapore — a signal that Beijing is willing to reach across borders to keep promising tech assets tethered to domestic or Hong Kong listings.
The currency and trade angle
Goldman’s team makes an out-of-consensus call worth flagging: it expects China’s current account surplus to rise to 4.2% of GDP in 2026, up from 3.6% in 2025, while the broader analyst consensus surveyed by Bloomberg expects a decline to 2.5%. The divergence comes down to export resilience — falling export prices are making Chinese goods more competitive even as the yuan is expected to appreciate slightly, with export-price inflation in dollar terms forecast to turn positive, rising to 0.7% from -2.7% the prior year.
The bottom line
China’s economy in 2026 is a study in contrasts: robust headline export growth sitting on top of underutilized factories, a weak labor market, and a property sector still in its fifth year of decline. The World Bank’s own baseline, published in its country program materials, projects growth moderating toward 4.0% by 2026 — a more conservative read than Goldman’s. Either way, the consensus across forecasters is the same: exports are carrying more of China’s growth than is healthy for the long run, and Beijing’s policy choices this year suggest it’s betting on technological dominance to eventually solve the demand problem, rather than opening the stimulus taps to solve it directly.
Discover more from The Economy
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Banks
The Money Is Drying Up: How US Pressure Is Choking Off Russia-China Payment Channels
The US Treasury Department has moved aggressively against a sanctions-evasion network linking Russia and China, exposing a secret payment channel used to facilitate cross-border transactions for sensitive exports and designating a Kyrgyz Republic-based financial institution accused of helping Moscow evade restrictions, according to the US Treasury’s official press release.
Inside the Evasion Network
The scheme relied on so-called “ruble clearing platforms” that facilitate non-cash mutual settlement for payments tied to sanctioned goods. US-designated Russian financial institutions including Sberbank, Alfa-Bank, Sovcombank, T-Bank, and Bank Tochka were reportedly participants. Treasury identified Russia-based and China-based trading companies acting as counterparties in the network, while also designating Keremet Bank, which Treasury says was purchased specifically to create a new sanctions-evasion hub for Russian import payments and export receipts. Treasury simultaneously re-designated nearly 100 entities under Executive Order 13662, reinforcing risk exposure for any foreign party continuing to work with Russia’s military-industrial base.
China’s Banks Start Saying No
The pressure appears to be working, at least partially. Russian banking sources describe a dramatic slowdown in cross-border payment flows, not only with China but also with Central Asian intermediaries such as Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan. A Moscow-based banker quoted by CEPA described the situation bluntly, noting that money has largely stopped flowing and only a narrow set of intermediary countries remain viable, according to CEPA’s analysis of the sanctions squeeze. Chinese banks have reportedly begun refusing payments from Russia and rejecting transactions where Russian names appear anywhere in supporting paperwork — a shift CEPA attributes to a US threat late last year to impose secondary sanctions on Chinese banks, cutting them off from dollar access.
The Scale of China’s Role
China has become indispensable to Russia’s wartime economy. Bilateral trade between the two countries hit a record $237 billion in 2023, up nearly 70% since 2021, and China has supplied more than 90% of Russia’s semiconductor imports since the invasion of Ukraine began, more than half of which were Western-branded or produced, according to CSIS’s research on sanctions and Russia’s economic transformation. China’s imports from Russia rose 60% between 2021 and 2024, according to a Congressional Research Service report.
The Crypto Workaround — And Its Limits
As traditional banking channels tighten, Russian banks are being pushed toward cryptocurrency settlement, though CEPA reports Chinese counterparties treat crypto transactions with Russia as fast but increasingly costly, further raising the effective price of Russian imports. The sanctioned Russian exchange Garantex has been under US sanctions since April 2022, and few jurisdictions remain willing to accept Russian crypto transfers, though Russian bankers reportedly expect the UAE to emerge as a more permissive hub for such flows.
The EU’s Parallel Track
The squeeze is not solely an American project. The European Council voted on June 18–19, 2026, to extend EU economic sanctions against Russia for a further twelve months, through July 2027, while calling for swift adoption of a 21st sanctions package targeting Russia’s shadow fleet, energy revenues, and banking system, according to the Council of the EU’s official statement. For global banks and multinational corporates, the compounding effect of US and EU enforcement means compliance risk tied to any residual Russia exposure — even indirect exposure routed through Chinese or Central Asian intermediaries — is rising sharply heading into the second half of 2026.
Discover more from The Economy
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
-
Markets & Finance6 months agoTop 15 Stocks for Investment in 2026 in PSX: Your Complete Guide to Pakistan’s Best Investment Opportunities
-
Analysis5 months agoTop 10 Stocks for Investment in PSX for Quick Returns in 2026
-
Analysis5 months agoBrazil’s Rare Earth Race: US, EU, and China Compete for Critical Minerals as Tensions Rise
-
Analysis5 months agoJohor’s Investment Boom: The Hidden Costs Behind Malaysia’s Most Ambitious Economic Surge
-
Banks6 months agoBest Investments in Pakistan 2026: Top 10 Low-Price Shares and Long-Term Picks for the PSX
-
Investment6 months agoTop 10 Mutual Fund Managers in Pakistan for Investment in 2026: A Comprehensive Guide for Optimal Returns
-
Global Economy7 months ago15 Most Lucrative Sectors for Investment in Pakistan: A 2025 Data-Driven Analysis
-
Global Economy7 months agoPakistan’s Export Goldmine: 10 Game-Changing Markets Where Pakistani Businesses Are Winning Big in 2025
