|
|
|
| Housing Provident Fund and Households' Investment in Risky Financial Assets: Evidence from China's Household Finance Survey of 2013 |
| CHEN Xuanjuan, LIN Hongmei
|
| School of Finance, Shanghai University of Finance and Economics |
|
|
|
Abstract Limited participation in stock markets is a widespread and puzzling phenomenon, but it is a particularly serious problem in China. We need to understand the factors that affect households' decisions to make risky financial investments. Previous studies indicate that house purchase price is a crucial factor in explaining the level of stockholdings. From 2000 to 2015, China's house purchase price grew rapidly, with a growth rate exceeding the rates in developed countries. In the same period, Chinese households show very high enthusiasm for housing investment. Housing investment requires substantial funds and may reduce households' exposure to risky financial assets.
Following the example of Singapore's Central Provident Fund, in 1994, China implemented the housing provident fund (HPF) to improve housing affordability. The HPF scheme affects the disposable income of households in two ways. First, according to the tax law, there is no need to pay personal income tax on payments to or withdrawals from the HPF. Therefore, the HPF increases households' future disposable income and lifetime wealth. On the other hand, payment to the HPF enhances a household's current liquidity constraints and the interest rates for HPF deposits are low. Furthermore, unlike endowment insurance, the impact of the HPF is different on households with and without housing. Households without housing cannot use withdrawals from the HPF as a down payment or to repay housing loans. Although households can withdraw funds from the HPF to pay rent, the amount that can be withdrawn for this purpose is limited.
Accordingly, this study addresses three main problems. First, does the HPF significantly influence households' investment in risky financial assets？ Second, what is the mechanism through which the HPF affects households' investment in risky financial assets？ Finally, we discuss the heterogeneity of the impact of the HPF on different types of households.
We use data from the 2013 China Household Finance Survey (CHFS). The CHFS database includes detailed information on household assets, liabilities, financial wealth, income, and insurance. This survey of 28,151 sample households covers 29 provinces (autonomous regions and municipalities) and 262 counties (districts and cities). As the majority of people with an HPF are urban, we delete rural households. After data pre-processing, our sample contains 11,093 urban households.
We use a Probit model to test the impact of the HPF on the possibility that a household will make risky financial investments. Then, we use a Tobit model to test the impact of the HPF on the proportion of risky financial investments made by households. Finally, we examine the mediating factors to determine the mechanism driving this relationship. To address endogeneity concerns, we use an instrumental variable. We also use the Heckman two-step model and panel fixed effects model as robustness tests.
The empirical results show that the HPF can significantly increase the possibility and proportion of risky financial investments made by households with houses. However, the HPF has no significant impact on households that do not own the place in which they live. The analyses of the mechanism show that the HPF significantly increases households' disposable incomes and improves their risk preference levels, and thus increases the possibility and proportion of investments in risky financial assets. These findings suggest that it is necessary to strengthen the support function of the HPF for households without houses. For example, by relaxing the conditions under which households can make withdrawals from the HPF. In addition, it is very important to increase the interest rate of HPF deposit, to reduce the opportunity cost of the mandate deposit of HPF.
The contributions of this study are as follows. First, this study is the first to link the HPF to risky financial investments and confirms that the HPF can significantly affect households' investment in risky financial assets. We put forward new evidence to explain individuals' limited participation in the stock market, expand the research on the HPF, and provide new topics for follow-up research. Second, the results indicate that the HPF not only improves housing affordability, but also regulates households' investment in risky financial assets. This conclusion provides insights into ways to increase households' property income and to promote the development of a multi-level capital market. Finally, the heterogeneity analysis shows that the HPF has no significant impact on investment in risky financial assets by households that do not own housing. This suggests that the government needs to pay attention to the implementation of the HPF system.
|
|
Received: 21 February 2019
Published: 02 May 2021
|
|
|
|
|
| [1] |
陈永伟、顾佳峰和史宇鹏,2014,《住房财富、信贷约束与城镇家庭教育开支——来自CFPS 2010数据的证据》,《经济研究》第S1期,第89～101页。
|
| [2] |
段志民,2016,《子女数量对家庭收入的影响》,《统计研究》第10期,第83～92页。
|
| [3] |
康书隆、余海跃和刘越飞,2017,《住房公积金、购房信贷与家庭消费——基于中国家庭追踪调查数据的实证研究》,《金融研究》第8期,第67～82页。
|
| [4] |
林靖、周铭山和董志勇,2017,《社会保险与家庭金融风险资产投资》,《管理科学学报》第2期,第94～107页。
|
| [5] |
卢云鹤与万海远,2017,《住房公积金制度的收入分配效应》,中国收入分配研究院工作论文No.66。
|
| [6] |
吴卫星和齐天翔,2007,《流动性、生命周期与投资组合相异性——中国投资者行为调查实证分析》,《经济研究》第2期,第97～110页。
|
| [7] |
肖作平和尹林辉,2010,《我国住房公积金缴存比例的影响因素研究——基于34个大中城市的经验证据》,《经济研究》第S1期,第129～142页。
|
| [8] |
徐跃进, 吴璟与刘洪玉, 2017,《住房公积金政策与缴存职工收益》,《统计研究》第5期,第49～58页。
|
| [9] |
徐佳和谭娅,2016,《中国家庭金融资产配置及动态调整》,《金融研究》第12期,第99～114页。
|
| [10] |
尹志超、宋全云和吴雨,2014,《金融知识、投资经验与家庭资产选择》,《经济研究》第4期,第62～75页。
|
| [11] |
詹鹏、万海远和李实,2018,《住房公积金与居民收入分配——基于可计算一般均衡模型的研究》,《数量经济技术经济研究》第9期,第99～114页。
|
| [12] |
张晓娇,2013,《风险态度与家庭金融资产组合》,西南财经大学。
|
| [13] |
张军和成川南,2019,《社会保障对家庭金融资产选择的影响——基于CHFS数据的实证研究》,《重庆理工大学学报(社会科学)》第11期,第60～72页.
|
| [14] |
周广肃和梁琪,2018,《互联网使用、市场摩擦与家庭风险金融资产投资》,《金融研究》第1期,第84～101页。
|
| [15] |
周寒、孙文远和郑登元,2019,《保险对家庭金融资产结构的影响——基于中国家庭金融调查(CHFS)数据的实证分析》,《武汉金融》第7期,第64～68页.
|
| [16] |
周钦、袁燕和臧文斌,2015,《医疗保险对中国城市和农村家庭资产选择的影响研究》,《经济学(季刊)》第3期,第931～960页.
|
| [17] |
宗庆庆、刘冲和周亚虹,2015,《社会养老保险与我国居民家庭风险金融资产投资——来自中国家庭金融调查(CHFS)的证据》,《金融研究》,第10期,第22～40页。
|
| [18] |
Blume,M.E. and I. Friend, 1975. “The Asset Structure of Individual Portfolios and Some Implications for Utility Functions”, Journal of Finance, 30(2):585～603.
|
| [19] |
Breuer, W., M. Riesener and A. J. Salzmann, 2012. “Risk Aversion vs. Individualism: What Drives Risk Taking in Household Finance？” European Journal of Finance, 20 (5):446 ～ 462.
|
| [20] |
Carliner, G., 2019. “Wage Differences by Language Group and the Market for Language Skills in Canada”, The Journal of Human Resources, 16(3): 384～399.
|
| [21] |
Campbell, J. Y., 2006. “Household Finance”, Journal of Finance, 61(4):1553～1604.
|
| [22] |
Chetty, R., L. O. Sándor and A. Szeidl, 2017. “The Effect of Housing on Portfolio Choice”, Journal of Finance, 72(3):1171～1212.
|
| [23] |
Chiquier, L. and L. Michael, 2009. “Housing Finance Policy in Emerging Markets”, World Bank Report.
|
| [24] |
Cocco, J. F., 2005. “Portfolio Choice in the Presence of Housing”, Review of Financial Studies, 18 (2):535～567.
|
| [25] |
Delavande, A. and S. Rohwedder, 2011. “Individuals' Uncertainty about Future Social Security Benefits and Portfolio Choice”, Journal of Applied Econometrics, 26(3):498～519.
|
| [26] |
Feldstein, M.,1982. “Social Security, Induced Retirement, and Aggregate Capital Accumulation:A Correction and Updating”, Journal of Political Economy,82(5):905～926.
|
| [27] |
Gormley, T., H. Liu and G. Zhou, 2010. “Limited Participation and Consumption-Saving Puzzles: A Simple Explanation and the Role of Insurance”, Journal of Financial Economics,96(2):331～ 344.
|
| [28] |
Haliassos, M., D. Christelis and D. Georgarakos, 2014. “Differences in Portfolios Across Countries: Economic Environment versus Household Characteristics”, Review of Economics & Statistics, 95(1):220～236.
|
| [29] |
Honoré, Bo E.,1992. “Trimmed Lad and Least Squares Estimation of Truncated and Censored Regression Models with Fixed Effects”, Econometrica, 60(3): 533～565.
|
| [30] |
Hubbard, R. G., J. Skinner and S. P. Zeldes,1995. “Precautionary Saving and Social Insurance”, Journal of Political Economy, 103(2): 360～399.
|
| [31] |
Kerkhofs, M., M. Lindeboom and J. Theeuwes,1998. “Retirement, Financial Incentives and Health”,Labour Economics,6(2):203～227.
|
| [32] |
Morgan, K., 1995. “All Their Eggs in One Basket: Portfolio Diversification of US Households”, Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 27(1):87～96.
|
| [33] |
van Rooij, M., A. Lusardi and R. Alessie,2007. “Financial Literacy and Stock Market Participation”, Journal of Financial Economics,101(2):449～472.
|
| [34] |
Wooldridge, J. M., 2010. “Econometrics Analysis of Cross-Section and Panel Data”, Massachusetts:The MIT Press.
|
|
|
|
