First, the reform of state-owned enterprises must be viewed historically
1. According to some people, the reform of China's state-owned enterprises is promoted under the guidance of neoliberal ideological trends and theories.
I don’t think so.
China's state-owned enterprise reform and property rights system reform were forced.
After the "appropriation to loans" in 1984, the first thing was the financial shortage.
The state does not invest capital in newly established state-owned enterprises, and the state does not invest new capital in old state-owned enterprises.
According to the "Company Law", investors must invest capital to establish an enterprise.
At that time, the balance sheet of the newly established state-owned enterprises had liabilities on the right side and assets on the left side. The enterprise had no registered capital.
At that time, state-owned enterprises started by "replacing loans with appropriations". Whose net assets were formed after the enterprises repaid the loans? In 1993, the former State-owned Assets Administration issued a document clearly defining the net assets formed as state-owned property rights.
In 2003, the State Council Document No. 96 reiterated this principle of defining property rights.
Secondly, banks cut off loans.
After the commercialization reform of state-owned banks in the mid-1990s, they were no longer bank cashiers and began to lend money according to market rules.
After the changes in bank behavior, the state-owned enterprises' openness to using money in the past has changed.
By 1997, the loss ratio of large and medium-sized state-owned enterprises was close to 40%. At that time, many state-owned enterprises lacked viability and were in trouble.
Under this historical background, state-owned enterprises have to reform. Without reform, they will not survive.
Therefore, the reform of state-owned enterprises was forced.
2. Let’s look at the process of state-owned enterprise reform.
The reform of state-owned enterprises was first promoted by local governments.
Local governments are directly facing pressure from all aspects, directly facing four major problems: factories need to produce, employees need to be employed, finances need to collect taxes, and society needs to be stable.
When faced with these pressures, there is no other option but to promote reform.
Therefore, the reform of state-owned enterprises first breaks through at the local level.
Looking at the current national situation, the reform of central enterprises lags behind the reform of local enterprises, the reform of large enterprises lags behind the reform of small and medium-sized enterprises, and the reform of enterprises with good economic conditions lags behind the reform of enterprises in difficulty.
In more than 20 years of state-owned enterprise reform, all possible methods have been tried.
For example, the first step is to delegate power and profits to state-owned enterprises, implement contract operations, and allow enterprises to diversify their investments.
What is the final effect of these reforms? That is, the operators of state-owned enterprises have great independent decision-making power. According to the evaluation of some scholars, it can be called "the best in the world."
But decision-makers do not bear responsibility for mistakes in decision-making.
This is because the reform of state-owned enterprises is promoted in the absence of investors. At the same time, we must also see that state-owned enterprises have basically solved the market-oriented problem of business operations in this process.
The reform of state-owned enterprises needs to solve two basic problems. One is the marketization of the business methods of state-owned enterprises, which has been basically solved after more than 20 years of reform.
The supply and marketing of human, property and property have basically been allocated in a market-oriented manner.
The second is the marketization of the state-owned enterprise system. This problem is being solved.
At present, the restructuring coverage of state-owned small and medium-sized enterprises has reached 80% to 90%. In this process, a small number of state-owned small and medium-sized enterprises have gone bankrupt. More than 30,000 state-owned enterprises have gone bankrupt, and more than 3,000 have policy-related bankruptcies. More than 6 million employees have gone bankrupt, and a large number of state-owned enterprises have gained new vitality.
According to current sample surveys, more than 70% of state-owned enterprises after restructuring have achieved profitability, which is already very good.
From 1998 to 2003, the number of state-owned enterprises decreased to 138,000, the number of employees dropped from 75 million to 43 million, and the annual profits increased from 21.3 billion yuan to more than 400 billion yuan.
Without active promotion of the restructuring of state-owned small and medium-sized enterprises, the local economy and the entire Chinese economy would not be in the same situation as they are today.
Enterprises that have completed restructuring now strive for survival before restructuring and development after restructuring.
They are now further considering and promoting the second restructuring.
Under the tide of reform, there will inevitably be both mud and sand. This is a process of exploration and game.
From a historical perspective, if the reform of state-owned enterprises had not been promoted in a timely manner in the past, historical opportunities may have been lost.
The debate on the reform of state-owned enterprises in 2004 reflected the different understandings of various parties on the reform of state-owned enterprises. Generally speaking, it had a positive effect, because all parties paid attention to the social contradictions that emerged during the reform. some problems arise.
This will make our laws and regulations more perfect and standardized.
In fact, this is also done.
However, we should not ignore one point and ignore the rest, and we should not miss the forest for the trees. Problems arise during reform and can only be improved through reform.
If you want to have a thorough understanding of China's state-owned enterprise reform and make a pertinent analysis, it is not enough to simply analyze the financial statements of listed companies.
Second, we must look at the reform of state-owned enterprises realistically
The reform of state-owned enterprises has now entered the stage of institutional reform and has entered the stage of overcoming difficulties.
It should be said to be the most complicated and difficult stage.
The reform of state-owned enterprises has moved from shallow-level reforms to deep-level reforms: First, the reform of the state-owned assets management system.
The 16th CPC National Congress solved the problem of investors having institutions in place, but it has not yet solved the problem of investors having functions in place. This is a problem that is more difficult to solve than the institutions of investors in place.
The second is the issue of structural adjustment of the state-owned economic layout.
Some experts have proposed that the state-owned economy should advance and retreat, and do something and not do something.
But how to manifest it and how to implement it? Still an unresolved issue.
The third issue is the restructuring of large state-owned enterprises.
Even if a company goes public, it does not mean that the company's restructuring has been completed.
The fourth is the adjustment of labor relations among state-owned employees.
The institutional dependence of state-owned employees on state-owned enterprises is the most difficult problem to solve in the reform of state-owned enterprises.
The fifth is the issue of the separation of main and auxiliary industries in state-owned large and medium-sized enterprises and the restructuring of auxiliary industries. It must solve the large and comprehensive and small and comprehensive models introduced from the former Soviet Union since the founding of the People's Republic of China and solve the problem of externalization of supporting production.
This is not a problem in market economy countries, but it is a very serious problem under our traditional planned economic system.
Sixth, enterprises should separate social issues.
At present, the separation of enterprise-run primary and secondary schools from the public security organs and the law is being promoted.
Seventh is the issue of social management of enterprise retirees.
This unresolved problem has increasingly seriously affected the reform of state-owned enterprises, including the fact that retired personnel of enterprises after restructuring are still being supported in the enterprises, and local governments have not taken over.
This part of the burden will eat up about 7% of the company's profits.
Eighth is the debt restructuring and non-performing asset disposal issues of state-owned enterprises.
In the past, the methods we adopted were bankruptcy and debt-for-equity swap.
There has been a breakthrough in this issue in the past two years.
Banks and other creditors have also begun to adopt a more pragmatic attitude.
Debt restructuring is a market-based solution to the problem.
The tenth issue is the merger, acquisition, reorganization and industrial integration of state-owned enterprises.
This involves both the reorganization between state-owned enterprises and the reorganization between state-owned capital and non-state-owned capital.
The eleventh issue is the governance structure of state-owned enterprises.
Baosteel is the first wholly state-owned company to set up a board of directors with external directors as the main body. This is a historic reform.
Twelve is the issue of restructuring of collective enterprises.
The state has issued documents for the first restructuring of large collective enterprises run by factories in Northeast China.
Third, we must view the reform of state-owned enterprises in a durable manner
There are currently three opinions on the reform of state-owned enterprises: one is the pessimistic theory.
Losing confidence in the reform of state-owned enterprises and holding a negative attitude towards the role of the state-owned economy.
The second is the theory of quick victory.
It is believed that the main problems in the reform of state-owned enterprises have been solved.
The third is the theory of durability.
Both pessimism and quick victory theory are inconsistent with objective facts.
The reform of state-owned enterprises is a long-term strategic goal.
History is the best doctor.
~If you agree with my answer, please click the Accept as Satisfactory Answer button in time~
~Mobile questioners can just click Satisfaction in the upper right corner of the client.
~Your acceptance is the motivation for me to move forward~~
~If you have any new questions, please ask me for help. It is not easy to answer the questions, so please understand~~
O(∩_∩)O, remember to praise and adopt, help each other
I wish you progress in your studies!