The Study On Macro Background Risk And Risky Financial Asset Allocation Of Urban Households In China

The macro background risk refers to the background risk source at the nonhousehold level.It is the critical focus of analyzing the insufficient participation in the financial market of household risk in China.This paper attempts to construct an analytical framework for the relationship between macro background risk and urban household asset allocation and empirically studies the impact of three macro background risks on the asset allocation of urban households,including competition for funds in the wealth management market,monetization policy of shed reform,and human capital policies,and corresponding micro-background risk impact mechanism.The macro background risk and urban household asset allocation framework constructed in this paper divides the macro background risks into three categories according to existing research:financial market environment,real estate regulation policy,and human capital policy.The three macro background risks are affected by different government departments and markets,and the impact mechanisms and characteristics of the three types of risks on the asset allocation of urban households are also different.From the perspective of the impact mechanism,the financial market environment is the natural environment that households face when allocating assets,and it is a macro risk factor that conforms to economic intuition;real estate regulation policy pays attention to the impact of factors such as real estate wealth distribution on household asset allocation,and its impact The mechanism is often relatively indirect and has been the focus of the family finance field in recent years;human capital policy,which focuses on the impact of factors such as family security,human capital transformation,and wealth distribution on family asset allocation,is an emerging area that needs to be improved.The above macro background risks all affect household asset allocation decisions through one or more micro background risks,and the research on the impact of micro background risks on urban household asset allocation has been relatively mature,which will be an essential basis for further analysis framework for macro background risks and urban household asset allocation.This paper also uses empirical evidence to test the macro background risk and urban household asset allocation framework established above.Specifically,this paper studies the impact of three macro background risks on the asset allocation of urban households and the corresponding micro background risk impact mechanism of three macro background risks of competition for funds in the wealth management market,monetization policy of shed reform,and human capital policies.Real estate,financial assets,and human capital are essential manifestations of household assets.Changes in macro background risks corresponding to various assets will undoubtedly have a significant impact on household financial asset allocation decision-making.Therefore,using the above empirical evidence is important for the framework constructed in this paper’s explanatory power of reality.Specifically,this empirical study found that:The competition for funds in the wealth management market and urban households’ risky financial investment.This study adopts a fixed-effect model,using Wind Bank wealth management product data and China Household Tracking Survey(CFPS)data from 2012 to 2018,analyzes the relationship between the competition for funds in the wealth management market and Chinese households’ risky financial investment.Through mechanism analysis,I find that the competition for funds in the wealth management market reduces Chinese households’ risky financial investment by increasing the interest rate of financial products and making break-even commitments.Further analysis suggests that medium and high solvency households have more expectations for break-even and are more affected by the competition for funds in the wealth management market.The monetization policy of shed reform and the risk financial investment of urban households.This study adopts the difference-in-differences model(DID).It uses the data of the China Household Finance Survey(CHFS)in 2015 and 2017 to empirically analyze the impact and mechanism of the shantytown reform monetization policy on the risk financial investment of urban households and draw the following conclusions:The monetization policy of shantytown reform has increased the proportion of household venture financial investment.The mechanism of action is the shantytown reform monetization policy temporarily increases the unexpected income of households,and through the combined effect of the scale of liquid assets and the"mental account," households increase the depth of investment in stocks,funds,and financial wealth management products.Heterogeneity analysis found that the investment decisions of households with moderate risk investment and low financial literacy are more likely to be influenced by the monetization policy of shantytown reform,and the attention to economic and financial information further strengthens this influence.The suggestion drawn from this is that the relevant departments should support the interpretation of the policy when formulating the real estate policy.At the same time,they should improve the family financial literacy education and reduce the negative impact of real estate policy changes on the family financial investment decision-making.Human capital policy and urban household venture financial investment.This study analyzed the impact of the two-child policy,the personal income tax reform policy in 2011,and the integration of the basic pension insurance system for employees on the risk financial investment of urban households.Empirical research finds that compared with the two-child policy and the 2016 employee basic pension system integration policy,the impact on urban household venture financial investment is not significant,while the 2011 personal income tax reform policy has a positive effect on urban household venture financial investment.Specifically,the two-child policy and urban household risk financial asset allocation research adopt the difference-indifferences model(DID),using the China Household Finance Survey(CHFS)data in 2013,2015,and 2017,and empirically draws the following research conclusions:the two-child policy has no significant effect to household venture financial investments.The coefficients of the"separate two-child" policy implemented in 2014 and the"universal two-child policy"implemented in 2016 are not significant,indicating that the two-child policy has not significantly changed the family’s risky family financial investment decisions short term.The 2011 personal income tax reform and urban household risk financial asset allocation research adopt the difference-in-differences model(DID),using the China Family Tracking Survey(CFPS)data in 2010 and 2012,the empirical analysis draws the following research conclusions:2011 personal income tax The reform has a positive effect on household venture financial investment.Specifically,both the payroll tax shock coefficient in the form of dummy variables and the payroll tax shock coefficient in the form of continuous variables are significantly positive,which indicates that the 2011 personal income tax reform policy has improved household risk financial investment.Realistically,the personal income tax reform in 2011 was a large-scale tax reduction shock,which significantly reduced the taxation of low-income,low-risk preference,and broad population groups,which contributed to the transformation of the human capital of such groups,and further improved the level of human capital.The scale of tradable assets of such households increases risk appetite,thus contributing to household risk financial investment improvement.The research on the unification of the basic pension insurance system for employees and the allocation of risky financial assets of urban households adopt the difference-in-differences model(DID)and the data of the China Family Tracking Survey(CFPS)in 2014 and 2016 to draw the following research conclusions empirically:the unified basic pension insurance system for employees does not affect the Urban households’ risk financial investment decisions have no significant impact.Specifically,neither the pension consolidation coefficient in dummy variables nor the pension consolidation coefficient in continuous variables is substantial.On the one hand,this may be because the family members of government agencies and public institutions account for a relatively small proportion of the entire family in the country,so the implementation of the pension integration policy has no noticeable effect at the national level.On the other hand,existing studies have also found that the merger of pensions has little impact on labor mobility,so the human capital level of the family members of the government and public institutions is limited,which may also lead to the merger of the basic pension insurance system for employees and the risk investment of families—insufficient degree of influence.The suggestion from this is that the formulation of human capital policy should consider the policy time lag and the scope of policy implementation objects to achieve the unification of policy effects and policy goals.