Regional Heterogeneity Analysis On The Impact Of Financial Support On The Development Of Urban Investment Bonds Under The Bipolar Policy

In the 1990s,urban investment bonds came into being under the reform of the tax-sharing system.While growing,it has also accumulated some drawbacks.In the context of the current rapid growth rate of urban investment bonds,hitting a record high,and the urban investment market facing a new round of tightening policies,we need to think about the path of sustainable development of the urban investment bonds again.On the basis of previous study,this paper firstly expounds the related concepts and development process of urban investment bonds and their platforms in China,and analyzes the issuance of urban investment bonds at the current stage,the situation and existing problems faced by the urban investment market.Secondly,from a theoretical perspective,it analyzes the theoretical basis and transmission mechanism of government support for the development of urban investment bonds from three levels:the theory of government support for the development of urban investment bonds,the theory of regional development heterogeneity,and the mechanism that financial support affects the scale of urban investment bonds.Finally,from 2010 to 2020,4 years of easing policy and 4 years of tightening policy,a total of 16,945 urban investment bonds are selected.Then this part divides them into 6 sub-samples according to the policy background and the eastern,central and western regions,using the measures of regional government financial support and the relevant indicators of the regional economic development level as explanatory variables.And then the study uses the step-by-step backward regression method,focusing on the analysis of the impact of government financial support.It not only does the study analyzes the factors affecting the development of urban investment bonds under the background of tightening policies,but also compares the development characteristics of urban investment bonds in the eastern,central and western regions,and provides innovative perspectives for the comparative study of urban investment bonds.Following are the conclusions of the study:First,under the background of tightening policies,the government in the eastern and central regions can control the net assets of support platforms such as land and real estate injected into the urban investment platform to control the growth rate of urban investment scale,while the western region can control the growth rate of urban investment scale.The method of increasing assets is not effective.The government can control the development of urban investment bonds by controlling the monetary funds or net profits of urban investment platforms by injecting cash flow or adding infrastructure projects.Second,during the easing policy period,the governments of the eastern and central regions can promote the development of urban investment bonds by injecting intangible assets such as land assets into urban investment platforms,increasing cash subsidies,and increasing the net assets of urban investment platforms.The expansion of urban investment platform project construction and other businesses will help generate income and increase net profit,and increase monetary and financial support for it to stimulate the development of urban investment bonds.Thirdly,comparing the sample regression results under loose and tight policies,it can be seen that urban investment bonds can be affected by more factors in a loose environment,and the government can exert impetus through its financial support and other external factors to promote the development of urban investment bonds.However,under strict supervision policies,the development of urban investment bonds is limited,and the factors that can significantly affect its scale are relatively reduced.The government should make full use of the limited influencing factors to exert reverse pressure or reduce corresponding financial support to prevent the excessive scale of urban investment bonds.expansion,thereby reducing the risk of hidden dangers.Finally,According to the study conclusions and some problems faced by the urban investment market at this stage,this paper proposes that government financial support should be rationalized from four levels,the implementation of policies should be tailored to local conditions,and should not be one size fits all.Then the management and control of debt issuance by urban investment entities should be in place in real time,and pay attention to suggestions such as structural growth of urban investment and financing.