← 返回巴西资讯
巴西资讯巴西金融监管2026年8月11日

巴西公共债务占比77.2%反超私人部门,中资企业信贷成本面临上行压力

分享

Public debt reduces space for private debt, pressures investments

2026年4月巴西公共债务占GDP比重达77.2%,超过私人部门债务的75.7%,政府融资需求挤出私人信贷,推高融资成本。在巴中资企业需关注信贷环境收紧及利率上行风险。

为什么值得关注

巴西公共债务占比77.2%反超私人部门,信贷成本上行将直接影响在巴中资企业的融资成本和投资决策。

巴西经济研究基金会(Fipe)旗下企业融资研究中心(Cefeb)最新报告显示,2026年4月巴西公共债务占GDP比重达到77.2%,超过私人部门债务(含家庭和企业)的75.7%,出现经济学意义上的“挤出效应”。这意味着政府作为最低风险借款人,吸收了更多储蓄和金融资源,推高了私人信贷成本。对于在巴西经营的中资企业而言,这意味着融资环境正在趋紧,信贷成本上升可能压缩利润空间,影响投资扩张计划。

根据Cefeb发布的报告,2026年4月巴西公共债务占GDP比重达到77.2%,超过私人部门债务(包括家庭和企业)的75.7%。这一数据揭示了巴西宏观经济中经典的“挤出效应”——公共部门吸收越来越多的储蓄和金融资源以滚动其负债。由于政府是风险最低的借款人,它将私人部门挤出资本市场,使生产性投资信贷更加昂贵。研究计算了联邦政府国内可交易债务的平均融资成本与私人债务成本之间的相关性为0.97,表明两者几乎同步变动。Cefeb协调员Roberto Troster(罗伯托·特罗斯特)表示,这些数字是警告信号,因为它们导致恶性循环:“政府需求更多资源,这提高了融资的风险溢价和利率。”

对于在巴西的中资企业而言,这一趋势的直接影响体现在融资成本上升和信贷可得性下降。报告显示,上市公司债务中资本市场份额从2022年的14.8%升至2026年的22%,而银行信贷份额从38.4%降至31.2%,表明企业越来越依赖资本市场融资,而这一渠道正受到政府债务扩张的挤压。巴西央行(BCB)的信贷政策目前薄弱且基于短期操作,增加了违约风险。随着支付延迟上升,信贷供应收缩,银行收紧贷款标准,企业推迟扩张计划。中资企业若在巴西有融资需求或依赖当地信贷市场,将直接面临成本上升和审批趋严的双重压力。底稿未涉及中资企业直接影响,但通过信贷成本上升和融资渠道收窄机制间接传导。

CBI解读:底稿数据显示,2023-2025年间巴西经历了“挤入”效应,私人债务市场繁荣,但2026年4月转向“挤出”令人担忧。前国库秘书Carlos Kawall(卡洛斯·卡瓦尔)指出,财政政策已失去反周期特性,“无论经济好坏,它都是扩张性的,尤其是因为经济表现良好,失业率低。”CBI认为,这一结构性转变意味着巴西政府财政扩张正在系统性挤压私人部门融资空间,且由于政府与私人债务融资成本相关性高达0.97,私人部门几乎无法规避政府融资成本上升的传导。Troster称,上次“挤出”现象发生在迪尔玛·罗塞夫政府期间(2014-2016年),但如今影响可能更严重,因为资本市场对公司负债的重要性前所未有。Kawall还警告,投资者包括大量个人投资者,国际经验表明影响会更广泛。

待观察:一是巴西政府后续财政调整措施,包括是否进一步通过提高IOF税或对封闭式基金征税等方式增加收入,这将直接影响市场流动性;二是巴西央行(BCB)在2026年下半年是否会调整基准利率以应对财政扩张带来的通胀压力,这将决定信贷成本走向;三是跟踪巴西公共债务占GDP比重是否持续攀升,以及私人部门债务占比能否企稳回升,这将验证“挤出效应”是否成为中期趋势。

CBI 观察编辑判断

事实层面,底稿明确显示巴西公共债务占GDP比重达77.2%,政府与私人债务融资成本相关性为0.97,表明两者几乎同步变动。CBI认为,这一高相关性意味着政府融资成本上升将几乎无损耗地传导至私人部门,中资企业难以通过选择不同融资渠道规避成本压力。同时,2023-2025年的“挤入”效应转向“挤出”,表明市场环境已发生趋势性变化,而非短期波动。

这条资讯对你有帮助吗?

信息概要

类型
市场数据
方向
巴西
分类
金融监管
层级
编辑整理
地点
在巴中资企业、依赖当地信贷市场的企业、私人部门借款人
核验
待核验
对象
在巴中资企业金融机构投资者
话题
金融政策行业趋势

来源信息

来源
Valor International
原文标题
Public debt reduces space for private debt, pressures investments
原始语言
英语
原文链接
查看原文 →
编辑
Clara Lin
查看原文(英语

Public debt reduces space for private debt, pressures investments

Roberto Troster, coordinator of Cefeb and the study’s author, says the figures are a warning sign because they lead to a vicious dynamic Rogerio Vieira/Valor Public debt remains on the rise and crossed an important threshold this year: reaching 77.2% of GDP in April, it surpassed the share of private-sector debt, which includes households and companies, at 75.7% in the same month, according to a report by the Center for Studies on the Financing of Brazilian Companies (Cefeb) at the Institute for Economic Research Foundation (Fipe). Analysis: A gathering storm in Brazilian credit markets Spending court looks to blame Focus survey for high cost of debt Lula scales back re-election platform to stress fiscal restraint The development revealed a classic phenomenon in macroeconomics, “crowding out,” or the displacement effect, in which the public sector absorbs an increasingly larger share of available savings and financial-market resources to roll over its liabilities. Because the government is the lowest-risk borrower, it “pushes” the private sector out of capital markets and makes credit for productive investment more expensive. Roberto Troster, coordinator of Cefeb and the study’s author, says the figures are a warning sign because they lead to a vicious dynamic. “The government demands more resources, and this raises the risk premium and interest rates for those taking out financing,” he says. The study provides an X-ray of the mechanism through which monetary policy is transmitted to credit in the country and calculates a 0.97 correlation between the average funding cost of the federal government’s domestic marketable debt and that of private debt, indicating an almost symmetrical alignment. When the government finances itself at a higher cost, the private productive sector immediately feels the impact, Troster says. In this way, he argues, the state acts as the financial market’s “anchor price.” At the same time, in the economist’s assessment, credit policy is poor and based on short-term operations, which increases defaults. As payment delays continue to rise, the supply of credit contracts and banks tighten lending criteria. Companies tend to shelve expansion plans as they seek to deleverage and improve operational efficiency. “Fiscal policy has lost any countercyclical character,” says Carlos Kawall, a former secretary of Brazil’s National Treasury and founder of asset manager Oriz. “It is expansionary by definition, regardless of whether the economy is doing poorly or well, especially because it is doing well, with low unemployment.” The study uses Gross General Government Debt (DBGG) as its basis, which includes the federal government (including the National Social Security Institute, or INSS), states and municipalities. Through the end of 2025, according to the report, public and private debt were growing in parallel, showing an economy becoming more leveraged. “In April 2026, the divergence becomes explicit. Public debt shoots up to 77.2%, while private debt falls to 75.7%.” Troster says the last time the “crowding out” phenomenon occurred was under the government of Dilma Rousseff, between 2014 and 2016. However, the impact on the private sector now is likely to be much more dramatic because the country has never had a capital market that was as relevant to companies’ liabilities. According to the Cefeb study, the segment’s share of the debt of publicly traded companies rose from 14.8% to 22% between 2022 and 2026, while the share of bank credit fell from 38.4% to 31.2%, indicating a structural shift in companies’ sources of financing. Kawall points out that investors are on the other side of these issuances, including a large number of individual investors. “We do not have this previous experience in Brazil, but international experience shows that the effect on how the economy functions tends to be amplified because it is more widespread,” he warns. According to him, a banking crisis generally remains more contained and under the control of the Central Bank. However, he notes that between 2023 and 2025, the country experienced a “crowding in” movement, with the “boom” in the private debt market, which largely replicates the public debt’s indexing structure, with securities linked to the CDI and IPCA. The former Treasury secretary says it is “concerning” to see the government moving toward “crowding out.” It is, he says, a model that consistently depends on increasing the stock of public debt, but that has also used higher revenues to finance itself, through measures such as increasing the IOF financial transactions tax and taxing exclusive closed-end funds. Economic growth, he assesses, was not enough to absorb the increase in spending, particularly mandatory spending, with the adjustment of the minimum wage and the reindexation of health care and education expenditures. Kawall points out that, when the fiscal framework was introduced in 2023, experts were already warning that it did not guarantee the sustainability of the debt trajectory. Long-term issuance loses steam Because the economy grew more than expected, the debt trajectory has not been explosive so far. Kawall notes that the request submitted to the Senate at the end of July for authorization to expand the capacity for sovereign borrowing abroad, proposing to replace the current cumulative ceiling of $100 billion with $35 billion, shows that the Treasury needs to broaden its investor base because of the growing difficulties with longer-term issuances in Brazil. The share of foreign-currency debt would rise from the current 3.8% of total debt to 7%. “Even with the growth of recent years, the credit market is small compared with the needs of the private sector, while the state is too large. Government debt has grown much more than private debt,” says Jeferson Bittencourt, head of Macroeconomics at ASA Investments and also a former secretary of the National Treasury. He explains that there is the structural problem of Brazil’s low level of savings and the cyclical problem, which is fiscal stress. The country’s savings, Bittencourt says, are made up of households, companies and the government. “What contribution does the government make to these savings? None; it generates negative savings, consuming other people’s savings, paying high interest rates, over short terms and with a low risk assessment.” Therefore, he says, “crowding out” manifests itself in higher interest rates and shorter terms for the private sector. The largest companies can still issue debt in the capital markets, at an average cost of 13.68% for debentures, according to the Cefeb report, but smaller companies face greater restrictions, leaving them dependent on bank credit, at an average cost of 18.40% for legal entities, or investment funds in receivables (FIDCs). The difference, the study shows, reached 4.53 percentage points in April, the date of the data analyzed. “Issuing debt at this cost imposes a line of value destruction on most sectors of the real economy,” Troster says. The effects of this asymmetry are showing up in companies’ financial health. The default rate among legal entities reached 4.8%, a historic peak: among micro and small companies, the rate reached 6%, while it remained at 0.5% among large companies. The number of companies with negative credit records also increased, rising from 6.66 million in January 2024 to 8.96 million in April this year, a 34.5% increase. Meanwhile, the difference between corporate and sovereign borrowing costs, according to Cefeb, remained reasonably stable between January 2022 and April 2026, generally fluctuating within a range of 2.5 to 4.5 percentage points. Subsidies guaranteed to certain sectors worsen the problem, Bittencourt says, because they are shielded from monetary policy and end up putting further pressure on interest rates. The provision of cheaper credit to certain sectors is also cited by professor Carlos Pedroso, former chief economist at MUFG Bank Brasil, who notes that the presence of the Brazilian Development Bank (BNDES) has been growing again. He expects lower GDP growth next year, a scenario that would only be avoided if there is an adjustment in the public sector. In an interview with Valor, the executive secretary of the Ministry of Finance, Rogério Ceron, declined to comment specifically on the Cefeb study but offered a conceptual assessment of “crowding out.” For him, longer-term rates have three components: rising interest rates around the world, over which Brazil has no control; the trajectory of fiscal policy in Brazil; and the large supply of tax-exempt securities, which puts pressure on the placement of government bonds. “We want a country with lower interest rates; that is a consensus. How do we do that? We need to start dismantling [the two components over which we have influence].” According to Ceron, on the fiscal side, it is necessary to “send the signals needed to remove the risk premium from the curve resulting from uncertainty.” Regarding tax-incentivized securities, a subject the Finance Ministry has raised repeatedly, he advocates a broad debate because, given the strong growth in issuances, the volume is incompatible with the country’s long-term savings and the situation “is not healthy.” For the secretary, “someone has to give”: “Either the Treasury itself has to extend the process of seeking the optimal composition of the debt or, on the other hand, these private-sector borrowers who use these instruments will also have to undertake some adjustment. This has to be debated and resolved. We can no longer postpone it.” Kawall agrees that tax exemptions for certain investments, such as tax-incentivized debentures and real estate and agribusiness credit bills (LCIs and LCAs), are a distortion that worsens the problem, as the financial market itself has pointed out, but “not by a long shot” are they the fundamental reason Brazil is seeing stress at such high levels. “If there were a correction to this taxation, would the problem be solved? No.” The former Treasury secretary also points out that the government itself encouraged demand for these investments, which are more sought after by higher-income investors, by taxing, for example, contributions to VGBL private pension plans. Bittencourt points to other problems. “There are countries that have higher debt than Brazil, others that have higher costs, but none that have both at the same time,” he says. Other countries, he says, have more room to maneuver to cut spending. In the U.S., for example, 20% of spending is discretionary, while in Brazil that share is less than 5%. “Fiscal adjustment in Brazil is much more complex than in another country.” (Jéssica Sant’Ana contributed reporting from Brasília.)

觉得有价值?

分享给需要了解巴西市场的朋友

帮助更多中国企业看懂巴西,做成生意

China Brazil Insight · 中巴合作价值链中的信息节点

这条资讯影响你的业务吗?

CBI 提供从信息到行动的完整支持