Former Chinese Premier Li Keqiang’s classmate questioned the credibility of China’s official statistics. He stated that misleading data requires additional data to follow up, leading to a cycle of misinformation.
International arbitrator and lawyer of the French Court of Appeals, Tao Jingzhou, was a classmate of Li Keqiang in the Law Department at Peking University in 1977.
In a recent article in the Financial Times, he pointed out that many observers doubt the accuracy of China’s official GDP data in recent years. Local officials often see meeting GDP targets not only as a way to keep their positions but also as a necessary condition for promotion.
He mentioned that China’s official statistics, especially annual GDP data, have long been subject to “strict scrutiny” by the Chinese authorities.
He also noted that Li Keqiang himself publicly stated in 2007 that these data are unreliable and proposed three alternative indicators to assess economic performance: railway freight volume, electricity consumption, and bank loans. These indicators later became known as the “Li Keqiang Index.” At that time, Li Keqiang had not yet become the Premier of the State Council of the Communist Party of China.
In recent years, the Chinese authorities have increasingly suppressed public skepticism about economic activities.
In August 2021, the Cyberspace Administration of China banned social media from posting messages that “distort the interpretation” of macroeconomic data, intensifying the atmosphere of mistrust.
According to the Cyberspace Administration of China’s key campaign against 8 types of violations, these include “irrational criticism, distortions” of official policies and data, “maliciously spreading negative opinions,” “circulating misinformation, even fabricating rumors,” and more. These restrictions have led many prominent economists in China to remain silent, and some banks and research institutions are unwilling to publish forecasts lower than official data. In some cases, economists have been advised not to criticize official data.
He believes that this silence is counterproductive, as “jokes related to GDP data are more common than ever in private conversations.”
“Open, reliable, and up-to-date data allows investors to monitor developments and manage expectations. If fundamental statistics such as GDP, consumer price index, and unemployment rate lose credibility, investors will be forced to prepare for the worst,” he warned.
In 2023, after several months of releasing record-high youth unemployment data, the Chinese National Bureau of Statistics stopped disclosing such information. Later indicators excluded students from the statistical scope, but the new unemployment rate remained high.
Furthermore, in December 2023, China’s Ministry of State Security warned major commentators on social media to stop criticizing the economy and spreading false information. According to foreign media reports, Zhu Hengpeng, a senior economist at the top Chinese think tank Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, went missing after making derogatory remarks about the Chinese economy in a private WeChat group.
Tao Jingzhou said, “These disturbing developments have amplified doubts about China’s economic reality, leading to the so-called ‘Tacitus Trap,’ named after the Roman historian Tacitus. The theory suggests that when public trust in the government declines, citizens may view all information released by the government — regardless of its veracity — as potentially false.”
Some netizens even joked that China’s recent economic success should be credited to the National Bureau of Statistics, the Propaganda Department, and the Internet Information Office.
“This new situation is neither sustainable nor conducive to long-term growth because distortions of information will create a destructive counter-cyclical trend. Misleading data needs to be followed by more misleading data to maintain the narrative, leading to a self-perpetuating cycle of misinformation,” Tao Jingzhou wrote.
He concluded by saying that transparency, rule of law, and objective economic analysis facilitate wise decision-making in the business sector. Beijing should not only allow experts to conduct public and critical analyses but also encourage them, as this will contribute to sustainable economic development.