国家外汇局国际收支司司长贾宁今日在国新办新闻发布会上表示，从宏观整体和国际收支平衡的视角 看，经常账户的顺差增长必然会对应资本和金融账户逆差扩大，因此不能将资本和金融账户逆差扩大简 单理解为资本流出压力增大。从我国情况看，近年来，资本和金融账户的逆差扩大主要是境内主体对外 投资增加，外资来华投资总体仍然保持着净流入。展望未来，我国经济结构持续优化，经济内外部平衡 态势更加稳固，金融市场双向开放稳步推进，将支撑国际收支保持基本平衡。(21世纪经济报道) ...

Group 1 - China has a long-standing trade surplus and a small fiscal deficit, while the US has a trade deficit and a fiscal deficit, indicating a dual deficit situation for the US and a dual surplus for China [1][30] - China's international investment position is positive, but its investment income is negative, whereas the US has a negative international investment position but positive investment income [1][15] - The analysis of the balance of payments and international investment positions highlights the macroeconomic factors contributing to the 2008 financial crisis and offers policy recommendations [1][30] Group 2 - China's current account balance is generally positive, while the US has a negative current account balance, reflecting China's trade surplus and the US's trade deficit [2][28] - As of October 2024, China holds $760.1 billion in US Treasury bonds, indicating significant capital flows between the two countries [2] - The financial account balance for China can fluctuate between surplus and deficit, contributing to the long-term appreciation of the Renminbi [2][3] Group 3 - China's trade balance shows a surplus in goods but a deficit in services, while the US has a deficit in goods and a surplus in services [4][28] - The service trade deficit in China suggests a need for improvement in the service sector to enhance competitiveness and reduce the trade imbalance [4][30] - The structure of international investment positions reveals that the US has significantly higher foreign assets and liabilities compared to China, indicating a more developed capital market [5][8] Group 4 - The net international investment position (NIIP) of China has been positive since 2011, indicating it is a net capital exporter, while the US has a negative NIIP, reflecting its status as a net capital importer [15][25] - The capital flows between China and the US exhibit distinct characteristics, with China primarily experiencing net inflows in direct and securities investments, while the US sees net outflows [16][30] - The "Stiglitz Paradox" illustrates the contrasting investment income dynamics between the two countries, with China having a positive NIIP but negative net investment income, and the US having a negative NIIP but positive net investment income [17][22] Group 5 - The relationship between the NIIP and the current and financial accounts indicates that changes in the NIIP are influenced by both account balances and valuation changes [15][34] - The capital flow dynamics and the structure of external assets and liabilities highlight the differences in economic strategies and market developments between China and the US [14][22] - The internationalization of the Renminbi is expected to impact China's balance of payments and international investment position, potentially leading to changes in trade surpluses or deficits [35]